"Shepherd was not a good chairman" - Sibierski

[Guest Dan]

absolutely. he fucked it up big time and had to go.

[OzzieMandias]

Shepherd wasn't even chairman when Keegan walked so it's a bit harsh to blame that on him!

 

By jove you're right!

 

Must have been getting carried away there... Ok I'll let him off with that one!

 

He was on the board and a major decision maker at that time wasn't he?

 

He was on the board but I don't think any money would have kept Keegan, the club had to sell some players to clear themselves of debt before becoming a PLC which pissed him off, he also made it clear he was going at the end of the season anyway, the club becoming a PLC helped speed up the process.

 

He also broke the World record transfer fee in signing Shearer a few months earlier so he was backed.

 

Except having to sell players was because of the money spent on Shearer. So being backed involved him also

Obviously Freddy genuinely wanted to make nufc successful, but ultimately he was out of depth, just like two of the managers he appointed were.

 

Just like three out of his four mangerial appointments, really.

 

I don't remember many moaning about Gullit at the time, hindsight is great though.

 

 

 

A silly post. Whatever you or I or anyone else did or didn't say makes not one blind bit of difference to the obvious fact that Gullit, like all but one of Shepherd's managerial appointments, was a failure.

[NE5]

shepherd appointed souness and roeder. if he had a remote clue about the game he wouldn't have hired two such useless managers.

 

I'm glad you think that appointing Dalglish, Gullit, Robson and Allardyce are the actions of a useless chairman, running a s**** club, that can't attract top managers who doesn't know anything about football.

 

Like every other chairman at every other club, who always appoint winners every time, except us.

 

mackems.gif

 

 

 

howay man. even a complete moron would know that those two were never going to be up to managing a big club like ours. you only had to look at their track records, so it's not a case of knowing which managers will be successful but rather not appointing TWO managers with very very poor cvs.

 

Only a complete and utter moron would say that anyone but Shepherd would be better for the club.

 

I take it that if you are going to criticise giving someone with little or no experience a try, you will apply that criteria to the great Steve Gibson, the Liverpool directors for appointing Dalglish, Evans, Paisley, ManU for appointing Wilf McGuiness, Arsenal and the great David Dein for appointing Bruce Rioch, there are hundreds of examples.

 

Quite simply, you can't get it right every time, everybody makes a shit appointment or two, and someone of YOUR experience ought to realise this [if you are who I think you are]. If you do, then you should also tell us the foolproof blueprint for such a thing, and I'm not taking the piss. I'll hold my hands up and say that I said Roeder was worth a crack, as the trophy winners with the cups hadn't worked, a lot of us said this at the time, although it would appear now that Shearer was a big influence - which to be fair was suspected. Souness should not have been appointed, but neither should the mackems have appointed Wilkinson for instance.

 

Clubs make shite appointments all the time. That is simply indisputable, as teams finish bottom all the time, and only a handful of clubs can win the cups and play in europe.

 

Playing in europe ? We haven't done THAT badly, have we ?

 

Look at it another way, we now have the manager we wanted when Bobby Robson went, who do you blame for him not coming then and who do you credit for him coming when HE felt the time was right for him ?

 

[Dinho lad]

I'll hold my hands up and say that Roeder was worth a crack,

 

 

:giggle:

[NE5]

Shepherd wasn't even chairman when Keegan walked so it's a bit harsh to blame that on him!

 

By jove you're right!

 

Must have been getting carried away there... Ok I'll let him off with that one!

 

He was on the board and a major decision maker at that time wasn't he?

 

He was on the board but I don't think any money would have kept Keegan, the club had to sell some players to clear themselves of debt before becoming a PLC which pissed him off, he also made it clear he was going at the end of the season anyway, the club becoming a PLC helped speed up the process.

 

He also broke the World record transfer fee in signing Shearer a few months earlier so he was backed.

 

Except having to sell players was because of the money spent on Shearer. So being backed involved him also

Obviously Freddy genuinely wanted to make nufc successful, but ultimately he was out of depth, just like two of the managers he appointed were.

 

Just like three out of his four mangerial appointments, really.

 

I don't remember many moaning about Gullit at the time, hindsight is great though.

 

 

 

A silly post. Whatever you or I or anyone else did or didn't say makes not one blind bit of difference to the obvious fact that Gullit, like all but one of Shepherd's managerial appointments, was a failure.

 

but YOU backed Souness' changes to the club, correct ?

 

I'm still waiting for your foolproof blueprint to win the league every season, just think of the money you could make Ozzie particularly if you sell your secret to the 87 clubs who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did over the last decade.

 

 

[NE5]

I'll hold my hands up and say that Roeder was worth a crack,

 

 

:giggle:

 

don't you know what a crack is Dinho lad  mackems.gif

[Baggio]

Shepherd wasn't even chairman when Keegan walked so it's a bit harsh to blame that on him!

 

By jove you're right!

 

Must have been getting carried away there... Ok I'll let him off with that one!

 

He was on the board and a major decision maker at that time wasn't he?

 

He was on the board but I don't think any money would have kept Keegan, the club had to sell some players to clear themselves of debt before becoming a PLC which pissed him off, he also made it clear he was going at the end of the season anyway, the club becoming a PLC helped speed up the process.

 

He also broke the World record transfer fee in signing Shearer a few months earlier so he was backed.

 

Except having to sell players was because of the money spent on Shearer. So being backed involved him also

Obviously Freddy genuinely wanted to make nufc successful, but ultimately he was out of depth, just like two of the managers he appointed were.

 

Just like three out of his four mangerial appointments, really.

 

I don't remember many moaning about Gullit at the time, hindsight is great though.

 

 

 

A silly post. Whatever you or I or anyone else did or didn't say makes not one blind bit of difference to the obvious fact that Gullit, like all but one of Shepherd's managerial appointments, was a failure.

 

So Shepherd appointed a highly rated young manager who had already won the Fa cup, played attractive football and was someone who 95% of the fans were happy with yet because it didn't work out for whatever reason you're knocking him for it as if it was a shit appointment.

 

Unbelievable agenda driven shite.

 

 

As for the comment about selling to buy Shearer, we had to sell because we had to become debt free to become a PLC, would we have had to sell if we were remaining in private hands? No, otherwise we would have sold sooner.

[Dinho lad]

I'll hold my hands up and say that Roeder was worth a crack,

 

 

:giggle:

 

don't you know what a crack is Dinho lad  mackems.gif

 

Loo0o0oo0o0o0o0o0o0o0lz! 

[gonufc]

NE5, putting aside the fact that Shepherd hired a couple of incompetent managers, he still held us back in places. Although he did a fair amount of good, in that he provided financial backing and hired a few good managers, the fact is that  he tampered with transfers and decisions that only managers should make...had he not done this I believe we could have seen a much more successful Newcastle.

[OzzieMandias]

Shepherd wasn't even chairman when Keegan walked so it's a bit harsh to blame that on him!

 

By jove you're right!

 

Must have been getting carried away there... Ok I'll let him off with that one!

 

He was on the board and a major decision maker at that time wasn't he?

 

He was on the board but I don't think any money would have kept Keegan, the club had to sell some players to clear themselves of debt before becoming a PLC which pissed him off, he also made it clear he was going at the end of the season anyway, the club becoming a PLC helped speed up the process.

 

He also broke the World record transfer fee in signing Shearer a few months earlier so he was backed.

 

Except having to sell players was because of the money spent on Shearer. So being backed involved him also

Obviously Freddy genuinely wanted to make nufc successful, but ultimately he was out of depth, just like two of the managers he appointed were.

 

Just like three out of his four mangerial appointments, really.

 

I don't remember many moaning about Gullit at the time, hindsight is great though.

 

 

 

A silly post. Whatever you or I or anyone else did or didn't say makes not one blind bit of difference to the obvious fact that Gullit, like all but one of Shepherd's managerial appointments, was a failure.

 

So Shepherd appointed a highly rated young manager who had already won the Fa cup, played attractive football and was someone who 95% of the fans were happy with yet because it didn't work out for whatever reason you're knocking him for it as if it was a shit appointment.

 

Unbelievable agenda driven shite.

 

 

As for the comment about selling to buy Shearer, we had to sell because we had to become debt free to become a PLC, would we have had to sell if we were remaining in private hands? No, otherwise we would have sold sooner.

 

Gulllit was a failed appointment. Undeniable fact.

 

Three out Shepherd's four managerial appointments were failures. Undeniable fact.

[Baggio]

Shepherd wasn't even chairman when Keegan walked so it's a bit harsh to blame that on him!

 

By jove you're right!

 

Must have been getting carried away there... Ok I'll let him off with that one!

 

He was on the board and a major decision maker at that time wasn't he?

 

He was on the board but I don't think any money would have kept Keegan, the club had to sell some players to clear themselves of debt before becoming a PLC which pissed him off, he also made it clear he was going at the end of the season anyway, the club becoming a PLC helped speed up the process.

 

He also broke the World record transfer fee in signing Shearer a few months earlier so he was backed.

 

Except having to sell players was because of the money spent on Shearer. So being backed involved him also

Obviously Freddy genuinely wanted to make nufc successful, but ultimately he was out of depth, just like two of the managers he appointed were.

 

Just like three out of his four mangerial appointments, really.

 

I don't remember many moaning about Gullit at the time, hindsight is great though.

 

 

 

A silly post. Whatever you or I or anyone else did or didn't say makes not one blind bit of difference to the obvious fact that Gullit, like all but one of Shepherd's managerial appointments, was a failure.

 

So Shepherd appointed a highly rated young manager who had already won the Fa cup, played attractive football and was someone who 95% of the fans were happy with yet because it didn't work out for whatever reason you're knocking him for it as if it was a shit appointment.

 

Unbelievable agenda driven shite.

 

 

As for the comment about selling to buy Shearer, we had to sell because we had to become debt free to become a PLC, would we have had to sell if we were remaining in private hands? No, otherwise we would have sold sooner.

 

Gulllit was a failed appointment. Undeniable fact.

 

Three out Shepherd's four managerial appointments were failures. Undeniable fact.

 

Using hindsight to try and knock someone when you were more than happy with it at the time is pathetic. Undeniable fact.

 

 

[jimmymag]

Shepherd was a PR nightmare!

 

Just compare him to the new regime who are generating nothing but positive vibes. Good riddance, now let's move on.

 

 

[NE5]

Shepherd wasn't even chairman when Keegan walked so it's a bit harsh to blame that on him!

 

By jove you're right!

 

Must have been getting carried away there... Ok I'll let him off with that one!

 

He was on the board and a major decision maker at that time wasn't he?

 

He was on the board but I don't think any money would have kept Keegan, the club had to sell some players to clear themselves of debt before becoming a PLC which pissed him off, he also made it clear he was going at the end of the season anyway, the club becoming a PLC helped speed up the process.

 

He also broke the World record transfer fee in signing Shearer a few months earlier so he was backed.

 

Except having to sell players was because of the money spent on Shearer. So being backed involved him also

Obviously Freddy genuinely wanted to make nufc successful, but ultimately he was out of depth, just like two of the managers he appointed were.

 

Just like three out of his four mangerial appointments, really.

 

I don't remember many moaning about Gullit at the time, hindsight is great though.

 

 

 

A silly post. Whatever you or I or anyone else did or didn't say makes not one blind bit of difference to the obvious fact that Gullit, like all but one of Shepherd's managerial appointments, was a failure.

 

So Shepherd appointed a highly rated young manager who had already won the Fa cup, played attractive football and was someone who 95% of the fans were happy with yet because it didn't work out for whatever reason you're knocking him for it as if it was a shit appointment.

 

Unbelievable agenda driven shite.

 

 

As for the comment about selling to buy Shearer, we had to sell because we had to become debt free to become a PLC, would we have had to sell if we were remaining in private hands? No, otherwise we would have sold sooner.

 

Gulllit was a failed appointment. Undeniable fact.

 

Three out Shepherd's four managerial appointments were failures. Undeniable fact.

 

Not to mention - again - Ozzie dishing the dirt on the club he says he supports to London journos who hate Newcastle, and supporting the changes to the club that Souness made, and still does as he won't refute them, he shows in this link how little he knows about the club, confirming what has been obvious all along to myself and a few others :

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=43363.0

 

 

[NE5]

Shepherd was a PR nightmare!

 

Just compare him to the new regime who are generating nothing but positive vibes. Good riddance, now let's move on.

 

 

that is a point jimmy, but irrelevant in the end. Football supporters don't want a club with good PR, they want a team that succeeds on the pitch, or attempts to ie does their best, and playing in europe regularly, buying top players while not being the ultimate success is a damn sight closer the vast majority of clubs most of whom would without a doubt swap their exploits with ours rather than have chairman who keep a low profile. Just ask the mackems for instance, Bob Murray didn't embarrass them, but the team did, massively. Or you could say he embarrassed them because he ran a club with an embarrassing team.

 

If Ashley and Mort don't match at least the top 5 positions achieved under the Halls and Shepherd, over a fair period, then in my opinion they haven't been as successful, and its as straightforward as that.

 

I'm all for moving on BTW, but there is nowt wrong with keeping things in perspective.

 

 

[Guest alexharrisonnufc]

I LOVE SIB!

[OzzieMandias]

Shepherd wasn't even chairman when Keegan walked so it's a bit harsh to blame that on him!

 

By jove you're right!

 

Must have been getting carried away there... Ok I'll let him off with that one!

 

He was on the board and a major decision maker at that time wasn't he?

 

He was on the board but I don't think any money would have kept Keegan, the club had to sell some players to clear themselves of debt before becoming a PLC which pissed him off, he also made it clear he was going at the end of the season anyway, the club becoming a PLC helped speed up the process.

 

He also broke the World record transfer fee in signing Shearer a few months earlier so he was backed.

 

Except having to sell players was because of the money spent on Shearer. So being backed involved him also

Obviously Freddy genuinely wanted to make nufc successful, but ultimately he was out of depth, just like two of the managers he appointed were.

 

Just like three out of his four mangerial appointments, really.

 

I don't remember many moaning about Gullit at the time, hindsight is great though.

 

 

 

A silly post. Whatever you or I or anyone else did or didn't say makes not one blind bit of difference to the obvious fact that Gullit, like all but one of Shepherd's managerial appointments, was a failure.

 

So Shepherd appointed a highly rated young manager who had already won the Fa cup, played attractive football and was someone who 95% of the fans were happy with yet because it didn't work out for whatever reason you're knocking him for it as if it was a shit appointment.

 

Unbelievable agenda driven shite.

 

 

As for the comment about selling to buy Shearer, we had to sell because we had to become debt free to become a PLC, would we have had to sell if we were remaining in private hands? No, otherwise we would have sold sooner.

 

Gulllit was a failed appointment. Undeniable fact.

 

Three out Shepherd's four managerial appointments were failures. Undeniable fact.

 

Using hindsight to try and knock someone when you were more than happy with it at the time is pathetic. Undeniable fact.

 

 

 

Endlessly repeating drivel about what you imagine people did or didn't say nine years ago does not change the facts:

 

Ruud Gullit was a poor appointment. Fact!

 

So were all of Shepherd's other managerial appointments – except Bobby, who practically camped on Shepherd's doorstep, begging to be given the job.

 

As it happens, I do remember what I said. I can even remember where I bought the newspaper that announced the news of Dalglish's replacement by Gullit, and who I was talking to when I said it.

 

It was words to the effect of, "What the fuck was the point of giving Dalglish £15 million to spend in the summer if they were going to sack him a few games into the season?"

 

Now, hindsight may be great, but it seems to elude our Freddie. How many more managerial changes would it take before it got that one right?

[NE5]

Shepherd wasn't even chairman when Keegan walked so it's a bit harsh to blame that on him!

 

By jove you're right!

 

Must have been getting carried away there... Ok I'll let him off with that one!

 

He was on the board and a major decision maker at that time wasn't he?

 

He was on the board but I don't think any money would have kept Keegan, the club had to sell some players to clear themselves of debt before becoming a PLC which pissed him off, he also made it clear he was going at the end of the season anyway, the club becoming a PLC helped speed up the process.

 

He also broke the World record transfer fee in signing Shearer a few months earlier so he was backed.

 

Except having to sell players was because of the money spent on Shearer. So being backed involved him also

Obviously Freddy genuinely wanted to make nufc successful, but ultimately he was out of depth, just like two of the managers he appointed were.

 

Just like three out of his four mangerial appointments, really.

 

I don't remember many moaning about Gullit at the time, hindsight is great though.

 

 

 

A silly post. Whatever you or I or anyone else did or didn't say makes not one blind bit of difference to the obvious fact that Gullit, like all but one of Shepherd's managerial appointments, was a failure.

 

So Shepherd appointed a highly rated young manager who had already won the Fa cup, played attractive football and was someone who 95% of the fans were happy with yet because it didn't work out for whatever reason you're knocking him for it as if it was a shit appointment.

 

Unbelievable agenda driven shite.

 

 

As for the comment about selling to buy Shearer, we had to sell because we had to become debt free to become a PLC, would we have had to sell if we were remaining in private hands? No, otherwise we would have sold sooner.

 

Gulllit was a failed appointment. Undeniable fact.

 

Three out Shepherd's four managerial appointments were failures. Undeniable fact.

 

Using hindsight to try and knock someone when you were more than happy with it at the time is pathetic. Undeniable fact.

 

 

 

Endlessly repeating drivel about what you imagine people did or didn't say nine years ago does not change the facts:

 

Ruud Gullit was a poor appointment. Fact!

 

So were all of Shepherd's other managerial appointments – except Bobby, who practically camped on Shepherd's doorstep, begging to be given the job.

 

As it happens, I do remember what I said. I can even remember where I bought the newspaper that announced the news of Dalglish's replacement by Gullit, and who I was talking to when I said it.

 

It was words to the effect of, "What the fuck was the point of giving Dalglish £15 million to spend in the summer if they were going to sack him a few games into the season?"

 

Now, hindsight may be great, but it seems to elude our Freddie. How many more managerial changes would it take before it got that one right?

 

So, what is your criteria for appointing a manager who will be a cast iron certain success ?

 

And, I take it that sacking Gullit after giving him money then appointing Bobby Robson was a shite idea too, using your logic ?

 

Somehow, I don't think I'll get a full response to this one  mackems.gif

[OzzieMandias]

 

If Ashley and Mort don't match at least the top 5 positions achieved under the Halls and Shepherd, over a fair period, then in my opinion they haven't been as successful, and its as straightforward as that.

 

I'm all for moving on BTW, but there is nowt wrong with keeping things in perspective.

 

 

 

If Ashley and Mort get us into the top half of the table for their first two seasons, they will have more than matched Shepherd's performance in his first two full seasons. Fact!

[OzzieMandias]

It's a pretty moronic "argument", this one about hindight.

 

Is it wrong to point out that World War I was a complete disaster, even though many people thought it was a good idea at the time? 

[Baggio]

It's a pretty moronic "argument", this one about hindight.

 

Is it wrong to point out that World War I was a complete disaster, even though many people thought it was a good idea at the time? 

 

That's hardly a fair comparison is it.

 

The fact is people wanted Gullit, it didn't work out for one reason or another but having a go at Shepherd for a decision people were happy with at the time is indeed pathetic, will you blame him if Allardyce doesn't work out too?

 

Fair enough to have a pop for both Souness and Roeder as they were not up to it in the first place, but Gullit was a good choice at the time.

[OzzieMandias]

 

That's hardly a fair comparison is it.

 

 

It's a perfectly fair comparison.

 

Please explain how hindsight is a valid way of judging the successes and failures of major historical figures, but an invalid way of judging the success and failures of minor football chairmen?

[Baggio]

 

That's hardly a fair comparison is it.

 

 

It's a perfectly fair comparison.

 

Please explain how hindsight is a valid way of judging the successes and failures of major historical figures, but an invalid way of judging the success and failures of minor football chairmen?

 

To start with you're not talking about a major historical figure, you're talking about an event.

 

If Mort appointed Wenger and for whatever reason he flopped here would you blame the chairman for making a bad decision even though you yourself were behind the move at the time?

[OzzieMandias]

 

That's hardly a fair comparison is it.

 

 

It's a perfectly fair comparison.

 

Please explain how hindsight is a valid way of judging the successes and failures of major historical figures, but an invalid way of judging the success and failures of minor football chairmen?

 

To start with you're not talking about a major historical figure, you're talking about an event.

 

Well, Einstein, how about Neville Chamberlain? Was his 1938 Nuremburg meeting with Hitler to secure "peace in our time" a success because many people at the time thought it was a good idea?

 

If Mort appointed Wenger and for whatever reason he flopped here would you blame the chairman for making a bad decision even though you yourself were behind the move at the time?

 

If Wenger failed, history would show he/they had failed. Fact!

 

Comparing Gullit to Wenger is funny though. That kind of stretch shows nothing except that the Shepherd-was-fabulous argument can only be sustained by indulging a lot of meaningless spin and stupid bullshit.

[Baggio]

 

That's hardly a fair comparison is it.

 

 

It's a perfectly fair comparison.

 

Please explain how hindsight is a valid way of judging the successes and failures of major historical figures, but an invalid way of judging the success and failures of minor football chairmen?

 

To start with you're not talking about a major historical figure, you're talking about an event.

 

Well, Einstein, how about Neville Chamberlain? Was his 1938 Nuremburg meeting with Hitler to secure "peace in our time" a success because many people at the time thought it was a good idea?

 

If Mort appointed Wenger and for whatever reason he flopped here would you blame the chairman for making a bad decision even though you yourself were behind the move at the time?

 

If Wenger failed, history would show he/they had failed. Fact!

 

Comparing Gullit to Wenger is funny though. That kind of stretch shows nothing except that the Shepherd-was-fabulous argument can only be sustained by indulging a lot of meaningless spin and stupid bullshit.

 

First of all I wasn't around in 1938 so my opinion on what happened then is slightly different to people of that time, however if I was and I agreed with something at the time I wouldn't start having ago at the bloke after it all went wrong, that would make me a 2 faced twat.

 

My point is not that Gullit failed, it's that people are using his appointment as something to knock Shepherd with when they were fully behind it at the time.

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

 

That's hardly a fair comparison is it.

 

 

It's a perfectly fair comparison.

 

Please explain how hindsight is a valid way of judging the successes and failures of major historical figures, but an invalid way of judging the success and failures of minor football chairmen?

 

To start with you're not talking about a major historical figure, you're talking about an event.

 

Well, Einstein, how about Neville Chamberlain? Was his 1938 Nuremburg meeting with Hitler to secure "peace in our time" a success because many people at the time thought it was a good idea?

 

If Mort appointed Wenger and for whatever reason he flopped here would you blame the chairman for making a bad decision even though you yourself were behind the move at the time?

 

If Wenger failed, history would show he/they had failed. Fact!

 

Comparing Gullit to Wenger is funny though. That kind of stretch shows nothing except that the Shepherd-was-fabulous argument can only be sustained by indulging a lot of meaningless spin and stupid bullshit.

 

First of all I wasn't around in 1938 so my opinion on what happened then is slightly different to people of that time, however if I was and I agreed with something at the time I wouldn't start having ago at the bloke after it all went wrong, that would make me a 2 faced twat.

 

 

The matter of what kind of twat you might be is of course entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Nobody's opinion at the time makes a blind bit of difference to the fact that the appeasement of Hitler was a failure.

 

My point is not that Gullit failed, it's that people are using his appointment as something to knock Shepherd with when they were fully behind it at the time.

 

 

 

Same old stupid argument. And repeating it over and over doesn't make it any less moronic.

 

Nothing anyone thought or said at the time makes one miniscule jot of difference to the simple, undeniable fact that Gullit was a failed appointment.