Freddie Shepherd to buy Leeds?!

[Guest Johan]

will be good for leeds IMO, a chairman with a bit more cash than bates, and who genuinly, despite how fookin shi*e he is, does appaear to care. One things for sure though, leeds will have graeme souness in charge to help them climb through the ranks

 

Alan Shearer ?

 

 

 

That could actually be an idea that would suit Newcastle as well. Perfect club to prove himself and show if he has what it takes to manage at the top level. Cant see him getting the manager job at Newcastle as his first job with the new board in charge.

[Guest Pie]

See this one ended up with more bollocks evident in it than you'd find in a corner shop sausage.

[NE5]

 

 

what are you on about now 

 

Edit: if you can answer the question I asked at the end of post nr 133, it may help you understand, but then again, if you don't understand by now, or bring yourself to admit it by now .........

 

 

 

I haven't read the question in post 133.

 

I couldn't get past the first line for some reason.  I just read up to where you of all people were having a go at somebody for his use of grammar, I cringed and skipped the rest of the post.

 

thanks for admitting you don't read all the posts, it might explain why you never get the context of anything.

 

Perhaps you should start

 

 

[Guest Phil K]

Bates....if ever there was a beard just BEGGING to be set fire to, it's his.

[2sheds]

NE5 I listed 4 points which you ignored. so I'll limit this reply to just one point.[/color]

 

As I have pointed out on numerous occasions, the only time we achieved 3 consecutive top 5 finishes in the last 50 years, was when Shepherd was chairman. Fact.

 

FACT - shepherd wasn't most successful chairman in our history - Bates was for Chelsea FACT.

 

3 consecutive top 5 finishes does not compare in the slightest to what Chelsea won in Bates time.

 

European Cup Winners' Cup winners:  1998. Full Members Cup winners: 1986. European SuperCup winners: 1998. FA Cup winners 1997, 2000. Charity Shield winners: 2000.

 

 

 

 

probably because, Chelsea had very little history, to speak of. Before Bates.

 

Fact.

 

Certainly nowhere near ours.

 

Fact.

 

Did you go to Stamford Bridge before Harding joined the board at Chelsea ? How much about Chelsea do you know, pre - Bates, and his first decade ?

 

 

 

I know from my quote which once again you've chosen to ignore that they won the full members cup in Bates first decade which is more than we won in Freds 10 years in charge.

 

I couldn't give a toss, because I know how much of a s*** club Chelsea were before Harding stepped in - also winning nowt until that time. You clearly don't, and you also are one of those with a daft agenda against Shepherd and Hall for calling you names, or whatever your problem with them is.

 

 

So you're accounting Chelseas success to Harding, yet when we try and criticise Shepard for what he's done for this club, its the Boards fault, in your world, are chairmen responsible for anything? If you were to talk about arsenal in 10 years time and ask how Hill-wood did as chairmen, are you going to say one individual in David Dein was responsible, we know that he was very influential but does the detract from Hill Woods achievements because in the real world when your at the top of your business you are accountable for what occurs, we cant truly account for every single action and provide a proper analysis so in the end you HAVE to generalise and look at the larger picture, if Harding was influential its irrelevant, just like Dougie Hall has been irrelvant in most of your arguments FOR Shepard even though in can be argued that he was instrumental in situation we are in now. So you take a step back and try to assess everything that has occured under his tenure ship. Bates, £80m debt, refurbished stadium left the club in a very healthy situation with the new owners, 2/3 years earlier than the current billionaire owner trend. plenty of major trophies,

Shepard £80m debt, refurbished stadium left in a reasonably healthy situation.....an intertoto cup/vase/bowl. In the end, whats been described above is generally the hallmark to what all Charimen are judged against. True?

 

The common denominator is that the chairman is not the sole person responsible for anything. The situation at Chelsea was that Bates was a horrible s*** doing a s*** of a job until Harding stepped in.

 

The club then had some good success, but over the years Bates was running it back into the ground again, his Chelsea village project - which he had been advised not to proceed with, was bankrupting the club - until Abramovic came along. Or Chelsea would have gone the way of Leeds.

 

This is the scenario. Like it or not. I can't for the life of me understand how anyone can have a good word to say about Ken Bates, or defend him. Whats the point

 

Chelsea fans will tell you that Harding was hugely influential, and without him, the club wouldn't have did what it did, by the way, not me. Although, I do agree.

 

 

Harding joined Chelsea in 1994.

 

By then Chelsea had already won 2 trophies under Bates (86 and 90) - a better record than your hero Freddie

 

PS I've highlighted the bits in bold that you choose to ignore , and the bit where you make a tit of yourself in red just to help you realise where you went wrong

 

on the contrary, I AM aware of how much of a s*** club Chelsea were, as I said, whereas you are not, otherwise you would have said so. If you have no experience of seeing this, and are attempting to disagree with someone who has, then there is only one tit here.

 

I am also very pleased you think winning the league cup,  is such a magnificent achievement, that it puts into context qualification for the Champions League being in your opinion, utter s****. I suggest you spill your bitterness to some of our managers for picking weakened teams in the League Cup rather than stupidly blame the directors for picking the wrong teams - and if you don't see that, then you really are a tit.  mackems.gif

 

 

 

Great reply but we were talking about Bates first 10 years vs Freddies.

 

You foolishly claimed Chelsea's success was all down to Harding (who joined after Bates had been in the job 12 years) and that they won nowt before that.

 

This is  a lie as I have proven.

 

As for the Champions League did that exist in Bates first 10 years?

 

If it didn't it is idiotic to mention it.

 

BTW the full members cup and the zenith data cup were not the league cup - wrong again Mr 'Facts'

 

 

YOu may be talking about Bates' first 10 years put against Freds, but I'm not. I never was.

 

I'm answering the post, I'm saying that I would rather Shepherd was chairman of my club than Bates. Nothing more nothing less, and I've said why.

 

It isn't idiotic to mention the Champions League at all, not when you know full well I am using it in the context of high premiership places, I think its idiotic of you to totally ignore this and these positions and put it against winning the League Cup, also ignoring the fact that poor decisions by our managers and lack lustre displays by our own players have clearly cost us trophies, and nothing else.

 

Only a complete idiot would blame the board for players underperforming in big matches, or the manager picking weakened teams.

 

And, if you seriously consider the Full members Cup and the Zenith Data cup as superior to such high league positions, it proves beyond any doubt you are an idiot. BTW, I never professed to being an expert about Chelsea, but now you mention it, I remember now, its the smoggies that Chelsea beat in the Final. And the smoggies had flags all over their town proclaiming "boro at Wembley". Yeh, right, I was really envious. 

 

 

You're first sentence is yet another lie, I've highlighted the bit in purple where YOU mention Bates first decade.

 

A decade where Chelsea won 2 trophies, before Harding became involved.

 

When Bates brought more success to an impoverished Chelsea than Fred brought to the hugely popular club he took charge of.

 

no, I'm responding to others. My first post was to say that I wouldn't want Bates in preference to Shepherd and I've said why.

 

I've also asked you if you know how Chelsea were before Harding joined the board, and that Chelsea fans will tell you that Harding was instrumental in setting the club up for the success that followed.

 

You can dispute this all you like, but as you don't reply to my comment asking what you know about Chelsea pre-harding, it is clear that you don't know.

 

 

Yet again your first sentence is another lie.

 

You weren't  responding to 'others', you were responding to ME, thats why you have quoted ME

 

 

substitute "You" for "others" then, if it makes you happy.

 

Sigh.

 

i take it you have no further comment to when I have said that you have zero experience or knowledge of Chelsea before Harding joined the board then ?

 

mackems.gif

 

Do you post on toontastic  care to tell us what name you use 

 

 

Yes your stupid question made me chuckle aswell.

 

Having repeatedly  demonstrated that I have knowledge of Chelsea before Harding joined their board I can only laugh at you for asking such an idiotic question.

 

Tee Hee

 

And I don't post on toontastic and therefore don't have a username

 

 

you don't appear to have much knowledge of Chelsea, pre Harding. Or Newcastle if you think Shepherd was so bad  mackems.gif

 

Tee hee

 

 

Once again I have demonstrated my knowledge of Chelsea pre Harding - I believe I informed YOU about the success they had under Bates before Harding joined.

 

 

 

To the rest of the board I do apologise for these quote pyramids buts its the only way to keep track of a proven serial liar.

[Howaythelads]

 

Great reply but we were talking about Bates first 10 years vs Freddies.

 

You foolishly claimed Chelsea's success was all down to Harding (who joined after Bates had been in the job 12 years) and that they won nowt before that.

 

This is  a lie as I have proven.

 

As for the Champions League did that exist in Bates first 10 years?

 

If it didn't it is idiotic to mention it.

 

BTW the full members cup and the zenith data cup were not the league cup - wrong again Mr 'Facts'

 

 

Aye, they were the same competition and one that none of the big teams took seriously. It's quite amazing that you're submitting this as proof  of how great your man Ken Bates is, but then was it you who mentioned diarrohea earlier on? You certainly seem to fill your posts with it regardless. The assertion that this competition is an indicator of great work by your man Bates is a shite on, for sure.

 

I suppose you'll soon be telling everybody that the Newcastle Board ousted by SJH was actually excellent because we won the Texaco Cup (twice) and the Anglo Italian Cup?

[Shearergol]

Does anyone on here actually respect the views of someone who thinks  mackems.gif is an argument winner?

 

NE5, I realise this will be followed by the extremely witty "toonspastic" comment, but I'll try anyway. Grow up a bit will ya. You might be the same age as Sam Allardyce, but my 4 year old niece is more mature.

 

Back to the point though  - if it were a choice between FS and KB then I think 99% of people would choose FS. It's a bit like asking someone if they want to be stabbed in the hand or stabbed in the eye though.

[Howaythelads]

Does anyone on here actually respect the views of someone who thinks  mackems.gif is an argument winner?

 

NE5, I realise this will be followed by the extremely witty "toonspastic" comment, but I'll try anyway. Grow up a bit will ya. You might be the same age as Sam Allardyce, but my 4 year old niece is more mature.

 

 

 

Jesus! That's like the dog telling the cat it's got a hairy arse.

[Shearergol]

Does anyone on here actually respect the views of someone who thinks  mackems.gif is an argument winner?

 

NE5, I realise this will be followed by the extremely witty "toonspastic" comment, but I'll try anyway. Grow up a bit will ya. You might be the same age as Sam Allardyce, but my 4 year old niece is more mature.

 

 

 

Jesus! That's like the dog telling the cat it's got a hairy arse.

 

Are you on this forum just to take the piss, like you admitted on Toontastic?

 

Fuck it, I'm not even lowering myself to your level. I'll leave you to it.

[Howaythelads]

Does anyone on here actually respect the views of someone who thinks  mackems.gif is an argument winner?

 

NE5, I realise this will be followed by the extremely witty "toonspastic" comment, but I'll try anyway. Grow up a bit will ya. You might be the same age as Sam Allardyce, but my 4 year old niece is more mature.

 

 

 

Jesus! That's like the dog telling the cat it's got a hairy arse.

 

Are you on this forum just to take the piss, like you admitted on Toontastic?

 

Fuck it, I'm not even lowering myself to your level. I'll leave you to it.

 

Good. Do that.

 

I'm surprised you're here tbh, as you can't mess around editing people's posts to make it appear they posted something they never did you must find it quite difficult.

[2sheds]

 

Great reply but we were talking about Bates first 10 years vs Freddies.

 

You foolishly claimed Chelsea's success was all down to Harding (who joined after Bates had been in the job 12 years) and that they won nowt before that.

 

This is  a lie as I have proven.

 

As for the Champions League did that exist in Bates first 10 years?

 

If it didn't it is idiotic to mention it.

 

BTW the full members cup and the zenith data cup were not the league cup - wrong again Mr 'Facts'

 

 

Aye, they were the same competition and one that none of the big teams took seriously. It's quite amazing that you're submitting this as proof  of how great your man Ken Bates is, but then was it you who mentioned diarrohea earlier on? You certainly seem to fill your posts with it regardless. The assertion that this competition is an indicator of great work by your man Bates is a s**** on, for sure.

 

I suppose you'll soon be telling everybody that the Newcastle Board ousted by SJH was actually excellent because we won the Texaco Cup (twice) and the Anglo Italian Cup?

 

Awwww thats so sweet coming to your buddy's rescue because he needs a rest from lying through his teeth.

 

I'll clarify your first sentence now.

The Full Members Cup and the Zenith Data Systems Cup were the same competition but they were not the League Cup as your fellow Shepherd leghumper NE5 seems to think.

I mentioned the two trophies not 'as proof of how great Ken Bates is' - as you seem to think - but merely to prove he brought trophies to Stamford Bridge - a feat Freddie was unable to surpass for us.

 

BTW its a very tired old trick to put words into your opponents mouth then to rubbish what they have supposed to have said.

 

Its also very pathetic.

 

As for your last line suppose all you want - just don't attack me on the basis of your poorly thought out conclusions.

[Delima]

I said I wasn't this beermonster, so why do you keep harping on about it like a blubbering rock ape ?

 

Most people have a problem with Middlesbrough, on account of feeling sorry for people who have to live there

 

If not, then their chip on the shoulder about Newcastle and Sunderland taking absolutely no notice of them.

 

Still no denying of LeazesMag this time. What happened to your vehement denial of LeazesMag last time? I beg you have lied and lied, misled and misled so many times you have forgotten that you are not supposed to be LeazesMag. Poor Beermonster!

 

Shame on you on your stupid, naive, silly, discriminative, disgusting and hideous stereotyping of people living in Middlesbrough, and people in general.

[NE5]

NE5 I listed 4 points which you ignored. so I'll limit this reply to just one point.[/color]

 

As I have pointed out on numerous occasions, the only time we achieved 3 consecutive top 5 finishes in the last 50 years, was when Shepherd was chairman. Fact.

 

FACT - shepherd wasn't most successful chairman in our history - Bates was for Chelsea FACT.

 

3 consecutive top 5 finishes does not compare in the slightest to what Chelsea won in Bates time.

 

European Cup Winners' Cup winners:  1998. Full Members Cup winners: 1986. European SuperCup winners: 1998. FA Cup winners 1997, 2000. Charity Shield winners: 2000.

 

 

 

 

probably because, Chelsea had very little history, to speak of. Before Bates.

 

Fact.

 

Certainly nowhere near ours.

 

Fact.

 

Did you go to Stamford Bridge before Harding joined the board at Chelsea ? How much about Chelsea do you know, pre - Bates, and his first decade ?

 

 

 

I know from my quote which once again you've chosen to ignore that they won the full members cup in Bates first decade which is more than we won in Freds 10 years in charge.

 

I couldn't give a toss, because I know how much of a s*** club Chelsea were before Harding stepped in - also winning nowt until that time. You clearly don't, and you also are one of those with a daft agenda against Shepherd and Hall for calling you names, or whatever your problem with them is.

 

 

So you're accounting Chelseas success to Harding, yet when we try and criticise Shepard for what he's done for this club, its the Boards fault, in your world, are chairmen responsible for anything? If you were to talk about arsenal in 10 years time and ask how Hill-wood did as chairmen, are you going to say one individual in David Dein was responsible, we know that he was very influential but does the detract from Hill Woods achievements because in the real world when your at the top of your business you are accountable for what occurs, we cant truly account for every single action and provide a proper analysis so in the end you HAVE to generalise and look at the larger picture, if Harding was influential its irrelevant, just like Dougie Hall has been irrelvant in most of your arguments FOR Shepard even though in can be argued that he was instrumental in situation we are in now. So you take a step back and try to assess everything that has occured under his tenure ship. Bates, £80m debt, refurbished stadium left the club in a very healthy situation with the new owners, 2/3 years earlier than the current billionaire owner trend. plenty of major trophies,

Shepard £80m debt, refurbished stadium left in a reasonably healthy situation.....an intertoto cup/vase/bowl. In the end, whats been described above is generally the hallmark to what all Charimen are judged against. True?

 

The common denominator is that the chairman is not the sole person responsible for anything. The situation at Chelsea was that Bates was a horrible s*** doing a s*** of a job until Harding stepped in.

 

The club then had some good success, but over the years Bates was running it back into the ground again, his Chelsea village project - which he had been advised not to proceed with, was bankrupting the club - until Abramovic came along. Or Chelsea would have gone the way of Leeds.

 

This is the scenario. Like it or not. I can't for the life of me understand how anyone can have a good word to say about Ken Bates, or defend him. Whats the point

 

Chelsea fans will tell you that Harding was hugely influential, and without him, the club wouldn't have did what it did, by the way, not me. Although, I do agree.

 

 

Harding joined Chelsea in 1994.

 

By then Chelsea had already won 2 trophies under Bates (86 and 90) - a better record than your hero Freddie

 

PS I've highlighted the bits in bold that you choose to ignore , and the bit where you make a tit of yourself in red just to help you realise where you went wrong

 

on the contrary, I AM aware of how much of a s*** club Chelsea were, as I said, whereas you are not, otherwise you would have said so. If you have no experience of seeing this, and are attempting to disagree with someone who has, then there is only one tit here.

 

I am also very pleased you think winning the league cup,  is such a magnificent achievement, that it puts into context qualification for the Champions League being in your opinion, utter s****. I suggest you spill your bitterness to some of our managers for picking weakened teams in the League Cup rather than stupidly blame the directors for picking the wrong teams - and if you don't see that, then you really are a tit.  mackems.gif

 

 

 

Great reply but we were talking about Bates first 10 years vs Freddies.

 

You foolishly claimed Chelsea's success was all down to Harding (who joined after Bates had been in the job 12 years) and that they won nowt before that.

 

This is  a lie as I have proven.

 

As for the Champions League did that exist in Bates first 10 years?

 

If it didn't it is idiotic to mention it.

 

BTW the full members cup and the zenith data cup were not the league cup - wrong again Mr 'Facts'

 

 

YOu may be talking about Bates' first 10 years put against Freds, but I'm not. I never was.

 

I'm answering the post, I'm saying that I would rather Shepherd was chairman of my club than Bates. Nothing more nothing less, and I've said why.

 

It isn't idiotic to mention the Champions League at all, not when you know full well I am using it in the context of high premiership places, I think its idiotic of you to totally ignore this and these positions and put it against winning the League Cup, also ignoring the fact that poor decisions by our managers and lack lustre displays by our own players have clearly cost us trophies, and nothing else.

 

Only a complete idiot would blame the board for players underperforming in big matches, or the manager picking weakened teams.

 

And, if you seriously consider the Full members Cup and the Zenith Data cup as superior to such high league positions, it proves beyond any doubt you are an idiot. BTW, I never professed to being an expert about Chelsea, but now you mention it, I remember now, its the smoggies that Chelsea beat in the Final. And the smoggies had flags all over their town proclaiming "boro at Wembley". Yeh, right, I was really envious. 

 

 

You're first sentence is yet another lie, I've highlighted the bit in purple where YOU mention Bates first decade.

 

A decade where Chelsea won 2 trophies, before Harding became involved.

 

When Bates brought more success to an impoverished Chelsea than Fred brought to the hugely popular club he took charge of.

 

no, I'm responding to others. My first post was to say that I wouldn't want Bates in preference to Shepherd and I've said why.

 

I've also asked you if you know how Chelsea were before Harding joined the board, and that Chelsea fans will tell you that Harding was instrumental in setting the club up for the success that followed.

 

You can dispute this all you like, but as you don't reply to my comment asking what you know about Chelsea pre-harding, it is clear that you don't know.

 

 

Yet again your first sentence is another lie.

 

You weren't  responding to 'others', you were responding to ME, thats why you have quoted ME

 

 

substitute "You" for "others" then, if it makes you happy.

 

Sigh.

 

i take it you have no further comment to when I have said that you have zero experience or knowledge of Chelsea before Harding joined the board then ?

 

mackems.gif

 

Do you post on toontastic  care to tell us what name you use 

 

 

Yes your stupid question made me chuckle aswell.

 

Having repeatedly  demonstrated that I have knowledge of Chelsea before Harding joined their board I can only laugh at you for asking such an idiotic question.

 

Tee Hee

 

And I don't post on toontastic and therefore don't have a username

 

 

you don't appear to have much knowledge of Chelsea, pre Harding. Or Newcastle if you think Shepherd was so bad  mackems.gif

 

Tee hee

 

 

Once again I have demonstrated my knowledge of Chelsea pre Harding - I believe I informed YOU about the success they had under Bates before Harding joined.

 

 

 

To the rest of the board I do apologise for these quote pyramids buts its the only way to keep track of a proven serial liar.

 

For some reason, you seem to be quite venomous. Are you sure you aren't one of that toontastic crowd  mackems.gif

 

The fact that I wondered what those cups are, shows how important they were. Hardly much to trumpet about really.

 

Do you think that when Leicester beat Tranmere, and the smogs and Spurs won the League Cup, that they won because they had better directors than we did ?

 

Hilarious  mackems.gif

 

You could explain how we didn't win a cup under Keegan if you like, when we clearly had a better team than Everton who beat us in the quarter final in 1995 and went on to win it ? Was that the directors fault too  mackems.gif

 

And losing the lead we had in 1996, was that the directors fault ?

 

Tee hee.

 

Biggest load of bollocks I've heard in ages, and thats saying something. Are you Ozzie Mandiarse in disguise ?

 

 

[Baggio]

will be good for leeds IMO, a chairman with a bit more cash than bates, and who genuinly, despite how fookin shi*e he is, does appaear to care. One things for sure though, leeds will have graeme souness in charge to help them climb through the ranks

 

Alan Shearer ?

 

 

 

Rob Lee, Les Ferdinand and Stephen Spence as his backroom team apparently.

[NE5]

I said I wasn't this beermonster, so why do you keep harping on about it like a blubbering rock ape ?

 

Most people have a problem with Middlesbrough, on account of feeling sorry for people who have to live there

 

If not, then their chip on the shoulder about Newcastle and Sunderland taking absolutely no notice of them.

 

Still no denying of LeazesMag this time. What happened to your vehement denial of LeazesMag last time? I beg you have lied and lied, misled and misled so many times you have forgotten that you are not supposed to be LeazesMag. Poor Beermonster!

 

Shame on you on your stupid, naive, silly, discriminative, disgusting and hideous stereotyping of people living in Middlesbrough, and people in general.

 

Shame on you, carrying on with this beermonster stuff, when I've told you it isn't me.

 

The use of the name LeazesMag has been explained, go look. I didn't realise that their was some sort of rule that people had to use the same name on all message boards. On here, I am NE5. Silly boy.

 

As for Middlesboro, they do have a chip on their shoulders about Geordies and their small time town, but one day when you grow up you may develop a sense of humour, even if you never have any common sense.

 

 

[NE5]

 

Great reply but we were talking about Bates first 10 years vs Freddies.

 

You foolishly claimed Chelsea's success was all down to Harding (who joined after Bates had been in the job 12 years) and that they won nowt before that.

 

This is  a lie as I have proven.

 

As for the Champions League did that exist in Bates first 10 years?

 

If it didn't it is idiotic to mention it.

 

BTW the full members cup and the zenith data cup were not the league cup - wrong again Mr 'Facts'

 

 

Aye, they were the same competition and one that none of the big teams took seriously. It's quite amazing that you're submitting this as proof  of how great your man Ken Bates is, but then was it you who mentioned diarrohea earlier on? You certainly seem to fill your posts with it regardless. The assertion that this competition is an indicator of great work by your man Bates is a s**** on, for sure.

 

I suppose you'll soon be telling everybody that the Newcastle Board ousted by SJH was actually excellent because we won the Texaco Cup (twice) and the Anglo Italian Cup?

 

Awwww thats so sweet coming to your buddy's rescue because he needs a rest from lying through his teeth.

 

I'll clarify your first sentence now.

The Full Members Cup and the Zenith Data Systems Cup were the same competition but they were not the League Cup as your fellow Shepherd leghumper   NE5 seems to think.

I mentioned the two trophies not 'as proof of how great Ken Bates is' - as you seem to think - but merely to prove he brought trophies to Stamford Bridge - a feat Freddie was unable to surpass for us.

 

BTW its a very tired old trick to put words into your opponents mouth then to rubbish what they have supposed to have said.

 

Its also very pathetic.

 

As for your last line suppose all you want - just don't attack me on the basis of your poorly thought out conclusions.

 

oh dear. For someone determined to show they are a Bates leghumper, thats pretty poor.  mackems.gif

 

By the way, this is just a reply, to YOU. The same as I responded to the quotes "last decade". I wouldn't normally spout such silly comments as "leghumper".

 

Nobody gives a toss about those 2 trophies, so get a life. As HTL said, Newcastle won a couple of meaningless trophies in the 1970's so much so I bet the younger lads haven't heard of those cups either.

 

By the way, even qualifying for the intertoto needed a higher league position to qualify ....... 

 

 

[NE5]

will be good for leeds IMO, a chairman with a bit more cash than bates, and who genuinly, despite how fookin shi*e he is, does appaear to care. One things for sure though, leeds will have graeme souness in charge to help them climb through the ranks

 

Alan Shearer ?

 

 

 

Rob Lee, Les Ferdinand and Stephen Spence as his backroom team apparently.

 

Is Ken Bates really Ozzie or 2sheds do you think ?

 

 

[NE5]

Does anyone on here actually respect the views of someone who thinks  mackems.gif is an argument winner?

 

NE5, I realise this will be followed by the extremely witty "toonspastic" comment, but I'll try anyway. Grow up a bit will ya. You might be the same age as Sam Allardyce, but my 4 year old niece is more mature.

 

Back to the point though  - if it were a choice between FS and KB then I think 99% of people would choose FS. It's a bit like asking someone if they want to be stabbed in the hand or stabbed in the eye though.

 

Grow up and run a message board for adults where they don't edit peoples posts and avatars.

 

At least you have the sense to realise that 99% of people would choose Shepherd before Bates, I'll give you that much. Thats all this thread was about, what a shame some idiots have to start spouting bile and anger.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

 

Great reply but we were talking about Bates first 10 years vs Freddies.

 

You foolishly claimed Chelsea's success was all down to Harding (who joined after Bates had been in the job 12 years) and that they won nowt before that.

 

This is  a lie as I have proven.

 

As for the Champions League did that exist in Bates first 10 years?

 

If it didn't it is idiotic to mention it.

 

BTW the full members cup and the zenith data cup were not the league cup - wrong again Mr 'Facts'

 

 

Aye, they were the same competition and one that none of the big teams took seriously. It's quite amazing that you're submitting this as proof  of how great your man Ken Bates is, but then was it you who mentioned diarrohea earlier on? You certainly seem to fill your posts with it regardless. The assertion that this competition is an indicator of great work by your man Bates is a s**** on, for sure.

 

I suppose you'll soon be telling everybody that the Newcastle Board ousted by SJH was actually excellent because we won the Texaco Cup (twice) and the Anglo Italian Cup?

 

Awwww thats so sweet coming to your buddy's rescue because he needs a rest from lying through his teeth.

 

I'll clarify your first sentence now.

The Full Members Cup and the Zenith Data Systems Cup were the same competition but they were not the League Cup as your fellow Shepherd leghumper NE5 seems to think.

I mentioned the two trophies not 'as proof of how great Ken Bates is' - as you seem to think - but merely to prove he brought trophies to Stamford Bridge - a feat Freddie was unable to surpass for us.

 

BTW its a very tired old trick to put words into your opponents mouth then to rubbish what they have supposed to have said.

 

Its also very pathetic.

 

As for your last line suppose all you want - just don't attack me on the basis of your poorly thought out conclusions.

 

More diarrohea I see. You say you'll "clarify" my first sentence and then you don't. Are you mentally challenged, or just a liar?

 

[Howaythelads]

I said I wasn't this beermonster, so why do you keep harping on about it like a blubbering rock ape ?

 

Most people have a problem with Middlesbrough, on account of feeling sorry for people who have to live there

 

If not, then their chip on the shoulder about Newcastle and Sunderland taking absolutely no notice of them.

 

Still no denying of LeazesMag this time. What happened to your vehement denial of LeazesMag last time? I beg you have lied and lied, misled and misled so many times you have forgotten that you are not supposed to be LeazesMag. Poor Beermonster!

 

Shame on you on your stupid, naive, silly, discriminative, disgusting and hideous stereotyping of people living in Middlesbrough, and people in general.

 

omg

[2sheds]

NE5 I listed 4 points which you ignored. so I'll limit this reply to just one point.[/color]

 

As I have pointed out on numerous occasions, the only time we achieved 3 consecutive top 5 finishes in the last 50 years, was when Shepherd was chairman. Fact.

 

FACT - shepherd wasn't most successful chairman in our history - Bates was for Chelsea FACT.

 

3 consecutive top 5 finishes does not compare in the slightest to what Chelsea won in Bates time.

 

European Cup Winners' Cup winners:  1998. Full Members Cup winners: 1986. European SuperCup winners: 1998. FA Cup winners 1997, 2000. Charity Shield winners: 2000.

 

 

 

 

probably because, Chelsea had very little history, to speak of. Before Bates.

 

Fact.

 

Certainly nowhere near ours.

 

Fact.

 

Did you go to Stamford Bridge before Harding joined the board at Chelsea ? How much about Chelsea do you know, pre - Bates, and his first decade ?

 

 

 

I know from my quote which once again you've chosen to ignore that they won the full members cup in Bates first decade which is more than we won in Freds 10 years in charge.

 

I couldn't give a toss, because I know how much of a s*** club Chelsea were before Harding stepped in - also winning nowt until that time. You clearly don't, and you also are one of those with a daft agenda against Shepherd and Hall for calling you names, or whatever your problem with them is.

 

 

So you're accounting Chelseas success to Harding, yet when we try and criticise Shepard for what he's done for this club, its the Boards fault, in your world, are chairmen responsible for anything? If you were to talk about arsenal in 10 years time and ask how Hill-wood did as chairmen, are you going to say one individual in David Dein was responsible, we know that he was very influential but does the detract from Hill Woods achievements because in the real world when your at the top of your business you are accountable for what occurs, we cant truly account for every single action and provide a proper analysis so in the end you HAVE to generalise and look at the larger picture, if Harding was influential its irrelevant, just like Dougie Hall has been irrelvant in most of your arguments FOR Shepard even though in can be argued that he was instrumental in situation we are in now. So you take a step back and try to assess everything that has occured under his tenure ship. Bates, £80m debt, refurbished stadium left the club in a very healthy situation with the new owners, 2/3 years earlier than the current billionaire owner trend. plenty of major trophies,

Shepard £80m debt, refurbished stadium left in a reasonably healthy situation.....an intertoto cup/vase/bowl. In the end, whats been described above is generally the hallmark to what all Charimen are judged against. True?

 

The common denominator is that the chairman is not the sole person responsible for anything. The situation at Chelsea was that Bates was a horrible s*** doing a s*** of a job until Harding stepped in.

 

The club then had some good success, but over the years Bates was running it back into the ground again, his Chelsea village project - which he had been advised not to proceed with, was bankrupting the club - until Abramovic came along. Or Chelsea would have gone the way of Leeds.

 

This is the scenario. Like it or not. I can't for the life of me understand how anyone can have a good word to say about Ken Bates, or defend him. Whats the point

 

Chelsea fans will tell you that Harding was hugely influential, and without him, the club wouldn't have did what it did, by the way, not me. Although, I do agree.

 

 

Harding joined Chelsea in 1994.

 

By then Chelsea had already won 2 trophies under Bates (86 and 90) - a better record than your hero Freddie

 

PS I've highlighted the bits in bold that you choose to ignore , and the bit where you make a tit of yourself in red just to help you realise where you went wrong

 

on the contrary, I AM aware of how much of a s*** club Chelsea were, as I said, whereas you are not, otherwise you would have said so. If you have no experience of seeing this, and are attempting to disagree with someone who has, then there is only one tit here.

 

I am also very pleased you think winning the league cup,  is such a magnificent achievement, that it puts into context qualification for the Champions League being in your opinion, utter s****. I suggest you spill your bitterness to some of our managers for picking weakened teams in the League Cup rather than stupidly blame the directors for picking the wrong teams - and if you don't see that, then you really are a tit.  mackems.gif

 

 

 

Great reply but we were talking about Bates first 10 years vs Freddies.

 

You foolishly claimed Chelsea's success was all down to Harding (who joined after Bates had been in the job 12 years) and that they won nowt before that.

 

This is  a lie as I have proven.

 

As for the Champions League did that exist in Bates first 10 years?

 

If it didn't it is idiotic to mention it.

 

BTW the full members cup and the zenith data cup were not the league cup - wrong again Mr 'Facts'

 

 

YOu may be talking about Bates' first 10 years put against Freds, but I'm not. I never was.

 

I'm answering the post, I'm saying that I would rather Shepherd was chairman of my club than Bates. Nothing more nothing less, and I've said why.

 

It isn't idiotic to mention the Champions League at all, not when you know full well I am using it in the context of high premiership places, I think its idiotic of you to totally ignore this and these positions and put it against winning the League Cup, also ignoring the fact that poor decisions by our managers and lack lustre displays by our own players have clearly cost us trophies, and nothing else.

 

Only a complete idiot would blame the board for players underperforming in big matches, or the manager picking weakened teams.

 

And, if you seriously consider the Full members Cup and the Zenith Data cup as superior to such high league positions, it proves beyond any doubt you are an idiot. BTW, I never professed to being an expert about Chelsea, but now you mention it, I remember now, its the smoggies that Chelsea beat in the Final. And the smoggies had flags all over their town proclaiming "boro at Wembley". Yeh, right, I was really envious. 

 

 

You're first sentence is yet another lie, I've highlighted the bit in purple where YOU mention Bates first decade.

 

A decade where Chelsea won 2 trophies, before Harding became involved.

 

When Bates brought more success to an impoverished Chelsea than Fred brought to the hugely popular club he took charge of.

 

no, I'm responding to others. My first post was to say that I wouldn't want Bates in preference to Shepherd and I've said why.

 

I've also asked you if you know how Chelsea were before Harding joined the board, and that Chelsea fans will tell you that Harding was instrumental in setting the club up for the success that followed.

 

You can dispute this all you like, but as you don't reply to my comment asking what you know about Chelsea pre-harding, it is clear that you don't know.

 

 

Yet again your first sentence is another lie.

 

You weren't  responding to 'others', you were responding to ME, thats why you have quoted ME

 

 

substitute "You" for "others" then, if it makes you happy.

 

Sigh.

 

i take it you have no further comment to when I have said that you have zero experience or knowledge of Chelsea before Harding joined the board then ?

 

mackems.gif

 

Do you post on toontastic  care to tell us what name you use 

 

 

Yes your stupid question made me chuckle aswell.

 

Having repeatedly  demonstrated that I have knowledge of Chelsea before Harding joined their board I can only laugh at you for asking such an idiotic question.

 

Tee Hee

 

And I don't post on toontastic and therefore don't have a username

 

 

you don't appear to have much knowledge of Chelsea, pre Harding. Or Newcastle if you think Shepherd was so bad  mackems.gif

 

Tee hee

 

 

Once again I have demonstrated my knowledge of Chelsea pre Harding - I believe I informed YOU about the success they had under Bates before Harding joined.

 

 

 

To the rest of the board I do apologise for these quote pyramids buts its the only way to keep track of a proven serial liar.

 

For some reason, you seem to be quite venomous. Are you sure you aren't one of that toontastic crowd  mackems.gif

 

The fact that I wondered what those cups are, shows how important they were. Hardly much to trumpet about really.

 

Do you think that when Leicester beat Tranmere, and the smogs and Spurs won the League Cup, that they won because they had better directors than we did ?

 

Hilarious  mackems.gif

 

You could explain how we didn't win a cup under Keegan if you like, when we clearly had a better team than Everton who beat us in the quarter final in 1995 and went on to win it ? Was that the directors fault too  mackems.gif

 

And losing the lead we had in 1996, was that the directors fault ?

 

Tee hee.

 

Biggest load of bollocks I've heard in ages, and thats saying something. Are you Ozzie Mandiarse in disguise ?

 

 

The biggest load of bollocks you've heard in ages is your own thoughts - I've never said any of those things you imply I've said.

 

If I have - post them.

 

BTW I've just ticked off your little friend HTL for attempting to pull the same shoddy trick.

 

The only thing I've asserted in this thread is that Bates saw more trophies come to Stamford Bridge than Freddie saw come to SJP.

 

Its a pity you can't accept that fact - instead you just want to post a succession of meaningless bluster and flat out lies to justify your weak position in this matter.

[Baggio]

will be good for leeds IMO, a chairman with a bit more cash than bates, and who genuinly, despite how fookin shi*e he is, does appaear to care. One things for sure though, leeds will have graeme souness in charge to help them climb through the ranks

 

Alan Shearer ?

 

 

 

Rob Lee, Les Ferdinand and Stephen Spence as his backroom team apparently.

 

Is Ken Bates really Ozzie or 2sheds do you think ?

 

 

 

Ozzie possibly, he's similar to Bates in that he knows little about football.

[2sheds]

 

Great reply but we were talking about Bates first 10 years vs Freddies.

 

You foolishly claimed Chelsea's success was all down to Harding (who joined after Bates had been in the job 12 years) and that they won nowt before that.

 

This is  a lie as I have proven.

 

As for the Champions League did that exist in Bates first 10 years?

 

If it didn't it is idiotic to mention it.

 

BTW the full members cup and the zenith data cup were not the league cup - wrong again Mr 'Facts'

 

 

Aye, they were the same competition and one that none of the big teams took seriously. It's quite amazing that you're submitting this as proof  of how great your man Ken Bates is, but then was it you who mentioned diarrohea earlier on? You certainly seem to fill your posts with it regardless. The assertion that this competition is an indicator of great work by your man Bates is a s**** on, for sure.

 

I suppose you'll soon be telling everybody that the Newcastle Board ousted by SJH was actually excellent because we won the Texaco Cup (twice) and the Anglo Italian Cup?

 

Awwww thats so sweet coming to your buddy's rescue because he needs a rest from lying through his teeth.

 

I'll clarify your first sentence now.

The Full Members Cup and the Zenith Data Systems Cup were the same competition but they were not the League Cup as your fellow Shepherd leghumper NE5 seems to think.

I mentioned the two trophies not 'as proof of how great Ken Bates is' - as you seem to think - but merely to prove he brought trophies to Stamford Bridge - a feat Freddie was unable to surpass for us.

 

BTW its a very tired old trick to put words into your opponents mouth then to rubbish what they have supposed to have said.

 

Its also very pathetic.

 

As for your last line suppose all you want - just don't attack me on the basis of your poorly thought out conclusions.

 

More diarrohea I see. You say you'll "clarify" my first sentence and then you don't. Are you mentally challenged, or just a liar?

 

I did clarify your first sentence - you had worded it ambiguously.

 

Sorry if my answer makes NE5 look bad by not knowing the difference between the full members cup/zenith data cup on one hand and the league cup on the other.

[NE5]

NE5 I listed 4 points which you ignored. so I'll limit this reply to just one point.[/color]

 

As I have pointed out on numerous occasions, the only time we achieved 3 consecutive top 5 finishes in the last 50 years, was when Shepherd was chairman. Fact.

 

FACT - shepherd wasn't most successful chairman in our history - Bates was for Chelsea FACT.

 

3 consecutive top 5 finishes does not compare in the slightest to what Chelsea won in Bates time.

 

European Cup Winners' Cup winners:  1998. Full Members Cup winners: 1986. European SuperCup winners: 1998. FA Cup winners 1997, 2000. Charity Shield winners: 2000.

 

 

 

 

probably because, Chelsea had very little history, to speak of. Before Bates.

 

Fact.

 

Certainly nowhere near ours.

 

Fact.

 

Did you go to Stamford Bridge before Harding joined the board at Chelsea ? How much about Chelsea do you know, pre - Bates, and his first decade ?

 

 

 

I know from my quote which once again you've chosen to ignore that they won the full members cup in Bates first decade which is more than we won in Freds 10 years in charge.

 

I couldn't give a toss, because I know how much of a s*** club Chelsea were before Harding stepped in - also winning nowt until that time. You clearly don't, and you also are one of those with a daft agenda against Shepherd and Hall for calling you names, or whatever your problem with them is.

 

 

So you're accounting Chelseas success to Harding, yet when we try and criticise Shepard for what he's done for this club, its the Boards fault, in your world, are chairmen responsible for anything? If you were to talk about arsenal in 10 years time and ask how Hill-wood did as chairmen, are you going to say one individual in David Dein was responsible, we know that he was very influential but does the detract from Hill Woods achievements because in the real world when your at the top of your business you are accountable for what occurs, we cant truly account for every single action and provide a proper analysis so in the end you HAVE to generalise and look at the larger picture, if Harding was influential its irrelevant, just like Dougie Hall has been irrelvant in most of your arguments FOR Shepard even though in can be argued that he was instrumental in situation we are in now. So you take a step back and try to assess everything that has occured under his tenure ship. Bates, £80m debt, refurbished stadium left the club in a very healthy situation with the new owners, 2/3 years earlier than the current billionaire owner trend. plenty of major trophies,

Shepard £80m debt, refurbished stadium left in a reasonably healthy situation.....an intertoto cup/vase/bowl. In the end, whats been described above is generally the hallmark to what all Charimen are judged against. True?

 

The common denominator is that the chairman is not the sole person responsible for anything. The situation at Chelsea was that Bates was a horrible s*** doing a s*** of a job until Harding stepped in.

 

The club then had some good success, but over the years Bates was running it back into the ground again, his Chelsea village project - which he had been advised not to proceed with, was bankrupting the club - until Abramovic came along. Or Chelsea would have gone the way of Leeds.

 

This is the scenario. Like it or not. I can't for the life of me understand how anyone can have a good word to say about Ken Bates, or defend him. Whats the point

 

Chelsea fans will tell you that Harding was hugely influential, and without him, the club wouldn't have did what it did, by the way, not me. Although, I do agree.

 

 

Harding joined Chelsea in 1994.

 

By then Chelsea had already won 2 trophies under Bates (86 and 90) - a better record than your hero Freddie

 

PS I've highlighted the bits in bold that you choose to ignore , and the bit where you make a tit of yourself in red just to help you realise where you went wrong

 

on the contrary, I AM aware of how much of a s*** club Chelsea were, as I said, whereas you are not, otherwise you would have said so. If you have no experience of seeing this, and are attempting to disagree with someone who has, then there is only one tit here.

 

I am also very pleased you think winning the league cup,  is such a magnificent achievement, that it puts into context qualification for the Champions League being in your opinion, utter s****. I suggest you spill your bitterness to some of our managers for picking weakened teams in the League Cup rather than stupidly blame the directors for picking the wrong teams - and if you don't see that, then you really are a tit.  mackems.gif

 

 

 

Great reply but we were talking about Bates first 10 years vs Freddies.

 

You foolishly claimed Chelsea's success was all down to Harding (who joined after Bates had been in the job 12 years) and that they won nowt before that.

 

This is  a lie as I have proven.

 

As for the Champions League did that exist in Bates first 10 years?

 

If it didn't it is idiotic to mention it.

 

BTW the full members cup and the zenith data cup were not the league cup - wrong again Mr 'Facts'

 

 

YOu may be talking about Bates' first 10 years put against Freds, but I'm not. I never was.

 

I'm answering the post, I'm saying that I would rather Shepherd was chairman of my club than Bates. Nothing more nothing less, and I've said why.

 

It isn't idiotic to mention the Champions League at all, not when you know full well I am using it in the context of high premiership places, I think its idiotic of you to totally ignore this and these positions and put it against winning the League Cup, also ignoring the fact that poor decisions by our managers and lack lustre displays by our own players have clearly cost us trophies, and nothing else.

 

Only a complete idiot would blame the board for players underperforming in big matches, or the manager picking weakened teams.

 

And, if you seriously consider the Full members Cup and the Zenith Data cup as superior to such high league positions, it proves beyond any doubt you are an idiot. BTW, I never professed to being an expert about Chelsea, but now you mention it, I remember now, its the smoggies that Chelsea beat in the Final. And the smoggies had flags all over their town proclaiming "boro at Wembley". Yeh, right, I was really envious. 

 

 

You're first sentence is yet another lie, I've highlighted the bit in purple where YOU mention Bates first decade.

 

A decade where Chelsea won 2 trophies, before Harding became involved.

 

When Bates brought more success to an impoverished Chelsea than Fred brought to the hugely popular club he took charge of.

 

no, I'm responding to others. My first post was to say that I wouldn't want Bates in preference to Shepherd and I've said why.

 

I've also asked you if you know how Chelsea were before Harding joined the board, and that Chelsea fans will tell you that Harding was instrumental in setting the club up for the success that followed.

 

You can dispute this all you like, but as you don't reply to my comment asking what you know about Chelsea pre-harding, it is clear that you don't know.

 

 

Yet again your first sentence is another lie.

 

You weren't  responding to 'others', you were responding to ME, thats why you have quoted ME

 

 

substitute "You" for "others" then, if it makes you happy.

 

Sigh.

 

i take it you have no further comment to when I have said that you have zero experience or knowledge of Chelsea before Harding joined the board then ?

 

mackems.gif

 

Do you post on toontastic  care to tell us what name you use 

 

 

Yes your stupid question made me chuckle aswell.

 

Having repeatedly  demonstrated that I have knowledge of Chelsea before Harding joined their board I can only laugh at you for asking such an idiotic question.

 

Tee Hee

 

And I don't post on toontastic and therefore don't have a username

 

 

you don't appear to have much knowledge of Chelsea, pre Harding. Or Newcastle if you think Shepherd was so bad  mackems.gif

 

Tee hee

 

 

Once again I have demonstrated my knowledge of Chelsea pre Harding - I believe I informed YOU about the success they had under Bates before Harding joined.

 

 

 

To the rest of the board I do apologise for these quote pyramids buts its the only way to keep track of a proven serial liar.

 

For some reason, you seem to be quite venomous. Are you sure you aren't one of that toontastic crowd  mackems.gif

 

The fact that I wondered what those cups are, shows how important they were. Hardly much to trumpet about really.

 

Do you think that when Leicester beat Tranmere, and the smogs and Spurs won the League Cup, that they won because they had better directors than we did ?

 

Hilarious  mackems.gif

 

You could explain how we didn't win a cup under Keegan if you like, when we clearly had a better team than Everton who beat us in the quarter final in 1995 and went on to win it ? Was that the directors fault too  mackems.gif

 

And losing the lead we had in 1996, was that the directors fault ?

 

Tee hee.

 

Biggest load of bollocks I've heard in ages, and thats saying something. Are you Ozzie Mandiarse in disguise ?

 

 

The biggest load of bollocks you've heard in ages is your own thoughts - I've never said any of those things you imply I've said.

 

If I have - post them.

 

BTW I've just ticked off your little friend HTL for attempting to pull the same shoddy trick.

 

The only thing I've asserted in this thread is that Bates saw more trophies come to Stamford Bridge than Freddie saw come to SJP.

 

Its a pity you can't accept that fact - instead you just want to post a succession of meaningless bluster and flat out lies to justify your weak position in this matter.

 

Ok then, why do you think we haven't won a cup in the last 15 years, and the last 10 years.

 

Who do you blame, for the bottled Cup Finals, other big games, and the manager fielding weakened teams. Or do you think the managers were not allowed the resources to give us a better team than some of the clubs that have won the League Cup.

 

Answer truthfully, or be branded a liar or an idiot.

 

I haven't lied, I posted my opinion on the subject of this thread, and since you joined in, have responded to your childish anger and bile.

 

 

[NE5]

 

Great reply but we were talking about Bates first 10 years vs Freddies.

 

You foolishly claimed Chelsea's success was all down to Harding (who joined after Bates had been in the job 12 years) and that they won nowt before that.

 

This is  a lie as I have proven.

 

As for the Champions League did that exist in Bates first 10 years?

 

If it didn't it is idiotic to mention it.

 

BTW the full members cup and the zenith data cup were not the league cup - wrong again Mr 'Facts'

 

 

Aye, they were the same competition and one that none of the big teams took seriously. It's quite amazing that you're submitting this as proof  of how great your man Ken Bates is, but then was it you who mentioned diarrohea earlier on? You certainly seem to fill your posts with it regardless. The assertion that this competition is an indicator of great work by your man Bates is a s**** on, for sure.

 

I suppose you'll soon be telling everybody that the Newcastle Board ousted by SJH was actually excellent because we won the Texaco Cup (twice) and the Anglo Italian Cup?

 

Awwww thats so sweet coming to your buddy's rescue because he needs a rest from lying through his teeth.

 

I'll clarify your first sentence now.

The Full Members Cup and the Zenith Data Systems Cup were the same competition but they were not the League Cup as your fellow Shepherd leghumper NE5 seems to think.

I mentioned the two trophies not 'as proof of how great Ken Bates is' - as you seem to think - but merely to prove he brought trophies to Stamford Bridge - a feat Freddie was unable to surpass for us.

 

BTW its a very tired old trick to put words into your opponents mouth then to rubbish what they have supposed to have said.

 

Its also very pathetic.

 

As for your last line suppose all you want - just don't attack me on the basis of your poorly thought out conclusions.

 

More diarrohea I see. You say you'll "clarify" my first sentence and then you don't. Are you mentally challenged, or just a liar?

 

I did clarify your first sentence - you had worded it ambiguously.

 

Sorry if my answer makes NE5 look bad by not knowing the difference between the full members cup/zenith data cup on one hand and the league cup on the other.

 

Doesn't make me look anything, if anything it makes you look an idiot for taking those cups seroiusly, because nobody else did.