Freddie Shepherd to buy Leeds?!

[Howaythelads]

Boo Boo

 

Sort yourself out, ffs.

[2sheds]

NE5 I'd rather bump this thread to be honest.

 

Claiming Bates success at Chelsea is totally down to Hardings cash is very silly and helps show how inept Freddie was.

 

IF Chelsea's success is due to the £25 million Harding injected into the club - why didn't fred match this level with the £25 million he got from Northern Rock?

 

To quote yourself

I remember Chelsea before Harding stepped in, they were no better than the mackems, and us at the time for that matter, for a long time with Bates as chairman.

 

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't.

 

How can this be? :sad2:

 

 

 

 

 

[NE5]

NE5 I'd rather bump this thread to be honest.

 

Claiming Bates success at Chelsea is totally down to Hardings cash is very silly and helps show how inept Freddie was.

 

IF Chelsea's success is due to the £25 million Harding injected into the club - why didn't fred match this level with the £25 million he got from Northern Rock?

 

To quote yourself

I remember Chelsea before Harding stepped in, they were no better than the mackems, and us at the time for that matter, for a long time with Bates as chairman.

 

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't.

 

How can this be? :sad2:

 

 

I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem.

 

You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything.

 

How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet.

 

You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game.

 

Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot.

 

 

[macbeth]

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/sport/2007/09/12/how_deins_dead_money_helped_ki.html

 

Sir John Hall made the grandest of claims when he took over Newcastle United between 1989 and 1992; he was doing it, he said, for "the Geordie nation," the club would be central to the north-east's renaissance, running it was part of his social conscience.

 

The family's majority stake cost them around £3m, and they too have since sold in stages - 9.8% to the cable company NTL for £16m in 1998 and 1999, then in 2003, the club itself bought some of the family's shares back for £4.5m. In June this year, Mike Ashley paid £55.34m for the family's remaining 42% stake, bringing the total reaped by the Halls to £75.8m. Freddy Shepherd, and his brother Bruce, who paid around £2.4m for their 28% shareholding, received £37.3m from Ashley.

 

Never understood why Shep gets more grief than the Halls.... The RoI calculation can be done from the figures in bold.

 

I think it was because Douglas hid in the background just taking the money and rarely putting his face in the public eye. Freddie on the other hand loved the limelight, loved being asked to be on the TV and radio, and therefore was more likely to accidentally say something that wasn't quite what he meant. SO for example his statement that he had never taken a penny out of the club, was a bit silly, and just wound people up when they coudl see that not a penny was £500,000 per year in salary, and ~£1m per year in divis.

 

The Halls do deserve more criticism than they get, they get away with it through being less public, and for actually putting more of their own money in when it it was so desperately needed. People remember Sir John warmly, he was the catalyst.

[NE5]

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/sport/2007/09/12/how_deins_dead_money_helped_ki.html

 

Sir John Hall made the grandest of claims when he took over Newcastle United between 1989 and 1992; he was doing it, he said, for "the Geordie nation," the club would be central to the north-east's renaissance, running it was part of his social conscience.

 

The family's majority stake cost them around £3m, and they too have since sold in stages - 9.8% to the cable company NTL for £16m in 1998 and 1999, then in 2003, the club itself bought some of the family's shares back for £4.5m. In June this year, Mike Ashley paid £55.34m for the family's remaining 42% stake, bringing the total reaped by the Halls to £75.8m. Freddy Shepherd, and his brother Bruce, who paid around £2.4m for their 28% shareholding, received £37.3m from Ashley.

 

Never understood why Shep gets more grief than the Halls.... The RoI calculation can be done from the figures in bold.

 

I think it was because Douglas hid in the background just taking the money and rarely putting his face in the public eye. Freddie on the other hand loved the limelight, loved being asked to be on the TV and radio, and therefore was more likely to accidentally say something that wasn't quite what he meant. SO for example his statement that he had never taken a penny out of the club, was a bit silly, and just wound people up when they coudl see that not a penny was £500,000 per year in salary, and ~£1m per year in divis.

 

The Halls do deserve more criticism than they get, they get away with it through being less public, and for actually putting more of their own money in when it it was so desperately needed. People remember Sir John warmly, he was the catalyst.

 

They remember him fondly because the team did better, under the managership of Keegan, who was chosen by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher, but not Sir John who didn't really want to make the change and sack Ardiles.  [but they choose to ignore that bit because it doesn't suit them]

 

Its got absolutely bugger all to do with being "run as a business"

 

As for the rest of the post, its just the usual

 

 

 

[2sheds]

NE5 I'd rather bump this thread to be honest.

 

Claiming Bates success at Chelsea is totally down to Hardings cash is very silly and helps show how inept Freddie was.

 

IF Chelsea's success is due to the £25 million Harding injected into the club - why didn't fred match this level with the £25 million he got from Northern Rock?

 

To quote yourself

I remember Chelsea before Harding stepped in, they were no better than the mackems, and us at the time for that matter, for a long time with Bates as chairman.

 

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't.

 

How can this be? :sad2:

 

 

I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem.

 

You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything.

 

How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet.

 

You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game.

 

Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot.

 

Nice bit of waffle there NE5 but I don't believe this thread is about '87 other chairmen'

 

Its about Bates and Shepherd and how Bates managed to achieve more success after a cash injection while Freddie didn't.

 

EDIT PS I'm 42 - the last time anyone thought I was 'young' was in a different millennium 

 

 

 

 

[Baggio]

I used to love getting into huge threads with NE5 about the old board but even I've had enough of this one.

[NE5]

NE5 I'd rather bump this thread to be honest.

 

Claiming Bates success at Chelsea is totally down to Hardings cash is very silly and helps show how inept Freddie was.

 

IF Chelsea's success is due to the £25 million Harding injected into the club - why didn't fred match this level with the £25 million he got from Northern Rock?

 

To quote yourself

I remember Chelsea before Harding stepped in, they were no better than the mackems, and us at the time for that matter, for a long time with Bates as chairman.

 

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't.

 

How can this be? :sad2:

 

 

I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem.

 

You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything.

 

How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet.

 

You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game.

 

Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot.

 

Nice bit of waffle there NE5 but I don't believe this thread is about '87 other chairmen'

 

Its about Bates and Shepherd and how Bates managed to achieve more success after a cash injection while Freddie didn't.

 

EDIT PS I'm 42 - the last time anyone thought I was 'young' was in a different millennium 

 

 

well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it.

 

Which says something and its quite easy to guess what.

 

Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you.

 

 

[NE5]

I used to love getting into huge threads with NE5 about the old board but even I've had enough of this one.

 

I win 

[Guest alex]

[Mick]

 

They remember him fondly because the team did better, under the managership of Keegan, who was chosen by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher, but not Sir John who didn't really want to make the change and sack Ardiles.  [but they choose to ignore that bit because it doesn't suit them]

 

Its got absolutely bugger all to do with being "run as a business"

 

As for the rest of the post, its just the usual

 

 

 

 

You seem to forget that Keegan only came to Newcastle after Sir John rang Keegan and told him that only two people could save Newcastle and they were talking to each other (or words to that effect), Freddy Fletcher was the one who first mentioned Keegan as a possible manager, something to do with work they'd done together years earlier.

 

You're right about Sir John not wanting to sack Ardilles as they were friends and socialised together.

[NE5]

 

They remember him fondly because the team did better, under the managership of Keegan, who was chosen by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher, but not Sir John who didn't really want to make the change and sack Ardiles.  [but they choose to ignore that bit because it doesn't suit them]

 

Its got absolutely bugger all to do with being "run as a business"

 

As for the rest of the post, its just the usual

 

 

 

 

You seem to forget that Keegan only came to Newcastle after Sir John rang Keegan and told him that only two people could save Newcastle and they were talking to each other (or words to that effect), Freddy Fletcher was the one who first mentioned Keegan as a possible manager, something to do with work they'd done together years earlier.

 

You're right about Sir John not wanting to sack Ardilles as they were friends and socialised together.

 

Sir John rang Keegan and said they were the only 2 people who could save Newcastle after Keegan walked out after the Swindon game.

 

What do you think of a businessman, or a football chairman, who puts friendships above the interests of the football club when the club was on the way down to the 3rd division  ?

 

 

[Howaythelads]

NE5 I'd rather bump this thread to be honest.

 

Claiming Bates success at Chelsea is totally down to Hardings cash is very silly and helps show how inept Freddie was.

 

IF Chelsea's success is due to the £25 million Harding injected into the club - why didn't fred match this level with the £25 million he got from Northern Rock?

 

To quote yourself

I remember Chelsea before Harding stepped in, they were no better than the mackems, and us at the time for that matter, for a long time with Bates as chairman.

 

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't.

 

How can this be? :sad2:

 

 

I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem.

 

You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything.

 

How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet.

 

You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game.

 

Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot.

 

Nice bit of waffle there NE5 but I don't believe this thread is about '87 other chairmen'

 

Its about Bates and Shepherd and how Bates managed to achieve more success after a cash injection while Freddie didn't.

 

EDIT PS I'm 42 - the last time anyone thought I was 'young' was in a different millennium 

 

 

 

 

 

How come you're 42 and know so little about Newcastle United? Could it be that your interest started when we were promoted to the PL, that your negative reaction to Fred is based on the team not being as good as it was when Keegan was manager?

[Baggio]

 

They remember him fondly because the team did better, under the managership of Keegan, who was chosen by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher, but not Sir John who didn't really want to make the change and sack Ardiles.  [but they choose to ignore that bit because it doesn't suit them]

 

Its got absolutely bugger all to do with being "run as a business"

 

As for the rest of the post, its just the usual

 

 

 

 

You seem to forget that Keegan only came to Newcastle after Sir John rang Keegan and told him that only two people could save Newcastle and they were talking to each other (or words to that effect), Freddy Fletcher was the one who first mentioned Keegan as a possible manager, something to do with work they'd done together years earlier.

 

You're right about Sir John not wanting to sack Ardilles as they were friends and socialised together.

 

Sir John rang Keegan and said they were the only 2 people who could save Newcastle after Keegan walked out after the Swindon game.

 

What do you think of a businessman, or a football chairman, who puts friendships above the interests of the football club when the club was on the way down to the 3rd division  ?

 

 

 

Keegan walked out because he didn't get the financial backing from the board that had been promised when he took over.

[Howaythelads]

 

They remember him fondly because the team did better, under the managership of Keegan, who was chosen by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher, but not Sir John who didn't really want to make the change and sack Ardiles.  [but they choose to ignore that bit because it doesn't suit them]

 

Its got absolutely bugger all to do with being "run as a business"

 

As for the rest of the post, its just the usual

 

 

 

 

You seem to forget that Keegan only came to Newcastle after Sir John rang Keegan and told him that only two people could save Newcastle and they were talking to each other (or words to that effect), Freddy Fletcher was the one who first mentioned Keegan as a possible manager, something to do with work they'd done together years earlier.

 

You're right about Sir John not wanting to sack Ardilles as they were friends and socialised together.

 

Sir John rang Keegan and said they were the only 2 people who could save Newcastle after Keegan walked out after the Swindon game.

 

What do you think of a businessman, or a football chairman, who puts friendships above the interests of the football club when the club was on the way down to the 3rd division  ?

 

 

 

Blimey! The man who walks on water who didn't want Keegan also didn't want to sack the manager who was taking the club to oblivion because he was his drinking mate.

 

I doubt you'll get an answer to your question because obviously the correct answer doesn't show SJH in a good light. Just as well this wasn't Fred because if it was we would ever hear the end of it.

[Howaythelads]

 

They remember him fondly because the team did better, under the managership of Keegan, who was chosen by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher, but not Sir John who didn't really want to make the change and sack Ardiles.  [but they choose to ignore that bit because it doesn't suit them]

 

Its got absolutely bugger all to do with being "run as a business"

 

As for the rest of the post, its just the usual

 

 

 

 

You seem to forget that Keegan only came to Newcastle after Sir John rang Keegan and told him that only two people could save Newcastle and they were talking to each other (or words to that effect), Freddy Fletcher was the one who first mentioned Keegan as a possible manager, something to do with work they'd done together years earlier.

 

You're right about Sir John not wanting to sack Ardilles as they were friends and socialised together.

 

Sir John rang Keegan and said they were the only 2 people who could save Newcastle after Keegan walked out after the Swindon game.

 

What do you think of a businessman, or a football chairman, who puts friendships above the interests of the football club when the club was on the way down to the 3rd division  ?

 

 

 

Keegan walked out because he didn't get the financial backing from the board that had been promised when he took over.

 

Your point? Do you think this is news, or something? Or do you just want to waste bandwidth posting something even the Bulgarian bloke knows.

[2sheds]

NE5 I'd rather bump this thread to be honest.

 

Claiming Bates success at Chelsea is totally down to Hardings cash is very silly and helps show how inept Freddie was.

 

IF Chelsea's success is due to the £25 million Harding injected into the club - why didn't fred match this level with the £25 million he got from Northern Rock?

 

To quote yourself

I remember Chelsea before Harding stepped in, they were no better than the mackems, and us at the time for that matter, for a long time with Bates as chairman.

 

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't.

 

How can this be? :sad2:

 

 

I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem.

 

You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything.

 

How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet.

 

You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game.

 

Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot.

 

Nice bit of waffle there NE5 but I don't believe this thread is about '87 other chairmen'

 

Its about Bates and Shepherd and how Bates managed to achieve more success after a cash injection while Freddie didn't.

 

EDIT PS I'm 42 - the last time anyone thought I was 'young' was in a different millennium 

 

 

well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it.

 

Which says something and its quite easy to guess what.

 

Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you.

 

Yes you made your feelings on the various trophies clear at the bottom of page 10 when you wrote:

Don't agree at all with the micky mouse cup analogy. Sorry like. I'd be pleased to win the UEFA Cup or the League Cup, but couldn't give a toss about the Full Members Cup, the Zenith Data Cup, the north east league or even the intertoto for that matter, just so long as we go through to the real competition the next time we are in it.

 

And thus dismissed the only piece of silverware fat fred brought home

 

Now is there any chance of you addressing which chairman used their cash injection most effectively?

[Baggio]

 

They remember him fondly because the team did better, under the managership of Keegan, who was chosen by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher, but not Sir John who didn't really want to make the change and sack Ardiles.  [but they choose to ignore that bit because it doesn't suit them]

 

Its got absolutely bugger all to do with being "run as a business"

 

As for the rest of the post, its just the usual

 

 

 

 

You seem to forget that Keegan only came to Newcastle after Sir John rang Keegan and told him that only two people could save Newcastle and they were talking to each other (or words to that effect), Freddy Fletcher was the one who first mentioned Keegan as a possible manager, something to do with work they'd done together years earlier.

 

You're right about Sir John not wanting to sack Ardilles as they were friends and socialised together.

 

Sir John rang Keegan and said they were the only 2 people who could save Newcastle after Keegan walked out after the Swindon game.

 

What do you think of a businessman, or a football chairman, who puts friendships above the interests of the football club when the club was on the way down to the 3rd division  ?

 

 

 

Keegan walked out because he didn't get the financial backing from the board that had been promised when he took over.

 

Your point? Do you think this is news, or something? Or do you just want to waste bandwidth posting something even the Bulgarian bloke knows.

 

I was joking with NE5 actually, toughguy.

 

As for the Bulgarian, you two have something in common then as neither of you go to games. Sky boy.

[Howaythelads]

NE5 I'd rather bump this thread to be honest.

 

Claiming Bates success at Chelsea is totally down to Hardings cash is very silly and helps show how inept Freddie was.

 

IF Chelsea's success is due to the £25 million Harding injected into the club - why didn't fred match this level with the £25 million he got from Northern Rock?

 

To quote yourself

I remember Chelsea before Harding stepped in, they were no better than the mackems, and us at the time for that matter, for a long time with Bates as chairman.

 

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't.

 

How can this be? :sad2:

 

 

I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem.

 

You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything.

 

How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet.

 

You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game.

 

Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot.

 

Nice bit of waffle there NE5 but I don't believe this thread is about '87 other chairmen'

 

Its about Bates and Shepherd and how Bates managed to achieve more success after a cash injection while Freddie didn't.

 

EDIT PS I'm 42 - the last time anyone thought I was 'young' was in a different millennium 

 

 

well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it.

 

Which says something and its quite easy to guess what.

 

Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you.

 

Yes you made your feelings on the various trophies clear at the bottom of page 10 when you wrote:

Don't agree at all with the micky mouse cup analogy. Sorry like. I'd be pleased to win the UEFA Cup or the League Cup, but couldn't give a toss about the Full Members Cup, the Zenith Data Cup, the north east league or even the intertoto for that matter, just so long as we go through to the real competition the next time we are in it.

 

And thus dismissed the only piece of silverware fat fred brought home

 

Now is there any chance of you addressing which chairman used their cash injection most effectively?

 

Do you understand the role of the Board versus the role of the manager? If you think you do I'd appreciate a short description please.

 

Thanks in advance.

[Howaythelads]

 

They remember him fondly because the team did better, under the managership of Keegan, who was chosen by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher, but not Sir John who didn't really want to make the change and sack Ardiles.  [but they choose to ignore that bit because it doesn't suit them]

 

Its got absolutely bugger all to do with being "run as a business"

 

As for the rest of the post, its just the usual

 

 

 

 

You seem to forget that Keegan only came to Newcastle after Sir John rang Keegan and told him that only two people could save Newcastle and they were talking to each other (or words to that effect), Freddy Fletcher was the one who first mentioned Keegan as a possible manager, something to do with work they'd done together years earlier.

 

You're right about Sir John not wanting to sack Ardilles as they were friends and socialised together.

 

Sir John rang Keegan and said they were the only 2 people who could save Newcastle after Keegan walked out after the Swindon game.

 

What do you think of a businessman, or a football chairman, who puts friendships above the interests of the football club when the club was on the way down to the 3rd division  ?

 

 

 

Keegan walked out because he didn't get the financial backing from the board that had been promised when he took over.

 

Your point? Do you think this is news, or something? Or do you just want to waste bandwidth posting something even the Bulgarian bloke knows.

 

I was joking with NE5 actually, toughguy.

 

As for the Bulgarian, you two have something in common then as neither of you go to games. Sky boy.

 

mackems.gif

[NE5]

 

They remember him fondly because the team did better, under the managership of Keegan, who was chosen by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher, but not Sir John who didn't really want to make the change and sack Ardiles.  [but they choose to ignore that bit because it doesn't suit them]

 

Its got absolutely bugger all to do with being "run as a business"

 

As for the rest of the post, its just the usual

 

 

 

 

You seem to forget that Keegan only came to Newcastle after Sir John rang Keegan and told him that only two people could save Newcastle and they were talking to each other (or words to that effect), Freddy Fletcher was the one who first mentioned Keegan as a possible manager, something to do with work they'd done together years earlier.

 

You're right about Sir John not wanting to sack Ardilles as they were friends and socialised together.

 

Sir John rang Keegan and said they were the only 2 people who could save Newcastle after Keegan walked out after the Swindon game.

 

What do you think of a businessman, or a football chairman, who puts friendships above the interests of the football club when the club was on the way down to the 3rd division  ?

 

 

 

Keegan walked out because he didn't get the financial backing from the board that had been promised when he took over.

 

that is correct.

 

Expect that to be ignored too.

 

 

[NE5]

 

They remember him fondly because the team did better, under the managership of Keegan, who was chosen by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher, but not Sir John who didn't really want to make the change and sack Ardiles.  [but they choose to ignore that bit because it doesn't suit them]

 

Its got absolutely bugger all to do with being "run as a business"

 

As for the rest of the post, its just the usual

 

 

 

 

You seem to forget that Keegan only came to Newcastle after Sir John rang Keegan and told him that only two people could save Newcastle and they were talking to each other (or words to that effect), Freddy Fletcher was the one who first mentioned Keegan as a possible manager, something to do with work they'd done together years earlier.

 

You're right about Sir John not wanting to sack Ardilles as they were friends and socialised together.

 

Sir John rang Keegan and said they were the only 2 people who could save Newcastle after Keegan walked out after the Swindon game.

 

What do you think of a businessman, or a football chairman, who puts friendships above the interests of the football club when the club was on the way down to the 3rd division  ?

 

 

 

Keegan walked out because he didn't get the financial backing from the board that had been promised when he took over.

 

Your point? Do you think this is news, or something? Or do you just want to waste bandwidth posting something even the Bulgarian bloke knows.

 

the Bulgarian bloke seems to have disappeared, unless someone knows who he is now ?

 

 

[Howaythelads]

 

They remember him fondly because the team did better, under the managership of Keegan, who was chosen by Hall Jnr, Shepherd and Fletcher, but not Sir John who didn't really want to make the change and sack Ardiles.  [but they choose to ignore that bit because it doesn't suit them]

 

Its got absolutely bugger all to do with being "run as a business"

 

As for the rest of the post, its just the usual

 

 

 

 

You seem to forget that Keegan only came to Newcastle after Sir John rang Keegan and told him that only two people could save Newcastle and they were talking to each other (or words to that effect), Freddy Fletcher was the one who first mentioned Keegan as a possible manager, something to do with work they'd done together years earlier.

 

You're right about Sir John not wanting to sack Ardilles as they were friends and socialised together.

 

Sir John rang Keegan and said they were the only 2 people who could save Newcastle after Keegan walked out after the Swindon game.

 

What do you think of a businessman, or a football chairman, who puts friendships above the interests of the football club when the club was on the way down to the 3rd division  ?

 

 

 

Keegan walked out because he didn't get the financial backing from the board that had been promised when he took over.

 

Your point? Do you think this is news, or something? Or do you just want to waste bandwidth posting something even the Bulgarian bloke knows.

 

the Bulgarian bloke seems to have disappeared, unless someone knows who he is now ?

 

 

 

Lots of people do like to disappear and then reappear using a different name for some reason.

[Dave]

If anyone changes their username there's always a note underneath that tells everyone what it used to be.

[Howaythelads]

If anyone changes their username there's always a note underneath that tells everyone what it used to be.

 

So it's impossible to register under another name then? Just asking like, 'cos I don't know, but I can't see what there is to stop someone doing that.