Mort: I’m in charge

[Dr Venkman]

i refuse to believe there's just a simple fan/chairman relationship going on with NE5 and Shepherd, its baffling mate, honestly, how you spin things to suit, for example saying things like 'they're happy with mid table mediocrity this season' etc etc, you've removed all context, i'll be happy with mid table this season, it'll be an improvement, we've been s*** for years and we need to build back up to strength, i just DONT understand you

 

 

I take it you haven't read Morts comments about spendign in January [/astonished]

 

You must be someone else who can't accept bare facts laid out in front of you, when they don't suit your opinions ?

 

Basically, if the club don't act to fill glaring hole in the team, and say they won't act, what conclusion do you draw ?

 

We haven't been s*** for years either BTW. I thought you were one of the better posters, until you said that.

 

 

 

yeah, i've seen his comments, it made sense to me,  i'm giving him a clean slate so i'll wait until the end of the season to make my judgement on how their first season in charge went, given the circumstances

 

bare facts? we're specualting over what the club MIGHT do in january, there are no facts yet, and facts change my opinions, so, eh, what?

 

i'm not sure if its a break down in communication but as far as i'm aware by saying years that can class as 2 years at the least, and i feel pretty assured that we've been s*** for at least two years, i dont really mind what you think of me

 

 

well, I suppose if you've followed the club for 5 or 6 years, then the last 2 years could seem a long time.

 

And if you've only supported the club since 1992, then the last few years have been comparitively not too good.

 

But if you've supported the club longer than that, they have been a long way short of s***, and for that, you'll have to take my word for it.

 

 

 

no i wont, there are many other sources of information, i dont have to take your word for anything, you've never said anything thats changed my views, as i'm sure i've never said anything thats changed yours, might aswell just pack it in

 

 

Aye, and other sources of information will confirm that we have been a damn sight worse in previous decades than in the last couple of years.

 

oh you're joining in are you? i wasnt beamed into the planet 2 years ago, i have a decent understanding of our history, i still think we've been s*** for the last few years, i was simply saying i dont have to take his word for it because he tends to get a bit preachy if you dont nip it in the bud

 

Where was the, "na na ni na na....." I'm sure it would fit in well after your hissy bit in bold.

 

If you have any understanding of the history of the club you'll know that as poor as the last few seasons have been there have been far, far worse in the memory of MANY supporters who still go to matches today.

 

i dont like the beatles, i've never disputed that there's been harder times, ever, irrelevant

 

No, the past is not irrelevant, it never is on any subject. The past provides lessons and information which only the arrogant ignore.

 

Cheers

 

maybe i should have clarified, i felt that what you were saying was irrelevant, not the past as a whole

 

the fact that you and NE5 are questioning the new boards intentions and where it will take us, and yet tell us at the same time that we should ignore/forgive shepherd and co taking us backwards over the last few years because we have been worse off before is a contradiction so glaringly obvious its almost amusing

 

haha, and you called me arrogant then ended your post with 'cheers', hahahahaha, mint

 

So it's a fact I'm questioning the intentions of the board? Good one. I don't think I've made a comment about these remarks from Mort but don't let the truth get in the way. 

 

 

in which case i apologise, i didnt take the time to re-read the thread before posting that comment and thought that was your line of thinking due to what you were saying about the past etc

 

I was picking up on your apparent disregard of the past as unimportant when in fact the opposite is true. In everything.

 

ok, well i've already addressed that

[Guest Knightrider]

Freddy Shepherd's first season as Chairman

 

From 2nd to 13th and an FA Cup Final defeat

 

Mort's first season?

 

See you in May...

 

Sir John Hall's first season as owner?

 

Bought the club for £4m and appointed Keegan resulting in 5 glorious years.

 

Ashley's first season as owner?

 

Bought the club for £140m and wiped out £70m of debt with his OWN money. Yet to appoint his own manager. Still half the season to go.

 

See you in 5 years time...

 

Why the differentiation between owner and chairman ie SJH and FS ?

 

Same major shareholder during all of this time - AND - as we have said before, Shepherd, Fletcher and Hall Jnr appointed Keegan, NOT Sir john Hall, so you shouldn't give him the credit for it.

 

Also, you couldn't get a better track record than Dalglish at the time, but you are right to point out our first FA Cup Final in 24 years.

 

I still say the club should go for europe this season, I can't see why they put it off. He would look at the money spent as money to take control of the club, as an investment. And so the ambition starts from now. Or not, as the case may be.

 

 

 

FS was not a major shareholder prior to becoming a PLC and Chairman, he was a Director of the board lead by the owner Sir John Hall who appointed FS as Chairman of the PLC board, it was FS who appointed himself as Chairman. Ashley is the owner of NUFC and Mort is the Chairman, appointed by Ashley.

 

FS didn't appoint KK either, they recommended him to the owner Sir John Hall who eventually appointed him on their backing so yes the credit for appointing him is Sir John Hall's. FS and co get the credit for advocating KK as a possible NUFC manager not for actually appointing him.

 

Anyway the whole point of my post was that you can't compare the current owner and chairman to the previous lot until they've had more than 6 months at the club. If people do want to compare then I think Ashley putting in over £200m of his own cash and in doing so virtually wiping out the debt is on a par with what Sir John Hall did to save the club from going bankrupt while FS as Chairman in his first season didn't spend a much as Mort has in his nor will Mort oversee a club from 2nd in the table to 13th.

 

In short they are up on the previous mob 6 months in. Not that I care personally, I'm taking a long term view of things and will wait and see what happens before judging anyone.

 

So far though I have been very impressed by the new guys and the club is going in the right direction for once, as opposed to the wrong direction which is where we were heading before some bloke dipped into his pockets and pulled out over 200 million quid, in doing so making FS and Co very rich men despite him never having put a penny of his own money into the club, unlike Mr Ashley who we should all be grateful to at this moment in time.

 

Debt free almost?

 

That's better than any Michael Owen signing...

 

 

Sorry to say this, mate. Once again you let yourself down and I have to wonder at your motivation. I generally don't bother responding to your posts now due to the misrepresentation they are filled with nowadays. I'm not sure you deliberately lie so it looks like you've somehow convinced yourself that you are posting the truth, despite their being much incorrect comment in your post.  The paragraph I highlighted in bold is an absolute classic that indicates your reluctance to offer credit where it's due, doing yourself no credit in return.

 

 

The bit you bolded is absolutely correct and factual so what are your talking about? I did give credit too, I gave FS and Co credit for advocating KK. Re-read it!

 

no it isn't. If not for Hall Jnr, Fletcher and Shepherd, Keegan would never have been manager of Newcastle. So you can't give him the credit for choosing him.

 

As I said, it was a majority board decision. And all the subsequent managers were also appointed on the same basis.

 

 

 

If not for Keegan's dad he wouldn't have been NUFC manager...

 

Sir John Hall appointed KK based on the recommendations of FS and Co so he deserves credit for appointing him as do the others for recommending him, which is what I wrote anyway.

 

The ultimate decision to appoint KK was Sir John Hall's, the others couldn't have appointed KK without Sir John Hall's say so.

 

As for every other manager, wrong. That's just your way of trying to deflect the blame for Souness and Roeder from FS, two of Shepherd's appointments.

 

For your information it was Douglas Hall who wanted to go foreign after Sir Bobby where as Sir John Hall didn't really care. FS wanted Bruce, couldn't get him, so went for Big Sam, couldn't get him so went for Souness. Same with Roeder after he failed to get MON.

 

The Halls were ghosts at Newcastle over the reign of FS and had little say in matters which Shepherd himself and even Sir Bobby said , the quotes are out there mate to back this up.

[Howaythelads]

Freddy Shepherd's first season as Chairman

 

From 2nd to 13th and an FA Cup Final defeat

 

Mort's first season?

 

See you in May...

 

Sir John Hall's first season as owner?

 

Bought the club for £4m and appointed Keegan resulting in 5 glorious years.

 

Ashley's first season as owner?

 

Bought the club for £140m and wiped out £70m of debt with his OWN money. Yet to appoint his own manager. Still half the season to go.

 

See you in 5 years time...

 

Why the differentiation between owner and chairman ie SJH and FS ?

 

Same major shareholder during all of this time - AND - as we have said before, Shepherd, Fletcher and Hall Jnr appointed Keegan, NOT Sir john Hall, so you shouldn't give him the credit for it.

 

Also, you couldn't get a better track record than Dalglish at the time, but you are right to point out our first FA Cup Final in 24 years.

 

I still say the club should go for europe this season, I can't see why they put it off. He would look at the money spent as money to take control of the club, as an investment. And so the ambition starts from now. Or not, as the case may be.

 

 

 

FS was not a major shareholder prior to becoming a PLC and Chairman, he was a Director of the board lead by the owner Sir John Hall who appointed FS as Chairman of the PLC board, it was FS who appointed himself as Chairman. Ashley is the owner of NUFC and Mort is the Chairman, appointed by Ashley.

 

FS didn't appoint KK either, they recommended him to the owner Sir John Hall who eventually appointed him on their backing so yes the credit for appointing him is Sir John Hall's. FS and co get the credit for advocating KK as a possible NUFC manager not for actually appointing him.

 

Anyway the whole point of my post was that you can't compare the current owner and chairman to the previous lot until they've had more than 6 months at the club. If people do want to compare then I think Ashley putting in over £200m of his own cash and in doing so virtually wiping out the debt is on a par with what Sir John Hall did to save the club from going bankrupt while FS as Chairman in his first season didn't spend a much as Mort has in his nor will Mort oversee a club from 2nd in the table to 13th.

 

In short they are up on the previous mob 6 months in. Not that I care personally, I'm taking a long term view of things and will wait and see what happens before judging anyone.

 

So far though I have been very impressed by the new guys and the club is going in the right direction for once, as opposed to the wrong direction which is where we were heading before some bloke dipped into his pockets and pulled out over 200 million quid, in doing so making FS and Co very rich men despite him never having put a penny of his own money into the club, unlike Mr Ashley who we should all be grateful to at this moment in time.

 

Debt free almost?

 

That's better than any Michael Owen signing...

 

 

Sorry to say this, mate. Once again you let yourself down and I have to wonder at your motivation. I generally don't bother responding to your posts now due to the misrepresentation they are filled with nowadays. I'm not sure you deliberately lie so it looks like you've somehow convinced yourself that you are posting the truth, despite their being much incorrect comment in your post.  The paragraph I highlighted in bold is an absolute classic that indicates your reluctance to offer credit where it's due, doing yourself no credit in return.

 

 

The bit you bolded is absolutely correct and factual so what are your talking about? I did give credit too, I gave FS and Co credit for advocating KK. Re-read it!

 

You are being completely and deliberately negative in your interpretation of events.

 

It is quite clear that had the decision being discussed here been solely down to SJH we would never have seen Keegan appointed as manager of Newcastle United. Therefore, it is churlish in the extreme to award credit to SJH for this appointment, you're motivation is clearly a pathetic attempt to avoid giving credit to FS for anything.

 

It's been making me laugh this evening that people are praising Mort for banging on about signing young players when this is exactly the policy the club had under the hated FS and Robson. We even talked about this policy on the forum at the time and wondered if it would blow up due to the youth and immaturity of the players. I doubt you've forgotten, although you don't really want to remember so perhaps it's gone.

 

I think the appointment of Souness has totally twisted your understanding of the football club and has blinded you. I'm sad for you, mate.

 

You can have the last word because that's mine. I can't be arsed with bitter and twisted people and you've joined that group for reasons known only to yourself.

[Guest Knightrider]

I'm not being negative, I'm being correct and in no way biased towards anyone. Unlike you...

[Guest Knightrider]

I think the appointment of Souness has totally twisted your understanding of the football club and has blinded you.

 

I blame Shepherd!

[fredbob]

i refuse to believe there's just a simple fan/chairman relationship going on with NE5 and Shepherd, its baffling mate, honestly, how you spin things to suit, for example saying things like 'they're happy with mid table mediocrity this season' etc etc, you've removed all context, i'll be happy with mid table this season, it'll be an improvement, we've been s*** for years and we need to build back up to strength, i just DONT understand you

 

 

I take it you haven't read Morts comments about spendign in January [/astonished]

 

You must be someone else who can't accept bare facts laid out in front of you, when they don't suit your opinions ?

 

Basically, if the club don't act to fill glaring hole in the team, and say they won't act, what conclusion do you draw ?

 

We haven't been s*** for years either BTW. I thought you were one of the better posters, until you said that.

 

 

 

yeah, i've seen his comments, it made sense to me,  i'm giving him a clean slate so i'll wait until the end of the season to make my judgement on how their first season in charge went, given the circumstances

 

bare facts? we're specualting over what the club MIGHT do in january, there are no facts yet, and facts change my opinions, so, eh, what?

 

i'm not sure if its a break down in communication but as far as i'm aware by saying years that can class as 2 years at the least, and i feel pretty assured that we've been s*** for at least two years, i dont really mind what you think of me

 

 

well, I suppose if you've followed the club for 5 or 6 years, then the last 2 years could seem a long time.

 

And if you've only supported the club since 1992, then the last few years have been comparitively not too good.

 

But if you've supported the club longer than that, they have been a long way short of s***, and for that, you'll have to take my word for it.

 

 

 

no i wont, there are many other sources of information, i dont have to take your word for anything, you've never said anything thats changed my views, as i'm sure i've never said anything thats changed yours, might aswell just pack it in

 

 

Aye, and other sources of information will confirm that we have been a damn sight worse in previous decades than in the last couple of years.

 

oh you're joining in are you? i wasnt beamed into the planet 2 years ago, i have a decent understanding of our history, i still think we've been s*** for the last few years, i was simply saying i dont have to take his word for it because he tends to get a bit preachy if you dont nip it in the bud

 

Where was the, "na na ni na na....." I'm sure it would fit in well after your hissy bit in bold.

 

If you have any understanding of the history of the club you'll know that as poor as the last few seasons have been there have been far, far worse in the memory of MANY supporters who still go to matches today.

 

i dont like the beatles, i've never disputed that there's been harder times, ever, irrelevant

 

Exactly, noone is doubting the past of this club, but again, why is that relevant to the modern times, world history is littered with darker times, but you cant go through life justifying present life in context to how bad it was.

 

This concept applies to all forms of life, there will always be worse times, be a a countries history, or a governemnt, but people dont go through life, comparing the modern fallacies of these governments and countries with the ones that occured in the past.

 

Can you imagine a Black person complaining about the Governemnts treatment of the New Orleans disaster and being rebutted by being told "you should be glad, it was worse worse in the past for you folk"

 

Thats basically the crux of your argument. "vYou should of been here during the McKeag days..."

 

What you have described above is not even close to what people are on about. Having made your misinterpretation you won't be able to grasp what is really being said and no amount of posts trying to explain is going to make any difference to you. You do not understand what is being posted.

 

So goodnight.

 

Yeh, i guess i gotta agree with ya there, i have no idea what your on about, i know that we struggled immensly in the past, but i still dont know how thats enitrely relevant with the cureent regimes, i dont know where the direct link is,

 

Can i just ask then, what is the link between the past decades and how should it effect the present regime in the present climate of football? I mean, i think the modern history of nufc started at 92 when we were in a position to estabilish ourselves as a dominant force. We'd concequered the difficult period, that was definitevely the past from that point onwards. We were in an amazing situation but we blew it.

 

While it might sound condensending, i promise you i'm not but could you explain your point of view regardign the past so i can understand. As you might of guessed im not from that generation but would like to learn.

[Guest Knightrider]

The past has no fucking bearing whatsoever on today. Two separate clubs, eras, even football and fans. Everything has changed, everything.

[Thespence]

I just think theres 2 types of transfers, transfers which imporve the team, and transfers which improve the squad. Again, without sounding patronizing, do you know the diffrerence? Becasue i have already said that  we should be using the period to adress the weakness of the team and not the squad.

 

We are addressing the weakness of the squad as we type by adding youth to it.  We dont have many good 17 to 20 year olds coming through & Sam said early doors that not one of last season reserve players were offered new deals in the summer. That is why we are signing Tozer  & have given trial to Tamas Kadar.  Also 22 year old Lance Davids has a trial as well. Mort did state this in his quotes.

 

 

[Shak]

The past has no f****** bearing whatsoever on today. Two separate clubs, eras, even football and fans. Everything has changed, everything.

 

No, not everything.

 

We still have these threads.

[NE5]

If we had £40 million to spend, and it had to spend it in one of the transfer periods, either January or the Summer, which period would you we rather spent the money in?

 

It completely hypothetical i understand. I just want your views to see where you stand.

 

If you read what he is typing, you would realise he is not really arsed about Jan or summer, he is more bothered signing players that are better than the current players. Which once we take out some of the crap in your posts is exactly the same thing your saying.

 

 

OH MY GOD, well if you read any of my f****** posts you'll realises im talking about the Jan period, do you know why? Becasuse its directively related to Morts quotes. I>E THIS WHOLE THREAD.

 

You have to be an amazing spin doctor to be able to attribue those quotes to anything other than this immediate transfer window.

 

AND for the 20th time, i ve openly agreed with NE5 and others that we should adress the weaknesses in our squad, ie the signing of Woodgate etc, but i dont think we should be filling the squad at this time.

 

Seriously, some people are so stupid, ive tried to include as much generic detail, addressing as many issues as i can but it seems many people struggle at the first f****** step.

 

In the post I quoted you definitely mention the summer.

 

Who is being a spin doctor? Me? NE5? You?

 

I know you keep agreeing with NE5 on points, that is why I find it strange you asked your 'hypothetical' question.

 

Did I touch nerve hinny? For your own sanity dont reply to this post, because I reckon you may turn out like  

 

How old are you?

 

I mentioned summer as part of a hypothetical situation, the aim was to try and look at the summer period in context to the jan period. If you were to ask the fans out there the same situation im sure most of them would opt for the summer. but why? Thats what i was trying to get at. Theres a reason why people prefer the summer, and im sure its the saem for the clubs. Thats all im saying.

 

i dont think ive ever spoken to anyone so stupid that they cant see that. Nevermind eh!

 

I've been able to see ne5 points about generally strengthening the squad, obviously in order for the club to progress we need to invest to strengthen goes without saying.

 

Of course, generally speaking his views are correct, im not arguing contrare to that but the bits that i disagree with are the ones which are directly relevant to Morts quotes. Says that we should sign all the time, which i disagree with, hence the points about Jan window period, whcih i will reiterate again, is releavant to Morts quotes.

 

do you see where the difference in our arguments lie?  

 

....probably not

 

 

I don;t think most supporters would say the summer - not that it makes any difference anyway. Why would you not want a player who will improve the team in asap ?

 

I don't see why you should not always be looking to improve your team, thats what football is all about. We have half the season left, we could qualify for europe with a couple of good players for the right positions, so why do you want to write it off and why would you support the board if they took the same stance. As I've said, I find such an attitude from them to be very worrying. In fact, to coin a word you used yourself, its a s*** approach.

 

And, you WERE losing your cool, as HTL pointed out. Which makes you look very childish, not him for pointing it out.

 

 

 

I don;t think most supporters would say the summer

-

 

Well then we're gonna have to agree to disagree there. If £40m was available to spend in only one of the transfer periods, im sure people would rather go for the summer period. The reasons that  they'd give are exactly the same reasons that i am giving to support my view that too much money shouldnt be spent in Jan.

 

Why would you not want a player who will improve the team in asap ?

 

This might be a difficult concept for you, but i actuall agree with you on this point and have stated throughout my posts this view, but i guess your in selective reading mode so must of missed it.

 

I just think theres 2 types of transfers, transfers which imporve the team, and transfers which improve the squad. Again, without sounding patronizing, do you know the diffrerence? Becasue i have already said that  we should be using the period to adress the weakness of the team and not the squad.

 

As a club we are continuosly looking for quick fixes, before the season, we were happy to finish in a top 10 position. By your logic arent you selling yourself short, really showing a bit of a lack of ambition. Why dont we just try and improve the squad to title challenges, we can afford it. By your way we should be doing that, which bit of compromise in your brain has acknowledged that that isnt a possiblity, it needs to be a slower process but why??

 

oh, nothing is a difficult concept for me. I've supported NUFC too long for that. I'm talking back to when we were really shit mind, which is a concept that I suspect is too difficult for you.

 

By your last paragraph, it would appear you are simply a victim of the current hype and cliches. I don't suppose you complained too much when we played in the Champions League, due to the quick fix of Bellamy and Robert massively improving what was a mid table team. One day your brain may realise that if you want to reach these heights, you set standards, and the quicker you get there the better.

 

I am pleased for you that you are happy with mid table league positions, despite moaning that it is shit.

 

Quick fix ? What a load of bollocks. The right couple of players and we would be in the top 6. And whats more, you would be happy with it too.

 

 

 

 

[Guest Knightrider]

I'd seriously love to know how us being shit in the 80s has anything to do with now, or how about us being great in the 20s and 50s having anything to do with now. History and traditions are important but in the context of this thread and these discussions they have no bearing whatsoever, positive or negative. I think we all need to move on as this really is a new era. Look back and compare when the current lot have been here more than 2 minutes, if you must. Otherwise, well, what are we talking about?!

[NE5]

Freddy Shepherd's first season as Chairman

 

From 2nd to 13th and an FA Cup Final defeat

 

Mort's first season?

 

See you in May...

 

Sir John Hall's first season as owner?

 

Bought the club for £4m and appointed Keegan resulting in 5 glorious years.

 

Ashley's first season as owner?

 

Bought the club for £140m and wiped out £70m of debt with his OWN money. Yet to appoint his own manager. Still half the season to go.

 

See you in 5 years time...

 

Why the differentiation between owner and chairman ie SJH and FS ?

 

Same major shareholder during all of this time - AND - as we have said before, Shepherd, Fletcher and Hall Jnr appointed Keegan, NOT Sir john Hall, so you shouldn't give him the credit for it.

 

Also, you couldn't get a better track record than Dalglish at the time, but you are right to point out our first FA Cup Final in 24 years.

 

I still say the club should go for europe this season, I can't see why they put it off. He would look at the money spent as money to take control of the club, as an investment. And so the ambition starts from now. Or not, as the case may be.

 

 

 

FS was not a major shareholder prior to becoming a PLC and Chairman, he was a Director of the board lead by the owner Sir John Hall who appointed FS as Chairman of the PLC board, it was FS who appointed himself as Chairman. Ashley is the owner of NUFC and Mort is the Chairman, appointed by Ashley.

 

FS didn't appoint KK either, they recommended him to the owner Sir John Hall who eventually appointed him on their backing so yes the credit for appointing him is Sir John Hall's. FS and co get the credit for advocating KK as a possible NUFC manager not for actually appointing him.

 

Anyway the whole point of my post was that you can't compare the current owner and chairman to the previous lot until they've had more than 6 months at the club. If people do want to compare then I think Ashley putting in over £200m of his own cash and in doing so virtually wiping out the debt is on a par with what Sir John Hall did to save the club from going bankrupt while FS as Chairman in his first season didn't spend a much as Mort has in his nor will Mort oversee a club from 2nd in the table to 13th.

 

In short they are up on the previous mob 6 months in. Not that I care personally, I'm taking a long term view of things and will wait and see what happens before judging anyone.

 

So far though I have been very impressed by the new guys and the club is going in the right direction for once, as opposed to the wrong direction which is where we were heading before some bloke dipped into his pockets and pulled out over 200 million quid, in doing so making FS and Co very rich men despite him never having put a penny of his own money into the club, unlike Mr Ashley who we should all be grateful to at this moment in time.

 

Debt free almost?

 

That's better than any Michael Owen signing...

 

 

Sorry to say this, mate. Once again you let yourself down and I have to wonder at your motivation. I generally don't bother responding to your posts now due to the misrepresentation they are filled with nowadays. I'm not sure you deliberately lie so it looks like you've somehow convinced yourself that you are posting the truth, despite their being much incorrect comment in your post.  The paragraph I highlighted in bold is an absolute classic that indicates your reluctance to offer credit where it's due, doing yourself no credit in return.

 

 

The bit you bolded is absolutely correct and factual so what are your talking about? I did give credit too, I gave FS and Co credit for advocating KK. Re-read it!

 

no it isn't. If not for Hall Jnr, Fletcher and Shepherd, Keegan would never have been manager of Newcastle. So you can't give him the credit for choosing him.

 

As I said, it was a majority board decision. And all the subsequent managers were also appointed on the same basis.

 

 

 

If not for Keegan's dad he wouldn't have been NUFC manager...

 

Sir John Hall appointed KK based on the recommendations of FS and Co so he deserves credit for appointing him as do the others for recommending him, which is what I wrote anyway.

 

The ultimate decision to appoint KK was Sir John Hall's, the others couldn't have appointed KK without Sir John Hall's say so.

 

As for every other manager, wrong. That's just your way of trying to deflect the blame for Souness and Roeder from FS, two of Shepherd's appointments.

 

For your information it was Douglas Hall who wanted to go foreign after Sir Bobby where as Sir John Hall didn't really care. FS wanted Bruce, couldn't get him, so went for Big Sam, couldn't get him so went for Souness. Same with Roeder after he failed to get MON.

 

The Halls were ghosts at Newcastle over the reign of FS and had little say in matters which Shepherd himself and even Sir Bobby said , the quotes are out there mate to back this up.

 

Sir John Hall would never have appointed Keegan if he had been left to choose his own manager. Fact. Accept it, and stop attempting to avoid giving credit to Shepherd and Hall Jnr at any cost. It makes you look churlish.

 

I told you Bruce was never offered the Newcastle job.

 

All the managers after Keegan were also appointed by virtue of a majority board decision, and not a single individual.

 

And up until Souness, they were all highly proven managers, expected to be able to win trophies.

 

 

 

 

[fredbob]

i refuse to believe there's just a simple fan/chairman relationship going on with NE5 and Shepherd, its baffling mate, honestly, how you spin things to suit, for example saying things like 'they're happy with mid table mediocrity this season' etc etc, you've removed all context, i'll be happy with mid table this season, it'll be an improvement, we've been s*** for years and we need to build back up to strength, i just DONT understand you

 

 

I take it you haven't read Morts comments about spendign in January [/astonished]

 

You must be someone else who can't accept bare facts laid out in front of you, when they don't suit your opinions ?

 

Basically, if the club don't act to fill glaring hole in the team, and say they won't act, what conclusion do you draw ?

 

We haven't been s*** for years either BTW. I thought you were one of the better posters, until you said that.

 

 

 

yeah, i've seen his comments, it made sense to me,  i'm giving him a clean slate so i'll wait until the end of the season to make my judgement on how their first season in charge went, given the circumstances

 

bare facts? we're specualting over what the club MIGHT do in january, there are no facts yet, and facts change my opinions, so, eh, what?

 

i'm not sure if its a break down in communication but as far as i'm aware by saying years that can class as 2 years at the least, and i feel pretty assured that we've been s*** for at least two years, i dont really mind what you think of me

 

 

well, I suppose if you've followed the club for 5 or 6 years, then the last 2 years could seem a long time.

 

And if you've only supported the club since 1992, then the last few years have been comparitively not too good.

 

But if you've supported the club longer than that, they have been a long way short of s***, and for that, you'll have to take my word for it.

 

 

 

no i wont, there are many other sources of information, i dont have to take your word for anything, you've never said anything thats changed my views, as i'm sure i've never said anything thats changed yours, might aswell just pack it in

 

 

Aye, and other sources of information will confirm that we have been a damn sight worse in previous decades than in the last couple of years.

 

oh you're joining in are you? i wasnt beamed into the planet 2 years ago, i have a decent understanding of our history, i still think we've been s*** for the last few years, i was simply saying i dont have to take his word for it because he tends to get a bit preachy if you dont nip it in the bud

 

Where was the, "na na ni na na....." I'm sure it would fit in well after your hissy bit in bold.

 

If you have any understanding of the history of the club you'll know that as poor as the last few seasons have been there have been far, far worse in the memory of MANY supporters who still go to matches today.

 

If you have any understanding of the history of the club you'll know that as poor as the last few seasons have been there have been far, far worse in the memory of MANY supporters who still go to matches today.

 

Anyone who is remotely successful in there life, are never happy with what they achieve. What you're saying there is that many people are grateful becasue of what they had to see. Well, im saying that in 92 we were in a position to estabilish ourselves as a dominant force in the premiership, we were on a level playin field with everyone, infact come 95(?) we were in a position to estabilish ourselves as THE dominant team in the premiership, but becasue oft he ineptitude of the board, failed, we fell so far behind it seems like an impossible task to do but we did. So by the modern view, what has been achieved isnt good enough, we didnt take the oppurtunity we were given therefore we wasted a golden oppurtunity, there cant be any excuse for that. No matter how bad it was.

 

You're quite clearly one of these "it'll do" people.

 

 

[Dave]

Sir John Hall would never have appointed Keegan if he had been left to choose his own manager. Fact.

 

How can that possibly be a fact?

[Guest Knightrider]

Freddy Shepherd's first season as Chairman

 

From 2nd to 13th and an FA Cup Final defeat

 

Mort's first season?

 

See you in May...

 

Sir John Hall's first season as owner?

 

Bought the club for £4m and appointed Keegan resulting in 5 glorious years.

 

Ashley's first season as owner?

 

Bought the club for £140m and wiped out £70m of debt with his OWN money. Yet to appoint his own manager. Still half the season to go.

 

See you in 5 years time...

 

Why the differentiation between owner and chairman ie SJH and FS ?

 

Same major shareholder during all of this time - AND - as we have said before, Shepherd, Fletcher and Hall Jnr appointed Keegan, NOT Sir john Hall, so you shouldn't give him the credit for it.

 

Also, you couldn't get a better track record than Dalglish at the time, but you are right to point out our first FA Cup Final in 24 years.

 

I still say the club should go for europe this season, I can't see why they put it off. He would look at the money spent as money to take control of the club, as an investment. And so the ambition starts from now. Or not, as the case may be.

 

 

 

FS was not a major shareholder prior to becoming a PLC and Chairman, he was a Director of the board lead by the owner Sir John Hall who appointed FS as Chairman of the PLC board, it was FS who appointed himself as Chairman. Ashley is the owner of NUFC and Mort is the Chairman, appointed by Ashley.

 

FS didn't appoint KK either, they recommended him to the owner Sir John Hall who eventually appointed him on their backing so yes the credit for appointing him is Sir John Hall's. FS and co get the credit for advocating KK as a possible NUFC manager not for actually appointing him.

 

Anyway the whole point of my post was that you can't compare the current owner and chairman to the previous lot until they've had more than 6 months at the club. If people do want to compare then I think Ashley putting in over £200m of his own cash and in doing so virtually wiping out the debt is on a par with what Sir John Hall did to save the club from going bankrupt while FS as Chairman in his first season didn't spend a much as Mort has in his nor will Mort oversee a club from 2nd in the table to 13th.

 

In short they are up on the previous mob 6 months in. Not that I care personally, I'm taking a long term view of things and will wait and see what happens before judging anyone.

 

So far though I have been very impressed by the new guys and the club is going in the right direction for once, as opposed to the wrong direction which is where we were heading before some bloke dipped into his pockets and pulled out over 200 million quid, in doing so making FS and Co very rich men despite him never having put a penny of his own money into the club, unlike Mr Ashley who we should all be grateful to at this moment in time.

 

Debt free almost?

 

That's better than any Michael Owen signing...

 

 

Sorry to say this, mate. Once again you let yourself down and I have to wonder at your motivation. I generally don't bother responding to your posts now due to the misrepresentation they are filled with nowadays. I'm not sure you deliberately lie so it looks like you've somehow convinced yourself that you are posting the truth, despite their being much incorrect comment in your post.  The paragraph I highlighted in bold is an absolute classic that indicates your reluctance to offer credit where it's due, doing yourself no credit in return.

 

 

The bit you bolded is absolutely correct and factual so what are your talking about? I did give credit too, I gave FS and Co credit for advocating KK. Re-read it!

 

no it isn't. If not for Hall Jnr, Fletcher and Shepherd, Keegan would never have been manager of Newcastle. So you can't give him the credit for choosing him.

 

As I said, it was a majority board decision. And all the subsequent managers were also appointed on the same basis.

 

 

 

If not for Keegan's dad he wouldn't have been NUFC manager...

 

Sir John Hall appointed KK based on the recommendations of FS and Co so he deserves credit for appointing him as do the others for recommending him, which is what I wrote anyway.

 

The ultimate decision to appoint KK was Sir John Hall's, the others couldn't have appointed KK without Sir John Hall's say so.

 

As for every other manager, wrong. That's just your way of trying to deflect the blame for Souness and Roeder from FS, two of Shepherd's appointments.

 

For your information it was Douglas Hall who wanted to go foreign after Sir Bobby where as Sir John Hall didn't really care. FS wanted Bruce, couldn't get him, so went for Big Sam, couldn't get him so went for Souness. Same with Roeder after he failed to get MON.

 

The Halls were ghosts at Newcastle over the reign of FS and had little say in matters which Shepherd himself and even Sir Bobby said , the quotes are out there mate to back this up.

 

Sir John Hall would never have appointed Keegan if he had been left to choose his own manager. Fact. Accept it, and stop attempting to avoid giving credit to Shepherd and Hall Jnr at any cost. It makes you look churlish.

 

I told you Bruce was never offered the Newcastle job.

 

All the managers after Keegan were also appointed by virtue of a majority board decision, and not a single individual.

 

And up until Souness, they were all highly proven managers, expected to be able to win trophies.

 

 

 

 

 

Re-read my post and you will see I have giving credit to FS and Co for the role they played in KK's appointment but unlike you I'm not biased towards anyone. And if Bruce wasn't offered the job, why did he say he turned down the chance to manage us? Is he lying? I doubt it because he was offered it.

 

FS even wrote in a match programme that he'd be an ideal future replacement for Sir Bobby one day when we played them a few years back.

 

Being a Geordie and all...

[Dave]

NE5 has never cleared up how he KNOWS Bruce wasn't offered the job. I've asked him before.

[Guest Knightrider]

He was and the following were sounded out too;

 

McLaren

O'Leary

Venables

Shearer

Big Sam

[Guest Knightrider]

Oh and Graham, almost forgot

[fredbob]

How can anyone criticize another person method of implenting success without the anyhting being completed?

Anyone who criticizes Mort at this period of time is opening themselves for ridicule, 5 months.

 

Shepards regime, as much as i would like it to be buried as history, cant be ignored as its still a heated topic, some people think that he was partly responsible for dragging the club out of dark times. And they are undoubtedly correct, however others, and this is my view thik that under Shepards stewardship wasted the golden oppurtunity to make a real success out of this club, some people point that making us the 5th most qualified team for europe in premiership is his claim for success, but the more ambitious of us think that we could of been a dominant team and therefore look back at his stewardship with great rue.

[Howaythelads]

How can anyone criticize another person method of implenting success without the anyhting being completed?

Anyone who criticizes Mort at this period of time is opening themselves for ridicule, 5 months.

 

Shepards regime, as much as i would like it to be buried as history, cant be ignored as its still a heated topic, some people think that he was partly responsible for dragging the club out of dark times. And they are undoubtedly correct, however others, and this is my view thik that under Shepards stewardship wasted the golden oppurtunity to make a real success out of this club, some people point that making us the 5th most qualified team for europe in premiership is his claim for success, but the more ambitious of us think that we could of been a dominant team and therefore look back at his stewardship with great rue.

 

[Mick]

 

no. Keegan says in his book that Sir John didn't want to appoint him, it was Shepherd, Fletcher and Hall Jnr who persuaded him, to take the job. If you mean that Sir John as chairman signed the contract, then that is correct, but it was not Sir john who chose Kevin keegan and persuaded him to take the job. Just a technicality, but if it had been down to Sir John, Keegan would never have been manager of Newcastle United, so you can't give him the credit for picking him. It is twisting things like this that makes people make bad judgements. These are the facts, laid down, indisputable, and you should make your conclusion from them, and the conclusion is obvious. Hall Jnr, Fletcher and Shepherd were responsible for appointing Keegan.

 

Basically, it was a majority decision by the board, and not a single person, which is how the board was run during all its time and how the other managers were also chosen.

 

The club - if it had paid for the ground expansion - would have cost Ashley over 200m quid to buy. Because he has paid it off, it is now worth that price instead of a reduced figure. People can spin this as much as they like - the same as the first paragraph ref the appointment of Keegan to suit themselves, but what I am typing is fact. If Ashley sells the club tomorrow, he would price it at between 200 and 250m quid and it would be the going rate for the club, with a paid for ground and no big debts. and he would get his money back.

 

I find the comments from Mort to indicate a lack of ambition in the boardroom, I hope this is a misleading comment, but I'm certainly not going to pretend he hasn't made them, like some people, just because he's made good PR in the press.

 

I think the club should go for europe by trying to bringing in what is a glaring hole in the team - a hole that was obvious last year when people said we needed defenders which we now have and have made little difference if any - and tbh I don't understand why they do not consider it worthwhile to make a run for a european spot either, that is if they want to to do it.

 

 

 

You've put your own spin on things.

 

 

 

I've seen Freddy Fletcher get most of the credit for bringing Keegan in and as far as I'm aware, it had something to do with Keegan and Fletcher having worked together previously, Sir John wasn't against bringing him in, he didn't want to sack Ardilles because he classed him as a friend but Douglas forced him into a corner and he agreed to it, he did this as chairman.

 

 

 

Here’s a quote from Sir John:

 

 

“They had made their decision, Freddie (Fletcher) and Douglas, they said it was the best thing for the club if Ossie were to go.  I didn’t know Kevin, but Freddie knew him from the two years he was with Newcastle as a player doing things for the brewery.  Freddie had met him through his own contacts with the brewery.  When I made the point that Kevin had been out of the game for years, Freddie said, “The fans love him.  He’ll do it!”

 

 

 

I had a link to an article on icnewcastle where Sir John tried to support the decision of Shepherd for sacking Sir Bobby.

 

 

http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/newcastleunited/news/tm_objectid=14660423%26method=full%26siteid=50081-name_page.html

 

"The problems in the dressing room seemed to continue through into the season and I can understand Freddy Shepherd, the chairman's decision.

 

 

 

The best I could find for the cost of level 7 was from wiki, I know anybody can edit it.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_James'_Park

 

 

 

The cost of the new construction work was estimated at £42 million

 

The first 6 month net spend with Mort is £10 million, the first 6 months under Shepherd was £3.8.

 

 

[fredbob]

How can anyone criticize another person method of implenting success without the anyhting being completed?

Anyone who criticizes Mort at this period of time is opening themselves for ridicule, 5 months.

 

Shepards regime, as much as i would like it to be buried as history, cant be ignored as its still a heated topic, some people think that he was partly responsible for dragging the club out of dark times. And they are undoubtedly correct, however others, and this is my view thik that under Shepards stewardship wasted the golden oppurtunity to make a real success out of this club, some people point that making us the 5th most qualified team for europe in premiership is his claim for success, but the more ambitious of us think that we could of been a dominant team and therefore look back at his stewardship with great rue.

 

 

Whats so "funny"? I dont understand, me and you truly are on different wavelengths, i genuinely cannot understand where you're coming from no matter how hard i try.

 

 

[fredbob]

If we had £40 million to spend, and it had to spend it in one of the transfer periods, either January or the Summer, which period would you we rather spent the money in?

 

It completely hypothetical i understand. I just want your views to see where you stand.

 

If you read what he is typing, you would realise he is not really arsed about Jan or summer, he is more bothered signing players that are better than the current players. Which once we take out some of the crap in your posts is exactly the same thing your saying.

 

 

OH MY GOD, well if you read any of my f****** posts you'll realises im talking about the Jan period, do you know why? Becasuse its directively related to Morts quotes. I>E THIS WHOLE THREAD.

 

You have to be an amazing spin doctor to be able to attribue those quotes to anything other than this immediate transfer window.

 

AND for the 20th time, i ve openly agreed with NE5 and others that we should adress the weaknesses in our squad, ie the signing of Woodgate etc, but i dont think we should be filling the squad at this time.

 

Seriously, some people are so stupid, ive tried to include as much generic detail, addressing as many issues as i can but it seems many people struggle at the first f****** step.

 

In the post I quoted you definitely mention the summer.

 

Who is being a spin doctor? Me? NE5? You?

 

I know you keep agreeing with NE5 on points, that is why I find it strange you asked your 'hypothetical' question.

 

Did I touch nerve hinny? For your own sanity dont reply to this post, because I reckon you may turn out like  

 

How old are you?

 

I mentioned summer as part of a hypothetical situation, the aim was to try and look at the summer period in context to the jan period. If you were to ask the fans out there the same situation im sure most of them would opt for the summer. but why? Thats what i was trying to get at. Theres a reason why people prefer the summer, and im sure its the saem for the clubs. Thats all im saying.

 

i dont think ive ever spoken to anyone so stupid that they cant see that. Nevermind eh!

 

I've been able to see ne5 points about generally strengthening the squad, obviously in order for the club to progress we need to invest to strengthen goes without saying.

 

Of course, generally speaking his views are correct, im not arguing contrare to that but the bits that i disagree with are the ones which are directly relevant to Morts quotes. Says that we should sign all the time, which i disagree with, hence the points about Jan window period, whcih i will reiterate again, is releavant to Morts quotes.

 

do you see where the difference in our arguments lie?  

 

....probably not

 

 

I don;t think most supporters would say the summer - not that it makes any difference anyway. Why would you not want a player who will improve the team in asap ?

 

I don't see why you should not always be looking to improve your team, thats what football is all about. We have half the season left, we could qualify for europe with a couple of good players for the right positions, so why do you want to write it off and why would you support the board if they took the same stance. As I've said, I find such an attitude from them to be very worrying. In fact, to coin a word you used yourself, its a s*** approach.

 

And, you WERE losing your cool, as HTL pointed out. Which makes you look very childish, not him for pointing it out.

 

 

 

I don;t think most supporters would say the summer

-

 

Well then we're gonna have to agree to disagree there. If £40m was available to spend in only one of the transfer periods, im sure people would rather go for the summer period. The reasons that  they'd give are exactly the same reasons that i am giving to support my view that too much money shouldnt be spent in Jan.

 

Why would you not want a player who will improve the team in asap ?

 

This might be a difficult concept for you, but i actuall agree with you on this point and have stated throughout my posts this view, but i guess your in selective reading mode so must of missed it.

 

I just think theres 2 types of transfers, transfers which imporve the team, and transfers which improve the squad. Again, without sounding patronizing, do you know the diffrerence? Becasue i have already said that  we should be using the period to adress the weakness of the team and not the squad.

 

As a club we are continuosly looking for quick fixes, before the season, we were happy to finish in a top 10 position. By your logic arent you selling yourself short, really showing a bit of a lack of ambition. Why dont we just try and improve the squad to title challenges, we can afford it. By your way we should be doing that, which bit of compromise in your brain has acknowledged that that isnt a possiblity, it needs to be a slower process but why??

 

oh, nothing is a difficult concept for me. I've supported NUFC too long for that. I'm talking back to when we were really s*** mind, which is a concept that I suspect is too difficult for you.

 

By your last paragraph, it would appear you are simply a victim of the current hype and cliches. I don't suppose you complained too much when we played in the Champions League, due to the quick fix of Bellamy and Robert massively improving what was a mid table team. One day your brain may realise that if you want to reach these heights, you set standards, and the quicker you get there the better.

 

I am pleased for you that you are happy with mid table league positions, despite moaning that it is s***.

 

Quick fix ? What a load of bollocks. I am pleased for you that you are happy with mid table league positions, despite moaning that it is s***.

 

 

 

 

 

By your last paragraph, it would appear you are simply a victim of the current hype and cliches

 

Talk about using cliches! I mean, what does that mean? What hype? What cliche? Im just merely agreeing with Morts views on the January transfer window, i think its a good idea saving money in the january period where it will be put to better use in the summer period. I agree with you that money needs to be spent inthe jan period, but i disagree of the amount of money, your view is that we shoudl spend as much money as possible as often as you can. After witnesing the club do that for the past 10 years and see not a single trophy and being left £80m in debt, i'm more than happy to try a different approach.

 

we played in the Champions League, due to the quick fix of Bellamy and Robert massively improving what was a mid table team

 

I'd hardly call Robert and Bellamy an ironic "quick fix", how long had SBR been in charge before they were signed? Do you think the transofrmation of the club would of been even more dramatic had they been signed in the first year?

 

I am pleased for you that you are happy with mid table league positions, despite moaning that it is s***.

 

honestly mate, after the past 4 seasons of dross, i am definitely happy with a stable mid table finish this season. Any improvement on that would be a bonus. Would i be happy with a mid table finish next season? Would i bollocks. Why? Becasue the foundations are set and we need to improve. I have reality on my side, and before the season started, even though i knew that with the squad we possessed European qualification was possible, i knew deep down with so much change it was asking just that little bit too much. By demanading Europe in the first season, your automaitcally expecting CL as the next progressive step. Now thats a target you have set SA and the current board fo CL qualification in 2 years.

 

The right couple of players and we would be in the top 6. And whats more, you would be happy with it too.

 

Maybe that is true, there are always 2 sides of the coin, and signing supposed quality isnt always a guaratee, we could stay static, which would be even more of a disaster.

I tohught that the aquisition of Luque and Boumsong were testament to that.

 

 

 

 

 

[Howaythelads]

How can anyone criticize another person method of implenting success without the anyhting being completed?

Anyone who criticizes Mort at this period of time is opening themselves for ridicule, 5 months.

 

Shepards regime, as much as i would like it to be buried as history, cant be ignored as its still a heated topic, some people think that he was partly responsible for dragging the club out of dark times. And they are undoubtedly correct, however others, and this is my view thik that under Shepards stewardship wasted the golden oppurtunity to make a real success out of this club, some people point that making us the 5th most qualified team for europe in premiership is his claim for success, but the more ambitious of us think that we could of been a dominant team and therefore look back at his stewardship with great rue.

 

 

Whats so "funny"? I dont understand, me and you truly are on different wavelengths, i genuinely cannot understand where you're coming from no matter how hard i try.

 

 

 

That's because you don't understand much at all.

 

Just keep the laughs coming...

[ChezGiven]

The past has no fucking bearing whatsoever on today. Two separate clubs, eras, even football and fans. Everything has changed, everything.

 

*sings* "If you know your history, you will know where you're coming from"