Mort: I’m in charge

[NE5]

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?

 

Because Keegan says so. He said that Shepherd, Fletcher and Hall Jnr wanted him, and Hall Snr didn't. Unless you know better ... whatever misinterpretation others wish to say ....

 

 

[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.

 

 

 

 

 

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...

 

No, you are wrong. I have stated the facts, and not slanting them in any way whatsoever, you are doing that to avoid giving the credit due to Shepherd, Hall Jnr and Fletcher for choosing and being totally responsible for the appointment of Keegan. This is from Keegan himself, so how is it showing any bias ? And why would I show any bias anyway ?

 

Your misrepresentation and/or lack of understanding is also shown by your comment on Bruce, and Shepherds comments. Maybe Shepherd personally wanted him, assuming he did, he didn't get the job because the majority board decision was that he wouldn't get the job. You see, this is how they were all chosen and appointed, exactly the same as Keegan. Exactly as I said.

 

BTW, in case you are going to continue the misrepresentation, it was Sir John Hall who first spouted the "Geordie Nation" bollocks, so why do you float the idea that it was Shepherd ?

 

 

[NE5]

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

 

that is correct. And I'm not going to tell you, or anyone for that matter. 

 

 

[NE5]

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.

 

 

You clearly have absolutely no idea of where the old board found the club, claiming they were "inept". Must admit, this has made me laugh. In 1995 Sir John was chairman, Keegan was manager, and it was the year before we nearly won the league. Such is your lack of knowledge, you put a question mark against it. Credibily destroyed, I'm afraid.

 

 

[Dave]

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

 

that is correct. And I'm not going to tell you, or anyone for that matter. 

 

 

 

No reason to believe you over HTT then, sorry.

[NE5]

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

 

that is correct. And I'm not going to tell you, or anyone for that matter. 

 

 

 

No reason to believe you over HTT then, sorry.

 

OK.

 

No reason to believe HTT over me either then, I take it 

[Mick]

 

OK.

 

No reason to believe HTT over me either then, I take it 

 

Steve Bruce was quoted as saying he had been offered the job, I'm sure the quotes came out around the time of the FA Cup game against Birmingham last season.

[Dave]

Yes, there is that.

[Dr Venkman]

go supermort

[Guest Knightrider]

No, you are wrong. I have stated the facts, and not slanting them in any way whatsoever, you are doing that to avoid giving the credit due to Shepherd, Hall Jnr and Fletcher for choosing and being totally responsible for the appointment of Keegan. This is from Keegan himself, so how is it showing any bias ? And why would I show any bias anyway ?

 

Can you please point out what is wrong with the following:

 

Freddie Shepherd, Douglas Hall and Freddie Fletcher (and others) advocated the appointment of Kevin Keegan to their boss Sir John Hall who on their advice, appointed the man as manager of Newcastle United. This is what I have repeatedly stated time and time again in this thread, giving each credit for their role in the appointment of KK. So how am I wrong and how have I, as you claim, failed to give credit, when I clearly have (a few times now)?

 

Your misrepresentation and/or lack of understanding is also shown by your comment on Bruce, and Shepherds comments. Maybe Shepherd personally wanted him, assuming he did, he didn't get the job because the majority board decision was that he wouldn't get the job. You see, this is how they were all chosen and appointed, exactly the same as Keegan. Exactly as I said.

 

He was offered the job and turned it down. He has said this himself numerous times now, as had his previous board at Birmingham City in defending their decision to stick with him after their relegation 2 seasons ago. Citing that Bruce, their manager, remained loyal to them when offered the chance to manage his home town team so they would remain loyal to him. I know you've been told otherwise but I personally can only go off what Bruce himself has said and indeed numerous references from Freddy Shepherd himself regarding Bruce and managing NUFC. If Shepherd personally wanted him, which you have conceded is a maybe, doesn't it stand to reason he would as Chairman push for his appointment? And he did, but got turned down.

 

There are also numerous quotes from Sir John Hall, Sir Bobby and even Shepherd himself that will back up any claim that he as Chairman made the decisions and him alone, or rather it was his ultimate say so. But still you refuse to even contemplate it. As Chairman of the board, the PLC and half owner basically, with a brother and son on the board too, I guarantee he will have had clinching vote on any decision or matter. This is made even more possible when you consider that both Sir John and Douglas Hall were never present at United and rarely got involved with the decision making in latter years which again Shepherd himself said, as did Sir John.

 

BTW, in case you are going to continue the misrepresentation, it was Sir John Hall who first spouted the "Geordie Nation" bollocks, so why do you float the idea that it was Shepherd ?

 

Wrong again, it was Keegan's idea, Sir John Hall bought into it hook line and sinker as did all of us at the time I suppose, to a degree anyway. But their Geordie Nation bollocks was quite different to Shepherd's Geordie Nation crap. Theirs was more about NUFC becoming a sporting empire very much in line with the local community. Shepherd's was that NUFC should have a Geordie manager hence why he went for Bruce. Douglas Hall in the meantime wanted a foreigner. Sir John just wanted out at that stage.

[fredbob]

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?

 

Because Keegan says so. He said that Shepherd, Fletcher and Hall Jnr wanted him, and Hall Snr didn't. Unless you know better ... whatever misinterpretation others wish to say ....

 

 

 

 

I'm sure i remember seeing a Keegan quote...something along the lines of...(on the phone to SJH) "there are only 2 people who can save this club now, and they're on the phone to each other now"

 

Does that mean anything?

[Howaythelads]

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?

 

Because Keegan says so. He said that Shepherd, Fletcher and Hall Jnr wanted him, and Hall Snr didn't. Unless you know better ... whatever misinterpretation others wish to say ....

 

 

 

 

I'm sure i remember seeing a Keegan quote...something along the lines of...(on the phone to SJH) "there are only 2 people who can save this club now, and they're on the phone to each other now"

 

Does that mean anything?

 

Aye, just not what you think. Obviously.

 

[Guest Pie]

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?

 

Because Keegan says so. He said that Shepherd, Fletcher and Hall Jnr wanted him, and Hall Snr didn't. Unless you know better ... whatever misinterpretation others wish to say ....

 

 

Didnt you once doubt Bobby's version of events when he claimed Speed was sold behind his back? Indeed you did. Not to say that you're wrong, just curious as to why one mans word is right and the other is doubted.

[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.

 

 

You clearly have absolutely no idea of where the old board found the club, claiming they were "inept". Must admit, this has made me laugh. In 1995 Sir John was chairman, Keegan was manager, and it was the year before we nearly won the league. Such is your lack of knowledge, you put a question mark against it. Credibily destroyed, I'm afraid.

 

 

 

Yeh i understnd that, i understand about the state of the club was abhorrent pre Fletcher, Hall and Shep, what im trying to say, and as you have correctly pointed out my knowledge basis isnt fantastic on the account of having a life etc, but from my point of view, irrespective of who was in charge of the club or the position we were in i feel we wasted a golden oppurtunity to be a huge club.

 

Now i dont claim to be a SOOPAFAN, i wouldnt dare pass myself of as that, all im tryin to do is offer my views on the clubs recent history, not the past, becasues thats not strictly relevant. Supposing the club started was created in 92, and what happened in the past didnt exist, how would you view the current situation and handling of the club?

 

Thats the point of view that i am using.

[Howaythelads]

OMG, this is side-splitting stuff.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

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?

 

Because Keegan says so. He said that Shepherd, Fletcher and Hall Jnr wanted him, and Hall Snr didn't. Unless you know better ... whatever misinterpretation others wish to say ....

 

 

 

 

I'm sure i remember seeing a Keegan quote...something along the lines of...(on the phone to SJH) "there are only 2 people who can save this club now, and they're on the phone to each other now"

 

Does that mean anything?

 

That was a SJH quote, was when KK walked out after a couple of weeks due to lack of promised funds

[Mick]

 

That was a SJH quote, was when KK walked out after a couple of weeks due to lack of promised funds

 

Keegan did cast some doubt on the timing of that quote when interviewed by John Gibson earlier this year.

 

http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/newcastleunited/news/tm_method=full%26objectid=18923168%26siteid=50081-name_page.html

 

"When Newcastle came calling for me it was very exciting," recalled Kevin.

 

 

"John Hall phoned and said `Only two people can save Newcastle United and they are talking to each other right now.' That was a powerful message."

 

 

[NE5]

 

OK.

 

No reason to believe HTT over me either then, I take it 

 

Steve Bruce was quoted as saying he had been offered the job, I'm sure the quotes came out around the time of the FA Cup game against Birmingham last season.

 

Well. He wasn't.

 

Can't you read.

 

 

[NE5]

 

That was a SJH quote, was when KK walked out after a couple of weeks due to lack of promised funds

 

Keegan did cast some doubt on the timing of that quote when interviewed by John Gibson earlier this year.

 

http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/newcastleunited/news/tm_method=full%26objectid=18923168%26siteid=50081-name_page.html

 

"When Newcastle came calling for me it was very exciting," recalled Kevin.

 

"John Hall phoned and said `Only two people can save Newcastle United and they are talking to each other right now.' That was a powerful message."

 

 

 

aye, how many years later. I typed half a page of his book, saying exactly when he said this, the last time you posted this crap.

 

Try reading a bit better.

 

John Hall said this after the Swindon game when he walked out. I cant' be arsed to type it all out again.

 

 

[Mick]

 

Well. He wasn't.

 

Can't you read.

 

 

 

He wasn't what?

[Guest elbee909]

 

Well. He wasn't.

 

Can't you read.

 

 

 

He wasn't what?

 

He wasn't offered the job, according to NE5.

[NE5]

No, you are wrong. I have stated the facts, and not slanting them in any way whatsoever, you are doing that to avoid giving the credit due to Shepherd, Hall Jnr and Fletcher for choosing and being totally responsible for the appointment of Keegan. This is from Keegan himself, so how is it showing any bias ? And why would I show any bias anyway ?

 

Can you please point out what is wrong with the following:

 

Freddie Shepherd, Douglas Hall and Freddie Fletcher (and others) advocated the appointment of Kevin Keegan to their boss Sir John Hall who on their advice, appointed the man as manager of Newcastle United. This is what I have repeatedly stated time and time again in this thread, giving each credit for their role in the appointment of KK. So how am I wrong and how have I, as you claim, failed to give credit, when I clearly have (a few times now)?

 

Your misrepresentation and/or lack of understanding is also shown by your comment on Bruce, and Shepherds comments. Maybe Shepherd personally wanted him, assuming he did, he didn't get the job because the majority board decision was that he wouldn't get the job. You see, this is how they were all chosen and appointed, exactly the same as Keegan. Exactly as I said.

 

He was offered the job and turned it down. He has said this himself numerous times now, as had his previous board at Birmingham City in defending their decision to stick with him after their relegation 2 seasons ago. Citing that Bruce, their manager, remained loyal to them when offered the chance to manage his home town team so they would remain loyal to him. I know you've been told otherwise but I personally can only go off what Bruce himself has said and indeed numerous references from Freddy Shepherd himself regarding Bruce and managing NUFC. If Shepherd personally wanted him, which you have conceded is a maybe, doesn't it stand to reason he would as Chairman push for his appointment? And he did, but got turned down.

 

There are also numerous quotes from Sir John Hall, Sir Bobby and even Shepherd himself that will back up any claim that he as Chairman made the decisions and him alone, or rather it was his ultimate say so. But still you refuse to even contemplate it. As Chairman of the board, the PLC and half owner basically, with a brother and son on the board too, I guarantee he will have had clinching vote on any decision or matter. This is made even more possible when you consider that both Sir John and Douglas Hall were never present at United and rarely got involved with the decision making in latter years which again Shepherd himself said, as did Sir John.

 

BTW, in case you are going to continue the misrepresentation, it was Sir John Hall who first spouted the "Geordie Nation" bollocks, so why do you float the idea that it was Shepherd ?

 

Wrong again, it was Keegan's idea, Sir John Hall bought into it hook line and sinker as did all of us at the time I suppose, to a degree anyway. But their Geordie Nation bollocks was quite different to Shepherd's Geordie Nation crap. Theirs was more about NUFC becoming a sporting empire very much in line with the local community. Shepherd's was that NUFC should have a Geordie manager hence why he went for Bruce. Douglas Hall in the meantime wanted a foreigner. Sir John just wanted out at that stage.

 

sigh.

 

Steve Bruce has never been offered the job as NUFC manager. Nobody has been offered the job as NUFC manager under the old board who wasn't by a majority boardroom decision. This is how all the managers were appointed under the ex board. Freddie Fletcher, Freddie Shepherd and Douglas Hall wanted and persuaded Kevin Keegan as NUFC manager behind Sir John halls back, and persuaded him to make a change of manager that he didn't want to make.

 

Sir John Hall was the first person to spout the Geordie Nation bollocks. If it was Keegans idea, then that also accounts for Shepherd saying exactly the same thing. You should really stop distorting things in this anti Shepherd way, it is affecting your judgement badly.

 

What i say is true, and if you don't believe me, it's your prerogative.

 

I'm sorry, but the bit I've put in bold is mind bogglingly hypocritical, and thats putting it mildly.

 

 

[Liam Liam Liam O]

 

Well. He wasn't.

 

Can't you read.

 

 

 

He wasn't what?

 

He wasn't offered the job, according to NE5.

 

NE5 was there when he didn't offer him the job?

[NE5]

 

Well. He wasn't.

 

Can't you read.

 

 

 

He wasn't what?

 

He wasn't offered the job, according to NE5.

 

No, you're wrong. Not according to me at all. I know he wasn't, according to someone else, who knows he wasn't.

 

 

[NE5]

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?

 

Because Keegan says so. He said that Shepherd, Fletcher and Hall Jnr wanted him, and Hall Snr didn't. Unless you know better ... whatever misinterpretation others wish to say ....

 

 

 

 

I'm sure i remember seeing a Keegan quote...something along the lines of...(on the phone to SJH) "there are only 2 people who can save this club now, and they're on the phone to each other now"

 

Does that mean anything?

 

That was a SJH quote, was when KK walked out after a couple of weeks due to lack of promised funds

 

That is correct. Its quite amazing the amount of things people change on here, to suit their "opinions".