Mort: I’m in charge

[NE5]

 

 

 

 

still waiting for you to say anything, as usual. Why not try to dispute those league positions booboo, c'mon, give us a laugh  mackems.gif

 

Priceless!!

 

Well, why don't you ?

 

 

[Howaythelads]

Wasn't Shepherd part of the old board pre SJH? Is he therefore responsible for those bad old days like he's responsible for the success in some eyes under SJH because he was also part of that board too?

 

Your reference to "he" shows you still don't get it.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

is this that argument with those folk.........................

 

.........................again ?

 

not really an "Argument" madras, just people disputing facts again.

 

 

 

So its not an argument, its a dispute?

 

I can see why these threads go on for so long

[NE5]

 

not really an "Argument" madras, just people disputing facts again.

 

 

or twisting facts to suit their side of the debate.

 

 

 

you mean, the 3 highest consecutive league positions in 50 years ?

 

Filling a 52,000 stadium every home game ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than any other era in the clubs history ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than every club in the country bar 4 ?

 

Please explain what is incorrect and twisted ?

 

[Guest BooBoo]

 

 

 

 

still waiting for you to say anything, as usual. Why not try to dispute those league positions booboo, c'mon, give us a laugh  mackems.gif

 

Priceless!!

 

Well, why don't you ?

 

 

 

 

GOLD!

[Liam Liam Liam O]

 

not really an "Argument" madras, just people disputing facts again.

 

 

or twisting facts to suit their side of the debate.

 

 

 

you mean, the 3 highest consecutive league positions in 50 years ?

 

Filling a 52,000 stadium every home game ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than any other era in the clubs history ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than every club in the country bar 4 ?

 

Please explain what is incorrect and twisted ?

 

 

Taking the club to the brink of financial meltdown?

[madras]

 

not really an "Argument" madras, just people disputing facts again.

 

 

or twisting facts to suit their side of the debate.

 

 

 

you mean, the 3 highest consecutive league positions in 50 years ?

 

Filling a 52,000 stadium every home game ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than any other era in the clubs history ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than every club in the country bar 4 ?

 

Please explain what is incorrect and twisted ?

 

the twisting is from this "As for Ashley clearing debts, it is a very good move to clear the debt due to the stadium expansion. He has increased the value of the club enormously by doing that."

 

yet shepherd backed his managers ?.....why isn't it that ashlkey has used his own cash to pay off the debts so any increased value merely reflects what he has spent .could shepherd have been doing this merely to try and boost the price of his shareholding ?

 

is it possible shepherd didn't really back anyone as he used corporate money for transfers whilst taking millions out.

 

shepherd didn't back the managers...nufc plc did.

 

[Guest Knightrider]

Wasn't Shepherd part of the old board pre SJH? Is he therefore responsible for those bad old days like he's responsible for the success in some eyes under SJH because he was also part of that board too?

 

quite shocked you are stooping to this level mate.

 

The answer is no, by the way.

 

Sir John was though, but resigned when the initial flotation failed due to lack of interest, failing to raise half of 2.5m quid.

 

This is fact by the way, because I put in to buy shares, and had my cheque returned.

 

 

 

 

 

You know me, I admit I can't stand FS and regard his time here as an ultimate failure. I admit my bias.

 

However, if you are claiming FS as part of the board under Sir John Hall deserves credit for those years then by your same logic, he deserves criticism for being part of the old board before SJH which he was. You are quick to highlight how FS played a role in KK's arrival and use that to defend him, but what about the role as a director or member of the old board he played in the club's woes pre-SJH?

 

Anyway, just to show how much of a turncoat FS was, he was very much on the side of the old board until SJH flashed him some money.

 

Oh and I just can't defend a crook.

 

Did I say crook, sorry I meant cock.

[NE5]

 

 

 

 

still waiting for you to say anything, as usual. Why not try to dispute those league positions booboo, c'mon, give us a laugh  mackems.gif

 

Priceless!!

 

Well, why don't you ?

 

 

 

 

GOLD!

 

So booboo, when did the club finish higher for 3 consecutive seasons ?

 

 

[NE5]

 

not really an "Argument" madras, just people disputing facts again.

 

 

or twisting facts to suit their side of the debate.

 

 

 

you mean, the 3 highest consecutive league positions in 50 years ?

 

Filling a 52,000 stadium every home game ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than any other era in the clubs history ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than every club in the country bar 4 ?

 

Please explain what is incorrect and twisted ?

 

 

Taking the club to the brink of financial meltdown?

 

You mean, a club that couldn't raise 2.5m quid on flotation ? ....... I bet people like you didn't turn down your FA Cup final tickets and Champions League qualifications ?

 

I'm pleased for you think shite boards do this  mackems.gif

[Guest Knightrider]

One day the truth will come out.

[NE5]

Wasn't Shepherd part of the old board pre SJH? Is he therefore responsible for those bad old days like he's responsible for the success in some eyes under SJH because he was also part of that board too?

 

quite shocked you are stooping to this level mate.

 

The answer is no, by the way.

 

Sir John was though, but resigned when the initial flotation failed due to lack of interest, failing to raise half of 2.5m quid.

 

This is fact by the way, because I put in to buy shares, and had my cheque returned.

 

 

 

 

 

You know me, I admit I can't stand FS and regard his time here as an ultimate failure. I admit my bias.

 

However, if you are claiming FS as part of the board under Sir John Hall deserves credit for those years then by your same logic, he deserves criticism for being part of the old board before SJH which he was. You are quick to highlight how FS played a role in KK's arrival and use that to defend him, but what about the role as a director or member of the old board he played in the club's woes pre-SJH?

 

Anyway, just to show how much of a turncoat FS was, he was very much on the side of the old board until SJH flashed him some money.

 

Oh and I just can't defend a crook.

 

Did I say crook, sorry I meant cock.

 

Sorry mate, you're showing your selective memory, guilty of putting personalities before judgements like some others.

 

lets hope Ashley and Mort back their managers more than the old board shall we ? I hope you don't claim they are "better", until they have proved it. Having said that, if the old board were such "cocks", they should be doing better already, for an example see the mackems since Niall Quinn took over from cocks, or for another example, see our own takeover in 1992 when they took over from cocks.

 

I hope you can understand this, but I have my doubts I must be honest.

 

 

[NE5]

One day the truth will come out.

 

Abramovic is a paragon of virtue isn't he 

[Minhosa]

One day the truth will come out.

 

One day it shall and I'd love it to be from someone inside the club actually saying what did go on behind the scenes during the Shepherd reign.

 

Maybe Mort and Co. could write a book detailing what they found during their first months in order to generate some transfer funds from the book sales - seen as they're not showing the same backing as Shepherd would have.

 

Shame, they'd be too professional for that.

[Dr Venkman]

actually the club didn't have the exact same makeup in ownership so the dynamics of the eras was different, that's before you recognise that the two eras had different people at the helm overseeing the day to day workings of the club. the sjh era was characterised by hall owning almost 80% and other figures having small amounts and limited but still important influence, shepherd for one, making up a board of advisors but with hall effectively doing whatever he wanted. after the flotation the ownership altered, sjh only owned around half and there were thousands of shareholders, and the halls gradually decreased their stake to around 40%. sjh then handed over day to day running to shepherd, and shepherd began quietly buying more and more shares, for instance in a cut-price deal with NTL, and so his influence grew, like when douglas hall stayed exiled in gibraltar and restricting input into the club after the notw scandal and hall spent all his time in spain. so it is fair to say you can divide the SJH chairmanship and the Shepherd chairmanship as separate eras.

 

we are talking about the performance on the field Johnny. Unless you think the chairman told the managers who to buy, who to play, etc etc, it boils down to the managers. This has been discussed, there is no way you can blame a chairman for players underperforming, as in 2 FA Cup Finals for instance. The job of the chairman and board stops at backing the manager, and that is what they have all done. They have all been backed with money and backing to put together teams good enough to have won trophies, and they have all won trophies previously to show that they also had the capability to do it. Especially Dalglish.

 

And as we have also said, Sir John did not appoint Keegan, he didn't think of him, and he was outvoted when it came to appointing him, so you can't give him any credit for it, that goes to the 3 people who did ie Shepherd, hall Jnr and Fletcher.

 

 

so taking the club forward gets the owners a pat on the back, and failing to capitalise on it and going backwards is the fault of the players, nice one

 

I don't believe I said that. It's always the players who play.

 

I do believe however, that you are looking like one of those people who are unable to differentiate between the different roles of players and directors. Nor do you understand that major shareholders of a multi million pound company don't normally leave the entire major decisions to someone else, and don't have any input, but we know that you are only spouting this nonsense to satisfy your agenda.

 

 

 

au contraire, i understand everything here, including the excruciatingly difficult concept to grasp that a players role is different to a directors, are you having a laugh?

 

i just think that freddy shepherd is a stupid c*** that we're better off without, and you dont, that's the only real difference between me and you, could you consider stopping thinking that everyone that doesnt agree with you either doesn't know the facts, or is just too daft to know what they mean?

 

i'd love to know what my agenda is, by the way, because freddy's gone and the majority of people think he was a t*** anyway, i'd have to have a screw loose to be devoting my spare time to wrecking his 'good name'

 

haha. Now you are looking a bit daft. If you think Shepherd is a dick and we are better off without him, then 87 clubs watched us enviously playing in europe regularly, and brought top class players to the club for a canny few years. As usual, I don't expect you to get a perspective, rather than chase a silly agenda. Also, if you think we were better off without the ex board, you wouldn't last 5 minutes supporting a club with a real s**** board.

 

As usual, ALL of your post concerns the personality, which affects your judgement, but I suspect you aren't capable of seeing this. I don't expect you to take up factual issues rather than personalities or you would have done so by now.

 

I'm not having a laugh ref my remarks about the difference in roles between players and directors, I think you - and many others - don't understand this. You clearly don't seem to understand when the job a director does becomes that of the player.

 

BTW, I'll only think we are better off without the ex board, when someone comes along and does better. The fact that you can't grasp this fairly basic concept says everything.

 

 

 

i can grasp the concept of your opinion, its not hard, i just disagree, they did a good job initially and then did a really s*** job and took us backwards, therefore i think we're better off without them, its ok though, i can disagree with you and still feel ok about it because its not disturbing to me that someone has different opinion to mine, i have no agenda

 

You don't grasp the concept at all. From your posts it looks like you're posting on an entirely different subject.

 

There's no doubt at all from your comments that your gripe with the previous board is nothing to do with how they ran the football club but is more to do with Fred being fat.  mackems.gif  I don't think you really have a clue what the previous board achieved for the football club. If you do know, then you have no grasp of the history of the club, given how you dismiss it so easily. Perhaps you think we have a divine right to win a trophy? I don't know, so you tell me. 

 

The reality is there is only so much any board can do. If they put in place everything it takes for the manager to build a team/squad capable of 3 top 5 finishes in a row, even though the league is the true measure I'd suggest that team is capable of winning a cup competition at least. If they fail to do so it can be for any number of reasons but it is not down to the incompetence of the board. This is really, really, really easy to understand once you can see past Fred being fat, a c**t or whatever other idiotic and childish label you want to pin on  him.

 

What happened was they made one terrible managerial appointment. I'm not underestimating how serious this was because it's the most important decision they have to make and they got it badly wrong with Souness. They then failed to put it right with Roeder, although he wasn't a disaster like Souness.  Perhaps they got it right with Allardyce? If so, what will you and your type moan about then, I wonder?

 

again, i UNDERSTAND all of that, i just have a difference of opinion, but if it suits you, you're right, i'm wrong, sick of this now anyway

 

and by the way i'm not a moaner, i am definitely a glass half full supporter, fred's a c***

 

You still don't see the difference between what a director does for a club and what a player does. Your OPINION may be that Fred is fat, or Fred is a c***, but what they did for the club is factual, and has absolutely nothing to do with "opinion".

 

That is all.

 

 

 

haha, yep, i still dont see it, explain it for me then. i've never mentioned weight, i have called him a cunt though, and will continue to, because he's a prize cunt

[Guest Knightrider]

One day the truth will come out.

 

Abramovic is a paragon of virtue isn't he 

 

I don't care about him and his club though, I care about NUFC. Oh I know the rest of football is bent too. I guarantee NUFC will now be run legit from now on though and not as some personal piggy bank.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

 

not really an "Argument" madras, just people disputing facts again.

 

 

or twisting facts to suit their side of the debate.

 

 

 

you mean, the 3 highest consecutive league positions in 50 years ?

 

Filling a 52,000 stadium every home game ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than any other era in the clubs history ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than every club in the country bar 4 ?

 

Please explain what is incorrect and twisted ?

 

 

Taking the club to the brink of financial meltdown?

 

You mean, a club that couldn't raise 2.5m quid on flotation ? ....... I bet people like you didn't turn down your FA Cup final tickets and Champions League qualifications ?

 

I'm pleased for you think shite boards do this  mackems.gif

 

So having recovered from not being not able to raise 2.5m on a floatation, he still didnt learn his lesson and tried to fuck it up again is what you are saying?  Thanks for helping me point that out.  The facts are that as a chairman of a football club and particularly a PLC one he just wasn't very good.  Still stick to your one sided agenda.

 

I admit though that the goals he scored to get us to the cup final were vital at the time.

[Guest Knightrider]

Wasn't Shepherd part of the old board pre SJH? Is he therefore responsible for those bad old days like he's responsible for the success in some eyes under SJH because he was also part of that board too?

 

quite shocked you are stooping to this level mate.

 

The answer is no, by the way.

 

Sir John was though, but resigned when the initial flotation failed due to lack of interest, failing to raise half of 2.5m quid.

 

This is fact by the way, because I put in to buy shares, and had my cheque returned.

 

 

 

 

 

You know me, I admit I can't stand FS and regard his time here as an ultimate failure. I admit my bias.

 

However, if you are claiming FS as part of the board under Sir John Hall deserves credit for those years then by your same logic, he deserves criticism for being part of the old board before SJH which he was. You are quick to highlight how FS played a role in KK's arrival and use that to defend him, but what about the role as a director or member of the old board he played in the club's woes pre-SJH?

 

Anyway, just to show how much of a turncoat FS was, he was very much on the side of the old board until SJH flashed him some money.

 

Oh and I just can't defend a crook.

 

Did I say crook, sorry I meant cock.

 

Sorry mate, you're showing your selective memory, guilty of putting personalities before judgements like some others.

 

lets hope Ashley and Mort back their managers more than the old board shall we ? I hope you don't claim they are "better", until they have proved it. Having said that, if the old board were such "cocks", they should be doing better already, for an example see the mackems since Niall Quinn took over from cocks, or for another example, see our own takeover in 1992 when they took over from cocks.

 

I hope you can understand this, but I have my doubts I must be honest.

 

 

 

Honestly NE5, I can't defend the man or turn a cheek to what I know. For sure he has done good things and I'm sure he isn't alone in footy but for me, as a so-called NUFC fan, well, I don't know how he can live with himself. SJH was never like that yet he had more scope to do what FS did, not even DH was like that and he had good reason to. Do you not find it suspicious how the takeover all came about like it did and why the Halls wanted out like they did, behind FS's back? They didn't want to be dragged down with it because that's what was going to happen. Only in years to come will we realise what an escape we've had thanks to Ashley and co. I dread to think what would have happened if FS was allowed to carry on or worse still, buy the club for himself.

 

I'll give you a clue, the warehouse carry on, but x10. I'm not surprised MA enlisted the help of a legal expert, the mess... The last thing you want to do is for something you've just bought for all that money to be confiscated by the old bill and investigated...

 

I'll say no more.

 

FS good for NUFC? He had us on the road to ruin man.

[madras]

ne5 ...is this the synopsis then.

 

both ashley and fat fred were/are in it for the money. ashley with his own cash and fat fred using corporate structures,as yet fat fred took out all the time and it doesn't look like ashley has. fat fred tried to make the club succesful (thus boosting his value of his shareholding) where as ashley appears to be financially stabilising the club in order for it to provide for itself (or he may decide to splurge who knows ?).

 

fat fred put very little in and took millions out where as,as yet ashley has put millions in and took nowt out.

 

 

is this right ?

[Minhosa]

Wasn't Shepherd part of the old board pre SJH? Is he therefore responsible for those bad old days like he's responsible for the success in some eyes under SJH because he was also part of that board too?

 

quite shocked you are stooping to this level mate.

 

The answer is no, by the way.

 

Sir John was though, but resigned when the initial flotation failed due to lack of interest, failing to raise half of 2.5m quid.

 

This is fact by the way, because I put in to buy shares, and had my cheque returned.

 

 

 

 

 

You know me, I admit I can't stand FS and regard his time here as an ultimate failure. I admit my bias.

 

However, if you are claiming FS as part of the board under Sir John Hall deserves credit for those years then by your same logic, he deserves criticism for being part of the old board before SJH which he was. You are quick to highlight how FS played a role in KK's arrival and use that to defend him, but what about the role as a director or member of the old board he played in the club's woes pre-SJH?

 

Anyway, just to show how much of a turncoat FS was, he was very much on the side of the old board until SJH flashed him some money.

 

Oh and I just can't defend a crook.

 

Did I say crook, sorry I meant cock.

 

Sorry mate, you're showing your selective memory, guilty of putting personalities before judgements like some others.

 

lets hope Ashley and Mort back their managers more than the old board shall we ? I hope you don't claim they are "better", until they have proved it. Having said that, if the old board were such "cocks", they should be doing better already, for an example see the mackems since Niall Quinn took over from cocks, or for another example, see our own takeover in 1992 when they took over from cocks.

 

I hope you can understand this, but I have my doubts I must be honest.

 

 

 

Honestly NE5, I can't defend the man or turn a cheek to what I know. For sure he has done good things and I'm sure he isn't alone in footy but for me, as a so-called NUFC fan, well, I don't know how he can live with himself. SJH was never like that yet he had more scope to do what FS did, not even DH was like that and he had good reason to. Do you not find it suspicious how the takeover all came about like it did and why the Halls wanted out like they did, behind FS's back? They didn't want to be dragged down with it because that's what was going to happen. Only in years to come will we realise what an escape we've had thanks to Ashley and co. I dread to think what would have happened if FS was allowed to carry on or worse still, buy the club for himself.

 

I'll give you a clue, the warehouse carry on, but x10. I'm not surprised MA enlisted the help of a legal expert, the mess... The last thing you want to do is for something you've just bought for all that money to be confiscated by the old bill and investigated...

 

I'll say no more.

 

FS good for NUFC? He had us on the road to ruin man.

 

Good words.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

ne5 ...is this the synopsis then.

 

both ashley and fat fred were/are in it for the money. ashley with his own cash and fat fred using corporate structures,as yet fat fred took out all the time and it doesn't look like ashley has. fat fred tried to make the club succesful (thus boosting his value of his shareholding) where as ashley appears to be financially stabilising the club in order for it to provide for itself (or he may decide to splurge who knows ?).

 

fat fred put very little in and took millions out where as,as yet ashley has put millions in and took nowt out.

 

 

is this right ?

 

Ashley is paying for Shepherds financial mistakes at the minute.  No-one can dispute that

[Dr Venkman]

ne5 ...is this the synopsis then.

 

both ashley and fat fred were/are in it for the money. ashley with his own cash and fat fred using corporate structures,as yet fat fred took out all the time and it doesn't look like ashley has. fat fred tried to make the club succesful (thus boosting his value of his shareholding) where as ashley appears to be financially stabilising the club in order for it to provide for itself (or he may decide to splurge who knows ?).

 

fat fred put very little in and took millions out where as,as yet ashley has put millions in and took nowt out.

 

 

is this right ?

 

Ashley is paying for Shepherds financial mistakes at the minute.  No-one can dispute that

 

yeah but obviously ashley just wants to sell the club on to make a minimal profit while endearing himself to the fans for half an hour by turning up to a few games, isnt it obvious? now, freddy shepherd, HE had the clubs best interests at heart, don't believe me? just look at the FACTS, well, the ones i put infront of you anyway, none of the other stuff that people make up, they only dislike him because of his weight and some of them think he's a c***, nothing to do with him being a greedy, arrogant, and to be quite honest, stupid man

[NE5]

 

not really an "Argument" madras, just people disputing facts again.

 

 

or twisting facts to suit their side of the debate.

 

 

 

you mean, the 3 highest consecutive league positions in 50 years ?

 

Filling a 52,000 stadium every home game ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than any other era in the clubs history ?

 

Qualifying for europe more than every club in the country bar 4 ?

 

Please explain what is incorrect and twisted ?

 

 

Taking the club to the brink of financial meltdown?

 

You mean, a club that couldn't raise 2.5m quid on flotation ? ....... I bet people like you didn't turn down your FA Cup final tickets and Champions League qualifications ?

 

I'm pleased for you think shite boards do this  mackems.gif

 

So having recovered from not being not able to raise 2.5m on a floatation, he still didnt learn his lesson and tried to fuck it up again is what you are saying?  Thanks for helping me point that out.  The facts are that as a chairman of a football club and particularly a PLC one he just wasn't very good.  Still stick to your one sided agenda.

 

I admit though that the goals he scored to get us to the cup final were vital at the time.

 

Unfortunately, if you had read through these posts, you will realise I was talking about Sir John hall, and not Shepherd, who was involved with the board and the failed share issue. Such is your own eagerness to prove your agenda with unfounded and untrue information.

 

I agree with your comment about the board not scoring those goals in FA Cup Finals though, maybe you won't blame them for us winning nowt in future  mackems.gif

 

 

[Minhosa]

What is it with the constant agenda in relation to justifying the Fat Bastards reign NE5?

 

Does it really bother you that much, that you feel you must defend his honour every day?

 

Surely we should all be looking forward with optimism and in support of the new Owner & Management Team?

 

What difference does it make that most people have nothing but disdain for the previous regime?

 

Genuine question, do you know Shepherd?

[NE5]

ne5 ...is this the synopsis then.

 

both ashley and fat fred were/are in it for the money. ashley with his own cash and fat fred using corporate structures,as yet fat fred took out all the time and it doesn't look like ashley has. fat fred tried to make the club succesful (thus boosting his value of his shareholding) where as ashley appears to be financially stabilising the club in order for it to provide for itself (or he may decide to splurge who knows ?).

 

fat fred put very little in and took millions out where as,as yet ashley has put millions in and took nowt out.

 

 

is this right ?

 

Ashley is paying for Shepherds financial mistakes at the minute.  No-one can dispute that

 

oh dear. If Ashley the businessman had paid due diligence when he took over, he would have known about the clubs accounts, or maybe he did and saw it as part of the overall package to buy the club ? What do you think, or are you one of those daft enough to suggest that he's done it for charity.

 

I've got some news for you, he hasn't done it for charity, he's done it to add to the value of the club. Do you disagree ? You could also tell us your opinion on the current state of all football clubs, including manu since the Glaziers took over. Do you really live in cloud cuckoo land you ignore the real world of football so much. 

 

If you want the football club to put financial stability first, and not take risks and show ambition, stand by for more seasons of mid table mediocrity and average cheap footballers, but it seems people like you will NEVER understand this until it hits you on the head.