Ashley has failed Newcastle United.

[NE5]

 

 

 

You are right about the debt. £45 million was repayable in instalments ending in 2016. The takeover triggered a clause in the loan agreement to the effect that the lender could call the debt in with 60 days notice. So Ashley got stuck with that. The other £30 million that Ashley put in was to satisfy the auditors that the club could carry on trading as a going concern. It was technically insolvent at 30th June 2007 so the auditors would have needed that assurance.

 

How much was the original loan?  I'm sure it wasn't much different to £45 million.

 

never mind mick. The top 4 who win all the trophies have debts of 1.5bn quid between them. I'm pleased you think we are in better shape than those 4 clubs and didn't waste any money in the transfer window

 

mackems.gif

 

How long have they been in debt to such an extent that they are now?

 

Typically stupid argument.

 

I've tried to explain the mess the club was in before they completely transformed it but you don't want to listen.

 

Your loss.

 

 

 

Was talking about the top 4. The stats that were released earlier show a business which categorically wasnt being run properly. This statement has nothing to do with thier ambition or transfer funds but the fact that they didnt stick to a sustainable business plan which is the norm for other clubs,

 

including the 87 or so who haven't qualified for europe as often as we did ? They have better "business plans" then 

[Syrette]

Here we go again.

[NE5]

As long as the chairman learns from his mistakes, something which Shepherd never learned to do, I'll be very happy.

 

At the moment, *the only mistake hes made is not sacking Big Sam sooner and bringing Keegan in before the opening of the January transfer window.

 

The significant mistake, amidst all the transfer strategy cautiousness delivered by Mort & Ashley which has already been cited, which may well bring about our relegation.

 

That mistake is the one that counts the most. That one month will go down as a 'not to do' blueprint for other clubs to go by. If we survive the drop, and if Keegan isn't sufficiently backed - surely promises must've have been made when considering the manner in which Keegan originally left - in the Summer as far as i'm concerned Ashley can bring in the scaffolders have them remove his "...... Direct" advertising and sell-up & bugger off, sooner rather than later that is.

 

*Yet some many people still can't see the point. I guess 'not being Freddy Shepherd' is one factor, along with all the other stuff ie. Ashley's "i stand as the leader of Toon Army - i bleed as they do" warcry in the press and by getting down & dirty in the terraces and generally coming across as your everyday grassroots supporter.... and the debt reduction issue is also a relevant point, which weighs in Ashley & Mort's favour at the minute.

 

This idea that because we couldn't buy in the January transfer window, we have endangered the club's Premier future sounds damning, but when you look at the actual circumstances it was perfectly understandable. The money wasn't going to be released to Allardyce because we didn't want to buy any more Smiths, Bartons or Nolans etc. He was sacked for abysmal results during an easy early fixture list (KK's now suffering the consequences). Keegan couldn't get in the players he wanted in a very short space of time, and here we are.

 

What could we have done differently? Kept Allardyce which would have meant starting again in the summer. Is that the argument?

 

not making excuse after excuse for not recognising a serous situation and putting the club in danger of relegation would be a start.

 

Quite amazing the hypocrisy on here. People slating Shepherd for not splashing cash every time we lose, then complaining about debts and saying Ashley did right not to waste money on a team in relegation trouble.

 

Then we have the sacking of a manager at a "bad time", where the last regime was absolutely slaughtered for it.

 

It would really appear that being a fat bastard who eats all the pies is the ultimate crime, and  you can get away with anything else.

 

 

 

So your objections are

 

1) That Allardyce was sacked at a bad time, meaning you must believe that appointing Keegan was a mistake, seeing as Allardyce should still be boss in your own words. In which case:

 

2) Allardyce should have been given serious money to spend in January, regardless of the fact he wasted £18m on Smith, Enrique and Barton?

 

This is where you're reasoning seems to be leading. Fair enough but your hypocrisy is astounding as you were more than happy enough at the time when Keegan was appointed. Once again people making arguments armed with shitloads of hindsight.

 

Hindsight in what exactly ?

 

I have ALWAYS said there is no such thing as a "bad time" to boot out a manager who has to go, nor is there any such thing as a "bad time" to appoint a new one if he's the right man. Look through my posts if you don't believe me. This is absolutely proven by the fact that I disagreed with loads of people who constantly moaned on about the fat bastard getting his timing wrong, and other such bollocks, see Allardyce having all the summer to "plan", the new board having all summer to "plan" [which a huge amount of people insisted would see us in good stead this season. You tell me what has happened. So much for "timing" and "planning".

 

Yes I'm happy with Keegan. If he stays.

 

No I'm not happy with the comments coming out of Ashleys mouthpiece which seem to be saying that the club are operating a sell to buy policy, and appear to be hoping that we are going to find the best young players all over the world before anybody else and win loads of trophies in 10 years time when they all become the new Gazza. Aye, right.  mackems.gif

 

The club failed to respond to an increasingly serious predicament ie a looming relegation battle, whereby Ashleys mouthpiece said a month or so before the transfer deadline that if the club buys any players they would be players for the future.

 

If YOU can't see these points, its YOUR problem, but continue slating the fat bastard for eating all the pies while the replacements struggle to match the results, european qualifications and league positions the club gained under the old regime and continuing to delude yourself they are "better" just because you don't like the fat bastard.

 

Basically, they aren't as good as the old board until they have proved it by virtue of those european and Champions League qualifications. This is not rocket science. Neither is the fact that they have so far shown only a distinct lack of awareness of what it takes to do it.

 

 

[madras]

 

we have indeed. Simple fact is that NUFC will never go bust and the nearest they will ever be is where they were when the Halls and Shepherd saved it in 1992.

 

As I have also said, the top 4 are quite happy with their debts - and success on the field, the purchase of these despicable "trophy" players, and the trophies that these players win. While some people on here prefer us to operate a "sell to buy" policy, buying a host of Johnny Averages and fight a relegation battle as a result, simply because they didn't like the fat b****** and were so absolutely obsessed and had their heads in the sand so much re their hatred of the fat b******, they even rather sadly dismissed his attempts to back his managers to bring top quality players to the club, being totally incapable of admitting or even realising that this is indeed the way that a club such as NUFC should be operating.

 

 

 

you're happy with this relegation fight and the possibility of ending up where the Halls and the fat b****** found us as soon as they have left then ?

 

 

we have a debt and  make a loss. the top 4 (abramovic apart) have debts and make profits...can you spot the difference ?

[Parky]

 

we have indeed. Simple fact is that NUFC will never go bust and the nearest they will ever be is where they were when the Halls and Shepherd saved it in 1992.

 

As I have also said, the top 4 are quite happy with their debts - and success on the field, the purchase of these despicable "trophy" players, and the trophies that these players win. While some people on here prefer us to operate a "sell to buy" policy, buying a host of Johnny Averages and fight a relegation battle as a result, simply because they didn't like the fat b****** and were so absolutely obsessed and had their heads in the sand so much re their hatred of the fat b******, they even rather sadly dismissed his attempts to back his managers to bring top quality players to the club, being totally incapable of admitting or even realising that this is indeed the way that a club such as NUFC should be operating.

 

 

 

you're happy with this relegation fight and the possibility of ending up where the Halls and the fat b****** found us as soon as they have left then ?

 

 

we have a debt and  make a loss. the top 4 (abramovic apart) have debts and make profits...can you spot the difference ?

 

Who the fuck are you Einstein?

[NE5]

 

we have indeed. Simple fact is that NUFC will never go bust and the nearest they will ever be is where they were when the Halls and Shepherd saved it in 1992.

 

As I have also said, the top 4 are quite happy with their debts - and success on the field, the purchase of these despicable "trophy" players, and the trophies that these players win. While some people on here prefer us to operate a "sell to buy" policy, buying a host of Johnny Averages and fight a relegation battle as a result, simply because they didn't like the fat b****** and were so absolutely obsessed and had their heads in the sand so much re their hatred of the fat b******, they even rather sadly dismissed his attempts to back his managers to bring top quality players to the club, being totally incapable of admitting or even realising that this is indeed the way that a club such as NUFC should be operating.

 

 

 

you're happy with this relegation fight and the possibility of ending up where the Halls and the fat b****** found us as soon as they have left then ?

 

 

we have a debt and  make a loss. the top 4 (abramovic apart) have debts and make profits...can you spot the difference ?

 

please tell us how they make a profit ?

 

 

[Dave]

 

we have indeed. Simple fact is that NUFC will never go bust and the nearest they will ever be is where they were when the Halls and Shepherd saved it in 1992.

 

As I have also said, the top 4 are quite happy with their debts - and success on the field, the purchase of these despicable "trophy" players, and the trophies that these players win. While some people on here prefer us to operate a "sell to buy" policy, buying a host of Johnny Averages and fight a relegation battle as a result, simply because they didn't like the fat b****** and were so absolutely obsessed and had their heads in the sand so much re their hatred of the fat b******, they even rather sadly dismissed his attempts to back his managers to bring top quality players to the club, being totally incapable of admitting or even realising that this is indeed the way that a club such as NUFC should be operating.

 

 

 

you're happy with this relegation fight and the possibility of ending up where the Halls and the fat b****** found us as soon as they have left then ?

 

 

we have a debt and  make a loss. the top 4 (abramovic apart) have debts and make profits...can you spot the difference ?

 

Who the fuck are you Einstein?

 

Oh the brilliant, brilliant irony.

[madras]

 

we have indeed. Simple fact is that NUFC will never go bust and the nearest they will ever be is where they were when the Halls and Shepherd saved it in 1992.

 

As I have also said, the top 4 are quite happy with their debts - and success on the field, the purchase of these despicable "trophy" players, and the trophies that these players win. While some people on here prefer us to operate a "sell to buy" policy, buying a host of Johnny Averages and fight a relegation battle as a result, simply because they didn't like the fat b****** and were so absolutely obsessed and had their heads in the sand so much re their hatred of the fat b******, they even rather sadly dismissed his attempts to back his managers to bring top quality players to the club, being totally incapable of admitting or even realising that this is indeed the way that a club such as NUFC should be operating.

 

 

 

you're happy with this relegation fight and the possibility of ending up where the Halls and the fat b****** found us as soon as they have left then ?

 

 

we have a debt and  make a loss. the top 4 (abramovic apart) have debts and make profits...can you spot the difference ?

 

please tell us how they make a profit ?

 

 

they make an operating profit...ie over the finacial year they bring in more than they pay out...if you can do this it's ok to carry debts,create debt to invest with etc.

 

if, on the other hand, you are paying out more than you have coming in,building up more debt can be ruinous.

[Dave]

you're happy with this relegation fight and the possibility of ending up where the Halls and the fat bastard found us as soon as they have left then ?

 

 

 

There's only one person around here that appears to be enjoying this season tbf.

[ChezGiven]

The point about Man U making profits is bollocks anyway, they only do that from an accounting point of view and it seems a little churlish to compare us to the most successful british club in the history of the game.

 

So there was some creative accounting going on and some risks being taken. Ask Brummie if he'd have preferred that during the 90s and the first half of this decade or would he have stuck with his own 'bean counter'? For all his prudence during that time and the continiuing approach adopted by Lerner they are only one decent transfer window ahead of us on the pitch and dont have our potential off it (although this season seems to have killed off any goodwill we had from the rest of the footballing community in this country).

[ChezGiven]

 

we have indeed. Simple fact is that NUFC will never go bust and the nearest they will ever be is where they were when the Halls and Shepherd saved it in 1992.

 

As I have also said, the top 4 are quite happy with their debts - and success on the field, the purchase of these despicable "trophy" players, and the trophies that these players win. While some people on here prefer us to operate a "sell to buy" policy, buying a host of Johnny Averages and fight a relegation battle as a result, simply because they didn't like the fat b****** and were so absolutely obsessed and had their heads in the sand so much re their hatred of the fat b******, they even rather sadly dismissed his attempts to back his managers to bring top quality players to the club, being totally incapable of admitting or even realising that this is indeed the way that a club such as NUFC should be operating.

 

 

 

you're happy with this relegation fight and the possibility of ending up where the Halls and the fat b****** found us as soon as they have left then ?

 

 

we have a debt and  make a loss. the top 4 (abramovic apart) have debts and make profits...can you spot the difference ?

 

please tell us how they make a profit ?

 

 

they make an operating profit...ie over the finacial year they bring in more than they pay out...if you can do this it's ok to carry debts,create debt to invest with etc.

 

if, on the other hand, you are paying out more than you have coming in,building up more debt can be ruinous.

 

Unless your future revenue was about to spike permananently by 35% of your current revenue, in which case who gives a shit. yes?

[madras]

 

we have indeed. Simple fact is that NUFC will never go bust and the nearest they will ever be is where they were when the Halls and Shepherd saved it in 1992.

 

As I have also said, the top 4 are quite happy with their debts - and success on the field, the purchase of these despicable "trophy" players, and the trophies that these players win. While some people on here prefer us to operate a "sell to buy" policy, buying a host of Johnny Averages and fight a relegation battle as a result, simply because they didn't like the fat b****** and were so absolutely obsessed and had their heads in the sand so much re their hatred of the fat b******, they even rather sadly dismissed his attempts to back his managers to bring top quality players to the club, being totally incapable of admitting or even realising that this is indeed the way that a club such as NUFC should be operating.

 

 

 

you're happy with this relegation fight and the possibility of ending up where the Halls and the fat b****** found us as soon as they have left then ?

 

 

we have a debt and  make a loss. the top 4 (abramovic apart) have debts and make profits...can you spot the difference ?

 

please tell us how they make a profit ?

 

 

they make an operating profit...ie over the finacial year they bring in more than they pay out...if you can do this it's ok to carry debts,create debt to invest with etc.

 

if, on the other hand, you are paying out more than you have coming in,building up more debt can be ruinous.

 

Unless your future revenue was about to spike permananently by 35% of your current revenue, in which case who gives a s***. yes?

it happened in the past with the TV deals and we still eneded up making losses by the end.

[ChezGiven]

 

we have indeed. Simple fact is that NUFC will never go bust and the nearest they will ever be is where they were when the Halls and Shepherd saved it in 1992.

 

As I have also said, the top 4 are quite happy with their debts - and success on the field, the purchase of these despicable "trophy" players, and the trophies that these players win. While some people on here prefer us to operate a "sell to buy" policy, buying a host of Johnny Averages and fight a relegation battle as a result, simply because they didn't like the fat b****** and were so absolutely obsessed and had their heads in the sand so much re their hatred of the fat b******, they even rather sadly dismissed his attempts to back his managers to bring top quality players to the club, being totally incapable of admitting or even realising that this is indeed the way that a club such as NUFC should be operating.

 

 

 

you're happy with this relegation fight and the possibility of ending up where the Halls and the fat b****** found us as soon as they have left then ?

 

 

we have a debt and  make a loss. the top 4 (abramovic apart) have debts and make profits...can you spot the difference ?

 

please tell us how they make a profit ?

 

 

they make an operating profit...ie over the finacial year they bring in more than they pay out...if you can do this it's ok to carry debts,create debt to invest with etc.

 

if, on the other hand, you are paying out more than you have coming in,building up more debt can be ruinous.

 

Unless your future revenue was about to spike permananently by 35% of your current revenue, in which case who gives a s***. yes?

it happened in the past with the TV deals and we still eneded up making losses by the end.

Our current revenue is around 87m, they are about to add 30m to that. Unprecedented yet foreseen, forecasted, taken into account, driving decisions and the reason why the game is full of yanks. Its the most important reality in the game.

[madras]

 

we have indeed. Simple fact is that NUFC will never go bust and the nearest they will ever be is where they were when the Halls and Shepherd saved it in 1992.

 

As I have also said, the top 4 are quite happy with their debts - and success on the field, the purchase of these despicable "trophy" players, and the trophies that these players win. While some people on here prefer us to operate a "sell to buy" policy, buying a host of Johnny Averages and fight a relegation battle as a result, simply because they didn't like the fat b****** and were so absolutely obsessed and had their heads in the sand so much re their hatred of the fat b******, they even rather sadly dismissed his attempts to back his managers to bring top quality players to the club, being totally incapable of admitting or even realising that this is indeed the way that a club such as NUFC should be operating.

 

 

 

you're happy with this relegation fight and the possibility of ending up where the Halls and the fat b****** found us as soon as they have left then ?

 

 

we have a debt and  make a loss. the top 4 (abramovic apart) have debts and make profits...can you spot the difference ?

 

please tell us how they make a profit ?

 

 

they make an operating profit...ie over the finacial year they bring in more than they pay out...if you can do this it's ok to carry debts,create debt to invest with etc.

 

if, on the other hand, you are paying out more than you have coming in,building up more debt can be ruinous.

 

Unless your future revenue was about to spike permananently by 35% of your current revenue, in which case who gives a s***. yes?

it happened in the past with the TV deals and we still eneded up making losses by the end.

Our current revenue is around 87m, they are about to add 30m to that. Unprecedented yet foreseen, forecasted, taken into account, driving decisions and the reason why the game is full of yanks. Its the most important reality in the game.

would you be comfortbale with the finances they had in the past for shepherd/dougie hall not to go the way they did previously ?

 

oh and dont you think it'll just drive wages and transfer fees up and those clubs struggling to make a profit now will still struggle even with the extra revenue ?

[UV]

 

if, on the other hand, you are paying out more than you have coming in,building up more debt can be ruinous.

 

It only goes up to 2006, but how are these clubs still in operation with year on year losses?

 

Villa

Blackburn

Everton

Man City

Boro 

 

[fredbob]

 

we have indeed. Simple fact is that NUFC will never go bust and the nearest they will ever be is where they were when the Halls and Shepherd saved it in 1992.

 

As I have also said, the top 4 are quite happy with their debts - and success on the field, the purchase of these despicable "trophy" players, and the trophies that these players win. While some people on here prefer us to operate a "sell to buy" policy, buying a host of Johnny Averages and fight a relegation battle as a result, simply because they didn't like the fat b****** and were so absolutely obsessed and had their heads in the sand so much re their hatred of the fat b******, they even rather sadly dismissed his attempts to back his managers to bring top quality players to the club, being totally incapable of admitting or even realising that this is indeed the way that a club such as NUFC should be operating.

 

 

 

you're happy with this relegation fight and the possibility of ending up where the Halls and the fat b****** found us as soon as they have left then ?

 

 

we have a debt and  make a loss. the top 4 (abramovic apart) have debts and make profits...can you spot the difference ?

 

please tell us how they make a profit ?

 

 

they make an operating profit...ie over the finacial year they bring in more than they pay out...if you can do this it's ok to carry debts,create debt to invest with etc.

 

if, on the other hand, you are paying out more than you have coming in,building up more debt can be ruinous.

 

Unless your future revenue was about to spike permananently by 35% of your current revenue, in which case who gives a s***. yes?

 

But nufc had been operating like this way before the TV revenue was to come to fruition. Doesnt the fact that we 72% of our revenue was being used for wages suggest that Shephard had to take massive financial risks and increase the wage threshold in order to attract the "top" players to help drive season ticket sales in order to cover his own back.

 

It turned into a vicious cirlce.

[Parky]

We have been spending a little too much on wages recently around 70%, that needs looking at by all means.

 

But football is a speculation driven business and ultimately all clubs take risks. Yes?

[madras]

 

if, on the other hand, you are paying out more than you have coming in,building up more debt can be ruinous.

 

It only goes up to 2006, but how are these clubs still in operation with year on year losses?

 

Villa

Blackburn

Everton

Man City

Boro 

 

 

if, on the other hand, you are paying out more than you have coming in,building up more debt can be ruinous.

 

It only goes up to 2006, but how are these clubs still in operation with year on year losses?

 

Villa

Blackburn

Everton

Man City

Boro 

 

keep going like that and thay wont be in operation

[fredbob]

 

 

 

You are right about the debt. £45 million was repayable in instalments ending in 2016. The takeover triggered a clause in the loan agreement to the effect that the lender could call the debt in with 60 days notice. So Ashley got stuck with that. The other £30 million that Ashley put in was to satisfy the auditors that the club could carry on trading as a going concern. It was technically insolvent at 30th June 2007 so the auditors would have needed that assurance.

 

How much was the original loan?  I'm sure it wasn't much different to £45 million.

 

never mind mick. The top 4 who win all the trophies have debts of 1.5bn quid between them. I'm pleased you think we are in better shape than those 4 clubs and didn't waste any money in the transfer window

 

mackems.gif

 

How long have they been in debt to such an extent that they are now?

 

Typically stupid argument.

 

I've tried to explain the mess the club was in before they completely transformed it but you don't want to listen.

 

Your loss.

 

 

 

Was talking about the top 4. The stats that were released earlier show a business which categorically wasnt being run properly. This statement has nothing to do with thier ambition or transfer funds but the fact that they didnt stick to a sustainable business plan which is the norm for other clubs,

 

including the 87 or so who haven't qualified for europe as often as we did ? They have better "business plans" then 

 

You're missing the point though, we havent always operated this way, in fact we were more successful when we operated the normal way. Its apretty silly comparison to be honest.

 

It seems to me that Shephard et al were forced to open up the threshold on wages and transfers after the sacking of Bobby in orde to stir up interest for season ticket sales.

 

To me, the whole plan was akin to a person using one credit card to clear the debts off another credit card.

[fredbob]

We have been spending a little too much on wages recently around 70%, that needs looking at by all means.

 

But football is a speculation driven business and ultimately all clubs take risks. Yes?

 

To me, the whole issue with Shephard et al comes down to the sacking of SBR. Thinking back to the time that SBR was last in charge there was alot of (unfair) discontent towards SBR and the team I'd imagine that as a result the renewal of season ticket sales werent as rapid as usual and therefore Shephard et al hands were being forced into action in order to stir up interest, which meant the sacking of SBR and also the bid for Rooney, (not sure if the sale of Woodgate is linked). This to me made the job untenable and hence the only man who would take the jobwas soon to be sacked - Souness who jumped ship, again not inspiring many people our hand was forced again with the lavish spending, which includedexpensive high wage acqusitions of Luque, Owen and Boumsong, the circle begins.

 

The thing is that this whole situation could of been saved with a decent appointment, for a man who has been involved with football for 15 years or so, his and the borads footballing judgement was terrible.

 

 

[Parky]

 

 

 

You are right about the debt. £45 million was repayable in instalments ending in 2016. The takeover triggered a clause in the loan agreement to the effect that the lender could call the debt in with 60 days notice. So Ashley got stuck with that. The other £30 million that Ashley put in was to satisfy the auditors that the club could carry on trading as a going concern. It was technically insolvent at 30th June 2007 so the auditors would have needed that assurance.

 

How much was the original loan?  I'm sure it wasn't much different to £45 million.

 

never mind mick. The top 4 who win all the trophies have debts of 1.5bn quid between them. I'm pleased you think we are in better shape than those 4 clubs and didn't waste any money in the transfer window

 

mackems.gif

 

How long have they been in debt to such an extent that they are now?

 

Typically stupid argument.

 

I've tried to explain the mess the club was in before they completely transformed it but you don't want to listen.

 

Your loss.

 

 

 

Was talking about the top 4. The stats that were released earlier show a business which categorically wasnt being run properly. This statement has nothing to do with thier ambition or transfer funds but the fact that they didnt stick to a sustainable business plan which is the norm for other clubs,

 

including the 87 or so who haven't qualified for europe as often as we did ? They have better "business plans" then 

 

You're missing the point though, we havent always operated this way, in fact we were more successful when we operated the normal way. Its apretty silly comparison to be honest.

 

It seems to me that Shephard et al were forced to open up the threshold on wages and transfers after the sacking of Bobby in orde to stir up interest for season ticket sales.

 

To me, the whole plan was akin to a person using one credit card to clear the debts off another credit card.

 

Only if the credit card you borrow from gets topped up by 52,000 + people every year. 

[Baggio]

No I'm not happy with the comments coming out of Ashleys mouthpiece which seem to be saying that the club are operating a sell to buy policy

 

Link?

[Parky]

We have been spending a little too much on wages recently around 70%, that needs looking at by all means.

 

But football is a speculation driven business and ultimately all clubs take risks. Yes?

 

To me, the whole issue with Shephard et al comes down to the sacking of SBR. Thinking back to the time that SBR was last in charge there was alot of (unfair) discontent towards SBR and the team I'd imagine that as a result the renewal of season ticket sales werent as rapid as usual and therefore Shephard et al hands were being forced into action in order to stir up interest, which meant the sacking of SBR and also the bid for Rooney, (not sure if the sale of Woodgate is linked). This to me made the job untenable and hence the only man who would take the jobwas soon to be sacked - Souness who jumped ship, again not inspiring many people our hand was forced again with the lavish spending, which includedexpensive high wage acqusitions of Luque, Owen and Boumsong, the circle begins.

 

The thing is that this whole situation could of been saved with a decent appointment, for a man who has been involved with football for 15 years or so, his and the borads footballing judgement was terrible.

 

 

 

I would in all honesty put a lot of our current challenges at the feet of GS. It will take another 2/3 seasons to recover from that.

[fredbob]

We have been spending a little too much on wages recently around 70%, that needs looking at by all means.

 

But football is a speculation driven business and ultimately all clubs take risks. Yes?

 

To me, the whole issue with Shephard et al comes down to the sacking of SBR. Thinking back to the time that SBR was last in charge there was alot of (unfair) discontent towards SBR and the team I'd imagine that as a result the renewal of season ticket sales werent as rapid as usual and therefore Shephard et al hands were being forced into action in order to stir up interest, which meant the sacking of SBR and also the bid for Rooney, (not sure if the sale of Woodgate is linked). This to me made the job untenable and hence the only man who would take the jobwas soon to be sacked - Souness who jumped ship, again not inspiring many people our hand was forced again with the lavish spending, which includedexpensive high wage acqusitions of Luque, Owen and Boumsong, the circle begins.

 

The thing is that this whole situation could of been saved with a decent appointment, for a man who has been involved with football for 15 years or so, his and the borads footballing judgement was terrible.

 

 

 

I would in all honesty put a lot of our current challenges at the feet of GS. It will take another 2/3 seasons to recover from that.

 

....or the sackingof SBR??? 

[Thespence]

Reading some of this & you would forget that football is played out on the pitch. I think as club we focus on the board room far too much. Maybe it is because of people like me who when younger in the 80's we used to sing "SACK THE BOARD" & now every generation since when the going gets tough focuses on the board, when it is really about players & managers.