Syrette Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v9yUVgrmPY Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 NE5, what is your link to the old board? Are you a friend of Freddy Shephard? Serious question bytheway. Are you a friend of Chris Mort ? You see, never a direct answer. I take it by that response that you are a friend of Mr Shephard. Right? To clarify, you think something is wrong with crediting a board who achieves regular european and champions League football against one who fails to see a looming relegation battle and imposes a "sell to buy" policy on the manager ? And you think anyone who - like you - prefers to see the latter, is Freddie Shepherd ? Amazing. mackems.gif You must indeed by Chris Mort, because surely nobody else would defend such actiions Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 SBR gets sacked when he doesnt deserve it in my opinion, to make matters worse the club handle the situation abdominably, the job becomes a poison chalice. We end up with Souness. The guts of your argument is the board didn't have the gall to sack him at the start of the season or the stomache to let him continue indefinately? The "manner" of Robson's sacking as a deterent to getting a new manager in is a massive red herring. When has the manner of the previous manager's sacking stopped a new manager taking the job? Houllier -> Benitez? Ranieri ->Mourinho? Jol -> Ramos? Fair enough, pick and choose what you want to reply to. Thats not my point at all, the first point and major point is that they shouldnt of sacked him in the first place because he hadnt done anything footballing wise to merit a sacking. By sacking him, the board sent a message saying that in essentially the club requires CL qualification as a minimum. The second part to my argument is indeed the manner and circumstances, ie finishing 5th, being a legend and being treated abdominably whilst in the job, being undermined and being openely humiliated. The examples you give arent particulary good to be honest, so no, its not a red herring, like a said we dont have the history to have such a lavish criteria for these sort of managers. Liverpool - fanstastic history, decent resources wherent achieving the big one they wanted Chelsea - Amazing resources, wanted the best, the best came. Spurs - Had a modernized set up and a club that had finished 5th twice, was looking to exploit there new set up and heavy investment went for the best at a crucial time for them. The only club remotely similar to our situation in the examples you give are Spurs and even then it isnt that similar, they had a new set up which thy were looking to exploit. Nufc didnt have anything to offer that those 3 didnt, we didnt have amazing resources, we arent considered one of the major clubs in the world and we didnt have a new set up to exploit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 NE5, what is your link to the old board? Are you a friend of Freddy Shephard? Serious question bytheway. Are you a friend of Chris Mort ? You see, never a direct answer. I take it by that response that you are a friend of Mr Shephard. Right? To clarify, you think something is wrong with crediting a board who achieves regular european and champions League football against one who fails to see a looming relegation battle and imposes a "sell to buy" policy on the manager ? And you think anyone who - like you - prefers to see the latter, is Freddie Shepherd ? Amazing. mackems.gif You must indeed by Chris Mort, because surely nobody else would defend such actiions So you have absolutley no link with the old board or Freddy Shepherd then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 fredbob, I couldn't be arsed responding to the rest of it because firstly it was 1 o'clock in the morning, and secondly you just contradict yourself all over the place so it's impossible to argue with you. The examples you give arent particulary good to be honest, so no, its not a red herring, like a said we dont have the history to have such a lavish criteria for these sort of managers. Liverpool - fanstastic history, decent resources wherent achieving the big one they wanted Chelsea - Amazing resources, wanted the best, the best came. Spurs - Had a modernized set up and a club that had finished 5th twice, was looking to exploit there new set up and heavy investment went for the best at a crucial time for them. Can you not see that? This isnt a question of ambition, that magic buzz word you like so much, this was a question of runing abusiness properly and using advantage that we had as a club to further ourselves. You have to realise that most fans see us as being on par with Man U at one point in our history, a bit further down the line we were on par with the likes of Chelsea and Liverpool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Does anyone reckon KK would have come back under the old board? Rhetorical question btw. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 SBR gets sacked when he doesnt deserve it in my opinion, to make matters worse the club handle the situation abdominably, the job becomes a poison chalice. We end up with Souness. The guts of your argument is the board didn't have the gall to sack him at the start of the season or the stomache to let him continue indefinately? The "manner" of Robson's sacking as a deterent to getting a new manager in is a massive red herring. When has the manner of the previous manager's sacking stopped a new manager taking the job? Houllier -> Benitez? Ranieri ->Mourinho? Jol -> Ramos? Fair enough, pick and choose what you want to reply to. Thats not my point at all, the first point and major point is that they shouldnt of sacked him in the first place because he hadnt done anything footballing wise to merit a sacking. By sacking him, the board sent a message saying that in essentially the club requires CL qualification as a minimum. The second part to my argument is indeed the manner and circumstances, ie finishing 5th, being a legend and being treated abdominably whilst in the job, being undermined and being openely humiliated. The examples you give arent particulary good to be honest, so no, its not a red herring, like a said we dont have the history to have such a lavish criteria for these sort of managers. Liverpool - fanstastic history, decent resources wherent achieving the big one they wanted Chelsea - Amazing resources, wanted the best, the best came. Spurs - Had a modernized set up and a club that had finished 5th twice, was looking to exploit there new set up and heavy investment went for the best at a crucial time for them. The only club remotely similar to our situation in the examples you give are Spurs and even then it isnt that similar, they had a new set up which thy were looking to exploit. Nufc didnt have anything to offer that those 3 didnt, we didnt have amazing resources, we arent considered one of the major clubs in the world and we didnt have a new set up to exploit. the main crust of this, which you still fail to grasp fredbob no matter how many times it is explained, is that no other board in the last 50 years has attempted to tap our fanbase and get anywhere near to our potential than the Halls and Shepherd. You even went so far as to say we shouldn't waste money in the transfer window, agreeing with Chris Mort when he said we wouldn't be spending any money on anybody but players for the future, despite us struggling, looking at a relegation fight, and then hypocritically repeating as in your above posts that you then think we are such a big club, that we have an automatic right to a champions League place. You seriously think that the Halls and Shepherd brought decades of success and trophies to an end don't you ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 NE5, what is your link to the old board? Are you a friend of Freddy Shephard? Serious question bytheway. Are you a friend of Chris Mort ? You see, never a direct answer. I take it by that response that you are a friend of Mr Shephard. Right? To clarify, you think something is wrong with crediting a board who achieves regular european and champions League football against one who fails to see a looming relegation battle and imposes a "sell to buy" policy on the manager ? And you think anyone who - like you - prefers to see the latter, is Freddie Shepherd ? Amazing. mackems.gif You must indeed by Chris Mort, because surely nobody else would defend such actiions So you have absolutley no link with the old board or Freddy Shepherd then? So you have absolutley no link to the new board or Chris Mort then ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 SBR gets sacked when he doesnt deserve it in my opinion, to make matters worse the club handle the situation abdominably, the job becomes a poison chalice. We end up with Souness. The guts of your argument is the board didn't have the gall to sack him at the start of the season or the stomache to let him continue indefinately? The "manner" of Robson's sacking as a deterent to getting a new manager in is a massive red herring. When has the manner of the previous manager's sacking stopped a new manager taking the job? Houllier -> Benitez? Ranieri ->Mourinho? Jol -> Ramos? Fair enough, pick and choose what you want to reply to. Thats not my point at all, the first point and major point is that they shouldnt of sacked him in the first place because he hadnt done anything footballing wise to merit a sacking. By sacking him, the board sent a message saying that in essentially the club requires CL qualification as a minimum. The second part to my argument is indeed the manner and circumstances, ie finishing 5th, being a legend and being treated abdominably whilst in the job, being undermined and being openely humiliated. The examples you give arent particulary good to be honest, so no, its not a red herring, like a said we dont have the history to have such a lavish criteria for these sort of managers. Liverpool - fanstastic history, decent resources wherent achieving the big one they wanted Chelsea - Amazing resources, wanted the best, the best came. Spurs - Had a modernized set up and a club that had finished 5th twice, was looking to exploit there new set up and heavy investment went for the best at a crucial time for them. The only club remotely similar to our situation in the examples you give are Spurs and even then it isnt that similar, they had a new set up which thy were looking to exploit. Nufc didnt have anything to offer that those 3 didnt, we didnt have amazing resources, we arent considered one of the major clubs in the world and we didnt have a new set up to exploit. the main crust of this, which you still fail to grasp fredbob no matter how many times it is explained, is that no other board in the last 50 years has attempted to tap our fanbase and get anywhere near to our potential than the Halls and Shepherd. You even went so far as to say we shouldn't waste money in the transfer window, agreeing with Chris Mort when he said we wouldn't be spending any money on anybody but players for the future, despite us struggling, looking at a relegation fight, and then hypocritically repeating as in your above posts that you then think we are such a big club, that we have an automatic right to a champions League place. You seriously think that the Halls and Shepherd brought decades of success and trophies to an end don't you ? i've said this before mr NE5, and i'll say it again to see if anyone listens this time: you talk 100% sense about say 5% of the whole picture why anyone argues with you about the 5% is continually lost on me, there's no counter argument...shame you won't cross over into the other 95% then things might get interesting Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 SBR gets sacked when he doesnt deserve it in my opinion, to make matters worse the club handle the situation abdominably, the job becomes a poison chalice. We end up with Souness. The guts of your argument is the board didn't have the gall to sack him at the start of the season or the stomache to let him continue indefinately? The "manner" of Robson's sacking as a deterent to getting a new manager in is a massive red herring. When has the manner of the previous manager's sacking stopped a new manager taking the job? Houllier -> Benitez? Ranieri ->Mourinho? Jol -> Ramos? Fair enough, pick and choose what you want to reply to. Thats not my point at all, the first point and major point is that they shouldnt of sacked him in the first place because he hadnt done anything footballing wise to merit a sacking. By sacking him, the board sent a message saying that in essentially the club requires CL qualification as a minimum. The second part to my argument is indeed the manner and circumstances, ie finishing 5th, being a legend and being treated abdominably whilst in the job, being undermined and being openely humiliated. The examples you give arent particulary good to be honest, so no, its not a red herring, like a said we dont have the history to have such a lavish criteria for these sort of managers. Liverpool - fanstastic history, decent resources wherent achieving the big one they wanted Chelsea - Amazing resources, wanted the best, the best came. Spurs - Had a modernized set up and a club that had finished 5th twice, was looking to exploit there new set up and heavy investment went for the best at a crucial time for them. The only club remotely similar to our situation in the examples you give are Spurs and even then it isnt that similar, they had a new set up which thy were looking to exploit. Nufc didnt have anything to offer that those 3 didnt, we didnt have amazing resources, we arent considered one of the major clubs in the world and we didnt have a new set up to exploit. the main crust of this, which you still fail to grasp fredbob no matter how many times it is explained, is that no other board in the last 50 years has attempted to tap our fanbase and get anywhere near to our potential than the Halls and Shepherd. You even went so far as to say we shouldn't waste money in the transfer window, agreeing with Chris Mort when he said we wouldn't be spending any money on anybody but players for the future, despite us struggling, looking at a relegation fight, and then hypocritically repeating as in your above posts that you then think we are such a big club, that we have an automatic right to a champions League place. You seriously think that the Halls and Shepherd brought decades of success and trophies to an end don't you ? i've said this before mr NE5, and i'll say it again to see if anyone listens this time: you talk 100% sense about say 5% of the whole picture why anyone argues with you about the 5% is continually lost on me, there's no counter argument...shame you won't cross over into the other 95% then things might get interesting what is the "other 95%" calling women dogs ? Going to brothels ? Eating pies ? Being a fat bastard ? Making daft statements in public now and again ? All pretty much irrelevant. As for appointing Souness, bad mistake but everybody makes mistakes. The most important thing is he/they backed their appointed managers to the hilt. The new board are making mistakes too, they have made many, the most costly of which - may yet - and it may also be deliberate policy - cause an absolute disaster, and far worse than any mistake the old board did. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 fredbob, I couldn't be arsed responding to the rest of it because firstly it was 1 o'clock in the morning, and secondly you just contradict yourself all over the place so it's impossible to argue with you. The examples you give arent particulary good to be honest, so no, its not a red herring, like a said we dont have the history to have such a lavish criteria for these sort of managers. Liverpool - fanstastic history, decent resources wherent achieving the big one they wanted Chelsea - Amazing resources, wanted the best, the best came. Spurs - Had a modernized set up and a club that had finished 5th twice, was looking to exploit there new set up and heavy investment went for the best at a crucial time for them. Can you not see that? This isnt a question of ambition, that magic buzz word you like so much, this was a question of runing abusiness properly and using advantage that we had as a club to further ourselves. You have to realise that most fans see us as being on par with Man U at one point in our history, a bit further down the line we were on par with the likes of Chelsea and Liverpool. Clever peice of work that, but again, taken completely out of context. The first quote is specifically relevant to why we werent in a good position to appoint a new maager of decent quality because we had nothing to offer which made our club an appealing club having sacked the previous legendary manager in extremely poor circumstances. The second quote is a more generaly view which underlines the reasons why the board didnt do a fanstastic job overall, becasue at key times the board made terrible decisions which set the club back more than it should of. This second quote is only minimally linked to SBR- the topic we are discussing, whereas the first quote is directly linked to the fallout after SBR was sacked. Just like to point out that it was you who questioned me as to whther i wanted to keep SBR and i said yes, because i thoughtand always thought that had we kept SBR we would be in a much better situation than we are now no the argument is turning to the manner in which he was sacked which wasnt my main point. We both agree that the manner of the sacking was wrong, yes? I beleive the manner of the sacking set the club back becasue it made the job extremely unnattractive because of the circumstances and is the key reason as to why we are in the situation we are in now. You dont think that the club was set back by these decsision. I think that SBR should of been given a chance to turn things around because he was a great manager who done amazing things for us, he was kicked out at the first sign of "trouble". You dont becasue he would of stayed for longer than he should of and he ended up getting cancer so that would of been a hinderence for the club. What more is there to this debate? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 SBR gets sacked when he doesnt deserve it in my opinion, to make matters worse the club handle the situation abdominably, the job becomes a poison chalice. We end up with Souness. The guts of your argument is the board didn't have the gall to sack him at the start of the season or the stomache to let him continue indefinately? The "manner" of Robson's sacking as a deterent to getting a new manager in is a massive red herring. When has the manner of the previous manager's sacking stopped a new manager taking the job? Houllier -> Benitez? Ranieri ->Mourinho? Jol -> Ramos? Fair enough, pick and choose what you want to reply to. Thats not my point at all, the first point and major point is that they shouldnt of sacked him in the first place because he hadnt done anything footballing wise to merit a sacking. By sacking him, the board sent a message saying that in essentially the club requires CL qualification as a minimum. The second part to my argument is indeed the manner and circumstances, ie finishing 5th, being a legend and being treated abdominably whilst in the job, being undermined and being openely humiliated. The examples you give arent particulary good to be honest, so no, its not a red herring, like a said we dont have the history to have such a lavish criteria for these sort of managers. Liverpool - fanstastic history, decent resources wherent achieving the big one they wanted Chelsea - Amazing resources, wanted the best, the best came. Spurs - Had a modernized set up and a club that had finished 5th twice, was looking to exploit there new set up and heavy investment went for the best at a crucial time for them. The only club remotely similar to our situation in the examples you give are Spurs and even then it isnt that similar, they had a new set up which thy were looking to exploit. Nufc didnt have anything to offer that those 3 didnt, we didnt have amazing resources, we arent considered one of the major clubs in the world and we didnt have a new set up to exploit. the main crust of this, which you still fail to grasp fredbob no matter how many times it is explained, is that no other board in the last 50 years has attempted to tap our fanbase and get anywhere near to our potential than the Halls and Shepherd. You even went so far as to say we shouldn't waste money in the transfer window, agreeing with Chris Mort when he said we wouldn't be spending any money on anybody but players for the future, despite us struggling, looking at a relegation fight, and then hypocritically repeating as in your above posts that you then think we are such a big club, that we have an automatic right to a champions League place. You seriously think that the Halls and Shepherd brought decades of success and trophies to an end don't you ? Wait a minute - what has this got to do with me debating whether i thought it was right or wrong to sack SBR? See what you wanna see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 NE5, what is your link to the old board? Are you a friend of Freddy Shephard? Serious question bytheway. Are you a friend of Chris Mort ? You see, never a direct answer. I take it by that response that you are a friend of Mr Shephard. Right? To clarify, you think something is wrong with crediting a board who achieves regular european and champions League football against one who fails to see a looming relegation battle and imposes a "sell to buy" policy on the manager ? And you think anyone who - like you - prefers to see the latter, is Freddie Shepherd ? Amazing. mackems.gif You must indeed by Chris Mort, because surely nobody else would defend such actiions So you have absolutley no link with the old board or Freddy Shepherd then? So you have absolutley no link to the new board or Chris Mort then ? I can categorically confirm that i have absolutley no link with the new board including Chris Mort, your turn.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 NE5, what is your link to the old board? Are you a friend of Freddy Shephard? Serious question bytheway. Are you a friend of Chris Mort ? You see, never a direct answer. I take it by that response that you are a friend of Mr Shephard. Right? To clarify, you think something is wrong with crediting a board who achieves regular european and champions League football against one who fails to see a looming relegation battle and imposes a "sell to buy" policy on the manager ? And you think anyone who - like you - prefers to see the latter, is Freddie Shepherd ? Amazing. mackems.gif You must indeed by Chris Mort, because surely nobody else would defend such actiions So you have absolutley no link with the old board or Freddy Shepherd then? So you have absolutley no link to the new board or Chris Mort then ? I can categorically confirm that i have absolutley no link with the new board including Chris Mort, your turn.... I don't believe you. Fred Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 SBR gets sacked when he doesnt deserve it in my opinion, to make matters worse the club handle the situation abdominably, the job becomes a poison chalice. We end up with Souness. The guts of your argument is the board didn't have the gall to sack him at the start of the season or the stomache to let him continue indefinately? The "manner" of Robson's sacking as a deterent to getting a new manager in is a massive red herring. When has the manner of the previous manager's sacking stopped a new manager taking the job? Houllier -> Benitez? Ranieri ->Mourinho? Jol -> Ramos? Fair enough, pick and choose what you want to reply to. Thats not my point at all, the first point and major point is that they shouldnt of sacked him in the first place because he hadnt done anything footballing wise to merit a sacking. By sacking him, the board sent a message saying that in essentially the club requires CL qualification as a minimum. The second part to my argument is indeed the manner and circumstances, ie finishing 5th, being a legend and being treated abdominably whilst in the job, being undermined and being openely humiliated. The examples you give arent particulary good to be honest, so no, its not a red herring, like a said we dont have the history to have such a lavish criteria for these sort of managers. Liverpool - fanstastic history, decent resources wherent achieving the big one they wanted Chelsea - Amazing resources, wanted the best, the best came. Spurs - Had a modernized set up and a club that had finished 5th twice, was looking to exploit there new set up and heavy investment went for the best at a crucial time for them. The only club remotely similar to our situation in the examples you give are Spurs and even then it isnt that similar, they had a new set up which thy were looking to exploit. Nufc didnt have anything to offer that those 3 didnt, we didnt have amazing resources, we arent considered one of the major clubs in the world and we didnt have a new set up to exploit. the main crust of this, which you still fail to grasp fredbob no matter how many times it is explained, is that no other board in the last 50 years has attempted to tap our fanbase and get anywhere near to our potential than the Halls and Shepherd. You even went so far as to say we shouldn't waste money in the transfer window, agreeing with Chris Mort when he said we wouldn't be spending any money on anybody but players for the future, despite us struggling, looking at a relegation fight, and then hypocritically repeating as in your above posts that you then think we are such a big club, that we have an automatic right to a champions League place. You seriously think that the Halls and Shepherd brought decades of success and trophies to an end don't you ? i've said this before mr NE5, and i'll say it again to see if anyone listens this time: you talk 100% sense about say 5% of the whole picture why anyone argues with you about the 5% is continually lost on me, there's no counter argument...shame you won't cross over into the other 95% then things might get interesting what is the "other 95%" calling women dogs ? Going to brothels ? Eating pies ? Being a fat b****** ? Making daft statements in public now and again ? All pretty much irrelevant. As for appointing Souness, bad mistake but everybody makes mistakes. The most important thing is he/they backed their appointed managers to the hilt. The new board are making mistakes too, they have made many, the most costly of which - may yet - and it may also be deliberate policy - cause an absolute disaster, and far worse than any mistake the old board did. the other 95% is anything not board related, which you rarely seem to get involved in...say discussing potential signings, tactics, formations, songs...anything else non related to the boardroom(s) at any given point in history i'm backing you up, your arguments are generally sound and i've found myself becoming more and more convinced by them over time to a degree, but they are extremely limited and that's kind of my point as i say it baffles me when people try to pick holes in it, there really aren't any Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 NE5, what is your link to the old board? Are you a friend of Freddy Shephard? Serious question bytheway. Are you a friend of Chris Mort ? You see, never a direct answer. I take it by that response that you are a friend of Mr Shephard. Right? To clarify, you think something is wrong with crediting a board who achieves regular european and champions League football against one who fails to see a looming relegation battle and imposes a "sell to buy" policy on the manager ? And you think anyone who - like you - prefers to see the latter, is Freddie Shepherd ? Amazing. mackems.gif You must indeed by Chris Mort, because surely nobody else would defend such actiions So you have absolutley no link with the old board or Freddy Shepherd then? So you have absolutley no link to the new board or Chris Mort then ? I can categorically confirm that i have absolutley no link with the new board including Chris Mort, your turn.... I don't believe you. Fred Haha, so you think i have a link with London based businessman and billionaire Mike Ashley. Are you seriously 53? You have the logic of a 10 years old. Classic evasion bytheway, dont answer the question directly, turn it around. Dead clever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 NE5, what is your link to the old board? Are you a friend of Freddy Shephard? Serious question bytheway. Are you a friend of Chris Mort ? You see, never a direct answer. I take it by that response that you are a friend of Mr Shephard. Right? To clarify, you think something is wrong with crediting a board who achieves regular european and champions League football against one who fails to see a looming relegation battle and imposes a "sell to buy" policy on the manager ? And you think anyone who - like you - prefers to see the latter, is Freddie Shepherd ? Amazing. mackems.gif You must indeed by Chris Mort, because surely nobody else would defend such actiions So you have absolutley no link with the old board or Freddy Shepherd then? So you have absolutley no link to the new board or Chris Mort then ? I can categorically confirm that i have absolutley no link with the new board including Chris Mort, your turn.... I don't believe you. Fred Haha, so you think i have a link with London based businessman and billionaire Mike Ashley. Are you seriously 53? You have the logic of a 10 years old. Classic evasion bytheway, dont answer the question directly, turn it around. Dead clever. And you have no sense of humour fredbob, and certainly not much about you if you seriously think that just because I see value in a board showing ambition and ran a club that qualified for europe more than everybody bar 4 other clubs means I have a friendship etc with the chairman of the club. The vast majority of football fans would be quite happy with this, and also realise they had supported clubs that had done very well. In fact they would give their teeth for what we have had the last 15 years. As a matter of interest, why do you call yourself "fredbob" who exactly is it a tribute to ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 NE5, what is your link to the old board? Are you a friend of Freddy Shephard? Serious question bytheway. Are you a friend of Chris Mort ? You see, never a direct answer. I take it by that response that you are a friend of Mr Shephard. Right? To clarify, you think something is wrong with crediting a board who achieves regular european and champions League football against one who fails to see a looming relegation battle and imposes a "sell to buy" policy on the manager ? And you think anyone who - like you - prefers to see the latter, is Freddie Shepherd ? Amazing. mackems.gif You must indeed by Chris Mort, because surely nobody else would defend such actiions So you have absolutley no link with the old board or Freddy Shepherd then? So you have absolutley no link to the new board or Chris Mort then ? I can categorically confirm that i have absolutley no link with the new board including Chris Mort, your turn.... I don't believe you. Fred Haha, so you think i have a link with London based businessman and billionaire Mike Ashley. Are you seriously 53? You have the logic of a 10 years old. Classic evasion bytheway, dont answer the question directly, turn it around. Dead clever. And you have no sense of humour fredbob, and certainly not much about you if you seriously think that just because I see value in a board showing ambition and ran a club that qualified for europe more than everybody bar 4 other clubs means I have a friendship etc with the chairman of the club. The vast majority of football fans would be quite happy with this, and also realise they had supported clubs that had done very well. In fact they would give their teeth for what we have had the last 15 years. As a matter of interest, why do you call yourself "fredbob" who exactly is it a tribute to ? So you dont have any link whatsoever to Freddy Shepherd or the old board then? Simple question. Fredbob is nothing to do with Freddy shepherd of Sir bobby Robson bytheway, nothing even closed to be linked to NUFC, but nice bit of detective work. Good try! Sorry for not acknowledging your joke bytheway, i didnt realise it was one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 SBR gets sacked when he doesnt deserve it in my opinion, to make matters worse the club handle the situation abdominably, the job becomes a poison chalice. We end up with Souness. The guts of your argument is the board didn't have the gall to sack him at the start of the season or the stomache to let him continue indefinately? The "manner" of Robson's sacking as a deterent to getting a new manager in is a massive red herring. When has the manner of the previous manager's sacking stopped a new manager taking the job? Houllier -> Benitez? Ranieri ->Mourinho? Jol -> Ramos? Fair enough, pick and choose what you want to reply to. Thats not my point at all, the first point and major point is that they shouldnt of sacked him in the first place because he hadnt done anything footballing wise to merit a sacking. By sacking him, the board sent a message saying that in essentially the club requires CL qualification as a minimum. The second part to my argument is indeed the manner and circumstances, ie finishing 5th, being a legend and being treated abdominably whilst in the job, being undermined and being openely humiliated. The examples you give arent particulary good to be honest, so no, its not a red herring, like a said we dont have the history to have such a lavish criteria for these sort of managers. Liverpool - fanstastic history, decent resources wherent achieving the big one they wanted Chelsea - Amazing resources, wanted the best, the best came. Spurs - Had a modernized set up and a club that had finished 5th twice, was looking to exploit there new set up and heavy investment went for the best at a crucial time for them. The only club remotely similar to our situation in the examples you give are Spurs and even then it isnt that similar, they had a new set up which thy were looking to exploit. Nufc didnt have anything to offer that those 3 didnt, we didnt have amazing resources, we arent considered one of the major clubs in the world and we didnt have a new set up to exploit. the main crust of this, which you still fail to grasp fredbob no matter how many times it is explained, is that no other board in the last 50 years has attempted to tap our fanbase and get anywhere near to our potential than the Halls and Shepherd. You even went so far as to say we shouldn't waste money in the transfer window, agreeing with Chris Mort when he said we wouldn't be spending any money on anybody but players for the future, despite us struggling, looking at a relegation fight, and then hypocritically repeating as in your above posts that you then think we are such a big club, that we have an automatic right to a champions League place. You seriously think that the Halls and Shepherd brought decades of success and trophies to an end don't you ? i've said this before mr NE5, and i'll say it again to see if anyone listens this time: you talk 100% sense about say 5% of the whole picture why anyone argues with you about the 5% is continually lost on me, there's no counter argument...shame you won't cross over into the other 95% then things might get interesting what is the "other 95%" calling women dogs ? Going to brothels ? Eating pies ? Being a fat b****** ? Making daft statements in public now and again ? All pretty much irrelevant. As for appointing Souness, bad mistake but everybody makes mistakes. The most important thing is he/they backed their appointed managers to the hilt. The new board are making mistakes too, they have made many, the most costly of which - may yet - and it may also be deliberate policy - cause an absolute disaster, and far worse than any mistake the old board did. the other 95% is anything not board related, which you rarely seem to get involved in...say discussing potential signings, tactics, formations, songs...anything else non related to the boardroom(s) at any given point in history i'm backing you up, your arguments are generally sound and i've found myself becoming more and more convinced by them over time to a degree, but they are extremely limited and that's kind of my point as i say it baffles me when people try to pick holes in it, there really aren't any oh, I just don't have the time mate. I would like to spend more time trying to build up howaythetoon to be honest, but spend too much time on here. There are some good discussions with some people, but not with others, mentioning no obvious names. Suppose I just don't really get interested in talking about picking teams etc, not really sure. What about you ? I'm just as disappointed in this season, and what has happened ie results wise, as anyone else too by the way. Maybe more so, because I never dreamed that when I saw all those Fairs Cup games in 1969 and bringing home that cup, even the 1974 and 1976 Wembley defeats, that all these years later I'd still be waiting for real success, and never expected to see 3 more Wembley appearances and 3 defeats either. Said to my mate as we walked out of the 1999 Cup Final "the day we fuckin win here will be the day we are sat on this grass without a ticket". The proverbial nightmare. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Is there an award for the thread with the most repeats of a single statement? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Clever peice of work that, but again, taken completely out of context. The first quote is specifically relevant to why we werent in a good position to appoint a new maager of decent quality because we had nothing to offer which made our club an appealing club having sacked the previous legendary manager in extremely poor circumstances. The second quote is a more generaly view which underlines the reasons why the board didnt do a fanstastic job overall, becasue at key times the board made terrible decisions which set the club back more than it should of. This second quote is only minimally linked to SBR- the topic we are discussing, whereas the first quote is directly linked to the fallout after SBR was sacked. Just like to point out that it was you who questioned me as to whther i wanted to keep SBR and i said yes, because i thoughtand always thought that had we kept SBR we would be in a much better situation than we are now no the argument is turning to the manner in which he was sacked which wasnt my main point. We both agree that the manner of the sacking was wrong, yes? I beleive the manner of the sacking set the club back becasue it made the job extremely unnattractive because of the circumstances and is the key reason as to why we are in the situation we are in now. You dont think that the club was set back by these decsision. I think that SBR should of been given a chance to turn things around because he was a great manager who done amazing things for us, he was kicked out at the first sign of "trouble". You dont becasue he would of stayed for longer than he should of and he ended up getting cancer so that would of been a hinderence for the club. What more is there to this debate? Try this then Only Spurs and City have gone foreign, and they both picked up managers who were either out of work and familiar with the premiership, or looking to work in the Premiership and biding their time for a job to come up. It's not like there's a whole host of top foreign managers queing up. There are a fair few who have said they want to come to the premierhship, its only the Liverpool job which looks like it will be availbale and appealing to big managers, the next one from that is ours, Houllier Lippi Van Gaal Scolari Mourihno (said he wants to come back sooner or later) Hitzfeld Capello They are all managers in recent times who have said they would like to come to the premiership, not saying that they would come now but just saying the names are out there. p.s Im aware of some of the peoples circumstances, just reiterating that its an appealing league which top class managers want to come to. The fact is is that managers want to manage in this league, its become an ambtions for a lot of managers becuase of the hype and money around the premiership nowadays. If you ask me if it were possilble for a top class foriegn manager to be appointed for nufc, despite todays performance id still say yes because the oppurtunity to manage one fo the big big clubs is becoming rarer and rarer so its a case of the next best thing. Which without a shadow of a doubt is us. Are you now going to argue that we were a more attractive proposition to a top manager as a club that just finished 14th, 7th, 14th who'd had 3 managers in as many years, the last of which lasted half a season, than one which had just finished 4th, 3rd, 5th simply because of the "manner" in which we sacked the previous well respected manager? How is the "manner" in which we got rid of Allardyce any better? You are the one who keeps bringing up the manner of the sacking, I only mention it because you seem to place such an emphasis on it - "I beleive the manner of the sacking set the club back becasue it made the job extremely unnattractive". I don't have a problem with it, and in fact I think (and thought at the time) we should have replaced him in the Summer. I realised that it would have been a very brave and unpopular decision at the time though and replacing him at the end of the season (as was the plan) was a decent compromise which would have allowed us to openly look for a new manager throughout the season (as it was out in the open that Robson was going to be retired from the job). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Is there an award for the thread with the most repeats of a single statement? "splash the cash you fat bastard" the winner by two dozen pies Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 So do you have any links to Shepherd then NE5, or not? I'm curious. Try to answer using the word 'yes' or the word 'no'. Special bonus points for not mentioning Chris Mort, Craig Bellamy, the Champions League or 1992. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Clever peice of work that, but again, taken completely out of context. The first quote is specifically relevant to why we werent in a good position to appoint a new maager of decent quality because we had nothing to offer which made our club an appealing club having sacked the previous legendary manager in extremely poor circumstances. The second quote is a more generaly view which underlines the reasons why the board didnt do a fanstastic job overall, becasue at key times the board made terrible decisions which set the club back more than it should of. This second quote is only minimally linked to SBR- the topic we are discussing, whereas the first quote is directly linked to the fallout after SBR was sacked. Just like to point out that it was you who questioned me as to whther i wanted to keep SBR and i said yes, because i thoughtand always thought that had we kept SBR we would be in a much better situation than we are now no the argument is turning to the manner in which he was sacked which wasnt my main point. We both agree that the manner of the sacking was wrong, yes? I beleive the manner of the sacking set the club back becasue it made the job extremely unnattractive because of the circumstances and is the key reason as to why we are in the situation we are in now. You dont think that the club was set back by these decsision. I think that SBR should of been given a chance to turn things around because he was a great manager who done amazing things for us, he was kicked out at the first sign of "trouble". You dont becasue he would of stayed for longer than he should of and he ended up getting cancer so that would of been a hinderence for the club. What more is there to this debate? Try this then Only Spurs and City have gone foreign, and they both picked up managers who were either out of work and familiar with the premiership, or looking to work in the Premiership and biding their time for a job to come up. It's not like there's a whole host of top foreign managers queing up. There are a fair few who have said they want to come to the premierhship, its only the Liverpool job which looks like it will be availbale and appealing to big managers, the next one from that is ours, Houllier Lippi Van Gaal Scolari Mourihno (said he wants to come back sooner or later) Hitzfeld Capello They are all managers in recent times who have said they would like to come to the premiership, not saying that they would come now but just saying the names are out there. p.s Im aware of some of the peoples circumstances, just reiterating that its an appealing league which top class managers want to come to. The fact is is that managers want to manage in this league, its become an ambtions for a lot of managers becuase of the hype and money around the premiership nowadays. If you ask me if it were possilble for a top class foriegn manager to be appointed for nufc, despite todays performance id still say yes because the oppurtunity to manage one fo the big big clubs is becoming rarer and rarer so its a case of the next best thing. Which without a shadow of a doubt is us. Are you now going to argue that we were a more attractive proposition to a top manager as a club that just finished 14th, 7th, 14th who'd had 3 managers in as many years, the last of which lasted half a season, than one which had just finished 4th, 3rd, 5th simply because of the "manner" in which we sacked the previous well respected manager? How is the "manner" in which we got rid of Allardyce any better? You are the one who keeps bringing up the manner of the sacking, I only mention it because you seem to place such an emphasis on it - "I beleive the manner of the sacking set the club back becasue it made the job extremely unnattractive". I don't have a problem with it, and in fact I think (and thought at the time) we should have replaced him in the Summer. I realised that it would have been a very brave and unpopular decision at the time though and replacing him at the end of the season (as was the plan) was a decent compromise which would have allowed us to openly look for a new manager throughout the season (as it was out in the open that Robson was going to be retired from the job). Wow, that is a lot of effort for a pretty poor post again, completely missing the point...again. Do we have something better to offer a new manager now? Well yes we do, we have the new set up of Spurs and the potential finances of Chelsea so again, comparing nufc 2008 with nufc 2004 is massively skewed. If we had the finaces or the set up to offer a new manager the what we can do now, then, then i would have to agree it would of been a more accpetable decision. I still dont understand the footballing justifications of sacking a manager who's just finished 5th. To me the plot reads legendary manager finisihed 4th , 3rd, 5th having staved off relegation 5 years previously gets sacked, he has been humiliated and undermined many times, the club doesnt have a fantastic record with longevity and managers, does a top class manager (which we needed) want to come here? or Jan 2008 New board, clean slate, potentially big finances and a new set up who have sacked the manager not appointed by them in questionable circumstances? Are you still saying im wrong to think that we should of stuck with SBR for at least antoher years to see what may of occured or are you that certain that we would of been releagated? You seem more intent on finding a contradiction from me than proving your point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 So do you have any links to Shepherd then NE5, or not? I'm curious. Try to answer using the word 'yes' or the word 'no'. Special bonus points for not mentioning Chris Mort, Craig Bellamy, the Champions League or 1992. surprised you even ask this Dave, when a quick IP check will show you that I live nearer to where you do than Tyneside just now !! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now