Definitely Ashley - "I want our team to be admired for brilliant football"

[NE5]

If you actually read my post properly before you had got so angry, you'd notice that I didn't actually say the things he had done were to the detriment to the club. I was taking offence at him expecting gratitude as if he was doing this out of the goodness of his heart.

 

When his savvy business acumen eventually - hopefully - translates into a team worthy of the fans, then I may kiss the ground he walks. I'm not kissing his arse for a healthy balance sheet.

 

 

I don't think that was his tone tbf - I think he was trying to emphasise that he had done something "major" by putting that much money in to show he was serious rather than a figure of fun suggested by his sit with the fans image.

 

I would stop short of kissing his arse but us being a debt free club is worthy of some gratitude I feel.

 

Being debt-free doesn't affect the fans. If the efficient running of the club's finances eventually results in higher revenues which are invested in higher quality personnel, which in turn results in better performances on the pitch - then it affects us.

 

Hasn't happened yet. I'll be grateful when it eventually - hopefully - does.

 

 

Yeah, Luton fans aren't being affected at all mate.

 

 

I agree with you Gol

 

one day some people may grasp the concept that running a football club isn't quite the same as running Marks and Spencers

 

 

[Shearergol]

If you actually read my post properly before you had got so angry, you'd notice that I didn't actually say the things he had done were to the detriment to the club. I was taking offence at him expecting gratitude as if he was doing this out of the goodness of his heart.

 

When his savvy business acumen eventually - hopefully - translates into a team worthy of the fans, then I may kiss the ground he walks. I'm not kissing his arse for a healthy balance sheet.

 

 

I don't think that was his tone tbf - I think he was trying to emphasise that he had done something "major" by putting that much money in to show he was serious rather than a figure of fun suggested by his sit with the fans image.

 

I would stop short of kissing his arse but us being a debt free club is worthy of some gratitude I feel.

 

Being debt-free doesn't affect the fans. If the efficient running of the club's finances eventually results in higher revenues which are invested in higher quality personnel, which in turn results in better performances on the pitch - then it affects us.

 

Hasn't happened yet. I'll be grateful when it eventually - hopefully - does.

 

 

Yeah, Luton fans aren't being affected at all mate.

 

 

I agree with you Gol

 

one day some people may grasp the concept that running a football club isn't quite the same as running Marks and Spencers

 

 

 

Was thinking on the way home from the match today that I should PM you. Done a few u-turns on some of our debates, and starting to agree with you on many things.

 

Help me

[fredbob]

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

 

 

I must be honest, I really don't know how to answer a question like this. Particularly as Arsenal have been more successful than Chelsea in the last decade.

 

 

 

Im glad you didnt slate it, im not sure either. True they have been more successful but havent had the "clinicalness" that Chelsea have. ie consecutive titles. If you ask me, Chelsea at there best were superior to Arsenal at there best.

 

Ok, not superior but better.

[madras]

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

 

 

I must be honest, I really don't know how to answer a question like this. Particularly as Arsenal have been more successful than Chelsea in the last decade.

 

 

OK ne5 you pick the time frame you want .

 

 

did he say the last decade...no.. he said recently and we all know the timeframe he means

[fredbob]

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

 

 

 

 

 

Either, they both win plenty.

 

They do, but i think its a fair bet to say that if Mourhino was in charge for a decade, he would of won more than Wenger in the saem decade. Thats my opinion anyway.

 

But anyway, the question is basically would you sacrifice a little success for a lot of style?

[Shearergol]

I'd rather we played like Chelsea to grind out results and win the league every year. Is that what you're asking?

[NE5]

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

 

 

I must be honest, I really don't know how to answer a question like this. Particularly as Arsenal have been more successful than Chelsea in the last decade.

 

 

 

Im glad you didnt slate it, im not sure either. True they have been more successful but havent had the "clinicalness" that Chelsea have. ie consecutive titles. If you ask me, Chelsea at there best were superior to Arsenal at there best.

 

Ok, not superior but better.

 

I could have slated it.

 

The concept that playing attractive football is preferable to winning football is something I don't grasp at all.

 

Winning football is entertaining to your own supporters. End of.

 

 

[Wullie]

Arsenal went through a whole season without losing a game. That's pretty clinical if you ask me.

 

If Arsene had the money that the Chelsea managers had at their disposal, they would be unstoppable. The man is a total footballing genius.

[Mick]

 

They do, but i think its a fair bet to say that if Mourhino was in charge for a decade, he would of won more than Wenger in the same decade. Thats my opinion anyway.

 

But anyway, the question is basically would you sacrifice a little success for a lot of style?

 

I don't need to change my answer, I'd settle for either, we've had nothing for so long, I'd take any.  If I was greedy I'd say style and success.

[fredbob]

Its all hypothetical ladies, thats the whole point of the question becase it link directly with Ashleys interview inthe sense that we are actively looking to be an attacking side rather than the safer "Clinical grind out wins side".

[Wullie]

Its all hypothetical ladies, thats the whole point of the question becase it link directly with Ashleys interview inthe sense that we are actively looking to be an attacking side rather than the safer "Clinical grind out wins side".

 

It's not one or the other really though. As mentioned, Arsenal win plenty and Keegan would have too if he'd stayed on imo.

[NJS]

I have to say that I try and be ruthless and cynical and say "win at all costs" - which is not necessarily what I think Chelsea were under Mourinho - and give my instinctive answer which is is style first. I guess thats why Ashley's words seem to make sense to me.

 

 

[fredbob]

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

 

 

I must be honest, I really don't know how to answer a question like this. Particularly as Arsenal have been more successful than Chelsea in the last decade.

 

 

 

Im glad you didnt slate it, im not sure either. True they have been more successful but havent had the "clinicalness" that Chelsea have. ie consecutive titles. If you ask me, Chelsea at there best were superior to Arsenal at there best.

 

Ok, not superior but better.

 

I could have slated it.

 

The concept that playing attractive football is preferable to winning football is something I don't grasp at all.

 

Winning football is entertaining to your own supporters. End of.

 

 

 

So if one of the contrasting style won you 1 more trophy in x years would you still prefer that style?

[Guest hameed]

mike ashley is a legend, i have faith in him, though i would've sed otherwise had redknapp actually accepted the job!

[Coco]

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

 

 

I must be honest, I really don't know how to answer a question like this. Particularly as Arsenal have been more successful than Chelsea in the last decade.

 

 

 

Im glad you didnt slate it, im not sure either. True they have been more successful but havent had the "clinicalness" that Chelsea have. ie consecutive titles. If you ask me, Chelsea at there best were superior to Arsenal at there best.

 

Ok, not superior but better.

 

I could have slated it.

 

The concept that playing attractive football is preferable to winning football is something I don't grasp at all.

 

Winning football is entertaining to your own supporters. End of.

 

 

 

So if one of the contrasting style won you 1 more trophy in x years would you still prefer that style?

 

This hypothetical is getting a bit out of hand now. As was stated, winning football is the main concern for fans. Winning 'ugly' is ok, as long as you're winning. As we saw, losing ugly is a whole different story...

[fredbob]

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

 

 

I must be honest, I really don't know how to answer a question like this. Particularly as Arsenal have been more successful than Chelsea in the last decade.

 

 

 

Im glad you didnt slate it, im not sure either. True they have been more successful but havent had the "clinicalness" that Chelsea have. ie consecutive titles. If you ask me, Chelsea at there best were superior to Arsenal at there best.

 

Ok, not superior but better.

 

I could have slated it.

 

The concept that playing attractive football is preferable to winning football is something I don't grasp at all.

 

Winning football is entertaining to your own supporters. End of.

 

 

 

So if one of the contrasting style won you 1 more trophy in x years would you still prefer that style?

 

This hypothetical is getting a bit out of hand now. As was stated, winning football is the main concern for fans. Winning 'ugly' is ok, as long as you're winning. As we saw, losing ugly is a whole different story...

 

I just wanted to see peoples views on style. Its something that is attribtued as on of the things that the" fans want". Its dismissed as myths by alot of people i just wanted to know if it actually has some merits. Which i genuinely think it does. I think alot of people heads say "substance" but thir hearts say "style".

 

If im perfectly honest, along with NJS id say style as well. I watch football to be entertained and nothing pleases me more than seeing beautiful football.

 

I just wanted to know if there was any compromise for success.

 

Obvioulsy not, we have 52000 win at all costs people out there.

 

I shall stop my questioning.

[Mick]

 

I just wanted to see peoples views on style. Its something that is attribtued as on of the things that the" fans want". Its dismissed as myths by alot of people i just wanted to know if it actually has some merits. Which i genuinely think it does. I think alot of people heads say "substance" but thir hearts say "style".

 

If im perfectly honest, along with NJS id say style as well. I watch football to be entertained and nothing pleases me more than seeing beautiful football.

 

I just wanted to know if there was any compromise for success.

 

Obvioulsy not, we have 52000 win at all costs people out there.

 

I shall stop my questioning.

 

I doubt we've got 52,000 win at all costs people.

[fredbob]

 

I just wanted to see peoples views on style. Its something that is attribtued as on of the things that the" fans want". Its dismissed as myths by alot of people i just wanted to know if it actually has some merits. Which i genuinely think it does. I think alot of people heads say "substance" but thir hearts say "style".

 

If im perfectly honest, along with NJS id say style as well. I watch football to be entertained and nothing pleases me more than seeing beautiful football.

 

I just wanted to know if there was any compromise for success.

 

Obvioulsy not, we have 52000 win at all costs people out there.

 

I shall stop my questioning.

 

I doubt we've got 52,000 win at all costs people.

 

Which is the whole point of the question!

[Guest Damus7]

I have been really down but this interview is the best thing I have read in years.

 

 

This is the same view that I have for the club.

This interview also reminds me of the famous " I've keept really quite, but i tell you something. He went down in my estimation when he said that. We have not resorted to that but il tell ya, you can tell him now if he is watching it, WE ARE STILL FIGHTING FOR THIS TITLE"

 

Mike Ashley, thanks for this excellent interview, and thanks for getting my mood in the right direction.

[Willow]

I have been really down but this interview is the best thing I have read in years.

 

 

This is the same view that I have for the club.

This interview also reminds me of the famous " I've keept really quite, but i tell you something. He went down in my estimation when he said that. We have not resorted to that but il tell ya, you can tell him now if he is watching it, WE ARE STILL FIGHTING FOR THIS TITLE"

 

Mike Ashley, thanks for this excellent interview, and thanks for getting my mood in the right direction.

 

Yes!

 

This is the exact thing that we needed to hear in this hour of need. I have butterflies in my stomach, jesus christ, mike is for real and now I have the biggest smile on my face!

 

C'MON!

 

 

[Exiled in Texas]

This passion and vision is what Ashley needs to sell to our future manager.

 

Sell this to Van Gaal, or Hiddink, or whoever Johny Foreigner we get.  But this has to be the speech given to them.

[Alberto2005]

I have been really down but this interview is the best thing I have read in years.

 

 

This is the same view that I have for the club.

This interview also reminds me of the famous " I've keept really quite, but i tell you something. He went down in my estimation when he said that. We have not resorted to that but il tell ya, you can tell him now if he is watching it, WE ARE STILL FIGHTING FOR THIS TITLE"

 

Mike Ashley, thanks for this excellent interview, and thanks for getting my mood in the right direction.

That Keegan interview wasn't a good one.

[Coco]

I have been really down but this interview is the best thing I have read in years.

 

 

This is the same view that I have for the club.

This interview also reminds me of the famous " I've keept really quite, but i tell you something. He went down in my estimation when he said that. We have not resorted to that but il tell ya, you can tell him now if he is watching it, WE ARE STILL FIGHTING FOR THIS TITLE"

 

Mike Ashley, thanks for this excellent interview, and thanks for getting my mood in the right direction.

That Keegan interview wasn't a good one.

 

Aye, that was the sign that Kev had lost the plot tbh...

[EthiGeordie]

  he seems sad that he didn't part company with Sam right away. But he is entitled to fire him it is just the timing what I really hate there are not that much good mangers avaialable and it is hard.

[oldtype]

Well, judging by the reaction here at least this interview seems like a brilliant coup for Ashley.

 

I agree with previous posters. Fuck logic, Fuck practicality. Lets get behind this man and whoever he appoints.

 

honest question: is SSR Invicta Toon in disguise?