Mick Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Terrible terrible appointment. Set his club back years. Then again would anyone like to see the logic in appointing Roeder as well? Logic, what's that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Apppointing Souness was a monstrous mistake, no question, its set the club back so many years, like king harry said, it took a good five yearsto recover and the same maybe happening to us. I personally think the first mistake was sacking SBR. I didnt agree with him being sacked, no way did he deserve it, but i guess nufc fans have to reap what they sowed. The manner of the sacking made it inevitable that we wouldnt appoint another manager of similar calibre, the job from that point didnt have anything special to offer and(altough im unsure of the finances at the time regarding sponsorship money) even though it transpired that we had a £50m warchest that still wasnt enough to persuade any decent managers which spoke volumes to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 I once asked NE5, seeing as he didn't agree that Freddie was a thick fat so and so, what was Freddie's intelligent reasoning for wanting to hire Souness? Blackburn being 2nd bottom of the league at the time, and Souness being on the brink of the sack. I never got a reply to that one strangely enough. howay man, even i can tell you the answer to that robson had (allegedly/truly) lost the players, dyer refusing to play etc...etc... and souness was seen as a disciplinarian with a decent record (to shepherd, this is all from his perspective) blackburn being bottom 3 could be seen as a blip in his time there to an outsider like shepherd as he'd got them promoted and won a cup, back into europe and so on surely you can see that? time changes perceptions but i clearly remember the feeling during that period that the players needed "sorting out" there are your reasons, some sound some not so sound in my opinion...it's more a testament to the short-termism of shepherd that he did what he did shepherd is obviously not an idiot is he? the only multi-millionaire idoits are lottery winners...he just wasn't suited to running a football club - he was obsessed with winning a trophy (presumably to be the local hero) and i don't think you can underestimate the fact souness had previously won a trophy at EVERY other club he'd been to in the mans thinking the fact the blackburn fans were dancing about when we took souness tells it's own story but if ANYONE can tell me or show me that when we signed him they could have predicted just how badly he managed things then i'd be very, very surprised...i basically thought we'd end up mid table but sort out the little turds at the club like dyer, and maybe sneak a cup along the way you asked for freddies intelligent reasoning, not mine i might add Well, I hate Souness, and he would never have been my choice in a million years, but I have to say that post has some merit. There was no merit in it whatsoever. None. It was a shit appointment from start to finish and most sensible folk said so at the time. I can see pnly moronic "he's shite because he ate all the pies" type posts are all that you can deal with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 I can see pnly moronic "he's s**** because he ate all the pies" type posts are all that you can deal with. Love the quote, who exactly are you quoting? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Terrible terrible appointment. Set his club back years. Then again would anyone like to see the logic in appointing Roeder as well? Logic, what's that? mackems.gif priceless Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 I can see pnly moronic "he's s**** because he ate all the pies" type posts are all that you can deal with. Love the quote, who exactly are you quoting? possibly you. You do appear to agree with the sentiment at least. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 possibly you. You do appear to agree with the sentiment at least. I've never said that, try again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 You are obviously unaware that Souness had said his chairman asked to write on a piece of paper the name of the player he would most like to sign, and he wrote the name "Michael Owen". I find it quite unbelievable that someone who professes to be a Newcastle supporter isn't aware of this. The only other possible alternative is that you are making something up to discredit the old board. Predictable I suppose. I have noted in the past that you [bob yule] like to say "I think........" and it appears to me to be the opening to make something up, which is what you are doing again in this instance. Perhaps you could try saying something like " I think Chris Mort said the club would only buy players for the long term in the January transfer window because the stupid tosser is putting prudency before the clubs needs on the field" but I don't think you will because it would mean admitting the old board, having an alternative viewpoint which gained us more european qualifications than every other club bar 4, 2 FA Cup Finals and a sold out big stadium every home game had actually done something right. As for Luque, Souness clearly said that "his mate" had recommended Luque to him as a "proper player" to replace the "cancers" Bellamy and Robert. The mate more than likely being his ex Liverpool collegeague Michael Robinson. One day, people like you two will stop making up stuff and inventing such bollocks as you go. So you believe what Souness said at the time regarding transfers but don't believe Keegan when he spoke about transfers in January? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 possibly you. You do appear to agree with the sentiment at least. I've never said that, try again. but you do think he's shite despite being chairman of the club during a period when only 4 clubs qualified more than us for europe, and we achieved our only 3 consecutive top 5 league positions in the last 50 years, and also you must be ever so slightly pissed off that now he has gone we are doing worse, when you said "anyone but the fat bastard would be better for the club"..blah blah blah. Never mind mick the new board are doing just great. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 but you do think he's s**** despite being chairman of the club during a period when only 4 clubs qualified more than us for europe, and we achieved our only 3 consecutive top 5 league positions in the last 50 years, and also you must be ever so slightly pissed off that now he has gone we are doing worse, when you said "anyone but the fat b****** would be better for the club"..blah blah blah. Never mind mick the new board are doing just great. I only thought he was shite because you said Doug Ellis was shite and you also said League position was the way to judge a team, Ellis was chairman of a Villa side who finished above us more than we finished above them, hence, shite when using your benchmark. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 but you do think he's s**** despite being chairman of the club during a period when only 4 clubs qualified more than us for europe, and we achieved our only 3 consecutive top 5 league positions in the last 50 years, and also you must be ever so slightly pissed off that now he has gone we are doing worse, when you said "anyone but the fat b****** would be better for the club"..blah blah blah. Never mind mick the new board are doing just great. I only thought he was shite because you said Doug Ellis was shite and you also said League position was the way to judge a team, Ellis was chairman of a Villa side who finished above us more than we finished above them, hence, shite when using your benchmark. Ellis took over a team that had won the european Cup, to relegation. Now thats what I call "going backwards" even though unlike yourself I don't rather stupidly think clubs can stay top or thereabouts forever. What a shame Sir John decided to go PLC back in 1997 after his allies on the board, ie Hall Jnr, Fletcher and Shepherd, had picked our best manager for 50 years for him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Ellis took over a team that had won the european Cup, to relegation. Now thats what I call "going backwards" even though unlike yourself I don't rather stupidly think clubs can stay top or thereabouts forever. What a shame Sir John decided to go PLC back in 1997 after his allies on the board, ie Hall Jnr, Fletcher and Shepherd, had picked our best manager for 50 years for him. Ellis took over a club that was struggling in the league, the manager who qualified for the European Cup had been sacked because of that and a different manager lifted the cup for them. Which of the two finished the highest the most? I thought that was a simple question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Ellis took over a team that had won the european Cup, to relegation. Now thats what I call "going backwards" even though unlike yourself I don't rather stupidly think clubs can stay top or thereabouts forever. What a shame Sir John decided to go PLC back in 1997 after his allies on the board, ie Hall Jnr, Fletcher and Shepherd, had picked our best manager for 50 years for him. Ellis took over a club that was struggling in the league, the manager who qualified for the European Cup had been sacked because of that and a different manager lifted the cup for them. Which of the two finished the highest the most? I thought that was a simple question. they were european cup holders. They were relegated. I've made my point about Ellis, I don't care about Aston Villa, I have also asked you your opinion on Newcastle United and the chairman you slate that ran the club that finished in the top 5 for 3 consecutive years for the only time in 50 years and qualified for europe more than everyone else but 4. I've also asked you your opinion on the fact that we are facing a major relegation fight for the first time since they came, as soon as they are out of the door, despite you insisting that pretty much anyone would be better than the fat bastard. mackems.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedudeabides Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 http://campuschapel.org/blog/uploaded_images/Big_Bill_In_Groundhog-731047.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 In fact, fuck Souness. I blame Thomas Gravesen for it all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Phil K Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Terrible terrible appointment. Set his club back years. Then again would anyone like to see the logic in appointing Roeder as well? Logic, what's that? There were plenty on here saying "Give Glen the job !" including many of those criticizing others at this very worrying time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 There were plenty on here saying "Give Glen the job !" including many of those criticizing others at this very worrying time. Not guilty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 There were plenty on here saying "Give Glen the job !" including many of those criticizing others at this very worrying time. Not guilty. but now the fat bastard has gone, we should be conquering the world, as it was all his fault that we weren't and it was so embarrassing that the grand total of 4 clubs qualified for europe more than we did, according to people like you mackems.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 ... wasn't a very good one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LooneyToonArmy Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 dunno daglish set us back aswell He signed some very good players for us. He should've we were the 2nd best team in the country, one of the richest in the world and in the Champion's League. and those players still took us from that position to mid-table. given time i'm sure he'd have done better but he did a poor job short-term. The football we played under Dalglish was atrocious. He did make some good signings in Given, Solano, Hamman (for that 1 season) but made some equally bad signings like the jobs for the boys (Rush, Barnes, his son etc), Des Hamilton, Andreas Andersson, Lionel Perez...... falling out with Ginola,selling Ferdinand and replacing them sub standard players. Everyone goes on about him taking us to 2nd place in the CL, but that was with Keegans team. The season after was his team......the one where we performed so miserably, playing largely boring negative football and finishing 13th. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Barnes was canny that season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 dunno daglish set us back aswell He signed some very good players for us. He should've we were the 2nd best team in the country, one of the richest in the world and in the Champion's League. and those players still took us from that position to mid-table. given time i'm sure he'd have done better but he did a poor job short-term. The football we played under Dalglish was atrocious. He did make some good signings in Given, Solano, Hamman (for that 1 season) but made some equally bad signings like the jobs for the boys (Rush, Barnes, his son etc), Des Hamilton, Andreas Andersson, Lionel Perez...... falling out with Ginola,selling Ferdinand and replacing them sub standard players. Everyone goes on about him taking us to 2nd place in the CL, but that was with Keegans team. The season after was his team......the one where we performed so miserably, playing largely boring negative football and finishing 13th. Hardly his fault Ferdinand was sold though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 dunno daglish set us back aswell He signed some very good players for us. He should've we were the 2nd best team in the country, one of the richest in the world and in the Champion's League. and those players still took us from that position to mid-table. given time i'm sure he'd have done better but he did a poor job short-term. The football we played under Dalglish was atrocious. He did make some good signings in Given, Solano, Hamman (for that 1 season) but made some equally bad signings like the jobs for the boys (Rush, Barnes, his son etc), Des Hamilton, Andreas Andersson, Lionel Perez...... falling out with Ginola,selling Ferdinand and replacing them sub standard players. Everyone goes on about him taking us to 2nd place in the CL, but that was with Keegans team. The season after was his team......the one where we performed so miserably, playing largely boring negative football and finishing 13th. Hardly his fault Ferdinand was sold though. i'm no apologist for dalglish but to underestimate the effect losing shearer had is to do him a massive disservice - was the best striker in europe at the time and would have affected everything maassively Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 dunno daglish set us back aswell He signed some very good players for us. He should've we were the 2nd best team in the country, one of the richest in the world and in the Champion's League. and those players still took us from that position to mid-table. given time i'm sure he'd have done better but he did a poor job short-term. The football we played under Dalglish was atrocious. He did make some good signings in Given, Solano, Hamman (for that 1 season) but made some equally bad signings like the jobs for the boys (Rush, Barnes, his son etc), Des Hamilton, Andreas Andersson, Lionel Perez...... falling out with Ginola,selling Ferdinand and replacing them sub standard players. Everyone goes on about him taking us to 2nd place in the CL, but that was with Keegans team. The season after was his team......the one where we performed so miserably, playing largely boring negative football and finishing 13th. Hardly his fault Ferdinand was sold though. i'm no apologist for dalglish but to underestimate the effect losing shearer had is to do him a massive disservice - was the best striker in europe at the time and would have affected everything maassively Ronaldo was. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LooneyToonArmy Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 dunno daglish set us back aswell He signed some very good players for us. He should've we were the 2nd best team in the country, one of the richest in the world and in the Champion's League. and those players still took us from that position to mid-table. given time i'm sure he'd have done better but he did a poor job short-term. The football we played under Dalglish was atrocious. He did make some good signings in Given, Solano, Hamman (for that 1 season) but made some equally bad signings like the jobs for the boys (Rush, Barnes, his son etc), Des Hamilton, Andreas Andersson, Lionel Perez...... falling out with Ginola,selling Ferdinand and replacing them sub standard players. Everyone goes on about him taking us to 2nd place in the CL, but that was with Keegans team. The season after was his team......the one where we performed so miserably, playing largely boring negative football and finishing 13th. Hardly his fault Ferdinand was sold though. i know, just replacing him with rubbish substandard players was the issue Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts