Timing: Our past, the present, our future? by NE5

[NE5]

From Sir Bobby's book. A small part of Chapter 20. Undermined.

 

Bolton did manage to poach Gary Speed from us, however, and therein lies another tale of how disjointed the manager-chairman relationship had become. On our tour to the Far East, John Carver suddenly informed me, 'We've had an offer for Gary Speed from Bolton.' I knew nothing about it, so I went in search of the chairman for clarification. On no account did I want Gary Speed to leave. First I caught up with the player himself.

'Gary, what's all this about you wanting to go to Bolton Wanderers? I know nothing about it. The chairman hasn't mentioned it to me. When John Carver told me an hour ago I was aghast. What do you want to go to Bolton for?'

'The club are going to let me go,' Gary said. 'If you don't know anything about it, you'd better see the chairman.'

'As far as I'm concerned, you're not going to Bolton Wanderers,' I told him 'You're staying here'

That saturday night, the day of our game, I tried the chairman's room, reception, the restaurant and the bar. Eventually, I was told he was out. I was so angry I sat in the foyer, waiting, for half an hour. Finally, the chairman's figure appeared in the doorway and I confronted him there and then. Under cross examination he denied all knowledge of Gary's impending move. It was heading into the realms of farce. The next step, naturally, was to go back to Gary. I spoke to him on our flight from Hong Kong.

'The chairman says he knows nothing about this Bolton thing,' I said and left it there. We arrived back in Newcastle on the Monday morning and, early that afternoon, the chairman called me. 'Gary Spped's in here with me, he wants to see you. He wants to say goodbye,' he said.

'What?' I exclaimed.

The deal had been completed that morning. Fifty years in the game have taught me that you cannot construct a transfer in four hours. The idea that a player of Gary Speed's calibre can be sold in four hours is absurd and yet I was being told throughout the weekend that the club knew notning of Bolton's interest in one of our most valued players.

'Gary, this is not my doing,' I told him. 'I want to keep you.' Having let Hugo Viana go back to Portugal, to play more football, we had lost two left footed midfielders. I needed to plug that hole and so, when my indignation had subsided, I gave the chairman four names - Nicky Butt, Michael Carrick, Mark Van Bommel and Sean Davis.

'Why don't you bring Carrick in, he's talented, and he's a Geordie,' I suggested but the chairman was reluctant to pay West Ham £3 million for Carrick's services. His view was that he could aquire him for £500,000 in the January transfer window. Freddy Shepherd honestly believed that Carrick would not move to any Premier league club but Newcastle. He was in the last year of his contract at Upton Park - hence Freddy's belief that West Ham would have to unload him for a reduced fee in January.

I told him 'Look, chairman, if another club comes in and pays West Ham the moneythey're looking for, they will not turn that money down.' Michael Carrick signed for Tottenham Hotspur that summer.

 

Here's another part from an early chapter about Bowyer..

 

The sands were shifting beneath my feet. Towards the end of that season, Charlie Woods came into my office.

'Bobby, you won't believe this, but David Pleat has been on and wants to know whats up with Lee Bowyer,' he said. David was the director of football at Spurs.

'David Pleat's been on the phone asking what?' I replied, incredulously.

Charlie ploughed on with the story. 'David was asking whether Lee is injured or something. He said. "The reason I'm asking is that he's been offered to me."

'The kid's worth £4 million,' I erupted. 'Who's offered him to Spurs?'

Charlie had the answer - 'The chairman'

Freddie Shepherd had apparently rung David Giess, Bowyer's agent, saying 'Get him out of this club. I want him out. I'm not paying his salary,' and so on and so on. He hadn't come to me for my opinion or asked, 'Are you happy with Bowyer?' I realised Bowyer wasn't playing very well and so did the chairman, but his response was to take the law into his own hands.

 

 

This is the same Bobby Robson who was losing his marbles, didn't know the terms of his own contract and actually said in a press conference we had made a profit on Carl Cort. It is amazing that people like you complain that the board did not reign in Souness for excessive spending or vetoing a deal on financial grounds, then when they do, you STILL find fault. As I have said, damned whatever they do.

 

So, what is your feeling to Hall Jnr and Shepherd being more responsible than Sir John for choosing and approaching Keegan to be manager of Newcastle ?

 

I don't suppose it is within your comprehension to understand that real piss taking is losing good managers for not backing them and spending years selling your best ones at the peak of their career ........... or being spending virtually all of your time fighting relegation, going down, coming back up again .......

 

At the end of the day, as I have said, having seen plenty of shite chairman I can assure you that the sentence above, is what makes a shite chairman or board, not one who have ambition and back their managers with the cash to prove it. If you can't understand this, or take the word of people who have experienced it, they are quite entitled to tell you how naive and narrow a view you must have.

 

And I am STILL waiting for someone to give me the names of all these people who are waiting in the wings, with the football awareness, ambitions and desire for the good of the club to take us above those 4 teams who have better records than we do over the last decade.

 

 

 

 

[NE5]

How NE5 can read that and still defend Shepherd is beyond me.

 

see the post by HTL

 

[Mick]

 

Its pretty straightforward. Do you think being 5th best over a decade, qualifying for europe 7 times in that period, filling a 52,000 stadium and buyuing major and current England interational footballers is shit ?

 

If you don't then the conlusion must be that you think we have a divine right to do better.

 

With the resources at hand, we should be doing better.  We should be, consistently, at the top end of the table.  How is this hard to grasp?  Divine right, no.  Expectiations, yes.

 

5th best over a decade?  Nice way of smoothing over the cracks.  If only we could say we were 5th best now.  Even though I'm lacking in your years, I remember when finishing 2nd wasn't an impossibility for us, like it now seems to be.

 

Qualifying for Europe is the least I'd expect of a club with our resources. 

 

Buying players is an achievement of the board?  Filling the stadium?  That'll be the supporters that a) fund the bloody club so they can buy players and offer the wages we do by b) filling the stadium.

 

That is unrealistic and fantastically naive. Not to mention completely indicative of the higher standards set by the current board, which I presume STILL escapes you.

 

Those higher standards have escaped them, I know that much.  If they have such high standards why haven't they stepped aside to let people more capable do the job?

 

Poor lot, these new Newcastle fans, they think playing regularly in europe and buying major England players is not good enough for them....they sound more and more like idiotic manu gloryseekers all the time  :roll:

 

Ah well, it's those fans that tolerate mediocrity at board level while paying top dollar for it that seem pretty idiotic to me.

 

as I have said, I am not backing or defending anybody, just stating facts. This is why I am correct and you are wrong, my opinion is based on facts, whereas others - not just you - are repeating what others spout through not looking at them and having a mind of your own.

 

Your opinion is based on a rather small and select group of facts and *interpretations of facts* that you hold on to for dear life. 

 

You think we have a divine right to be mediocre.

 

Sadly, you defeat your own logic by saying we got Dalglish because he was free, then paid to appoint Souness.

 

I know.  You couldn't make it up.  I didn't say our board had any consistency in how it comes to these decisions, did I?  I doubt logic could have played any sort of part in appointing Souness.  Dalglish, you know, they went for the best option (in their eyes) in terms of cost and what they thought he'd bring to the setup.  Fair enough.

 

Souness was a sign of how low they had to stoop to scrape the bottom of the barrel after ditching Robson. 

 

If this isn't a sign of decline in terms of ambition and standing in English football then I'm not really sure what is.

 

Dalglish was appointed as a serious statement of intent to build on the Keegan legacy. Before 1992 he wouldn't have even considered the Newcastle job. Like many others including Bobby Robson. If you disagree with that, it shows completely you have absolutely zero awareness of that era, and hence having zero awareness of that era explains completely why you completely underestimate the board we have nowadays.

 

ie. Naive.

 

You seem to have a problem with raising your expectations in line with the foundations laid down post-92. 

 

To paraphrase your paramour, we pay the board Rolls Royce wages and we're not getting Rolls Royce performance.  Not now.  But you'll turn a blind eye to that, which seems a hell of a lot more naive to me.

 

 

If filling the stadium, and running the club to a level that it can buy major England players and international players at their peak or approaching their peak, isn't an achievement of the board by raising expectations and showing ambition, please explain why 30,000 supporters pissed off - for years on average - when the club was shite. Best fans going .....  same as everyone else actually. What brought them back ?

 

We have always had the same potential, with the same potential fanbase. Other big clubs also have big potential, with a big potential fanbase, that we have overtaken since the current board took over the club, there are a few we haven't because they are very well run themselves, and have had sustained success for the thick end of 30-40 years experience to draw on while we have had our best years under Keegan. What is so hard to grasp about this ? Contrary to what you think we do not have a divine right to finish above all these clubs and contrary to what you say, you DO think we have this, because it is exactly what you are saying. You remember when when we were 2nd ..... well I remember when we would have killed to qualify for europe even once.

 

Nobody is settling for "mediocrity", because for one thing, qualifying for europe more than any other club in a decade except 4, is certainly not "mediocrity".

 

Ah well, it's those fans that tolerate mediocrity at board level while paying top dollar for it that seem pretty idiotic to me

does this quote mean you would withdraw your support if the club was "mediocre"...... which pretty much says everything. Meaning that as you haven't withdrawn your support then it is far from "mediocre" - as it was ( and worse ) for decades prior to the current board. The league positions are available in case you think I am making this up.

 

There is absolutely no way in the world that bringing a manager to the club who had won 4 league titles with 2 clubs, 2 FA Cups and 3 manager of the year awards is anything other than a direct and deliberate attempt to win the premiership and the big trophies. You can dispute that as long as you like - anything but admit otherwise - but if you do deny it, it simply shows your paranoia and blindness, and inability to give credit for anything, like others.

 

Lastly - as some people have made comments saying I should "show my experience" --- when I say these things it is precisely what I am doing. Whether you choose to take it on board or not, or presume you know best despite not experienced these eras is of course your decision, but sensible people would not discard the information. What you wish to think of people who choose to ignore it is of course also up to you. I think it gives me the right to think they must be pretty daft.

 

How many times do you need telling that although our crowds were lower than today, they were still one of the highest in English football, the crowds were a sign of the times?

 

You tried to have a go at me for running our crowds down when somebody read what I was saying the wrong way and you tried to get him on your side, you're an absolute hypocrite.

 

Our crowds have ALWAYS been one of the best in the country since the turn of the last century, it's been that way for something like 90 years.

 

[Mick]

 

This is the same Bobby Robson who was losing his marbles, didn't know the terms of his own contract and actually said in a press conference we had made a profit on Carl Cort. It is amazing that people like you complain that the board did not reign in Souness for excessive spending or vetoing a deal on financial grounds, then when they do, you STILL find fault. As I have said, damned whatever they do.

 

So, what is your feeling to Hall Jnr and Shepherd being more responsible than Sir John for choosing and approaching Keegan to be manager of Newcastle ?

 

I don't suppose it is within your comprehension to understand that real piss taking is losing good managers for not backing them and spending years selling your best ones at the peak of their career ........... or being spending virtually all of your time fighting relegation, going down, coming back up again .......

 

At the end of the day, as I have said, having seen plenty of shite chairman I can assure you that the sentence above, is what makes a shite chairman or board, not one who have ambition and back their managers with the cash to prove it. If you can't understand this, or take the word of people who have experienced it, they are quite entitled to tell you how naive and narrow a view you must have.

 

And I am STILL waiting for someone to give me the names of all these people who are waiting in the wings, with the football awareness, ambitions and desire for the good of the club to take us above those 4 teams who have better records than we do over the last decade.

 

 

 

 

 

I thought it was proven that Sir Bobby did make a profit on Carl Cort, do you have the memory span of a Goldfish?  It's amazing the lengths you'll go to in trying to defend Shepherd, you'll run down Sir Bobby in an attempt to defend the un-defendable.

 

 

[NE5]

 

This is the same Bobby Robson who was losing his marbles, didn't know the terms of his own contract and actually said in a press conference we had made a profit on Carl Cort. It is amazing that people like you complain that the board did not reign in Souness for excessive spending or vetoing a deal on financial grounds, then when they do, you STILL find fault. As I have said, damned whatever they do.

 

So, what is your feeling to Hall Jnr and Shepherd being more responsible than Sir John for choosing and approaching Keegan to be manager of Newcastle ?

 

I don't suppose it is within your comprehension to understand that real piss taking is losing good managers for not backing them and spending years selling your best ones at the peak of their career ........... or being spending virtually all of your time fighting relegation, going down, coming back up again .......

 

At the end of the day, as I have said, having seen plenty of shite chairman I can assure you that the sentence above, is what makes a shite chairman or board, not one who have ambition and back their managers with the cash to prove it. If you can't understand this, or take the word of people who have experienced it, they are quite entitled to tell you how naive and narrow a view you must have.

 

And I am STILL waiting for someone to give me the names of all these people who are waiting in the wings, with the football awareness, ambitions and desire for the good of the club to take us above those 4 teams who have better records than we do over the last decade.

 

 

 

 

 

I thought it was proven that Sir Bobby did make a profit on Carl Cort, do you have the memory span of a Goldfish?  It's amazing the lengths you'll go to in trying to defend Shepherd, you'll run down Sir Bobby in an attempt to defend the un-defendable.

 

 

 

Shame but I think its quite amazing the lengths you will go to to ignore facts and try to paint out the board as a shite board, despite you --- cough cough --- saying - you are a long term supporter, which if true, certainly means you should know what a shite board really is. Which of course, means you aren't.

 

And - we bought Cort for 7m and sold him for what exactly ? So, less of that rubbish you spouted the last time.

 

PS...unlike you, I have a memory going back to 1964. Whereas yours is only 1992.

 

 

[NE5]

 

Its pretty straightforward. Do you think being 5th best over a decade, qualifying for europe 7 times in that period, filling a 52,000 stadium and buyuing major and current England interational footballers is shit ?

 

If you don't then the conlusion must be that you think we have a divine right to do better.

 

With the resources at hand, we should be doing better.  We should be, consistently, at the top end of the table.  How is this hard to grasp?  Divine right, no.  Expectiations, yes.

 

5th best over a decade?  Nice way of smoothing over the cracks.  If only we could say we were 5th best now.  Even though I'm lacking in your years, I remember when finishing 2nd wasn't an impossibility for us, like it now seems to be.

 

Qualifying for Europe is the least I'd expect of a club with our resources. 

 

Buying players is an achievement of the board?  Filling the stadium?  That'll be the supporters that a) fund the bloody club so they can buy players and offer the wages we do by b) filling the stadium.

 

That is unrealistic and fantastically naive. Not to mention completely indicative of the higher standards set by the current board, which I presume STILL escapes you.

 

Those higher standards have escaped them, I know that much.  If they have such high standards why haven't they stepped aside to let people more capable do the job?

 

Poor lot, these new Newcastle fans, they think playing regularly in europe and buying major England players is not good enough for them....they sound more and more like idiotic manu gloryseekers all the time  :roll:

 

Ah well, it's those fans that tolerate mediocrity at board level while paying top dollar for it that seem pretty idiotic to me.

 

as I have said, I am not backing or defending anybody, just stating facts. This is why I am correct and you are wrong, my opinion is based on facts, whereas others - not just you - are repeating what others spout through not looking at them and having a mind of your own.

 

Your opinion is based on a rather small and select group of facts and *interpretations of facts* that you hold on to for dear life. 

 

You think we have a divine right to be mediocre.

 

Sadly, you defeat your own logic by saying we got Dalglish because he was free, then paid to appoint Souness.

 

I know.  You couldn't make it up.  I didn't say our board had any consistency in how it comes to these decisions, did I?  I doubt logic could have played any sort of part in appointing Souness.  Dalglish, you know, they went for the best option (in their eyes) in terms of cost and what they thought he'd bring to the setup.  Fair enough.

 

Souness was a sign of how low they had to stoop to scrape the bottom of the barrel after ditching Robson. 

 

If this isn't a sign of decline in terms of ambition and standing in English football then I'm not really sure what is.

 

Dalglish was appointed as a serious statement of intent to build on the Keegan legacy. Before 1992 he wouldn't have even considered the Newcastle job. Like many others including Bobby Robson. If you disagree with that, it shows completely you have absolutely zero awareness of that era, and hence having zero awareness of that era explains completely why you completely underestimate the board we have nowadays.

 

ie. Naive.

 

You seem to have a problem with raising your expectations in line with the foundations laid down post-92. 

 

To paraphrase your paramour, we pay the board Rolls Royce wages and we're not getting Rolls Royce performance.  Not now.  But you'll turn a blind eye to that, which seems a hell of a lot more naive to me.

 

 

If filling the stadium, and running the club to a level that it can buy major England players and international players at their peak or approaching their peak, isn't an achievement of the board by raising expectations and showing ambition, please explain why 30,000 supporters pissed off - for years on average - when the club was shite. Best fans going .....  same as everyone else actually. What brought them back ?

 

We have always had the same potential, with the same potential fanbase. Other big clubs also have big potential, with a big potential fanbase, that we have overtaken since the current board took over the club, there are a few we haven't because they are very well run themselves, and have had sustained success for the thick end of 30-40 years experience to draw on while we have had our best years under Keegan. What is so hard to grasp about this ? Contrary to what you think we do not have a divine right to finish above all these clubs and contrary to what you say, you DO think we have this, because it is exactly what you are saying. You remember when when we were 2nd ..... well I remember when we would have killed to qualify for europe even once.

 

Nobody is settling for "mediocrity", because for one thing, qualifying for europe more than any other club in a decade except 4, is certainly not "mediocrity".

 

Ah well, it's those fans that tolerate mediocrity at board level while paying top dollar for it that seem pretty idiotic to me

does this quote mean you would withdraw your support if the club was "mediocre"...... which pretty much says everything. Meaning that as you haven't withdrawn your support then it is far from "mediocre" - as it was ( and worse ) for decades prior to the current board. The league positions are available in case you think I am making this up.

 

There is absolutely no way in the world that bringing a manager to the club who had won 4 league titles with 2 clubs, 2 FA Cups and 3 manager of the year awards is anything other than a direct and deliberate attempt to win the premiership and the big trophies. You can dispute that as long as you like - anything but admit otherwise - but if you do deny it, it simply shows your paranoia and blindness, and inability to give credit for anything, like others.

 

Lastly - as some people have made comments saying I should "show my experience" --- when I say these things it is precisely what I am doing. Whether you choose to take it on board or not, or presume you know best despite not experienced these eras is of course your decision, but sensible people would not discard the information. What you wish to think of people who choose to ignore it is of course also up to you. I think it gives me the right to think they must be pretty daft.

 

How many times do you need telling that although our crowds were lower than today, they were still one of the highest in English football, the crowds were a sign of the times?

 

You tried to have a go at me for running our crowds down when somebody read what I was saying the wrong way and you tried to get him on your side, you're an absolute hypocrite.

 

Our crowds have ALWAYS been one of the best in the country since the turn of the last century, it's been that way for something like 90 years.

 

 

So please explain why we sold 3 England players in the 1980's ? Why Gordon Lee moved to Everton if we were such a good club, and why teams like Oxford, Derby, Forest, Luton, Southampton, West Brom, QPR, Leicester, Wolves, Sheff Wed, Ipswich, Norwich, Blackburn, Swindon, West Ham, Coventry, Wimbledon, Stoke have all won domestic trophies since we last did while we were either fighting relegation or playing in the 2nd division, and other clubs such as Southend, Plymouth, Barnsley, Grimsby, Rotherham, Oldham, Notts County, Cambridge, Millwall and Brighton have all finished above us in the league in the 3 decades or so prior to the current board taking over the club in 1992 ?

 

 

[Dinho lad]

We are in the position we are in because of the man you backed, Souness.

 

 

Errr..Shepherd backed him....with erm.....money. Lots and lots of money. (And not to mention too much time)

 

That's why we are in the position we are in.  :roll:

[GM]

Shame but I think its quite amazing the lengths you will go to to ignore facts

 

So, your irony bypass was a complete success then

[NE5]

We are in the position we are in because of the man you backed, Souness.

 

 

Errr..Shepherd backed him....with erm.....money. Lots and lots of money. (And not to mention too much time)

 

That's why we are in the position we are in.  :roll:

 

seen Newcastle play yet, dino ?

 

 

[NE5]

Shame but I think its quite amazing the lengths you will go to to ignore facts

 

So, your irony bypass was a complete success then

 

thank you for the input

 

 

[Syrette]

Yeah thanks from me too, GM.

[GM]

Shame but I think its quite amazing the lengths you will go to to ignore facts

 

So, your irony bypass was a complete success then

 

thank you for the input

 

 

No bother. Happy Birthday, by the way!

[Syrette]

196 - what an age. Older than the game of football itself!

[Dinho lad]

We are in the position we are in because of the man you backed, Souness.

 

 

Errr..Shepherd backed him....with erm.....money. Lots and lots of money. (And not to mention too much time)

 

That's why we are in the position we are in.  :roll:

 

seen Newcastle play yet, dino ?

 

 

 

That's a new one, init?!!

[macbeth]

It's like a bad bad joke.   He'll even read someone predict that that's exactly what he'll say in response, and then say it anyway.

 

but you're missing the point. The only reason these sorts of 'facts' are repeated time and time again are because they are real, unarguable facts. Do you have some sort of mental defect that means you cannot understand that ?

 

I think it is contagious and most of us are suffering from it.

[NE5]

It's like a bad bad joke.   He'll even read someone predict that that's exactly what he'll say in response, and then say it anyway.

 

but you're missing the point.

 

 

[CaliMag]

My Spidersenses tells me this will be a 47 page thread by December with one banning.

 

[macbeth]

.......and why teams like Oxford, Derby, Forest, Luton, Southampton, West Brom, QPR, Leicester, Wolves, Sheff Wed, Ipswich, Norwich, Blackburn, Swindon, West Ham, Coventry, Wimbledon, Stoke have all won domestic trophies since we last did while we were either fighting relegation or playing in the 2nd division, and other clubs such as Southend, Plymouth, Barnsley, Grimsby, Rotherham, Oldham, Notts County, Cambridge, Millwall and Brighton have all finished above us in the league in the 3 decades or so prior to the current board taking over the club in 1992 ?

 

 

 

But all those sides have still won trophies since we last won one, not sure how that makes the current board any more successful than any of the previous ones ? You raise the point, so I guess you see it as good that nothing has changed on the trophy front.

 

And since Shepherd took over we have had Blackburn, Tottenham, Everton, Boro, Man City, Villa, Charlton, Birmingham, Fulham, Southampton, sunlun, Ipswich, Leeds, Leicester, West Ham, Derby and Sheff Wed have all finished above us. Its a pointless list of names really, but you started it.

 

Just because 20, or 30, or 40 years ago the sewers smelled appallingly doesn't mean they don't smell badly today.

[NE5]

.......and why teams like Oxford, Derby, Forest, Luton, Southampton, West Brom, QPR, Leicester, Wolves, Sheff Wed, Ipswich, Norwich, Blackburn, Swindon, West Ham, Coventry, Wimbledon, Stoke have all won domestic trophies since we last did while we were either fighting relegation or playing in the 2nd division, and other clubs such as Southend, Plymouth, Barnsley, Grimsby, Rotherham, Oldham, Notts County, Cambridge, Millwall and Brighton have all finished above us in the league in the 3 decades or so prior to the current board taking over the club in 1992 ?

 

 

 

But all those sides have still won trophies since we last won one, not sure how that makes the current board any more successful than any of the previous ones ? You raise the point, so I guess you see it as good that nothing has changed on the trophy front.

 

And since Shepherd took over we have had Blackburn, Tottenham, Everton, Boro, Man City, Villa, Charlton, Birmingham, Fulham, Southampton, sunlun, Ipswich, Leeds, Leicester, West Ham, Derby and Sheff Wed have all finished above us. Its a pointless list of names really, but you started it.

 

Just because 20, or 30, or 40 years ago the sewers smelled appallingly doesn't mean they don't smell badly today.

 

just because 10 years ago we were 2nd, doesn't mean an average of 5th since is shit either.

 

The point is - as I'm sure you realise is - where should Newcastle United be ? In europe regularly, buying international players ?

 

Do we do that now or not, and did we do that with the previous board for decades ?

 

And those clubs I have named, were above us for the most part, for years, a decade, or longer. Not a year or two.

 

The club has had teams good enough to win trophies, borne out by their league postions, so I am afraid the blame for that should be laid where it belongs, at the feet of the players for bottling the big games that have mattered, and maybe the managers for their preparation, tactics etc. being not right, especially some of the managers who fielded reserve players in League Cup games.

 

And as we had shit directors with no ambition before, and plenty of big clubs have the same now, where does it become automatic that any replacements for the current board will be ambitious ?

 

I don't see you acknowledging this though, and I am not really interested in your views on dividends, nor do I think people like Crozier - as you think - would be better in view of his appalling footballing decisions in charge of the FA.

 

Next.

 

 

[macbeth]

My Spidersenses tells me this will be a 47 page thread by December with one banning.

 

 

 

me, me, me sir ?

 

Although the club's financial results will be out any day soon. Or should be. Last year they were out 13 weeks after the financial year end, we're already two weeks passed that time this year. (although Cameron Hall took two years to post their last results ) I need to be able to come on here to advertise the fact that my site as the figures for this year included, so people can ha ve a look. When I do that I expect to get the blame from some postcodes for them showing the board in a bad light. Cos it's always best to shoot the messenger 

[macbeth]

Just because 20, or 30, or 40 years ago the sewers smelled appallingly doesn't mean they don't smell badly today.

 

just because 10 years ago we were 2nd, doesn't mean an average of 5th since is shit either.

 

On average 7 sides finish above us each season. Damn statistics.

 

 

The point is - as I'm sure you realise is - where should Newcastle United be ? In europe regularly, buying international players ?

 

Do we do that now or not, and did we do that with the previous board for decades ?

 

We know that. I know you keep repeating it as if we don't know it, but we do. Where you and everyone else in the world seem to differ is that you wish t compare the current board with something as bad as you can imaigine (Ellis is your usual other exmaple) and say be thankful for what you have, cos it is better than the worst. I want us to compare ourselves with the best that is around and aim to reach that. I want us to grow as a club, not spiral downwards. You aim to be better than the worst and to be happy with that.

 

 

And those clubs I have named, were above us for the most part, for years, a decade, or longer. Not a year or two.

 

The club has had teams good enough to win trophies, borne out by their league postions, so I am afraid the blame for that should be laid where it belongs, at the feet of the players for bottling the big games that have mattered, and maybe the managers for their preparation, tactics etc. being not right, especially some of the managers who fielded reserve players in League Cup games.

 

Why only them ? Really, why only them ? Players have the on-pitch responsibility. Their manager coaches, picks and motivates the players. The role of the board is to manage the finances of the club, and make key managerial appointments to make sure the business runs to its optimum. Tea lady makes the tea.

 

And as we had shit directors with no ambition before, and plenty of big clubs have the same now, where does it become automatic that any replacements for the current board will be ambitious ?

 

I don't belive there is any football director anywhere who is not ambitious for his club. I'm friends with a chairman of a Scottish Leage side. He is driven in his ambitions. Unlike our board he pours personal money in to help those ambitions to fruition. The ambitions are not to be buying Scottish internationals or playing in Europe, they are essentially one for survival at the level they are currently at. I'd be amazed if anyone who is a football director is any different. You seem obsessed with "ambition" as a key criteria. "Ambition" is great, the probelm is lack of talent. Souness had ambition, Mick McCarthy had ambition, Bob Murray had ambition, Freddy Shepherd has ambition.

 

 

I don't see you acknowledging this though, and I am not really interested in your views on dividends, nor do I think people like Crozier - as you think - would be better in view of his appalling footballing decisions in charge of the FA.

 

Took a while to get those in again. I was getting worried. I can talk about dividends if you want.

 

 

 

NO they scream.  :shtup:

 

Hall and Shepherds have taken out roughly £33m from our club in 9 years. I undertsand why you don't want to talk about it.

 

 

 

 

[Guest Gemmill]

Once again, somebody else takes 10 minutes out to completely dismantle NE5's argument and entire reason for being on Newcastle forums.  He won't see it though.  He'll just come back with the same old tired stuff about 5th best, divine right, full houses etc. etc. 

 

And lo and behold....

 

If filling the stadium, and running the club to a level that it can buy major England players and international players at their peak or approaching their peak, isn't an achievement of the board by raising expectations and showing ambition, please explain why 30,000 supporters pissed off - for years on average - when the club was shite........Contrary to what you think we do not have a divine right to finish above all these clubs......qualifying for europe more than any other club in a decade except 4, is certainly not "mediocrity".

 

It's like a bad bad joke.   He'll even read someone predict that that's exactly what he'll say in response, and then say it anyway.

 

get back to work ....

 

is this your new job Gem.....you do even less work than the other one  bluebigeek.gif

 

Yes it is.  And yes, I do.  bluebigrazz.gif

 

I'm right though, you can't keep peddling the same old shit to defend this failing regime.  You're doing yourself no favours by excusing Shepherd's failures all the time.

 

You still think we have a divine right to be 2nd ...

 

You're a hoot. We are in the position we are in because of the man you backed, Souness.

 

I am pleased you still consider regular european football to be "failure" ... yet you are still attraced enough to presumably pay for a ticket.

If you want them out, stop going. It worked the last time they were shit. I mean bottom of the 2nd division, not playing european football on a regular basis BTW

 

 

 

 

Ahhh, the divine right line.  How utterly predictable. 

 

And you STILL fail to realise that it was Shepherd's backing of Souness that has put us where we are, not mine.  How this most simple of "facts" (I know you like facts, particularly when they're in quotation marks) is beyond your powers of comprehension is a mystery to me, and yet somehow it is.  I get the blame for Shepherd's biggest mistake to date - makes it easier to defend him I suppose.

 

I pay for a ticket because I want to watch my team play, not because I think the current board is the bees' knees - another concept beyond your limited intelligence.

 

Keep defending Shepherd though.  You're a joke in the eyes of pretty much everyone on here because of it.

[OzzieMandias]

Over time, the board's signal failure has been its inability to consolidiate on the success we achieved in the SJH/KK days. We had a chance to establish ourselves as a top four club and we blew it. Miracle of miracles, SBR almost got us back up there again with a chance to build on a season or two of Champions' League money but (Partizan) we blew it again. The overall trajectory has been downwards and we're back where we were when I first started supporting the club in the late 1960s -- mid-table, good on our day and capable of inching our way into Europe (we'd finished 10th the season before we won the Fairs Cup and only got into the competition by a quirk in the qualification rules) but generally pretty mediocre and no match for the top clubs of the day.

 

All else is haggling over the details of how this happened.

 

What to do?

 

NE5 says "better the devil you know". A recipe for more of the same, in my opinion, subject to the law of diminishing returns.

 

Most of the rest us reckon that our resources indicate the club can perform better than it is currently doing, and that evident stagnation can only be arrested by some kind of radical change. Fat Fred has shot his wad, and is surely our biggest obstacle to finding the right manager. It's not just that his choices are poor. It's not even that he as likely to undermine them as back them once they're in position. It's also that now everyone knows what he is like, few people seem to want to work for him. He's not exactly a well-respected figure. In fact he's a downright embarrassment.

 

What's needed is different structure, new thinking, better appointments, less bullshit, and a much-need infusion of cash. Otherwise we ain't going nowhere.

 

 

[Guest elbee909]

I look forward to the day when this thread is rendered completely pointless.  It's pretty close already.

[Guest thompers]

 

And as we had shit directors with no ambition before, and plenty of big clubs have the same now, where does it become automatic that any replacements for the current board will be ambitious ?

 

 

How many clubs do you know of that generate the income that ours does that doesn't reinvest the income ambitiously? I can't think of any. The clubs around that are 'unambitious' as you say are more often than not the ones that can't afford to be ambitious.