NE5 Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Only 4 clubs have qualified for europe more than us in the last decade, the same 4 clubs are the only ones with a higher average league position. What is so difficult in interpreting that Already dealt with that before. When you're faced with rebuttals to your arguments you just retreat back into your shell. No fun. yes, you dealt with it. You were unable to name any more than 4. Yes, yes. You're always correct, I'm obviously wrong, everything is peachy. Well, go ahead and name them. Take your time. No, you misunderstand. Your stats there are meaningless when it comes to the argument that NUFC have declined. You know, you'd think with the better facilities, better stadium and all that stirling stuff, we'd have more chance of doing well than ever before. Strange that we're doing less well in terms of league finishes now, despite having a bigger stadium and better training facilities. I wonder why this could be? All that European experience and we seemingly have learnt rather little. I'm assuming that according to your stats, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea and Man Utd are those above us. Well, Liverpool got rid of their Roy Evans, now we have ours. Optimistic? It's fairly obvious they are the only 4 clubs above us. Well done. 7. On average. Stop misinterpreting the figures. On average, during Shepherd's time as Chairman, you would find SEVEN clubs finishing above us. That there are only 4 that consistently do with the remaining 3 comprising a variety of different teams is irrelevant. We still finish 8th on average, not 4th. only 4 clubs have performed more consistently and qualified more for europe. Fact. What are you, an accountant or something Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gemmill Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Only 4 clubs have qualified for europe more than us in the last decade, the same 4 clubs are the only ones with a higher average league position. What is so difficult in interpreting that Already dealt with that before. When you're faced with rebuttals to your arguments you just retreat back into your shell. No fun. yes, you dealt with it. You were unable to name any more than 4. Yes, yes. You're always correct, I'm obviously wrong, everything is peachy. Well, go ahead and name them. Take your time. No, you misunderstand. Your stats there are meaningless when it comes to the argument that NUFC have declined. You know, you'd think with the better facilities, better stadium and all that stirling stuff, we'd have more chance of doing well than ever before. Strange that we're doing less well in terms of league finishes now, despite having a bigger stadium and better training facilities. I wonder why this could be? All that European experience and we seemingly have learnt rather little. I'm assuming that according to your stats, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea and Man Utd are those above us. Well, Liverpool got rid of their Roy Evans, now we have ours. Optimistic? It's fairly obvious they are the only 4 clubs above us. Well done. 7. On average. Stop misinterpreting the figures. On average, during Shepherd's time as Chairman, you would find SEVEN clubs finishing above us. That there are only 4 that consistently do with the remaining 3 comprising a variety of different teams is irrelevant. We still finish 8th on average, not 4th. only 4 clubs have performed more consistently and qualified more for europe. Fact. What are you, an accountant or something And yet still on average, 3 more clubs manage to outperform us every season. What are you, a politician or something? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest elbee909 Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 It's fairly obvious they are the only 4 clubs above us. Well done. I did make the proviso though, that it was according to statistics drawn from very selective criteria. Where are we now? 1 1 Manchester United 2 2 Chelsea 3 3 Bolton Wanderers 4 4 Portsmouth 5 5 Everton 6 6 Aston Villa 7 7 Reading 8 8 Arsenal 9 9 Blackburn Rovers 10 10 Liverpool 11 11 Fulham 12 12 Manchester City 13 13 Newcastle United 13th. Familiar territory indeed. Well, if you're going to draw your conclusions from a rather narrow set of criteria I don't see why I shouldn't. Of course, I wouldn't, because it's patently ridiculous when it comes to evaluating the performance of the board post SJH. Take everything into account, or nothing. You pluck what suits you out the air (if not elsewhere) and think you've struck gold. Are you saying that the structure and setup of the club is improved hugely so giving club a platform to move forward? Do you not call that good planning? Or do you call it going backwards? Considering the wage:turnover ratio has worsened consistently in recent years, it might as well be going backwards. One could say, at the time before it completely nosedived, that Leeds had similar trappings of 'moving forward'. European football, international players. If we have the structure and setup to move forwards, why are they not actually doing so? I guess they don't have a divine right to do better, but have a divine right to do worse. If you are saying that the club hasn't matched Keegan in the managerial stakes, but made progress in those areas then I will agree. All you have to do now is realise that nobody has a right to appoint the best managers and win one of only 2 major domestic trophies, and accept qualifying for europe for what it is. Which is - being one of the countries top clubs. In all honesty, I think _some_ (not all) of our European qualifications were rather fortunate. Not so in the days of finishing second, but the criteria for entering European qualification have slackened over recent years which is something you refuse to recognise. Even taking that into account, our manner of European entry hasn't exactly been convincing in recent years. Top clubs applying for the Intertoto on a consistent basis? Ok, maybe once in a while, I could understand. But we probably submit our applications at the start of the season these days. If you fail to do that, you should tell us who your magical man is that will guarantee being the equal of those who run the 4 clubs you mention, as we have a divine right to expect it and the current board being so shit, will of course be an easy task. I think it could even take less than that. Just put a board structure down akin to some of those clubs, and we'll be taking a step forward. Even if Fred etc. remained, if we put intelligent and successful individuals in place that ensured he didn't have the ability to make every single decision himself, then that'd be something. Unless you're happy with a board that rewards themselves fat dividends not matter how poorly we do, but if you want to trust that sort of board to truly take us forward, then fine. Don't bother looking at all the big city clubs that used to be above us for decades though, as they are obviously run by inferior people otherwise such a thing could not happen Relevance? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 It's fairly obvious they are the only 4 clubs above us. Well done. I did make the proviso though, that it was according to statistics drawn from very selective criteria. Where are we now? 1 1 Manchester United 2 2 Chelsea 3 3 Bolton Wanderers 4 4 Portsmouth 5 5 Everton 6 6 Aston Villa 7 7 Reading 8 8 Arsenal 9 9 Blackburn Rovers 10 10 Liverpool 11 11 Fulham 12 12 Manchester City 13 13 Newcastle United 13th. Familiar territory indeed. Well, if you're going to draw your conclusions from a rather narrow set of criteria I don't see why I shouldn't. Of course, I wouldn't, because it's patently ridiculous when it comes to evaluating the performance of the board post SJH. Take everything into account, or nothing. You pluck what suits you out the air (if not elsewhere) and think you've struck gold. Are you saying that the structure and setup of the club is improved hugely so giving club a platform to move forward? Do you not call that good planning? Or do you call it going backwards? Considering the wage:turnover ratio has worsened consistently in recent years, it might as well be going backwards. One could say, at the time before it completely nosedived, that Leeds had similar trappings of 'moving forward'. European football, international players. If we have the structure and setup to move forwards, why are they not actually doing so? I guess they don't have a divine right to do better, but have a divine right to do worse. If you are saying that the club hasn't matched Keegan in the managerial stakes, but made progress in those areas then I will agree. All you have to do now is realise that nobody has a right to appoint the best managers and win one of only 2 major domestic trophies, and accept qualifying for europe for what it is. Which is - being one of the countries top clubs. In all honesty, I think _some_ (not all) of our European qualifications were rather fortunate. Not so in the days of finishing second, but the criteria for entering European qualification have slackened over recent years which is something you refuse to recognise. Even taking that into account, our manner of European entry hasn't exactly been convincing in recent years. Top clubs applying for the Intertoto on a consistent basis? Ok, maybe once in a while, I could understand. But we probably submit our applications at the start of the season these days. If you fail to do that, you should tell us who your magical man is that will guarantee being the equal of those who run the 4 clubs you mention, as we have a divine right to expect it and the current board being so shit, will of course be an easy task. I think it could even take less than that. Just put a board structure down akin to some of those clubs, and we'll be taking a step forward. Even if Fred etc. remained, if we put intelligent and successful individuals in place that ensured he didn't have the ability to make every single decision himself, then that'd be something. Unless you're happy with a board that rewards themselves fat dividends not matter how poorly we do, but if you want to trust that sort of board to truly take us forward, then fine. Don't bother looking at all the big city clubs that used to be above us for decades though, as they are obviously run by inferior people otherwise such a thing could not happen Relevance? the qualifying for europe has slackened in recent years ?? How come all those clubs you consider "better run" than us haven't also qualified. You don't read anything do you. And you can't argue with facts, which are quite simply whatever the rules are, they apply to everyone, if someone wants to qualify for europe, then they must finish above us, and so if they don't do that then are not "better". Ref "slackened" Please explain when was the last time someone qualified for the UEFA Cup when finishing 10th in the league ? The last sentence is obviously wondering where you can see all these chairman outperforming ours.... The board have not taken a dividend this year, evne when they have, an amount of 2 or 3 million quid a year isn't going to transform the club into the new Chelsea of make much if any impact, and I bet you weren;t saying this when we were playing in the CL. This board could run the club like other clubs, with a 30000 crowd, selling players instead of attempting to make more money, buying only from money that comes in, and still take dividends, competing at a lower level than they do, but they choose to try to compete higher. You completely fail to grasp this point, it will not dawn on you until or if this happens. It is utterly pointless arguing with you and others like you, because it is quite obvious you do think the club has a divine right to play in the Champions League and win trophies, and you have a divine right to expect a board to show ambition, such is the success of the board in the last decade of raising expectations among the clubs supporters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gemmill Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 It is utterly pointless arguing with you and others like you, because it is quite obvious you do think the club has a divine right to play in the Champions League and win trophies, and you have a divine right to expect a board to show ambition, such is the success of the board in the last decade of raising expectations among the clubs supporters. If you attribute those opinions to people (opinions they don't hold), then yes, it is utterly pointless arguing with them. If you listen to what they have to say and respond to it, rather than firing a volley of "facts" at them no matter what content of their post is, you'll find your discussions on here and other message boards become much more fruitful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 I can assure you now that an ambitious board/chairman who run the club and put the money up for the manager but makes an odd daft statement in public is a damn sight better than a gentleman who runs the club like a modern scrooge, and lacks the vision and enterprise to tap the support of a football club. You don't need to look around at our own past, look around at other big city clubs that we have overtaken and have attracted nothing like our results, european qualifications and support. The sad thing is - and again I don't mean you - is that there are people out there who STILL don't understand that we could easily, very easily, replace the current board with one like this. Let me make an assurance to you, £50 million of shite does not make a good chairman. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Basically, I think he would have showed ambition and hauled the club up if he had took over the setup from McKeag. A non-argument. He didn't take over the setup from McKeag. eerrrrr....it wasn't me who approached the hypothetical argument in the first place. Are you still backing your man Souness ? 7th request. Or are you going to behave in a completely immature and stupid fashion like you did before. Who is the worst? The person who appointed Souness or the person who supported him for whatever reason. Millionth request. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 It is utterly pointless arguing with you and others like you, because it is quite obvious you do think the club has a divine right to play in the Champions League and win trophies, and you have a divine right to expect a board to show ambition, such is the success of the board in the last decade of raising expectations among the clubs supporters. If you attribute those opinions to people (opinions they don't hold), then yes, it is utterly pointless arguing with them. If you listen to what they have to say and respond to it, rather than firing a volley of "facts" at them no matter what content of their post is, you'll find your discussions on here and other message boards become much more fruitful. I don't care if you agree with the facts I post or not. They are facts, and the views I post are based on reality. If you respond with facts showing we haven't qualified for europe more than only 4 clubs, and we haven't bought major England players, and we haven't expanded the stadium, and we don't show ambition to play at the top levels of the game, and the current board haven't changed the club massively for the better since they took over in 1992, then your attempts to discuss such things with me might prove more fruitful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Basically, I think he would have showed ambition and hauled the club up if he had took over the setup from McKeag. A non-argument. He didn't take over the setup from McKeag. eerrrrr....it wasn't me who approached the hypothetical argument in the first place. Are you still backing your man Souness ? 7th request. Or are you going to behave in a completely immature and stupid fashion like you did before. Who is the worst? The person who appointed Souness or the person who supported him for whatever reason. Millionth request. So you ARE Ozzie ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 I can assure you now that an ambitious board/chairman who run the club and put the money up for the manager but makes an odd daft statement in public is a damn sight better than a gentleman who runs the club like a modern scrooge, and lacks the vision and enterprise to tap the support of a football club. You don't need to look around at our own past, look around at other big city clubs that we have overtaken and have attracted nothing like our results, european qualifications and support. The sad thing is - and again I don't mean you - is that there are people out there who STILL don't understand that we could easily, very easily, replace the current board with one like this. Let me make an assurance to you, £50 million of shite does not make a good chairman. Coming from someone who thinks a board that almost took us down to the 3rd division, sold our best players and spent the best part of 30 years either struggling in the 1st division or playing in the 2nd...is "the same" as one who qualifies regularly for europe, buys major England players in their prime and sacks managers who finish half way in the top league ..... it shows the total futility of discussing such matters further. So I'll file your post in the bin where it belongs, as usual Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 So you ARE Ozzie ? I can't help but laugh when I see the lengths you'll go to in an attempt to avoid answering a question, Mr chairman. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Coming from someone who thinks a board that almost took us down to the 3rd division, sold our best players and spent the best part of 30 years either struggling in the 1st division or playing in the 2nd...is "the same" as one who qualifies regularly for europe, buys major England players in their prime and sacks managers who finish half way in the top league ..... it shows the total futility of discussing such matters further. So I'll file your post in the bin where it belongs, as usual Coming from someone who thinks that somebody who supports Souness is worse than the man who appoints him. Also coming from someone who thinks that Ellis is shite and Shepherd isn't although Villa have finished above us more than we have them under Shepherd. @ NE5. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 I don't care if you agree with the facts I post or not. They are facts, and the views I post are based on reality. Some people can't tell the difference between facts and spin. Fact! On average, around seven clubs finish above us since Fat Fred took over. In some seasons it's as many as ten or 12. Fact! Your particular version of "lies, damn lies and statistics" also foolishly ignores that the situation has been steadily getting worse and worse for years. Fact! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Fox Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Mick, you are wasting your time expecting a sensible response from NE5. He is incapable of giving a straight answer. I have asked him numerous times whether the thinks the performances now are of the quality that we achieved under KK. He does not answer other than to go of on a tangent about there have been some quality performances. The answer to my question is "Yes" or "No". He does not understand. By the way "Would an ambitious club and chairman have appointed Souness or Roeder as Managers. Answer for NE5's benefit is NO. So guys you are better off discussing other topics. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 I don't care if you agree with the facts I post or not. They are facts, and the views I post are based on reality. Some people can't tell the difference between facts and spin. Fact! On average, around seven clubs finish above us since Fat Fred took over. In some seasons it's as many as ten or 12. Fact! Your particular version of "lies, damn lies and statistics" also foolishly ignores that the situation has been steadily getting worse and worse for years. Fact! Another stupid post. I'm certain you can't read properly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Fox Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 HTL and NE5, or is it Freddie and his brother. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Macbeth's way of running a football club would take it to ruin, as previous Board's of Newcastle nearly did. His support of Crozier, despite the shite football decisions made by Crozier, tell me all I need to know about what macbeth wants from a football club. He's a money first man, he would sell the soul of the football club and the support with it such is his obsession with the balance sheet. As for Mick, the posts just get more ridiculous each time. Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 HTL and NE5, or is it Freddie and his brother. gay.gif What's a southampton supporter doing giving a shite about Newcastle? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Macbeth's way of running a football club would take it to ruin, as previous Board's of Newcastle nearly did. His support of Crozier, despite the shite football decisions made by Crozier, tell me all I need to know about what macbeth wants from a football club. He's a money first man, he would sell the soul of the football club and the support with it such is his obsession with the balance sheet. As for Mick, the posts just get more ridiculous each time. Cheers The comfort blanket gets wheeled out once again, very predictable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Fox Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 So you've decided to make a reappearance have you. Still the same old rubbish. Its not going to be like a previous board where you disappeared with your tail between your legs when people would not listen to your parade ground views, surely. How's the the Lee Bowyer Appreciation society Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Coming from someone who thinks a board that almost took us down to the 3rd division, sold our best players and spent the best part of 30 years either struggling in the 1st division or playing in the 2nd...is "the same" as one who qualifies regularly for europe, buys major England players in their prime and sacks managers who finish half way in the top league ..... it shows the total futility of discussing such matters further. So I'll file your post in the bin where it belongs, as usual Coming from someone who thinks that somebody who supports Souness is worse than the man who appoints him. Also coming from someone who thinks that Ellis is shite and Shepherd isn't although Villa have finished above us more than we have them under Shepherd. @ NE5. It's a sign of maturity to admit it when you're wrong, assuming you haven't convinced yourself that you were actually against Souness for ages. We all know that FS and the Board are the people in power, however, the voice of supporters does mean something. By supporting Souness for so long beyond the time he should have lost all support goes some of the way to keeping the wanker in the job for so long. Ironic that Roeder is attracting such a lack of support on here so quickly from those who supported the clubs worst ever manager for so long.....you know who you are although you can deny it all you like. Fools. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Mick, you are wasting your time expecting a sensible response from NE5. He is incapable of giving a straight answer. I have asked him numerous times whether the thinks the performances now are of the quality that we achieved under KK. He does not answer other than to go of on a tangent about there have been some quality performances. The answer to my question is "Yes" or "No". He does not understand. By the way "Would an ambitious club and chairman have appointed Souness or Roeder as Managers. Answer for NE5's benefit is NO. So guys you are better off discussing other topics. What would you know of the performances of the club at any time in it's history? Have you honestly EVER been to a match, other than when Newcastle played away to your club, Southampton? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 So you've decided to make a reappearance have you. Still the same old rubbish. Its not going to be like a previous board where you disappeared with your tail between your legs when people would not listen to your parade ground views, surely. How's the the Lee Bowyer Appreciation society Tough talk from the southern soft shite primary school teacher...... You can't intimidate me like you do a young kiddie. Seen southampton more than Newcastle........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest elbee909 Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 the qualifying for europe has slackened in recent years ?? How come all those clubs you consider "better run" than us haven't also qualified. Other also-rans have at one time or another. You don't read anything do you. The irony... And you can't argue with facts, which are quite simply whatever the rules are, they apply to everyone, if someone wants to qualify for europe, then they must finish above us, and so if they don't do that then are not "better". Ref "slackened" Please explain when was the last time someone qualified for the UEFA Cup when finishing 10th in the league ? As you asked, as Europe is apparently the golden criteria for you - Fulham finished 13th, qualified via the Intertoto. 2002 wasn't it? Southampton came 8th and qualified via finishing via a cup final (yes, we did that, I know - great that we're up with the Southamptons of this world). Boro won the League cup and qualified via that, despite finishing 11th. Since more European places were awarded to England more clubs have got in by the back door; European places have been shuffled along since UEFA started milking their cash cow for more than it's worth. The last sentence is obviously wondering where you can see all these chairman outperforming ours.... No, it was wondering what the relevance was, which is why I used the word 'relevance'. Something about ancient history I think it was. The board have not taken a dividend this year Nice change. They've got stuff sewn up so tight now though, they could take the same amount out via leasing warehouses to themselves three times over and we wouldn't bloody know. , evne when they have, an amount of 2 or 3 million quid a year isn't going to transform the club into the new Chelsea of make much if any impact, and I bet you weren;t saying this when we were playing in the CL. You think incompetence should be rewarded? Wow, you should start up a company, I'll be first to sign up for you. This board could run the club like other clubs, with a 30000 crowd, selling players instead of attempting to make more money, buying only from money that comes in, and still take dividends, competing at a lower level than they do, but they choose to try to compete higher. They compete as high as they have to to maintain profitability. Hooray. I think it's interesting that some of those things you mentioned, Arsenal have done in recent times - 30000-odd crowd, selling players, but they manage to compete just fine. Can we have a Wenger please. You completely fail to grasp this point, it will not dawn on you until or if this happens. It is utterly pointless arguing with you and others like you, because it is quite obvious you do think the club has a divine right to play in the Champions League and win trophies, and you have a divine right to expect a board to show ambition, such is the success of the board in the last decade of raising expectations among the clubs supporters. It's true - after all the trophies we've won in the last 10 years, I fully expect us to keep winning the same amount of them! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 Another stupid post. I'm certain you can't read properly. Very mature response. Perhaps you could point out which of the facts I presented is, in fact, wrong? Thought not. 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