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

[Mick]

 

He doesn't know it ever happened.

 

He lied about being there.

 

Not quite but in your mind it's true.

 

By the way, did I ever tell you what NE5 once told me when Souness was at the club and most people were arguing in his favour?

[NE5]

 

but you are backing Ozzie who backed Souness

 

I am pleased you are not happy to be playing in europe with all the other leading clubs in the country. Can't imagine what your reaction would be if we were one of those shit clubs with shit boards that never play in europe, sell their best players and consistently fight relegation or go down.

 

 

I'll back Ozzie on some things and not on others, I'll probably back you on some and not on others, like I did with Souness but not Shepherd, that's normal.

 

you can comment on the bold bit if you like. As well as tell us why Gordon Lee and Arthur Cox left Newcastle, leading to relegation and the sale of our 3 locally born England players

 

As you are a long term supporter - cough cough - you should know the answer.

 

 

[Mick]

 

but you are backing Ozzie who backed Souness

 

I am pleased you are not happy to be playing in europe with all the other leading clubs in the country. Can't imagine what your reaction would be if we were one of those shit clubs with shit boards that never play in europe, sell their best players and consistently fight relegation or go down.

 

 

I'll back Ozzie on some things and not on others, I'll probably back you on some and not on others, like I did with Souness but not Shepherd, that's normal.

 

you can comment on the bold bit if you like. As well as tell us why Gordon Lee and Arthur Cox left Newcastle, leading to relegation and the sale of our 3 locally born England players

 

As you are a long term supporter - cough cough - you should know the answer.

 

 

 

Gordon Lee left because he said he wanted to be closer to his family who were still living in the North West, you should remember that.  Arthur Cox left because he didn't think that the board were backing him enough, I've answered both before.

 

Our 3 locally born England players were sold because they wanted to leave, the same as when Hamann was sold to Liverpool because he wanted to leave.

 

What's the significance of these three locally born players who probably watched Newcastle as much as Hamann before any of them signed?

 

Is it that one was a mackem?

 

Is it that one hardly ever watched Newcastle before he signed?

[Howaythelads]

 

but you are backing Ozzie who backed Souness

 

I am pleased you are not happy to be playing in europe with all the other leading clubs in the country. Can't imagine what your reaction would be if we were one of those shit clubs with shit boards that never play in europe, sell their best players and consistently fight relegation or go down.

 

 

I'll back Ozzie on some things and not on others, I'll probably back you on some and not on others, like I did with Souness but not Shepherd, that's normal.

 

you can comment on the bold bit if you like. As well as tell us why Gordon Lee and Arthur Cox left Newcastle, leading to relegation and the sale of our 3 locally born England players

 

As you are a long term supporter - cough cough - you should know the answer.

 

 

 

Gordon Lee left because he said he wanted to be closer to his family who were still living in the North West, you should remember that.  Arthur Cox left because he didn't think that the board were backing him enough, I've answered both before.

 

Our 3 locally born England players were sold because they wanted to leave, the same as when Hamann was sold to Liverpool because he wanted to leave.

 

What's the significance of these three locally born players who probably watched Newcastle as much as Hamann before any of them signed?

 

Is it that one was a mackem?

 

Is it that one hardly ever watched Newcastle before he signed?

 

Why did those 3 players want to leave? Why did the Jorman want to leave? The reasons aren't the same, as any long term supporter knows.  Which means you're well and truly knackered on that one.

 

[macbeth]

NE5 .... http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,21590.0.html

 

You must remember, it was asking you for views on the finances. It was referign to facts though. Not opinions dressed up as facts, but real facts  :winking:

 

You refused to answer cos the questions were too hard.

[NE5]

NE5 .... http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,21590.0.html

 

You must remember, it was asking you for views on the finances. It was referign to facts though. Not opinions dressed up as facts, but real facts  :winking:

 

You refused to answer cos the questions were too hard.

 

a bit stupid - but I'm not surprised - of you to drag up another sad thread accusing me of not answering, where I did.

 

You do realise you are wasting your time trying to recruit me for your crusade ? There are plenty of gullible easy pickings around.

 

 

[macbeth]

NE5 .... http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,21590.0.html

 

You must remember, it was asking you for views on the finances. It was referign to facts though. Not opinions dressed up as facts, but real facts  :winking:

 

You refused to answer cos the questions were too hard.

 

a bit stupid - but I'm not surprised - of you to drag up another sad thread accusing me of not answering, where I did.

 

You do realise you are wasting your time trying to recruit me for your crusade ? There are plenty of gullible easy pickings around.

 

 

 

sh*t, sorry. Where did you answer ? The only answer I could find was the one where you said Adam Crozier said the FLC was a waste of time, and that NUFC has a board who were more ambitious than any other, and that I had a hidden agenda

[Mick]

 

Why did those 3 players want to leave? Why did the Jorman want to leave? The reasons aren't the same, as any long term supporter knows.  Which means you're well and truly knackered on that one.

 

 

I'm sure Hamann said that he wanted to go to Liverpool to win things, or at least words to that effect.

 

Beardsley went to Liverpool because he thought (rightly) that he'd have a better chance of winning something.

 

Waddle left for the money and became known as Judas because of it, Waddle went to Spurs then Marseille, he even admitted that he left Spurs because of the money although he never admitted leaving Newcastle for the cash, most fans thought that was the reason.  That's why he took so much stick from thousands of us when we played down at Tottenham although I probably wasn't at the ground to witness the abuse and you probably were, I'm sure you can now reveal what exactly the abuse was about.

 

Gazza, some people said his head had been turned by the money people were earning at other clubs and he had just been voted PFA young player of the year, again though that was never the reason given but how many players are going to say that they left because of the money and get stick for it when they can just blame the board who were an easy target?

 

I'm quite sure John Gibson once said that Gazza doubled his money when he went to Spurs but that's going off memory of something that happened years ago.  I'm sure I read that he thought he'd been ripped off by the club when he was playing for us and starring in games and being paid a low wage, low for a footballer.

 

Basically, we don't know why two of them left, Waddle and Gazza, so you say what you want and I'll come up with something different.  You can say that it was because of the un-ambitious board which it might have been and I'll go off the perception that a lot of people had at the time, money.

 

[macbeth]

 

Why did those 3 players want to leave? Why did the Jorman want to leave? The reasons aren't the same, as any long term supporter knows.  Which means you're well and truly knackered on that one.

 

 

I'm sure Hamann said that he wanted to go to Liverpool to win things, or at least words to that effect.

 

Beardsley went to Liverpool because he thought (rightly) that he'd have a better chance of winning something.

 

Waddle left for the money and became known as Judas because of it, Waddle went to Spurs then Marseille, he even admitted that he left Spurs because of the money although he never admitted leaving Newcastle for the cash, most fans thought that was the reason.  That's why he took so much stick from thousands of us when we played down at Tottenham although I probably wasn't at the ground to witness the abuse and you probably were, I'm sure you can now reveal what exactly the abuse was about.

 

Gazza, some people said his head had been turned by the money people were earning at other clubs and he had just been voted PFA young player of the year, again though that was never the reason given but how many players are going to say that they left because of the money and get stick for it when they can just blame the board who were an easy target?

 

I'm quite sure John Gibson once said that Gazza doubled his money when he went to Spurs but that's going off memory of something that happened years ago.  I'm sure I read that he thought he'd been ripped off by the club when he was playing for us and starring in games and being paid a low wage, low for a footballer.

 

Basically, we don't know why two of them left, Waddle and Gazza, so you say what you want and I'll come up with something different.  You can say that it was because of the un-ambitious board which it might have been and I'll go off the perception that a lot of people had at the time, money.

 

 

did you go to every game the season Waddle left ? If not you cannot possibly comment.

[NE5]

 

Why did those 3 players want to leave? Why did the Jorman want to leave? The reasons aren't the same, as any long term supporter knows.  Which means you're well and truly knackered on that one.

 

 

 

 

Basically, we don't know why two of them left, Waddle and Gazza, so you say what you want and I'll come up with something different.  You can say that it was because of the un-ambitious board which it might have been and I'll go off the perception that a lot of people had at the time, money.

 

 

which are totally unrelated of course 

 

Why did Gordon Lee not move his family up to Newcastle and why did he not buy the players for Newcastle that he bought for Everton  ?

 

Why did Pop Robson [another local lad] call Newcastle "unprofessional" then move to WEST HAM ?

 

How many local lads on this message board would want to leave Newcastle United these days if you played for them ?

 

You're an absolute scream. You don't really know about these era's do you ?

 

 

[Syrette]

:lazy:

[Mick]

 

which are totally unrelated of course 

 

Why did Gordon Lee not move his family up to Newcastle and why did he not buy the players for Newcastle that he bought for Everton?

 

Why did Pop Robson [another mackem] call Newcastle "unprofessional" then move to WEST HAM?

 

How many local lads on this message board would want to leave Newcastle United these days if you played for them?

 

You're an absolute scream. You don't really know about these era's do you?

 

Corrected above misuse of the term "local lad"

 

 

Why did Gordon Lee not move his family up to Newcastle?  I'm not his spokesman so wasn't given that information, were you?

 

Pop Robson that local mackem, hardly stayed anywhere for very long, after leaving Newcastle he was moving clubs every couple of seasons, he couldn't stay in one place for very long so whatever excuse he uses is invalidated by his actions to a certain degree.  If he'd made his reasons known then stayed at one or two clubs for any length of time then I'd find what he said a bit easier to agree with.

 

Could he not make his mind up if West Ham or the Mackems were the club for him?  What does that say about a mackem who left the team he claimed to support?  How does the mackem who had little or no loyalty to the team he supported help in your campaign to defend Shepherd?

 

"How many local lads on this message board would want to leave Newcastle United these days if you played for them" has no relevance to anything, it's hypothetical for a start.  12 months ago I would have said that I didn't want to work outside of the North East, today I do.

 

I see you've got into asking questions again to try and deflect attention away from your obsession with defending the un-defendable chairman.

 

You don't even know about this era so don't try to pick up on my knowledge of past era's or I'll remind people how you think that Ellis is a shit chairman while he has a better record of finishing above us while we've had Shepherd, sorry I just did.

[Guest The Fox]

No he wasn't given that information but he thinks like HTL that  he knows it all. He cant justify half the stuff he posts.

Mick,

Lets not wind them up anymore mate, its gone on too long.

 

The majority of long term posters on here and some short term have the club at heart, there will always be differing views. Nobody knows any more than anyone else unless they are related to the hierarchy.

Some get abusive and insulting when their views are questioned, some use humour and some do lie. We all know that but personally I never leave the board without having a chuckle at the banter, insults etc.

I have respect for all Newcastle fans for putting up with mediocrity for so long and remaining loyal, although I sometimes wish they had a bit more fore in their belly.

I have supported them through thin and thin since the days of Eastham, White and Allchurch if not before. Have not had the opportunity to seemany home games but have travelled extensively to watch them away, when some of the dides they put out would have struggled in the Conference.

I have fond memories of Len White era, the Stan Anderson/Jim Iley era/ the KK era.

It would just be great to actually win something and then maintain the challenge.

l

[merlin]

No he wasn't given that information but he thinks like HTL that  he knows it all. He cant justify half the stuff he posts.

Mick,

Lets not wind them up anymore mate, its gone on too long.

 

The majority of long term posters on here and some short term have the club at heart, there will always be differing views. Nobody knows any more than anyone else unless they are related to the hierarchy.

Some get abusive and insulting when their views are questioned, some use humour and some do lie. We all know that but personally I never leave the board without having a chuckle at the banter, insults etc.

I have respect for all Newcastle fans for putting up with mediocrity for so long and remaining loyal, although I sometimes wish they had a bit more fore in their belly.

I have supported them through thin and thin since the days of Eastham, White and Allchurch if not before. Have not had the opportunity to seemany home games but have travelled extensively to watch them away, when some of the dides they put out would have struggled in the Conference.

I have fond memories of Len White era, the Stan Anderson/Jim Iley era/ the KK era.

It would just be great to actually win something and then maintain the challenge.

l

 

Good post, Fox - I reckon this is dragging on for too long.

For what its worth, Hamman(the only one worth commenting on , since he departed in the last 10 years)

said, after he left , that ; 'The Board was average, so the Club was average' , but confirmed that he had actually enjoyed living in the NE and travelling round the area.

He didn't get on with Gullit, either.

 

The others departed over 10 years ago - Gazza was the last local lad of any significance to leave, and that was in 1988. Personally, I think we should only be considering events that happened since the Hall/Shepherd takeover in 1992.

 

Every supporter wants the club to WIN THINGS - at least, that should be the object of the exercise, as it is only by doing that that the club will develop as it should.

[Howaythelads]

No he wasn't given that information but he thinks like HTL that  he knows it all. He cant justify half the stuff he posts.

Mick,

Lets not wind them up anymore mate, its gone on too long.

 

The majority of long term posters on here and some short term have the club at heart, there will always be differing views. Nobody knows any more than anyone else unless they are related to the hierarchy.

Some get abusive and insulting when their views are questioned, some use humour and some do lie. We all know that but personally I never leave the board without having a chuckle at the banter, insults etc.

I have respect for all Newcastle fans for putting up with mediocrity for so long and remaining loyal, although I sometimes wish they had a bit more fore in their belly.

I have supported them through thin and thin since the days of Eastham, White and Allchurch if not before. Have not had the opportunity to seemany home games but have travelled extensively to watch them away, when some of the dides they put out would have struggled in the Conference.

I have fond memories of Len White era, the Stan Anderson/Jim Iley era/ the KK era.

It would just be great to actually win something and then maintain the challenge.

l

 

Good post, Fox - I reckon this is dragging on for too long.

For what its worth, Hamman(the only one worth commenting on , since he departed in the last 10 years)

said, after he left , that ; 'The Board was average, so the Club was average' , but confirmed that he had actually enjoyed living in the NE and travelling round the area.

He didn't get on with Gullit, either.

 

The others departed over 10 years ago - Gazza was the last local lad of any significance to leave, and that was in 1988. Personally, I think we should only be considering events that happened since the Hall/Shepherd takeover in 1992.

 

Every supporter wants the club to WIN THINGS - at least, that should be the object of the exercise, as it is only by doing that that the club will develop as it should.

 

Not being funny, but if you are so sure it is right not to consider Boards of pre-1992  do you believe it is impossible that a replacement for the current Board could be like those of pre-1992 going back decades?

 

That's a serious question.

[Howaythelads]

Ok, I'll reply seriously.........don't know why I'm bothering though as I know you won't read it properly.

 

No he wasn't given that information but he thinks like HTL that  he knows it all. He cant justify half the stuff he posts.

Mick,

Lets not wind them up anymore mate, its gone on too long.

 

:roll: An easy refuge and one you now take regularly. I don't claim and never have claimed to know more than anyone else, I have opinions from the outside, like everyone else on here.

 

The majority of long term posters on here and some short term have the club at heart, there will always be differing views. Nobody knows any more than anyone else unless they are related to the hierarchy.

Some get abusive and insulting when their views are questioned, some use humour and some do lie. We all know that but personally I never leave the board without having a chuckle at the banter, insults etc.

I have respect for all Newcastle fans for putting up with mediocrity for so long and remaining loyal, although I sometimes wish they had a bit more fore in their belly.

I have supported them through thin and thin since the days of Eastham, White and Allchurch if not before. Have not had the opportunity to seemany home games but have travelled extensively to watch them away, when some of the dides they put out would have struggled in the Conference.

I have fond memories of Len White era, the Stan Anderson/Jim Iley era/ the KK era.

It would just be great to actually win something and then maintain the challenge.

l

 

Yes, some do. As someone regularly on the receiving end of abuse on here for posting my opinion ( "Jenas being shite", "Ameobi being shite", "Bellamy being good", "we'll miss Robert when he goes", "Souness being shite", "Shearer should have gone after we finished 3rd" etc etc) I know full well what you mean. All of those opinions in brackets went against the general opinion at the time and brought all kinds of abuse my way. Hence my comments in response and the way I generally post now.

 

Even though we often disagreed I did have some respect for you because you used to be able to debate properly. Now you merely lie. It's a bit of a surprise to me, honestly. And not a good thing for a school teacher, it's not a good example.

[merlin]

No he wasn't given that information but he thinks like HTL that  he knows it all. He cant justify half the stuff he posts.

Mick,

Lets not wind them up anymore mate, its gone on too long.

 

The majority of long term posters on here and some short term have the club at heart, there will always be differing views. Nobody knows any more than anyone else unless they are related to the hierarchy.

Some get abusive and insulting when their views are questioned, some use humour and some do lie. We all know that but personally I never leave the board without having a chuckle at the banter, insults etc.

I have respect for all Newcastle fans for putting up with mediocrity for so long and remaining loyal, although I sometimes wish they had a bit more fore in their belly.

I have supported them through thin and thin since the days of Eastham, White and Allchurch if not before. Have not had the opportunity to seemany home games but have travelled extensively to watch them away, when some of the dides they put out would have struggled in the Conference.

I have fond memories of Len White era, the Stan Anderson/Jim Iley era/ the KK era.

It would just be great to actually win something and then maintain the challenge.

l

 

Good post, Fox - I reckon this is dragging on for too long.

For what its worth, Hamman(the only one worth commenting on , since he departed in the last 10 years)

said, after he left , that ; 'The Board was average, so the Club was average' , but confirmed that he had actually enjoyed living in the NE and travelling round the area.

He didn't get on with Gullit, either.

 

The others departed over 10 years ago - Gazza was the last local lad of any significance to leave, and that was in 1988. Personally, I think we should only be considering events that happened since the Hall/Shepherd takeover in 1992.

 

Every supporter wants the club to WIN THINGS - at least, that should be the object of the exercise, as it is only by doing that that the club will develop as it should.

 

Not being funny, but if you are so sure it is right not to consider Boards of pre-1992  do you believe it is impossible that a replacement for the current Board could be like those of pre-1992 going back decades?

 

That's a serious question.

 

It IS a serious question, and one deserving of an honest answer.

Firstly, the reason not to get involved with stuff that happened prior to 1992 is that there are quite a few who read the board that weren't very old when the Pop Robson or Waddle/Beardsley stuff happened(its nearly 20 years since even Beardsley left for Liverpool).

Those of us who are well into middle-age know all about it , and can remember the facts.

 

Secondly - I DON'T know if any person/Group replacing the current Board will be like the pre-1992 outfit ;

how can I, I'm not a Crystal-ball reader - however, the Boards of pre-92 vintage were, in the main, family Dynasties. Even though we are, on the face of it, a PLC, in reality we are now once again a Family dynastic Club ; all very well IF the top man at the time is capable & ambitious FOR THE CLUB , but its a lottery in that respect.

My judgement that a change of ownership/Direction is necessary is based on events of past 3 years(in the main), and if a TRULY ambitious Group takes over, we can do much better than this.

In addition, a business-minded organisation would want to make the club more successful in order to maximise its potential - without Football success, the club is not really doing that.

 

Hope that answers your question.

[Mick]

 

Not being funny, but if you are so sure it is right not to consider Boards of pre-1992  do you believe it is impossible that a replacement for the current Board could be like those of pre-1992 going back decades?

 

That's a serious question.

 

I would think that somebody who was heavily involved with the magpie group and played an active part in getting rid of the old board has a lot of valid points to make on the subject of the board.  I would say his opinion is more valid than both of ours although it doesn't stop either of us having an opinion.

 

I would also think most people realise we could get worse than we've got as chairman, we just don't automatically think it will happen and hope this isn’t the case.

 

A lot of people can also see how we’ve gone backwards under Shepherd although we have no divine right to do better than we are.

 

You can knock the old board as much as you want, it’s easy.  But, I don’t see anything in Shepherd to make me think he’s doing any better than they did or would have done better than them if he was in the same position.

 

The old board didn’t become shit over night, it was a combination of a lot of mistakes by a lot of people and it just snowballed.  McKeag seems to get most of the blame, I hated him more than any other chairman at the time because I was looking at the current situation, at that time, and blamed him for everything.  In reality it was something that happened and part of the reason was the state of football in this country, you can ignore this is you want but I would just say look at attendance figures for football in general, they were crap at most grounds.  That didn’t really pick up until Sky came on the scene and pumped more money into football than ever before.

 

I’m not trying to defend the board of old, they were crap and made mistakes.  The only chairman of old that Shepherd might have been better than is Westwood because Freddy might have splashed more cash after the Fairs Cup win, then again he might not have, we’ll never know.

 

What I do know is that Shepherd couldn’t have spent money at that time if the club didn’t have it, the banks would not have allowed it.  He’s got no record of appointing managers who have been a success so I have no reason to think he would have done any better on that score than the old boards.

 

What has he done that suggests he would have done better back then?

 

It’s also a serious question because I don’t see anything on his CV that gives me any confidence that things would have been better back then, under him.

 

Yes, they were crap, so is he.  I have no personal reason to dislike Shepherd other than what he's done to our club.  Where we were the day he took over and where we have been for far too much of his chairmanship and that's down to him for appointing the wrong people and backing failures, he did that, not us.  We now appear to be strapped for cash, the reason is his two mistakes, appointing shit then backing it with far too much money, it was doomed the day Souness was appointed, Shepherd got one of his top two priorities wrong when he appointed Souness then got the second priority, the clubs finances wrong by backing Souness with mega sums of money.

 

Sorry about the rant, I'm not sure where that came from.

 

[merlin]

 

Not being funny, but if you are so sure it is right not to consider Boards of pre-1992  do you believe it is impossible that a replacement for the current Board could be like those of pre-1992 going back decades?

 

That's a serious question.

 

I would think that somebody who was heavily involved with the magpie group and played an active part in getting rid of the old board has a lot of valid points to make on the subject of the board.  I would say his opinion is more valid than both of ours although it doesn't stop either of us having an opinion.

 

I would also think most people realise we could get worse than we've got as chairman, we just don't automatically think it will happen and hope this isn’t the case.

 

A lot of people can also see how we’ve gone backwards under Shepherd although we have no divine right to do better than we are.

 

You can knock the old board as much as you want, it’s easy.  But, I don’t see anything in Shepherd to make me think he’s doing any better than they did or would have done better than them if he was in the same position.

 

The old board didn’t become shit over night, it was a combination of a lot of mistakes by a lot of people and it just snowballed.  McKeag seems to get most of the blame, I hated him more than any other chairman at the time because I was looking at the current situation, at that time, and blamed him for everything.  In reality it was something that happened and part of the reason was the state of football in this country, you can ignore this is you want but I would just say look at attendance figures for football in general, they were crap at most grounds.  That didn’t really pick up until Sky came on the scene and pumped more money into football than ever before.

 

I’m not trying to defend the board of old, they were crap and made mistakes.  The only chairman of old that Shepherd might have been better than is Westwood because Freddy might have splashed more cash after the Fairs Cup win, then again he might not have, we’ll never know.

 

What I do know is that Shepherd couldn’t have spent money at that time if the club didn’t have it, the banks would not have allowed it.  He’s got no record of appointing managers who have been a success so I have no reason to think he would have done any better on that score than the old boards.

 

What has he done that suggests he would have done better back then?

 

It’s also a serious question because I don’t see anything on his CV that gives me any confidence that things would have been better back then, under him.

 

Yes, they were crap, so is he.  I have no personal reason to dislike Shepherd other than what he's done to our club.  Where we were the day he took over and where we have been for far too much of his chairmanship and that's down to him for appointing the wrong people and backing failures, he did that, not us.  We now appear to be strapped for cash, the reason is his two mistakes, appointing shit then backing it with far too much money, it was doomed the day Souness was appointed, Shepherd got one of his top two priorities wrong when he appointed Souness then got the second priority, the clubs finances wrong by backing Souness with mega sums of money.

 

Sorry about the rant, I'm not sure where that came from.

 

 

Good post Mick - agree with most of your summary.

Fact that I was involved in Magpie Group does NOT give me a divine right to be right !

Football is a game of opinions , and every fan is entitled to their own.

Having experienced the whole thing back in the late 80s'early 90s does give me an insight into certain aspects of the club which some fans may not have(as well as some knowledge of the characters), but most supporters know that the club is in need of refreshing and dynamic Direction.

All the playing problems stem from this, and a new approach, with more honest & above-board running of the Club is desperately required.

 

One thing I DO know, which many will not - on the eve of our first game of 92/93(Promotion season), Sir John had a look round SJP in the late afternoon - he found that many of the seats were covered in dust following painting/decorating . Everyone had gone home , so he and Lady Mae spent several hours arranging and assisting for the cleaning of these prior to the next day.

He told us about this himself on the day of the match(v Southend), and how annoyed they'd been with the ground management for not checking.

 

Can you see this happening today.....!!

[Howaythelads]

 

It IS a serious question, and one deserving of an honest answer.

Firstly, the reason not to get involved with stuff that happened prior to 1992 is that there are quite a few who read the board that weren't very old when the Pop Robson or Waddle/Beardsley stuff happened(its nearly 20 years since even Beardsley left for Liverpool).

Those of us who are well into middle-age know all about it , and can remember the facts.

 

I disagree mate. The fact the majority on here weren't very old or even born in the Robson, Waddle/Beardsley days is even more reason to tell them how it was. I also disagree that the older people can remember the facts. Without wishing to argue with them by mentioning it, it's pretty obvious that Mick and John don't remember those days.

 

Secondly - I DON'T know if any person/Group replacing the current Board will be like the pre-1992 outfit ;

how can I, I'm not a Crystal-ball reader - however, the Boards of pre-92 vintage were, in the main, family Dynasties. Even though we are, on the face of it, a PLC, in reality we are now once again a Family dynastic Club ; all very well IF the top man at the time is capable & ambitious FOR THE CLUB , but its a lottery in that respect.

 

Neither do I. But if you really remember those days are you not in the slightest bit worried that replacing the current Board, although they've made errors, opens up the possibility of an unambitious Board just as much as it does an ambitious one?

 

My judgement that a change of ownership/Direction is necessary is based on events of past 3 years(in the main), and if a TRULY ambitious Group takes over, we can do much better than this.

In addition, a business-minded organisation would want to make the club more successful in order to maximise its potential - without Football success, the club is not really doing that.

 

I can't disagree with the second sentence, it would make sense but it is still not guaranteed. Regarding the first sentence, again you may be right. The current Board may have taken the club as far as it can and yes, we can do much better than this. The thing is though, until Souness nobody was complaining much, it does point to the problem not being the Board per se, but more one extremely bad managerial appointment.

 

[OzzieMandias]

The truth is of course precisely the other way around.

 

Shepherd has managed to make just one managerial appointment that wasn't extremely bad.

[Howaythelads]

 

I would think that somebody who was heavily involved with the magpie group and played an active part in getting rid of the old board has a lot of valid points to make on the subject of the board.  I would say his opinion is more valid than both of ours although it doesn't stop either of us having an opinion.

 

If you're talking about macbeth, I wouldn't agree. He is like the previous Boards, he's not interested in what happens on the field of play, he'd have seen us relegated rather than borrow the money to sign Owen, for example.

He's admitted it too.

 

I would also think most people realise we could get worse than we've got as chairman, we just don't automatically think it will happen and hope this isn’t the case.

 

I don't believe the club would automatically get a worse Chairman, the problem is that most people DON'T realise that we could get a worse one.

 

A lot of people can also see how we’ve gone backwards under Shepherd although we have no divine right to do better than we are.

 

We've gone backward mainly since the appointment of Souness, a major poor decision. We had started to slowly go  backward for the last 18 months of Robson's time. I believe the other mistake by the Board was not moving Robson on after we finished 3rd, but then not many people agree with that even now with hindsight. And of course, bringing in the right replacement is vital.

 

You can knock the old board as much as you want, it’s easy.  But, I don’t see anything in Shepherd to make me think he’s doing any better than they did or would have done better than them if he was in the same position.

 

Sorry, I know your reply is a serious one, but that's an astounding comment and one I doubt is shared by any of the 15,000 to 20,000 regulars during the time of previous Board's. I may be wrong though, perhaps I'm on my own.

 

The old board didn’t become shit over night, it was a combination of a lot of mistakes by a lot of people and it just snowballed.  McKeag seems to get most of the blame, I hated him more than any other chairman at the time because I was looking at the current situation, at that time, and blamed him for everything.  In reality it was something that happened and part of the reason was the state of football in this country, you can ignore this is you want but I would just say look at attendance figures for football in general, they were crap at most grounds.  That didn’t really pick up until Sky came on the scene and pumped more money into football than ever before.

 

It was nothing at all to do with the state of football. The state of football was the same for every club and that has nothing at all to do with whether a Board of Directors show ambition for their club or not. All Board's of Newcastle have been shite at least since I started supporting the club right through to 1992. None of them EVER showed the kind of ambition shown by the current Board. I'm not talking here about ability of individual members of the Board, I'm talking about the desire shown by those people for the club to succeed. It didn't exist until 1992.

 

I’m not trying to defend the board of old, they were crap and made mistakes.  The only chairman of old that Shepherd might have been better than is Westwood because Freddy might have splashed more cash after the Fairs Cup win, then again he might not have, we’ll never know.

 

It is an absolute no-brainer that the likes of Fred would have tried to build on the Fairs Cup win of 1969.  You're right, we'll never know but everything Fred has done since becoming Chairman points toward the idea he would have attempted to build on that success.

 

What I do know is that Shepherd couldn’t have spent money at that time if the club didn’t have it, the banks would not have allowed it.  He’s got no record of appointing managers who have been a success so I have no reason to think he would have done any better on that score than the old boards.

 

Here's where we come back to that old chestnut of you using hindsight. The previous Boards never had the ambition to appoint the kind of successful managers Fred has appointed. Why do you think he appointed people like Dalglish, Gullit and Robson? He appointed these people because they all had successful track records and he hoped they would continue that success at Newcastle. NE5 has posted some of the achievements of Dalglish in particular. It would be like appointing Wenger now, or even better than that. These were all good appointments by the Board. We all know about the bad one, but even that one had specific reasons behind it that many people agreed with at the time and only with hindsight now believe otherwise. Do you really believe constantly employing hindsight is a proper way of judging a Board? I've said it before, the same Arsenal Board that messed up by appointing Rioch got it brilliantly correct with Wenger. The same Liverpool Board that appointed Benitez made the idiotic mistake of appointing 2 managers at the same time!!!

 

Yes, they were crap, so is he.  I have no personal reason to dislike Shepherd other than what he's done to our club.  Where we were the day he took over and where we have been for far too much of his chairmanship and that's down to him for appointing the wrong people and backing failures, he did that, not us.  We now appear to be strapped for cash, the reason is his two mistakes, appointing shit then backing it with far too much money, it was doomed the day Souness was appointed, Shepherd got one of his top two priorities wrong when he appointed Souness then got the second priority, the clubs finances wrong by backing Souness with mega sums of money.

 

As I've said before, enough people supported the appointment and also the idea of judging Souness when he'd built his own team. I know the Board makes the decisions but the fans can and do make a difference. An earlier lack of backing by the supporters for Souness might well have seen an earlier departure of the wanker. The responsibility is of course for the Board, but those people on this forum who fully supported this spending spree by Souness should at least have the integrity to not hide behind that fact now, they should have the balls to admit that although they hate Fred for making this mistake, they backed it to the hilt and would have made the same mistake themselves. They know who they are.

 

[OzzieMandias]

Ambition?

 

This was David Stonehouse in 2001:

 

"I'm not sitting here worried about getting fresh capital. My concern is the transfer system, players' wages and performance. We do not have to get into the Champions League, mid-table stability is more important and we will cut our cloth accordingly."

 

http://www.nufc.com/html/telegraph_stonehouse.html

[Howaythelads]

Ambition?

 

This was David Stonehouse in 2001:

 

"I'm not sitting here worried about getting fresh capital. My concern is the transfer system, players' wages and performance. We do not have to get into the Champions League, mid-table stability is more important and we will cut our cloth accordingly."

 

http://www.nufc.com/html/telegraph_stonehouse.html

 

Thanks for making the point that the club has a good and prudent Board. 

[OzzieMandias]

So you agree that you were wrong about the board's ambition.

 

Well done!

 

We'll see, of course, how stable is the mid-table position that the board have "achieved".