thenige Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 So when did Keegan actually come out and say he was unhappy with the current set-up? I must have missed that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 So when did Keegan actually come out and say he was unhappy with the current set-up? I must have missed that. He didn't, and no-one's said he did. Two months before taking the job, in the interview from inside sport (youtube it) he said Allardyce would be a fool to accept a DOF, anyone would be a fool to take on such a role and Ashley would be a fool to install one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I could believe it if someone told me Keegan had some reservations about the job. But this idea of Keegan not wanting to even be in Football at all and being totally against the ideas the club were putting forward, but accepting the job anyway because he was bankrupt is insane IMO. "Bankrupt"? Nowt like that, just covering his losses with a side bet ffs. He wants to be here, but more to cover his losses than from any desire to be back in the game, because he clearly wasn't interested 60 days before he did come back. mate that doesnt matter at all, if you'd asked him 60 days before he took over the first time he would've said 'no thanks, i'm happy playing golf in the sun' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I could believe it if someone told me Keegan had some reservations about the job. But this idea of Keegan not wanting to even be in Football at all and being totally against the ideas the club were putting forward, but accepting the job anyway because he was bankrupt is insane IMO. "Bankrupt"? Nowt like that, just covering his losses with a side bet ffs. He wants to be here, but more to cover his losses than from any desire to be back in the game, because he clearly wasn't interested 60 days before he did come back. mate that doesnt matter at all, if you'd asked him 60 days before he took over the first time he would've said 'no thanks, i'm happy playing golf in the sun' So what changed in that 60 days? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I could believe it if someone told me Keegan had some reservations about the job. But this idea of Keegan not wanting to even be in Football at all and being totally against the ideas the club were putting forward, but accepting the job anyway because he was bankrupt is insane IMO. "Bankrupt"? Nowt like that, just covering his losses with a side bet ffs. He wants to be here, but more to cover his losses than from any desire to be back in the game, because he clearly wasn't interested 60 days before he did come back. mate that doesnt matter at all, if you'd asked him 60 days before he took over the first time he would've said 'no thanks, i'm happy playing golf in the sun' So what changed in that 60 days? Read his autobiography, he wasn't even living in Spain when we approached him first time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I could believe it if someone told me Keegan had some reservations about the job. But this idea of Keegan not wanting to even be in Football at all and being totally against the ideas the club were putting forward, but accepting the job anyway because he was bankrupt is insane IMO. "Bankrupt"? Nowt like that, just covering his losses with a side bet ffs. He wants to be here, but more to cover his losses than from any desire to be back in the game, because he clearly wasn't interested 60 days before he did come back. mate that doesnt matter at all, if you'd asked him 60 days before he took over the first time he would've said 'no thanks, i'm happy playing golf in the sun' So what changed in that 60 days? Read his autobiography, he wasn't even living in Spain when we approached him first time. Is that meant for me or Venkman? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I could believe it if someone told me Keegan had some reservations about the job. But this idea of Keegan not wanting to even be in Football at all and being totally against the ideas the club were putting forward, but accepting the job anyway because he was bankrupt is insane IMO. "Bankrupt"? Nowt like that, just covering his losses with a side bet ffs. He wants to be here, but more to cover his losses than from any desire to be back in the game, because he clearly wasn't interested 60 days before he did come back. mate that doesnt matter at all, if you'd asked him 60 days before he took over the first time he would've said 'no thanks, i'm happy playing golf in the sun' So what changed in that 60 days? Read his autobiography, he wasn't even living in Spain when we approached him first time. i've read it mate, i wasnt trying to be too specific it was just a throwaway comment, the geography isnt it important, its the sentiment and to happy face, i think what changed in 60 days, both times, is we offered him the job Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I could believe it if someone told me Keegan had some reservations about the job. But this idea of Keegan not wanting to even be in Football at all and being totally against the ideas the club were putting forward, but accepting the job anyway because he was bankrupt is insane IMO. "Bankrupt"? Nowt like that, just covering his losses with a side bet ffs. He wants to be here, but more to cover his losses than from any desire to be back in the game, because he clearly wasn't interested 60 days before he did come back. mate that doesnt matter at all, if you'd asked him 60 days before he took over the first time he would've said 'no thanks, i'm happy playing golf in the sun' So what changed in that 60 days? Read his autobiography, he wasn't even living in Spain when we approached him first time. i've read it mate, i wasnt trying to be too specific it was just a throwaway comment, the geography isnt it important, its the sentiment and to happy face, i think what changed in 60 days, both times, is we offered him the job I think Sir John offered him the job and sold him on his passion for making Newcastle a force at a time when second division clubs could go up, build and challenge. Do you think Ashley did the same, with talk of a DOF and delusions of breaking the top 4 within 3 seasons that are in direct opposition to Keegans pre-stated stance on those subjects? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Is this some kind of performance art piece between you two? "The Folly of Argument"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Is this some kind of performance art piece between you two? "The Folly of Argument"? There's been no hostility. Why's discussing something that's happened more of a folly than the dozens of subjects people are getting irate about all over the board on players and stuff that hasn't and will never happen? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShearMagic Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Brilliant interview. I, like many others, love Kevin Keegan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I could believe it if someone told me Keegan had some reservations about the job. But this idea of Keegan not wanting to even be in Football at all and being totally against the ideas the club were putting forward, but accepting the job anyway because he was bankrupt is insane IMO. "Bankrupt"? Nowt like that, just covering his losses with a side bet ffs. He wants to be here, but more to cover his losses than from any desire to be back in the game, because he clearly wasn't interested 60 days before he did come back. mate that doesnt matter at all, if you'd asked him 60 days before he took over the first time he would've said 'no thanks, i'm happy playing golf in the sun' So what changed in that 60 days? Read his autobiography, he wasn't even living in Spain when we approached him first time. i've read it mate, i wasnt trying to be too specific it was just a throwaway comment, the geography isnt it important, its the sentiment and to happy face, i think what changed in 60 days, both times, is we offered him the job Sorry that came across a bit abrupt, posting covertly in work! Was just trying to add to the conversation, not make an abrupt post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Is this some kind of performance art piece between you two? "The Folly of Argument"? There's been no hostility. Why's discussing something that's happened more of a folly than the dozens of subjects people are getting irate about all over the board on players and stuff that hasn't and will never happen? The quotations indicated the title of your piece, which I assumed, and still assume, is being acted out in mockery of the things you mentioned to highlight the foolish and utterly futile nature of the method by which some people on this board attempt to "argue" and "discuss". If it isn't, then cheers on an accidental masterpiece. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Is this some kind of performance art piece between you two? "The Folly of Argument"? There's been no hostility. Why's discussing something that's happened more of a folly than the dozens of subjects people are getting irate about all over the board on players and stuff that hasn't and will never happen? The quotations indicated the title of your piece, which I assumed, and still assume, is being acted out in mockery of the things you mentioned to highlight the foolish and utterly futile nature of the method by which some people on this board attempt to "argue" and "discuss". If it isn't, then cheers on an accidental masterpiece. Ooh, feeling intelligent today are we? Just because you've listened to a godspeed you black emperor record, doesn't mean you're rod stewart you know, if you dont like the thread, i suggest you use the forecourt to turn around. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 Is this some kind of performance art piece between you two? "The Folly of Argument"? There's been no hostility. Why's discussing something that's happened more of a folly than the dozens of subjects people are getting irate about all over the board on players and stuff that hasn't and will never happen? The quotations indicated the title of your piece, which I assumed, and still assume, is being acted out in mockery of the things you mentioned to highlight the foolish and utterly futile nature of the method by which some people on this board attempt to "argue" and "discuss". If it isn't, then cheers on an accidental masterpiece. Why do you think a calm freindly discussion must be a mockery of the teeth gnashing going on elsewhere? That would make every conversation ever held a satire. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 I could believe it if someone told me Keegan had some reservations about the job. But this idea of Keegan not wanting to even be in Football at all and being totally against the ideas the club were putting forward, but accepting the job anyway because he was bankrupt is insane IMO. "Bankrupt"? Nowt like that, just covering his losses with a side bet ffs. He wants to be here, but more to cover his losses than from any desire to be back in the game, because he clearly wasn't interested 60 days before he did come back. mate that doesnt matter at all, if you'd asked him 60 days before he took over the first time he would've said 'no thanks, i'm happy playing golf in the sun' So what changed in that 60 days? Read his autobiography, he wasn't even living in Spain when we approached him first time. i've read it mate, i wasnt trying to be too specific it was just a throwaway comment, the geography isnt it important, its the sentiment and to happy face, i think what changed in 60 days, both times, is we offered him the job Sorry that came across a bit abrupt, posting covertly in work! Was just trying to add to the conversation, not make an abrupt post no worries fella 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