Where's the ambition?

[NE5]

Where's the ambition?

 

Getting Lee Bowyer in on a free, that's real ambition.

 

Chelsea paid how much for Sidwell and Ben Haim ?

 

Thats a joke comment mate, thought you were a bit better than that to be honest

 

You're not advocating spending money the club doesnt' have too, then criticising for doing it, are you ?

 

 

[Liam Liam Liam O]

 

tripe.

 

How many players did we sign from top division clubs ie other than "bargain" player from the lower leagues, between 1969 and 1993 ?

 

And how many of our best players wanted to leave as a result, where did they go, and how were they replaced.

 

You want facts do you mick, its all yours.

 

 

Your stupid repetitive question is irrelevant, the point is that we've won nothing since 1969 and it hasn't stopped us from signing players.  We even signed your favourite player and a player who became your favourite manager, the then England captain between 1969 and 1993. 

 

so you aren't going to reply then ?

 

Give us amounts, figures, to gauge the ambition and desire to succeed of the club. Of course they signed some good players, but obviously not enough.

 

Why did we sell 3 England players, why did they go, who replaced them ?

 

By the way, my "favourite" player isn't who you think.

 

Finishing in the top 5 places for a consistent period needs more top players than challenging for promotion from the 2nd division.

 

I knew you would not reply to this, and you never will, because you can't. The vast majority of players we bought during those years were from outside the top league in the hope they would be "bargains" yet you imply differently.

 

Well done for making up the biggest load of tosh I've ever seen on here.

 

 

 

 

 

http://ganjataz.com/general-bollocks/images/by-GT/forum-shitz/pot-kettle-black.jpg

[OzzieMandias]

Having listened to the Bellamy interview with Supermac I thought would post a few general comments about what he said....

 

- He told how Robson was completely undermined towards the end of his Newcastle tenure.  The sale of Viana back to Lisbon and Kluivert to Newcastle were both done by the board, behind Bobbys back and in Kluivert's case, against Robson's will.

 

[Thespence]

that may be true mate, I'll ask him to clarify when I see him in a few weeks time. Main point is it wasn't Shepherds fault despite someone else making something up, again.

 

Ask away if he tells you anything he is not telling you the truth, as all the ITK in Wallsed Boys club circle know this as FACT. It was not Shepherds fault or KK for getting rid of the reserves it was 100% Alan Irvines.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Having listened to the Bellamy interview with Supermac I thought would post a few general comments about what he said....

 

- He told how Robson was completely undermined towards the end of his Newcastle tenure.  The sale of Viana back to Lisbon and Kluivert to Newcastle were both done by the board, behind Bobbys back and in Kluivert's case, against Robson's will.

 

 

Bellamy criticising Shepherd?  This should be interesting........................

[Thespence]

Having listened to the Bellamy interview with Supermac I thought would post a few general comments about what he said....

 

- He told how Robson was completely undermined towards the end of his Newcastle tenure.  The sale of Viana back to Lisbon and Kluivert to Newcastle were both done by the board, behind Bobbys back and in Kluivert's case, against Robson's will.

 

Bellamy criticising Shepherd?  This should be interesting........................

 

Of course he is going to diss Shepherd, as Shepherd correctly backed his manager like any board with any sense of credibility would do.

[Mick]

 

so you aren't going to reply then ?

 

Give us amounts, figures, to gauge the ambition and desire to succeed of the club. Of course they signed some good players, but obviously not enough.

 

Why did we sell 3 England players, why did they go, who replaced them ?

 

By the way, my "favourite" player isn't who you think.

 

Finishing in the top 5 places for a consistent period needs more top players than challenging for promotion from the 2nd division.

 

I knew you would not reply to this, and you never will, because you can't. The vast majority of players we bought during those years were from outside the top league in the hope they would be "bargains" yet you imply differently.

 

Well done for making up the biggest load of tosh I've ever seen on here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You do realise that the point I was making is that we may not have won anything for a long time and it doesn't make a difference when trying to sign players.  The fact that you say we couldn't attract players closer to 1969 but have been able to more recently does my point no harm at all, thanks for that.

[cp40]

Having listened to the Bellamy interview with Supermac I thought would post a few general comments about what he said....

 

- He told how Robson was completely undermined towards the end of his Newcastle tenure.  The sale of Viana back to Lisbon and Kluivert to Newcastle were both done by the board, behind Bobbys back and in Kluivert's case, against Robson's will.

 

Bellamy criticising Shepherd?  This should be interesting........................

 

Of course he is going to diss Shepherd, as Shepherd correctly backed his manager like any board with any sense of credibility would do.

 

 

ive heard quite a few tales, of Shepherd doing things, without managers knowledge, Meddling, i think was the word used.

 

I aint getting into, a pro/ anti Shepherd debate, not tonite. My mind is made up on shepherd. We are well rid.

[NE5]

 

tripe.

 

How many players did we sign from top division clubs ie other than "bargain" player from the lower leagues, between 1969 and 1993 ?

 

And how many of our best players wanted to leave as a result, where did they go, and how were they replaced.

 

You want facts do you mick, its all yours.

 

 

Your stupid repetitive question is irrelevant, the point is that we've won nothing since 1969 and it hasn't stopped us from signing players.  We even signed your favourite player and a player who became your favourite manager, the then England captain between 1969 and 1993. 

 

so you aren't going to reply then ?

 

Give us amounts, figures, to gauge the ambition and desire to succeed of the club. Of course they signed some good players, but obviously not enough.

 

Why did we sell 3 England players, why did they go, who replaced them ?

 

By the way, my "favourite" player isn't who you think.

 

Finishing in the top 5 places for a consistent period needs more top players than challenging for promotion from the 2nd division.

 

I knew you would not reply to this, and you never will, because you can't. The vast majority of players we bought during those years were from outside the top league in the hope they would be "bargains" yet you imply differently.

 

Well done for making up the biggest load of tosh I've ever seen on here.

 

 

 

 

 

http://ganjataz.com/general-bollocks/images/by-GT/forum-shitz/pot-kettle-black.jpg

 

what exactly am I making up ?

 

Our top 5 league positions [best in 50 years] ?

 

The amount of major international footballers bought by the club, as against previously which could be counted on one hand  ?

 

The capacity crowds [over double from when they came] ?

 

The european qualifications ?

 

Please amplify.

 

 

[NE5]

 

so you aren't going to reply then ?

 

Give us amounts, figures, to gauge the ambition and desire to succeed of the club. Of course they signed some good players, but obviously not enough.

 

Why did we sell 3 England players, why did they go, who replaced them ?

 

By the way, my "favourite" player isn't who you think.

 

Finishing in the top 5 places for a consistent period needs more top players than challenging for promotion from the 2nd division.

 

I knew you would not reply to this, and you never will, because you can't. The vast majority of players we bought during those years were from outside the top league in the hope they would be "bargains" yet you imply differently.

 

Well done for making up the biggest load of tosh I've ever seen on here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You do realise that the point I was making is that we may not have won anything for a long time and it doesn't make a difference when trying to sign players.  The fact that you say we couldn't attract players closer to 1969 but have been able to more recently does my point no harm at all, thanks for that.

 

haha, what a joke. Please explain why the trophy winning clubs signed the best players, including our best players ?

 

I'm pleased you confirm you think that our fortunes in the last decade are no better than in the 1970's and 1980s  mackems.gif

 

 

[Thespence]

 

tripe.

 

How many players did we sign from top division clubs ie other than "bargain" player from the lower leagues, between 1969 and 1993 ?

 

And how many of our best players wanted to leave as a result, where did they go, and how were they replaced.

 

You want facts do you mick, its all yours.

 

 

Your stupid repetitive question is irrelevant, the point is that we've won nothing since 1969 and it hasn't stopped us from signing players.  We even signed your favourite player and a player who became your favourite manager, the then England captain between 1969 and 1993. 

 

so you aren't going to reply then ?

 

Give us amounts, figures, to gauge the ambition and desire to succeed of the club. Of course they signed some good players, but obviously not enough.

 

Why did we sell 3 England players, why did they go, who replaced them ?

 

By the way, my "favourite" player isn't who you think.

 

Finishing in the top 5 places for a consistent period needs more top players than challenging for promotion from the 2nd division.

 

I knew you would not reply to this, and you never will, because you can't. The vast majority of players we bought during those years were from outside the top league in the hope they would be "bargains" yet you imply differently.

 

Well done for making up the biggest load of tosh I've ever seen on here.

 

 

 

 

 

http://ganjataz.com/general-bollocks/images/by-GT/forum-shitz/pot-kettle-black.jpg

 

what exactly am I making up ?

 

Our top 5 league positions [best in 50 years] ?

 

The amount of major international footballers bought by the club, as against previously which could be counted on one hand  ?

 

The capacity crowds [over double from when they came] ?

 

The european qualifications ?

 

Please amplify.

 

I feel sometimes some (increasing all the time though ) people are on auto-piolt to your posts, i.e they are against it before they have read it.

[fredbob]

 

 

I feel like we are arguing 2 different things- your point was that Keegans quotes will make no difference, then you point to how Souness was able sign players, ignoring the fact that nufc 2004  are completely incomaprable to nufc 2008. All im saying is that at that time we had a lot more going for us thn we do now.

 

You look at that chaising pack

 

Everton, Villa, Spurs, Man City, Portsmouth and finally us, well we are at the very bottom of that pack with regards to a number factors that might attract a player, the only thing we could of offered is finance (which many other clubs have) and the appeal of unlimited ambition. Thats it, players arent primarily interested in stadiums, or number of fans, they are interested in money, oppurtunity of silverware, current standings of the clubs high profile managers these are things which we lack and for Keegan to come out and dampen our ambition is a little misguided if you ask me.

 

As for Keegan being abig name because he managed England - well are you sure you want to go down that route??

 

NUFC in 2004 were 14th in the league so the opportunity of silverware wasn't as good as it is now although the difference in negligible but it still exists.  I'm struggling how you can use money as an issue since we've been turned down by 2 players who were offered more to come here but chose not to for whatever reason.  As for Keegan and England, he was given that job on merit and people will know him because of it.  Keegan being out of the game for 3 years will not change the fact that he’s a big name manager.

 

See, you're so close to realising why we arent on the same playing field now as we were in 2004 its unreal. Thats what im arguing, thats why im saying its imperative we dont undersell our ambitin like Keegan has.

 

Im not saying money is an issue for us, im saying its no longer one of our ace cards like it was becasue everyone else who competing with us has that card now. We got trumped to 2 signings becasue they can offer more than us footballing wise, well every single club above us has something more to offer  than us, whether it be silverware, or Europe, or a world reknowned manager, we have none of those things. The only thing we have to sell the club is the ambition, but Keegan with these comments has put a massive dampener on this, making it even more difficult to sign players.

 

As for England- not one of your strongest cards, i mean Hoddle, Taylor, Mclaren, Veneables are big name managers by that yardstick, some of those even suceeded at international level and arent considered big names, Keegan didnt.

[Guest fraser]

Where's the ambition?

 

Getting Lee Bowyer in on a free, that's real ambition.

 

Chelsea paid how much for Sidwell and Ben Haim ?

 

Thats a joke comment mate, thought you were a bit better than that to be honest

 

You're not advocating spending money the club doesnt' have too, then criticising for doing it, are you ?

 

 

 

I'm not discussing Chelsea, I didn't know you were; my remark still stands. I'm sure Bowyer, free, was a bargain. To be fair we'd laid out on Ambrose earlier in the year.

[Mick]

 

haha, what a joke. Please explain why the trophy winning clubs signed the best players, including our best players ?

 

I'm pleased you confirm you think that our fortunes in the last decade are no better than in the 1970's and 1980s  mackems.gif

 

 

 

Thanks again.

[Baggio]

Having listened to the Bellamy interview with Supermac I thought would post a few general comments about what he said....

 

- He told how Robson was completely undermined towards the end of his Newcastle tenure.  The sale of Viana back to Lisbon and Kluivert to Newcastle were both done by the board, behind Bobbys back and in Kluivert's case, against Robson's will.

 

 

Oh dear. mackems.gif

 

But it's nothing we didn't already know.

[Mick]

 

See, you're so close to realising why we arent on the same playing field now as we were in 2004 its unreal. Thats what im arguing, thats why im saying its imperative we dont undersell our ambitin like Keegan has.

 

Im not saying money is an issue for us, im saying its no longer one of our ace cards like it was becasue everyone else who competing with us has that card now. We got trumped to 2 signings becasue they can offer more than us footballing wise, well every single club above us has something more to offer  than us, whether it be silverware, or Europe, or a world reknowned manager, we have none of those things. The only thing we have to sell the club is the ambition, but Keegan with these comments has put a massive dampener on this, making it even more difficult to sign players.

 

As for England- not one of your strongest cards, i mean Hoddle, Taylor, Mclaren, Veneables are big name managers by that yardstick, some of those even suceeded at international level and arent considered big names, Keegan didnt.

 

Apart from the top 4, none of the others have a realistic chance of winning anything, yes the two cups will have been won by a team outside of the top 4 but that's just like Everton finishing 4th once, it's a rare occurrence and is no more likely to happen next year than any other year in the last 10 or 15 years.  We're not in Europe next season while some of the teams above us are, I'd be very surprised if some of the teams above us have more to offer than we do because I doubt some of the teams above us will be in that position for too long. 

 

I doubt Martin O'Neill is that well known outside of Britain, the same goes for Redknapp, Hughes (to a lesser extent) and Curbishley.

 

The comments by Keegan will be forgotten about within a couple of weeks and I doubt many foreign players have even picked up what was said. 

 

Which of those former England managers were the ones that succeeded?

 

Anyway, this argument is stupid, we’re obviously shit and are doomed for next season.

[Shearergol]

I'll answer the question NE5 asked me earlier now I'm back.

 

Personally, I can't think of a good reason why Keegan would be so negative about the ambition of the club, unless it has something to do with the board not being as ambitious as he is. It's either that or we've been rejected by so many players now that he's worrying we can't bring anyone of any quality in. It worries me that Keegan has changed from a positive Keegan to a negative one in the space of a few weeks. Something has happened behind the scenes in my opinion.

 

 

Disclaimer: For those who struggle to understand English, the above post does not mean I don't like Keegan.

 

Thanks.

[fredbob]

 

See, you're so close to realising why we arent on the same playing field now as we were in 2004 its unreal. Thats what im arguing, thats why im saying its imperative we dont undersell our ambitin like Keegan has.

 

Im not saying money is an issue for us, im saying its no longer one of our ace cards like it was becasue everyone else who competing with us has that card now. We got trumped to 2 signings becasue they can offer more than us footballing wise, well every single club above us has something more to offer than us, whether it be silverware, or Europe, or a world reknowned manager, we have none of those things. The only thing we have to sell the club is the ambition, but Keegan with these comments has put a massive dampener on this, making it even more difficult to sign players.

 

As for England- not one of your strongest cards, i mean Hoddle, Taylor, Mclaren, Veneables are big name managers by that yardstick, some of those even suceeded at international level and arent considered big names, Keegan didnt.

 

Apart from the top 4, none of the others have a realistic chance of winning anything, yes the two cups will have been won by a team outside of the top 4 but that's just like Everton finishing 4th once, it's a rare occurrence and is no more likely to happen next year than any other year in the last 10 or 15 years. We're not in Europe next season while some of the teams above us are, I'd be very surprised if some of the teams above us have more to offer than we do because I doubt some of the teams above us will

be in that position for too long.

 

I doubt Martin O'Neill is that well known outside of Britain, the same goes for Redknapp, Hughes (to a lesser extent) and Curbishley.

 

The comments by Keegan will be forgotten about within a couple of weeks and I doubt many foreign players have even picked up what was said.

 

Which of those former England managers were the ones that succeeded?

 

Anyway, this argument is stupid, were obviously s*** and are doomed for next season.

 

See i dont know what you are arguing now, it seems to be more of a retort to anything i say rather than an argument for what you're saying. Basically im saying Keegans comments may damage us becasue he is underselling one of our 2 fronts of appeal. Our 2 fronts of appeal are finance and ambition.

 

So he's shot himself in the foot somewhat by undermining the overall ambition of the club before we've even got started.

 

What im saying, is its especially damaging becasue unlike a few years ago, (2004 was the year you mentioned) we dont have as many fronts of appeal for potential signings as we did then so its incomparable.

 

You look at other clubs around us and they have the exact same fronts of appeal; finance and ambition(which they arent underselling) and they also have others such as Europe, cup wins etc.

 

Ill say that Hoddle and Veneables achieved more at international level than Keegan - but they definitely arent big names.

 

If you want to win a fight, you dont tie one of your hands behind your back, especially when your oppositions has more fists than a Hindu god.

[Lazy]

Depends on how good you are with your free fist I suppose.

[Cronky]

 

It worries me that Keegan has changed from a positive Keegan to a negative one in the space of a few weeks. Something has happened behind the scenes in my opinion.

 

 

For sure, there's a missing part to this story. Getting beaten by Chelsea wouldn't usually be that upsetting. It may be the loss of Modric that's got to him, because the rumour did float around at the time that Keegan was livid about it.

 

It's interesting that Mort took the unusual step of publicly declaring in the programme that they'd outbid Tottenham. If Keegan feels that the Board hadn't offered enough money, then he'd have been annoyed at what looked like an attempt by Mort to gain public sympathy / understanding.

 

There was something particularly half-arsed about Keegan's comments. It was like he was trying to have a dig at someone, without really coming out with it.

[TRon]

Where's the ambition? The Woodgate and Modric bids have shown it, as have the sacking of Allardyce and the appointing of Keegan himself.

 

It's not unusual for managers to use the press to leverage pressure on Chairmen to spend the cash, but Keegan hasn't done the club any favours here. All he's done is given the likes of Martin Samuels the chance to stick the boot in at the slightest hint of opportunity and create an uncertain atmosphere about the club. Whatever is going on behind the scenes, I think we should be showing a united front, which sad to say, KK is not projecting right now.

 

 

[Scoreboard82]

He may have said we won't get into the top 4, but that doesn't mean he isn't going to try to get into the top 4.

I think some of what he said, was said in an attempt to keep Ashley on his toes, and make him face up to what a challenge lies ahead. Probably testing Ashley to see how ambitious he really is.

[Dave]

Where's the ambition? The Woodgate and Modric bids have shown it, as have the sacking of Allardyce and the appointing of Keegan himself.

 

It's not unusual for managers to use the press to leverage pressure on Chairmen to spend the cash, but Keegan hasn't done the club any favours here. All he's done is given the likes of Martin Samuels the chance to stick the boot in at the slightest hint of opportunity and create an uncertain atmosphere about the club. Whatever is going on behind the scenes, I think we should be showing a united front, which sad to say, KK is not projecting right now.

 

 

 

Sums up my feelings pretty well.

 

It's not having a go at anyone, it's just concerns.

[NE5]

Where's the ambition?

 

Getting Lee Bowyer in on a free, that's real ambition.

 

Chelsea paid how much for Sidwell and Ben Haim ?

 

Thats a joke comment mate, thought you were a bit better than that to be honest

 

You're not advocating spending money the club doesnt' have too, then criticising for doing it, are you ?

 

 

 

I'm not discussing Chelsea, I didn't know you were; my remark still stands. I'm sure Bowyer, free, was a bargain. To be fair we'd laid out on Ambrose earlier in the year.

 

you are saying that one free transfer mirrors a clubs ambition, and I'm telling you that that is absolutely absurd, and I've gave you  two examples to the contrary, unless you pretty stupidly think that Chelsea lack ambition

 

 

[NE5]

I'll answer the question NE5 asked me earlier now I'm back.

 

Personally, I can't think of a good reason why Keegan would be so negative about the ambition of the club, unless it has something to do with the board not being as ambitious as he is. It's either that or we've been rejected by so many players now that he's worrying we can't bring anyone of any quality in. It worries me that Keegan has changed from a positive Keegan to a negative one in the space of a few weeks. Something has happened behind the scenes in my opinion.

 

 

Disclaimer: For those who struggle to understand English, the above post does not mean I don't like Keegan.

 

Thanks.

 

well put and fairly obvious