Comolli Sucks

[TRon]

Btw it's funny as fuck that you slate everyone for disliking the old board after ten years in charge, when here you are jumping on the new lot at every opportunity after only one.

 

Spot the hypocrisy.

 

This summer will tell us everything. Let's see what happens.

 

I've told you before, I'm jumping on them because they appear to be lethargic, lacking ambition, and clueless about football. If they show they have real ambition to fulfill the potential of the club, thats all we can ask. It won;t be done by not competing with the top 4 clubs and by operating a "sell to buy" policy.

 

Thats what Keegans comments were about. I'm pleased you think its funny as fuck that the manager is unhappy with his board, do you want him to fail or something ?

 

 

 

 

THAT, is funny as fuck. You're mental.

 

Odd, but I laugh like fuck when you say that to me, particularly as I've actually supported the club when they really were shit, unlike yourself.

 

 

 

You mean when Willie McFaul was manager? I remember that. I didn't realise it entitled me to claim the sun shone out of a local scrap dealer's arse.

[Baggio]

 

oh, appointing a good manager and backing him [ie like the ones who reached a couple of Cup Finals and qualified for europe more than everybody in the country bar 4 clubs] always improves things. Shame that the current manager is unhappy with his backing, which nobody has complained about for nearly 20 years, and he didn't himself during his first stint, but I'm sure you know best and assure us he was only joking 2 weeks ago.

 

But you being a KBJ, or a naive little lad, won't understand.

 

 

err are you sure about that?

 

oh dear. Yes I am aware that Souness complained about only having 50m quid.

 

There's always one  mackems.gif

 

And we sold...

 

Jenas £7 million

Bellamy £4.5 million

Hughes £1 million

O'Brien £2 million

Ambrose £1 million

Bernard £400,000

 

Total £15.9 million

 

Add to that the money for Woodgate that was never spent which takes our income on player sales to £28.9 million.

 

So basically Shepherd gave out roughly just over £21 million spread out over 2 season.

 

Lets say £11 million a season to keep it simple. Well done Fred, I hope this current board match that figure this Summer.

[madras]

You'll never win, madras.

 

[/post aimed at madras]

getting there though....he's ignoring the 3 years prior to january as in achievment. it wasn't that long ago he was almost changing his tune from "backing the manager" to "what they achieved" till he realised our last trophy was under westwood.

 

personally i'm sure NUFC would be better off giving keegan £15mill than giving souness or roeder or allardyce £100mill.

[James]

Average league position over five years prior to Shepherd becoming chairman: 6.8

 

Average league position over five years prior to Shepherd departing as chairman: 8.6

 

During his time, he took us backwards, not forwards.

[fredbob]

 

oh, appointing a good manager and backing him [ie like the ones who reached a couple of Cup Finals and qualified for europe more than everybody in the country bar 4 clubs] always improves things. Shame that the current manager is unhappy with his backing, which nobody has complained about for nearly 20 years, and he didn't himself during his first stint, but I'm sure you know best and assure us he was only joking 2 weeks ago.

 

But you being a KBJ, or a naive little lad, won't understand.

 

 

err are you sure about that?

 

oh dear. Yes I am aware that Souness complained about only having 50m quid.

 

There's always one  mackems.gif

 

And we sold...

 

Jenas £7 million

Bellamy £4.5 million

Hughes £1 million

O'Brien £2 million

Ambrose £1 million

Bernard £400,000

 

Total £15.9 million

 

Add to that the money for Woodgate that was never spent which takes our income on player sales to £28.9 million.

 

So basically Shepherd gave out roughly just over £21 million spread out over 2 season.

 

Lets say £11 million a season to keep it simple. Well done Fred, I hope this current board match that figure this Summer.

 

.....also id like to add a bit about woodgate, NE5, you cant use the sgining of woodgate as a sign of the boards ambitions when a season later they sell him for the profit, its so contradictory its untrue.

[madras]

Interesting about the boot room theory, was it in a caravan?

 

As you've appeared, with a daft remark, perhaps you could reply to this and show all the younger lads you have the knowledge you think you do. Names etc to back up your claims [which are complete tosh, but there you go] which you have avoided to date.

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=52559.msg1314753#msg1314753

 

In answer to your above, Keegan has said this on numerous occasions, as have some of the players he signed the first time.

 

 

perhaps you would like to explain the 3 years leading to jan 2008,managerial appointments,finances and why you think it was going to improve ?

 

(have fun on the rest of the forum lads, i'll keep him occupied here)

 

 

I'm rather pleased for you that you appear to think that the new board have equalled those Champions League qualifications, as you appear to think they are "better".

 

I can't wait for all these 17 year old kids to turn into the new Maldini's. Also hope those other 19 pesky clubs in the premiership don't have the same idea that we've had in trying to find them, now why didn't anybody think of this before  mackems.gif

 

Are you another one of those who slate the people that attracted you back to the club ?

 

mackems.gif mackems.gif

 

 

no...i said the 3 years to jan 2008 and what made you think it would improve ?

 

oh, appointing a good manager and backing him [ie like the ones who reached a couple of Cup Finals and qualified for europe more than everybody in the country bar 4 clubs] always improves things. Shame that the current manager is unhappy with his backing, which nobody has complained about for nearly 20 years, and he didn't himself during his first stint, but I'm sure you know best and assure us he was only joking 2 weeks ago.

 

But you being a KBJ, or a naive little lad, won't understand.

 

 

oh dearie me......does the phrase "not like it said in the brochure" ring a bell or that keegan left becuase he wouldn't get the backing he wanted with the club as a PLC ?

 

 

KBJ ?  don't think so

 

naive little kid........not at 40

 

well, if you really are 40, then you aren't aware of too much. Probably like my older cousin, who also says he's "always supported the club" and never went to a game for 15 years until 1992/93

 

 

do you really want to get into a superfan argument ? i can talk you round gay meadow,bludell park and the abbey stadium if you want ?

 

I'm gannin to bed, but I doubt you've seen more games than me. Not that I care. As I said, you haven't learned too much if you think qualifiying for europe more than everybody but 4 clubs is s*** ........

 

 

 

we didn't look much like qualifying for europe under souness,roeder and allardyce did we...unless you meant cardiff,swansea or wrexham ?

 

 

oh and you do care about having been to more games, thats why you use that line of attack all the time.....and it's really all you have.

[Skeletor]

My dad is bigger than yours!

 

Really?

[Dave]

My dad is bigger than yours!

 

Really?

 

He's older too, so ner.

[madras]

My dad is bigger than yours!

 

Really?

 

He's older too, so ner.

daves dad is NE5

[KaKa]

I knew this thread had great potential 

[Skeletor]

My dad is bigger than yours!

 

Really?

 

He's older too, so ner.

 

Well my dad is Mike Ashley, Chris Mort AND Kevin Keegan so ner.[/trump card]

[Dave]

Are you ITK?

[Skeletor]

Are you ITK?

 

I am the know.

[madras]

Are you ITK?

that sounds very league of gentlemen

[NE5]

You'll never win, madras.

 

[/post aimed at madras]

getting there though....he's ignoring the 3 years prior to january as in achievment. it wasn't that long ago he was almost changing his tune from "backing the manager" to "what they achieved" till he realised our last trophy was under westwood.

 

personally i'm sure NUFC would be better off giving keegan £15mill than giving souness or roeder or allardyce £100mill.

 

3 years against 30 years  ? You're not including finishing 7th and qualifying for europe, something we did only 4 times in those 30 years ?

 

are you sure you supported the club when you say you did ?

 

 

[madras]

You'll never win, madras.

 

[/post aimed at madras]

getting there though....he's ignoring the 3 years prior to january as in achievment. it wasn't that long ago he was almost changing his tune from "backing the manager" to "what they achieved" till he realised our last trophy was under westwood.

 

personally i'm sure NUFC would be better off giving keegan £15mill than giving souness or roeder or allardyce £100mill.

 

3 years against 30 years  ? You're not including finishing 7th and qualifying for europe, something we did only 4 times in those 30 years ?

 

are you sure you supported the club when you say you did ?

 

 

yes. enough to see the way we were going.something you cant be honest to yourself about.

[Guest kingdawson]

Take this all with a pinch of salt, think I posted it at the time but is worth regurgitating as it is probably just as likely as anything the press cook up:

 

I heard that the Mamic brothers made Modric go to Spurs instead of us because we refused to agree to some clauses.

 

The deal we wanted was the removal of third party control, as the Mamic brothers controlled all of Modric's decisions. We wanted the transfer to involve a buyout that would break Modric's contractual obligations to Mamic, passing on agent responsibilities to Peter Harrison.

 

Mamics weren't happy with this, they wanted to move Modric onto a bigger club in a couple of years and pocket more money.

 

The Spurs deal came about with a minimum release clause and a hefty next sale clause.

 

load of steaming bollocks imho. Berbs wanted to add this clause when he was negiotiating a new contract and Levy straight away rejected it, so i fail to see why we'd agree one for Modric.

 

because you want to defend Spurs on a Newcastle board? It's hardly like you are an impartial observer here on issues like this one.

 

 

 

Not about defending spurs. It's logic....

[fredbob]

Take this all with a pinch of salt, think I posted it at the time but is worth regurgitating as it is probably just as likely as anything the press cook up:

 

I heard that the Mamic brothers made Modric go to Spurs instead of us because we refused to agree to some clauses.

 

The deal we wanted was the removal of third party control, as the Mamic brothers controlled all of Modric's decisions. We wanted the transfer to involve a buyout that would break Modric's contractual obligations to Mamic, passing on agent responsibilities to Peter Harrison.

 

Mamics weren't happy with this, they wanted to move Modric onto a bigger club in a couple of years and pocket more money.

 

The Spurs deal came about with a minimum release clause and a hefty next sale clause.

 

load of steaming bollocks imho. Berbs wanted to add this clause when he was negiotiating a new contract and Levy straight away rejected it, so i fail to see why we'd agree one for Modric.

 

because you want to defend Spurs on a Newcastle board? It's hardly like you are an impartial observer here on issues like this one.

 

 

 

Not about defending spurs. It's logic....

 

Where's the logic? It's a completely unsubtantiated claim. Its clear Modric has been told where to go - I'm basing that on the fact that he wasnt here when we were negotiaing with the Mamic brothers then swiftly signed for Spurs. Add to the fact we offered more money to the Mamic brothers and more money to Modric and you still wouldn't be able to see that there were obviously something in the Spurs deal which made them turn a blind eye to immediate extra cash from us....i see the logic in what James said, seems perfectly viable to me.

 

 

[Parky]

Take this all with a pinch of salt, think I posted it at the time but is worth regurgitating as it is probably just as likely as anything the press cook up:

 

I heard that the Mamic brothers made Modric go to Spurs instead of us because we refused to agree to some clauses.

 

The deal we wanted was the removal of third party control, as the Mamic brothers controlled all of Modric's decisions. We wanted the transfer to involve a buyout that would break Modric's contractual obligations to Mamic, passing on agent responsibilities to Peter Harrison.

 

Mamics weren't happy with this, they wanted to move Modric onto a bigger club in a couple of years and pocket more money.

 

The Spurs deal came about with a minimum release clause and a hefty next sale clause.

 

load of steaming bollocks imho. Berbs wanted to add this clause when he was negiotiating a new contract and Levy straight away rejected it, so i fail to see why we'd agree one for Modric.

 

because you want to defend Spurs on a Newcastle board? It's hardly like you are an impartial observer here on issues like this one.

 

 

 

Not about defending spurs. It's logic....

 

Where's the logic? It's a completely unsubtantiated claim. Its clear Modric has been told where to go - I'm basing that on the fact that he wasnt here when we were negotiaing with the Mamic brothers then swiftly signed for Spurs. Add to the fact we offered more money to the Mamic brothers and more money to Modric and you still wouldn't be able to see that there were obviously something in the Spurs deal which made them turn a blind eye to immediate extra cash from us....i see the logic in what James said, seems perfectly viable to me.

 

 

 

 

....and also it's Croatia ffs!!!    There would be less strings signing a player from Sicily.

[fredbob]

Take this all with a pinch of salt, think I posted it at the time but is worth regurgitating as it is probably just as likely as anything the press cook up:

 

I heard that the Mamic brothers made Modric go to Spurs instead of us because we refused to agree to some clauses.

 

The deal we wanted was the removal of third party control, as the Mamic brothers controlled all of Modric's decisions. We wanted the transfer to involve a buyout that would break Modric's contractual obligations to Mamic, passing on agent responsibilities to Peter Harrison.

 

Mamics weren't happy with this, they wanted to move Modric onto a bigger club in a couple of years and pocket more money.

 

The Spurs deal came about with a minimum release clause and a hefty next sale clause.

 

load of steaming bollocks imho. Berbs wanted to add this clause when he was negiotiating a new contract and Levy straight away rejected it, so i fail to see why we'd agree one for Modric.

 

because you want to defend Spurs on a Newcastle board? It's hardly like you are an impartial observer here on issues like this one.

 

 

 

Not about defending spurs. It's logic....

 

Where's the logic? It's a completely unsubtantiated claim. Its clear Modric has been told where to go - I'm basing that on the fact that he wasnt here when we were negotiaing with the Mamic brothers then swiftly signed for Spurs. Add to the fact we offered more money to the Mamic brothers and more money to Modric and you still wouldn't be able to see that there were obviously something in the Spurs deal which made them turn a blind eye to immediate extra cash from us....i see the logic in what James said, seems perfectly viable to me.

 

 

 

 

....and also it's Croatia ffs!!!    There would be less strings signing a player from Sicily.

 

Probably made them an offer they couldnt refuse...

[Taylor Swift]

Take this all with a pinch of salt, think I posted it at the time but is worth regurgitating as it is probably just as likely as anything the press cook up:

 

I heard that the Mamic brothers made Modric go to Spurs instead of us because we refused to agree to some clauses.

 

The deal we wanted was the removal of third party control, as the Mamic brothers controlled all of Modric's decisions. We wanted the transfer to involve a buyout that would break Modric's contractual obligations to Mamic, passing on agent responsibilities to Peter Harrison.

 

Mamics weren't happy with this, they wanted to move Modric onto a bigger club in a couple of years and pocket more money.

 

The Spurs deal came about with a minimum release clause and a hefty next sale clause.

 

load of steaming bollocks imho. Berbs wanted to add this clause when he was negiotiating a new contract and Levy straight away rejected it, so i fail to see why we'd agree one for Modric.

 

because you want to defend Spurs on a Newcastle board? It's hardly like you are an impartial observer here on issues like this one.

 

 

 

Not about defending spurs. It's logic....

 

Where's the logic? It's a completely unsubtantiated claim. Its clear Modric has been told where to go - I'm basing that on the fact that he wasnt here when we were negotiaing with the Mamic brothers then swiftly signed for Spurs. Add to the fact we offered more money to the Mamic brothers and more money to Modric and you still wouldn't be able to see that there were obviously something in the Spurs deal which made them turn a blind eye to immediate extra cash from us....i see the logic in what James said, seems perfectly viable to me.

 

 

 

How is the fact that Modric has a sale-on and minimum fee clause a substantiated claim? By who? Source.

 

Mort said we offered more money and more wages, and that was it. Modric himself has come out to say that he picked Spurs because of the manager and because they're in Europe. Why do you believe Mort and not Modric?

 

You're just cherry-picking which quotes to believe in, but if you believe both Mort and and Modric, it still makes perfect sense that he signed for Spurs. And there doesn't need to be any sale-on or minimum fee clause to make him signing for Spurs any more comprehensible.

[Guest kingdawson]

Take this all with a pinch of salt, think I posted it at the time but is worth regurgitating as it is probably just as likely as anything the press cook up:

 

I heard that the Mamic brothers made Modric go to Spurs instead of us because we refused to agree to some clauses.

 

The deal we wanted was the removal of third party control, as the Mamic brothers controlled all of Modric's decisions. We wanted the transfer to involve a buyout that would break Modric's contractual obligations to Mamic, passing on agent responsibilities to Peter Harrison.

 

Mamics weren't happy with this, they wanted to move Modric onto a bigger club in a couple of years and pocket more money.

 

The Spurs deal came about with a minimum release clause and a hefty next sale clause.

 

load of steaming bollocks imho. Berbs wanted to add this clause when he was negiotiating a new contract and Levy straight away rejected it, so i fail to see why we'd agree one for Modric.

 

because you want to defend Spurs on a Newcastle board? It's hardly like you are an impartial observer here on issues like this one.

 

 

 

Not about defending spurs. It's logic....

 

Where's the logic? It's a completely unsubtantiated claim. Its clear Modric has been told where to go - I'm basing that on the fact that he wasnt here when we were negotiaing with the Mamic brothers then swiftly signed for Spurs. Add to the fact we offered more money to the Mamic brothers and more money to Modric and you still wouldn't be able to see that there were obviously something in the Spurs deal which made them turn a blind eye to immediate extra cash from us....i see the logic in what James said, seems perfectly viable to me.

 

 

 

Ok here's the logic bit....

 

two months or so, before the Modric deal, Berbs' piece of turd agent tries to include a minimum release clause in his contract, to which Levy calls of negotiations (this was widely reported in various papers and sites). The club then sing a totally different tune, and Poyet and co seem like they dont give a toss if Berbs leaves in interviews ect, after pleading with him to stay a while back.

 

So now you're saying, Levy would just totally do a u-turn and give another player a minimum fee release clause, even though he didnt want to give one to our prized asset? rightttttttttttt.

 

Ramos also tried to sign Modric at Sevilla and Modric has said how much he rates him, plus London, plus Uefa cup....

[Liam Liam Liam O]

I reckon its more than likely Modric picked Spurs over us.

 

No point arguing about it.

[Taylor Swift]

It's embarassing that some of our fans have to make up ridiculous claims in their head to justify why Modric chose Spurs over us. It's pretty simple, man. They're just a better prospect than we are at the moment and you're living in the clouds if you think that being in Europe and having a reputable manager like Ramos doesn't make a difference.

 

And this is not defeatist of me to admit this as well. In fact, the sooner we all realise this, the sooner we can try to fix our problems (instead of ignoring it) and improve the club as a prospect instead of merely saying 'oh yeah, that player signed for them only because of that clause and this clause'.

[relámpago blanco]

Take this all with a pinch of salt, think I posted it at the time but is worth regurgitating as it is probably just as likely as anything the press cook up:

 

I heard that the Mamic brothers made Modric go to Spurs instead of us because we refused to agree to some clauses.

 

The deal we wanted was the removal of third party control, as the Mamic brothers controlled all of Modric's decisions. We wanted the transfer to involve a buyout that would break Modric's contractual obligations to Mamic, passing on agent responsibilities to Peter Harrison.

 

Mamics weren't happy with this, they wanted to move Modric onto a bigger club in a couple of years and pocket more money.

 

The Spurs deal came about with a minimum release clause and a hefty next sale clause.

 

load of steaming bollocks imho. Berbs wanted to add this clause when he was negiotiating a new contract and Levy straight away rejected it, so i fail to see why we'd agree one for Modric.

 

because you want to defend Spurs on a Newcastle board? It's hardly like you are an impartial observer here on issues like this one.

 

 

 

Not about defending spurs. It's logic....

 

Where's the logic? It's a completely unsubtantiated claim. Its clear Modric has been told where to go - I'm basing that on the fact that he wasnt here when we were negotiaing with the Mamic brothers then swiftly signed for Spurs. Add to the fact we offered more money to the Mamic brothers and more money to Modric and you still wouldn't be able to see that there were obviously something in the Spurs deal which made them turn a blind eye to immediate extra cash from us....i see the logic in what James said, seems perfectly viable to me.

 

 

 

Ok here's the logic bit....

 

two months or so, before the Modric deal, Berbs' piece of turd agent tries to include a minimum release clause in his contract, to which Levy calls of negotiations (this was widely reported in various papers and sites). The club then sing a totally different tune, and Poyet and co seem like they dont give a toss if Berbs leaves in interviews ect, after pleading with him to stay a while back.

 

So now you're saying, Levy would just totally do a u-turn and give another player a minimum fee release clause, even though he didnt want to give one to our prized asset? rightttttttttttt.

 

Ramos also tried to sign Modric at Sevilla and Modric has said how much he rates him, plus London, plus Uefa cup....

His agents make the decisions on where he goes. 

 

Agents like money, agents don't give 2 flying F***s about a players happiness, Newcastle offered more etc...