Newcastle in Turmoil, says Sir Les

[OzzieMandias]

 

the other major decision - so it appears to date - is to put into place a policy which won't get back into the Champions League. Thats the point.

 

 

 

So you think Shepherd was going to get us back into the Champions League?

[NE5]

 

Way to completely dodge the question, as usual.

 

sigh. What question ? There are numerous people on here who don't answer questions Dave, in fact some of them are kings of question dodgers 

 

You know my stance, looking for a board with the right approach to things is what counts the most. Thats my reply, and my view, and history backs it up. Clubs with ambitions to live at the top end have to buy quality footballers, have the best footballers, and have to be prepared to pay the going rate or more to get your man, as Johnnypd has said.  What's more basic than that ?

 

 

 

 

[NE5]

 

the other major decision - so it appears to date - is to put into place a policy which won't get back into the Champions League. Thats the point.

 

 

 

So you think Shepherd was going to get us back into the Champions League?

 

why do you never respond with intelligence to a complete post  mackems.gif

[NE5]

Keegan will tell us what he thinks and what he wants but he has certain constraints because he;s the manager, I don't have any doubt that the meeting they had in London was an exchange of views and ideas, but one thing out of it is that Keegan has been told he can't go around saying the club can't get into the top 4 teams. No owner of any company would like that, its correct from Ashleys point of view, and Keegan has to accept it.

 

Keegan didnt say he'd not be able to get us into the top 4. He said we could, but it'd take 4-5 years.

 

I.e. thats how long its going to take to undo the damage the previous board did in overseeing us going from CL qualifiers to a dogshit, relegation threatened club with plenty of s*** players on massive wages and unsustainable huge debts.

 

Which is pretty accurate imo. Hopefully it'll take 2-3 years to undo the damage, but certainly there'll be no quick fix due to our current state and unattractiveness.

 

you mean the same board who got us out of real dogshit and into the Champions League in the first place ?

 

Cherry picking.

 

With good backing and good judgement, Newcastle would be back in those european places next season., at least. Just like Keegan did the first time, from real dogshit and not an established top flight club.

 

 

 

 

[NE5]

really useless argument... the manager has already spoken out several times that we are far behind and need players. his requests/concerns have been backed by senior players like given.

the modric bid is also a pointless "evidence" as there is no proof who initiated that bid in the first place. the only solid fact is that the club hasn't signed any major player since kk took over.

 

the guy who wrote the column mentioned that obvious cost-cutting exercise is being run. i'll throw another term in the mix - "stopping escalation of commitment". it is a business term, look it up. looks like mike wants out... otherwise he wouldnt not be so eager to get a investors onboard and cut all possible expenses. all speculation of course but doesnt look good at all.

 

then again, the lack of quality signings so far could be just incompetence and/or lack of will at the top.

 

 

precisely.

 

 

[Dave]

 

Way to completely dodge the question, as usual.

 

sigh. What question ? There are numerous people on here who don't answer questions Dave, in fact some of them are kings of question dodgers 

 

You know my stance, looking for a board with the right approach to things is what counts the most. Thats my reply, and my view, and history backs it up. Clubs with ambitions to live at the top end have to buy quality footballers, have the best footballers, and have to be prepared to pay the going rate or more to get your man, as Johnnypd has said.  What's more basic than that ?

 

 

 

 

 

Read this post again. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=54544.msg1408466#msg1408466

 

The question is the one with the question mark on the end (it looks like this: '?'), just in case you were struggling.

[PRL]

http://teledyski.emuzyka.pl/teledysk/22063.html

[NE5]

 

Way to completely dodge the question, as usual.

 

sigh. What question ? There are numerous people on here who don't answer questions Dave, in fact some of them are kings of question dodgers 

 

You know my stance, looking for a board with the right approach to things is what counts the most. Thats my reply, and my view, and history backs it up. Clubs with ambitions to live at the top end have to buy quality footballers, have the best footballers, and have to be prepared to pay the going rate or more to get your man, as Johnnypd has said.  What's more basic than that ?

 

 

Read this post again. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=54544.msg1408466#msg1408466

 

The question is the one with the question mark on the end (it looks like this: '?'), just in case you were struggling.

 

How many times do you want me to say how having Keegan back as manager is great ? I've been harping on about it for years.

 

Now , are you going to reply properly to my posts, and are you going to chase up other people that don't reply to simple questions ? And not just the ones [like me] who disagree with you and the majority of posters [which doesn't make them right]. I've tried to put my point across with facts and logic to back up what I'm saying.

 

 

[UV]

Keegan will tell us what he thinks and what he wants but he has certain constraints because he;s the manager, I don't have any doubt that the meeting they had in London was an exchange of views and ideas, but one thing out of it is that Keegan has been told he can't go around saying the club can't get into the top 4 teams. No owner of any company would like that, its correct from Ashleys point of view, and Keegan has to accept it.

 

Keegan didnt say he'd not be able to get us into the top 4. He said we could, but it'd take 4-5 years.

 

I.e. thats how long its going to take to undo the damage the previous board did in overseeing us going from CL qualifiers to a dogshit, relegation threatened club with plenty of s*** players on massive wages and unsustainable huge debts.

 

Which is pretty accurate imo. Hopefully it'll take 2-3 years to undo the damage, but certainly there'll be no quick fix due to our current state and unattractiveness.

 

completely spot on

 

the damage the old board did to the club was massive, the souness appointment cos this club 5-10 years

 

4-5 years  5-10 years

Give over man.

 

Look at Robsons first couple of seasons and tell me you can't see similarities with having to get rid of deadwood high earners whilst wheeling and dealing in the market.

 

Once the likes of Duff, Smith, Shola are off the wage bill (like Fegurson, Macelino, Maric before them) we'll see greater flexibility in what we can afford to offer players in terms of wages

 

High earners like Shola 

 

Dyer, Parker, Luque, Emre, and to a lesser extent Babayaro, Carr and Solano have all gone from the top end of the wage bill since Ashley came in. The only high earners left over from the bad old days of European football are Owen, Duff & probably Martins & Given.

 

Has your boss had any more insights on that £100m that's available if Keegan can spend it btw?

[Dave]

 

Way to completely dodge the question, as usual.

 

sigh. What question ? There are numerous people on here who don't answer questions Dave, in fact some of them are kings of question dodgers 

 

You know my stance, looking for a board with the right approach to things is what counts the most. Thats my reply, and my view, and history backs it up. Clubs with ambitions to live at the top end have to buy quality footballers, have the best footballers, and have to be prepared to pay the going rate or more to get your man, as Johnnypd has said.  What's more basic than that ?

 

 

Read this post again. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=54544.msg1408466#msg1408466

 

The question is the one with the question mark on the end (it looks like this: '?'), just in case you were struggling.

 

How many times do you want me to say how having Keegan back as manager is great ? I've been harping on about it for years.

 

Now , are you going to reply properly to my posts, and are you going to chase up other people that don't reply to simple questions ? And not just the ones [like me] who disagree with you and the majority of posters [which doesn't make them right]. I've tried to put my point across with facts and logic to back up what I'm saying.

 

 

 

Did the current board get that major decision right or not? It's a fairly simple question as I said last time.

[NE5]

Keegan will tell us what he thinks and what he wants but he has certain constraints because he;s the manager, I don't have any doubt that the meeting they had in London was an exchange of views and ideas, but one thing out of it is that Keegan has been told he can't go around saying the club can't get into the top 4 teams. No owner of any company would like that, its correct from Ashleys point of view, and Keegan has to accept it.

 

Keegan didnt say he'd not be able to get us into the top 4. He said we could, but it'd take 4-5 years.

 

I.e. thats how long its going to take to undo the damage the previous board did in overseeing us going from CL qualifiers to a dogshit, relegation threatened club with plenty of s*** players on massive wages and unsustainable huge debts.

 

Which is pretty accurate imo. Hopefully it'll take 2-3 years to undo the damage, but certainly there'll be no quick fix due to our current state and unattractiveness.

 

completely spot on

 

the damage the old board did to the club was massive, the souness appointment cos this club 5-10 years

 

4-5 years  5-10 years

Give over man.

 

Look at Robsons first couple of seasons and tell me you can't see similarities with having to get rid of deadwood high earners whilst wheeling and dealing in the market.

 

Once the likes of Duff, Smith, Shola are off the wage bill (like Fegurson, Macelino, Maric before them) we'll see greater flexibility in what we can afford to offer players in terms of wages

 

High earners like Shola 

 

Dyer, Parker, Luque, Emre, and to a lesser extent Babayaro, Carr and Solano have all gone from the top end of the wage bill since Ashley came in. The only high earners left over from the bad old days of European football are Owen, Duff & probably Martins & Given.

 

Has your boss had any more insights on that £100m that's available if Keegan can spend it btw?

 

straight in one ear and out the other side I would imagine 

[NE5]

 

Way to completely dodge the question, as usual.

 

sigh. What question ? There are numerous people on here who don't answer questions Dave, in fact some of them are kings of question dodgers 

 

You know my stance, looking for a board with the right approach to things is what counts the most. Thats my reply, and my view, and history backs it up. Clubs with ambitions to live at the top end have to buy quality footballers, have the best footballers, and have to be prepared to pay the going rate or more to get your man, as Johnnypd has said.  What's more basic than that ?

 

 

Read this post again. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=54544.msg1408466#msg1408466

 

The question is the one with the question mark on the end (it looks like this: '?'), just in case you were struggling.

 

How many times do you want me to say how having Keegan back as manager is great ? I've been harping on about it for years.

 

Now , are you going to reply properly to my posts, and are you going to chase up other people that don't reply to simple questions ? And not just the ones [like me] who disagree with you and the majority of posters [which doesn't make them right]. I've tried to put my point across with facts and logic to back up what I'm saying.

 

 

 

Did the current board get that decision right or not?

 

oh its a good appointment, but if they don't back him he won't reach what he is capable of. I've said this a few times too Dave.

 

Are you going to respond to all my points and comments now ?

 

 

[Dave]

Thanks. That's all I wanted to know. Wasn't that easy?

 

I'll ignore all your diversionary rubbish, thanks.

[OzzieMandias]

 

the other major decision - so it appears to date - is to put into place a policy which won't get back into the Champions League. Thats the point.

 

 

 

So you think Shepherd was going to get us back into the Champions League?

 

why do you never respond with intelligence to a complete post  mackems.gif

 

Oh the sheer idiot irony!

 

Why are you so scared to answer my question? It was, after all, prompted by your own statement.

[Skeletor]

Why are people still discussing this when they could be discussing Coloccini's hair in his thread.

[NE5]

Thanks. That's all I wanted to know. Wasn't that easy?

 

I'll ignore all your diversionary rubbish, thanks.

 

so you don't have an intelligent view on how the current board are operating, apart from blind optimism ?

 

Good reply, or is it diversionary rubbish.

 

 

[Mick]

Why are people still discussing this when they could be discussing Coloccini's hair in his thread.

 

Or discuss this in the other thread, that would be a first.

[Dave]

Thanks. That's all I wanted to know. Wasn't that easy?

 

I'll ignore all your diversionary rubbish, thanks.

 

so you don't have an intelligent view on how the current board are operating, apart from blind optimism ?

 

Good reply, or is it diversionary rubbish.

 

 

 

I asked you one simple question about the single biggest decision they have made so far, which was to change the manager.

 

I don't want to talk about all the other stuff you flung in to try and avoid the question, that was the only thing I wanted to get your opinion on.

 

Eventually after asking about five times I got you to admit you agree with me that it was a good move and they got it right. So that's the one major decision they've made and they got it right. Yet 'overall' you say 'Ashley is nowhere near looking like he knows how to succeed'. Strange.

[NE5]

Thanks. That's all I wanted to know. Wasn't that easy?

 

I'll ignore all your diversionary rubbish, thanks.

 

so you don't have an intelligent view on how the current board are operating, apart from blind optimism ?

 

Good reply, or is it diversionary rubbish.

 

 

 

I asked you one simple question about the single biggest decision they have made so far, which was to change the manager.

 

I don't want to talk about all the other stuff you flung in to try and avoid the question, that was the only thing I wanted to get your opinion on.

 

Eventually after asking about five times I got you to admit you agree with me that it was a good move and they got it right. So that's the one major decision they've made and they got it right. Yet 'overall' you say 'Ashley is nowhere near looking like he knows how to succeed'. Strange.

 

it isn't the one major decision. The decision not to compete at the level we ought to and back the manager is another major decision, and ultimately, no matter how good the manager is, if you don't back him you're not going to get the best from him.

 

I find if very strange that Ashley has appointed Keegan, based on what he did first time round presumably, and isn't giving him a chance to repeat it ?

 

Whats your opinion on that ?

 

Dave I've been saying for years if Keegan had stayed at the club we would have gone on to win things IMO. You must have been blind to have missed it, on that basis I found your question slightly pointless.

 

 

[Syrette]

Why do UV (HTL reborn?) and NE5 rarely if ever post in threads that don't have anything to do with the new and/or old boards?

[NE5]

Why do UV (HTL reborn?) and NE5 rarely if ever post in threads that don't have anything to do with the new and/or old boards?

 

why do you think only 2 people disagree with you ?

 

 

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Keegan will tell us what he thinks and what he wants but he has certain constraints because he;s the manager, I don't have any doubt that the meeting they had in London was an exchange of views and ideas, but one thing out of it is that Keegan has been told he can't go around saying the club can't get into the top 4 teams. No owner of any company would like that, its correct from Ashleys point of view, and Keegan has to accept it.

 

Keegan didnt say he'd not be able to get us into the top 4. He said we could, but it'd take 4-5 years.

 

I.e. thats how long its going to take to undo the damage the previous board did in overseeing us going from CL qualifiers to a dogshit, relegation threatened club with plenty of s*** players on massive wages and unsustainable huge debts.

 

Which is pretty accurate imo. Hopefully it'll take 2-3 years to undo the damage, but certainly there'll be no quick fix due to our current state and unattractiveness.

 

completely spot on

 

the damage the old board did to the club was massive, the souness appointment cos this club 5-10 years

 

4-5 years  5-10 years

Give over man.

 

Look at Robsons first couple of seasons and tell me you can't see similarities with having to get rid of deadwood high earners whilst wheeling and dealing in the market.

 

Once the likes of Duff, Smith, Shola are off the wage bill (like Fegurson, Macelino, Maric before them) we'll see greater flexibility in what we can afford to offer players in terms of wages

 

High earners like Shola 

 

Dyer, Parker, Luque, Emre, and to a lesser extent Babayaro, Carr and Solano have all gone from the top end of the wage bill since Ashley came in. The only high earners left over from the bad old days of European football are Owen, Duff & probably Martins & Given.

 

Has your boss had any more insights on that £100m that's available if Keegan can spend it btw?

 

Shola will be on £25k, thats £1.3m a year. You think that sort of figure couldn't be put to better use?

 

I never quoted that figure as fact, merely passing on what I had been told. FWIW he's said no different since (prefering to bang on about Man U at the mo) but the Modric bid would suggest that serious money is available for what the board/mgt team deem to be the right player.

 

And I'll answer NE5 in this post too. Find a post where I have blindly slagged off FS etc and praised the new board to the hilt.

 

Shepherd did a good job for a time, but cocked up big style towards the end of his regime. Yes he made money available for transfers and his heart was in the right place, but chasing his dream for the club could have bankrupt us (note not saying we were going bust when MA bought us but we could not continue to live of loans and advance sponsorship payments like we were).

 

And yes Ashley has also made some good moves, and made some mistakes. But I agree with the approach of buying younger hungry players over those on their way down. But I agree also that quality is quality and if a Berbatov was available and willing to come to us we should make an exception to the 'policy'.

 

And finally, yes unless Ashley can deliver European football he will have failed. I'm willing to give this new direction 3 years to see where it is taking us, but he didn't become a billionaire by blinding following duff ideas.

[Dave]

Thanks. That's all I wanted to know. Wasn't that easy?

 

I'll ignore all your diversionary rubbish, thanks.

 

so you don't have an intelligent view on how the current board are operating, apart from blind optimism ?

 

Good reply, or is it diversionary rubbish.

 

 

 

I asked you one simple question about the single biggest decision they have made so far, which was to change the manager.

 

I don't want to talk about all the other stuff you flung in to try and avoid the question, that was the only thing I wanted to get your opinion on.

 

Eventually after asking about five times I got you to admit you agree with me that it was a good move and they got it right. So that's the one major decision they've made and they got it right. Yet 'overall' you say 'Ashley is nowhere near looking like he knows how to succeed'. Strange.

 

it isn't the one major decision. The decision not to compete at the level we ought to and back the manager is another major decision, and ultimately, no matter how good the manager is, if you don't back him you're not going to get the best from him.

 

I find if very strange that Ashley has appointed Keegan, based on what he did first time round presumably, and isn't giving him a chance to repeat it ?

 

Whats your opinion on that ?

 

Dave I've been saying for years if Keegan had stayed at the club we would have gone on to win things IMO. You must have been blind to have missed it, on that basis I found your question slightly pointless.

 

 

 

The question was designed to get an admission from you that on that one (the only one IMO) major decision so far the board has done well and should be commended for it. For some reason however you refuse to do this.

 

I too find it strange that they would appoint Keegan then not back him to the fullest degree. However, I've seen nothing to suggest this is the case, barring the fantasies of some bored journalists that have nothing better to do than to try and unsettle the club. In my opinion you are falling for it hook, line and sinker despite years of telling us those same journalists don't know what they are talking about. Coincidently when attacking the previous board...

 

I feel the journalists are jumping on every single little thing they can and you are going along with it all because you want to be proved right. You have nothing whatsoever to back up your claim that a decision has been made not to compete at whatever level you feel is our 'right', and as such I find it preposterous that you can say it as though it is fact.

 

Of course I'm not 100% convinced right now (it's impossible to be either way), but I will judge them after a longer period of time than you obviously are doing, because I feel that is fair. Just like I judged the previous board on their 10+ years in charge.

[UV]

Why do UV (HTL reborn?) and NE5 rarely if ever post in threads that don't have anything to do with the new and/or old boards?

 

The hairstyles of players we may or may not be interested in were much better under the old board.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Why do UV (HTL reborn?) and NE5 rarely if ever post in threads that don't have anything to do with the new and/or old boards?

 

The hairstyles of players we may or may not be interested in were much better under the old board.

 

Actually that is a FACT.

 

Killer, Venison, (late on) Beresford, Ginola.

 

What we got now?

 

Owens schoolboy cut?