KK resigns - see OP for new club statement issued September 6th

[Baggio]

Anyone know the win percentage with Keegan as manager this time?

 

Also the likes of Allardyce, Roeder, Souness etc.

 

Misleading IMO. KK took over a struggling side and had a lot of bad early results, but he'd definitely turned things round by the end. He did a good job on the pitch, there shouldn't be any argument about that.

 

All of our managers have taken over a struggling side, that's why the one before them was sacked.

[Guest optimistic nit]

i think keegan and ashley had different visions of how they wanted to get back to the top, which ashley realised after a short while. usually this would result in the sacking of the manager, but because keegan is unsackable ashley tried to keep keegan while building the club the way he wanted, and we've ended up with this mess.

[Tsunami]

Simplistic and not very well done; but that's how I feel anyway.

 

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm253/nufcstu/welling-1.jpg

[thomas]

Jesus H Christ

[Guest Micktoon]

Simplistic and not very well done; but that's how I feel anyway.

 

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm253/nufcstu/welling-1.jpg

 

[Disco]

Just got back off me holidays and find all of this mental tbh. What the fuck is going on? Can we not have 1 season where things run smoothly. Mental goings on.

[indi]

Who was it that was saying that Wise et al had presented him with player after player and he'd rejected them all out of hand? Sure someone said something along those lines.

 

**Conspiracy theory alert**

 

If for a moment you contemplate that being true and you combine it with the infamous list - I know, but my natural tendency to simply dismiss anything in the papers has been dealt a blow over the last few days - then you're left with a situation where the club was given the choice of:

 

Give Keegan what he wants and go after the big names, who would cost big, big money with little chance of ever getting any of it back, thereby going against the stated aim of the club's transfer policy. Not to mention that some of them are probably fading stars anyway and many of them would never consider coming here in the first place. If this was the chosen path, then there would be a serious risk of ending up with no-one coming in at all and if some did they would be unlikely to represent value for money. However you'd probably know what you were buying as the players would have proven track records.

 

Go against Keegan's wishes and bring in who "the club" thinks will benefit the team, namely young up-and-coming players from abroad for less money and on lower wages. If this was the chosen path, then there are risks too, firstly and most importantly that you run the risk of seriously pissing Keegan off, but also that you are taking a bit of a gamble that the players you buy will settle and be successful in the Premiership, as we know that's not always guaranteed. However if they did turn out to be a success then we have a bargain on our hands a la Jonas and we can't lose even if he decides he's outgrown us and moves on because we make a packet on the deal.

 

 

It seems to me that we started the window using option 2, hence Jonas, Bassong, Collo, Guthrie and all the youngsters, but then something happened and everything seemed to grind to a halt, before we grabbed a couple of late deals on deadline day. What was the hold up? Why did things seem to stall in the middle?

 

Perhaps, and this is entirely speculation, that was the point where Keegan really laid it on the line that he wasn't happy that no-one from his list was being brought in and started to reject anyone put before him that wasn't on it. This might explain the numerous players that we were linked with where nothing seemed to happen in the end and the seeming lack of action until deadline day.

 

It seems to me that if this was true then at least some effort was made to get the players Keegan wanted, hence his comments and positive reaction to the Milner sale, etc, but for whatever reason that didn't pay off, probably for one of the reasons listed above. Maybe that's wrong and they just spent a few weeks arguing amongst themselves rather than getting on with bringing players in, but I think that the gap in the middle shows that at least some consideration was given to Keegan's list. If they really didn't care about what he thought then they'd have just carried on bringing in the players they wanted and I reckon we'd have ended up with a good few additional signings to what we had. I don't for a second believe that it was anyone's intention to not sign a number of players this summer, almost certainly everyone wanted to end up with a bigger and what they thought was a better squad than what we've got.

 

So as the deadline started to loom and the impasse remained, due to the recruitment guys either being unable (due to them simply not being for sale or not wanting to come here), or unwilling to spend the kind of money required, to bring in the players on Keegan's list, I think that they may have just thought, "fuck him we need to get someone in, otherwise we're screwed" and signed Xisco and Nacho whether Keegan liked it or not.

 

I think Keegan might well have been playing brinkmanship with the club over signings, refusing to sanction anyone other than the players he had specifically identified, knowing that the deadline might force the club into caving in and breaking the bank to get someone like Henry, etc, the club was either unable or unwilling to do this and eventually called his bluff by bringing in the two deadline-day lads. Whether that was someone acting independently or it was all part of a cunning plan, I don't know, but I don't believe that there was ever a conspiracy to get rid of Keegan. I reckon a few people may not have given a shit whether he quit or not, but I don't think the majority expected him to, certainly not Ashley, he wouldn't have said what he said and worn that shirt at Arsenal if he did.

 

Keegan is either a very stubborn or principled man depending upon your point of view, either way it amounts to the same thing and I think he forced the issue here until it reached breaking point and the club broke and brought in Xisco and Nacho without his express consent and he quit because of it. Where blame should be apportioned depends upon the answers to a few questions:

 

- Were Keegan's targets unrealistic or undesirable? (The three that have been quoted definitely fall into this category)

- Was there any effort to secure people on his list that weren't covered by the above?

- Was that effort sufficient?

- What was Keegan's response if it was? Was he realistic or was he intransigent?

 

 

I'd just like to remind you that this is assuming the two things stated at the beginning are correct and I'm not sure that they were. Also this isn't about what happened after Keegan stormed out as we've discussed that to death now and I'm bored of giving my opinion on it.

 

Whatdaya reckon?

[Dave]

That's like the worst Photoshop I think I've ever seen.

 

Edit - sorry indi.

[Greg]

That's like the worst Photoshop I think I've ever seen.

 

I think it was a Paint rather than a Photoshop!

[Dave]

Who was it that was saying that Wise et al had presented him with player after player and he'd rejected them all out of hand? Sure someone said something along those lines.

 

**Conspiracy theory alert**

 

If for a moment you contemplate that being true and you combine it with the infamous list - I know, but my natural tendency to simply dismiss anything in the papers has been dealt a blow over the last few days - then you're left with a situation where the club was given the choice of:

 

Give Keegan what he wants and go after the big names, who would cost big, big money with little chance of ever getting any of it back, thereby going against the stated aim of the club's transfer policy. Not to mention that some of them are probably fading stars anyway and many of them would never consider coming here in the first place. If this was the chosen path, then there would be a serious risk of ending up with no-one coming in at all and if some did they would be unlikely to represent value for money. However you'd probably know what you were buying as the players would have proven track records.

 

Go against Keegan's wishes and bring in who "the club" thinks will benefit the team, namely young up-and-coming players from abroad for less money and on lower wages. If this was the chosen path, then there are risks too, firstly and most importantly that you run the risk of seriously pissing Keegan off, but also that you are taking a bit of a gamble that the players you buy will settle and be successful in the Premiership, as we know that's not always guaranteed. However if they did turn out to be a success then we have a bargain on our hands a la Jonas and we can't lose even if he decides he's outgrown us and moves on because we make a packet on the deal.

 

 

It seems to me that we started the window using option 2, hence Jonas, Bassong, Collo, Guthrie and all the youngsters, but then something happened and everything seemed to grind to a halt, before we grabbed a couple of late deals on deadline day. What was the hold up? Why did things seem to stall in the middle?

 

Perhaps, and this is entirely speculation, that was the point where Keegan really laid it on the line that he wasn't happy that no-one from his list was being brought in and started to reject anyone put before him that wasn't on it. This might explain the numerous players that we were linked with where nothing seemed to happen in the end and the seeming lack of action until deadline day.

 

It seems to me that if this was true then at least some effort was made to get the players Keegan wanted, hence his comments and positive reaction to the Milner sale, etc, but for whatever reason that didn't pay off, probably for one of the reasons listed above. Maybe that's wrong and they just spent a few weeks arguing amongst themselves rather than getting on with bringing players in, but I think that the gap in the middle shows that at least some consideration was given to Keegan's list. If they really didn't care about what he thought then they'd have just carried on bringing in the players they wanted and I reckon we'd have ended up with a good few additional signings to what we had. I don't for a second believe that it was anyone's intention to not sign a number of players this summer, almost certainly everyone wanted to end up with a bigger and what they thought was a better squad than what we've got.

 

So as the deadline started to loom and the impasse remained, due to the recruitment guys either being unable (due to them simply not being for sale or not wanting to come here), or unwilling to spend the kind of money required, to bring in the players on Keegan's list, I think that they may have just thought, "fuck him we need to get someone in, otherwise we're screwed" and signed Xisco and Nacho whether Keegan liked it or not.

 

I think Keegan might well have been playing brinkmanship with the club over signings, refusing to sanction anyone other than the players he had specifically identified, knowing that the deadline might force the club into caving in and breaking the bank to get someone like Henry, etc, the club was either unable or unwilling to do this and eventually called his bluff by bringing in the two deadline-day lads. Whether that was someone acting independently or it was all part of a cunning plan, I don't know, but I don't believe that there was ever a conspiracy to get rid of Keegan. I reckon a few people may not have given a shit whether he quit or not, but I don't think the majority expected him to, certainly not Ashley, he wouldn't have said what he said and worn that shirt at Arsenal if he did.

 

Keegan is either a very stubborn or principled man depending upon your point of view, either way it amounts to the same thing and I think he forced the issue here until it reached breaking point and the club broke and brought in Xisco and Nacho without his express consent and he quit because of it. Where blame should be apportioned depends upon the answers to a few questions:

 

- Were Keegan's targets unrealistic or undesirable? (The three that have been quoted definitely fall into this category)

- Was there any effort to secure people on his list that weren't covered by the above?

- Was that effort sufficient?

- What was Keegan's response if it was? Was he realistic or was he intransigent?

 

 

I'd just like to remind you that this is assuming the two things stated at the beginning are correct and I'm not sure that they were. Also this isn't about what happened after Keegan stormed out as we've discussed that to death now and I'm bored of giving my opinion on it.

 

Whatdaya reckon?

 

Very interesting theory.

[madras]

if todays newspaper stories are true and keegan has agreed a confidentiality clause it looks like his grounds for constructive dismissal werent agreed by his lawyers. did he agree to the structure originally and thought his strength of charcter could change it to his liking ?

 

also the club needing a confidentiaslity clause...if keegans constructive dismissal claim was KO'd by his own lawyers what have the club got to hide ?

[NJS]

Indi - the article in the Times which had Keegan's list was written by a journalist so far up the dwarf's arse, its his cock causing the chirpy cockney smile we all know and love - I don't believe it for a second. Keegan always spoke about a "realistic" transfer budget which must have been laid down very early. The fact that said budget was zero is a fucking disgrace.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest optimistic nit]

i think that there is absolutely no chance that there was 0 money available to spend. i think the money was there, its just apparent keegan wasn't the one spending it.

[Robster]

Anyone know the win percentage with Keegan as manager this time?

 

Also the likes of Allardyce, Roeder, Souness etc.

 

Misleading IMO. KK took over a struggling side and had a lot of bad early results, but he'd definitely turned things round by the end. He did a good job on the pitch, there shouldn't be any argument about that.

 

All of our managers have taken over a struggling side, that's why the one before them was sacked.

 

I know your really angry at KK walking out mate but I hope your not suggesting you would rather have any of the other 3 instead.

[NJS]

i think that there is absolutely no chance that there was 0 money available to spend. i think the money was there, its just apparent keegan wasn't the one spending it.

 

Small profit as it turned out which may have been up to £10m with a couple more signings - fucking wow.

 

I think its clear this was very deliberate and questions have to be asked.

 

If this ethos of buying just cheap young players continued for say 3 or 4 years how much ST and TV money would have been accumulated? What would be the point in generating cash? - hmm - let me see.

 

 

[Mick]

if todays newspaper stories are true and keegan has agreed a confidentiality clause it looks like his grounds for constructive dismissal werent agreed by his lawyers. did he agree to the structure originally and thought his strength of charcter could change it to his liking ?

 

also the club needing a confidentiaslity clause...if keegans constructive dismissal claim was KO'd by his own lawyers what have the club got to hide ?

 

Keegan agreed to a structure which gave him the final say on transfers, if that changed then constructive dismissal would be possible.

[Guest Ian56]

Anyone hearing these rumours that Newcastle may sue Keegan for 2M due to breach of contract? Been mentioned by a couple of newspapers today apparently.

 

This would be a massive misjudgement if true on Ashley's part. 

[Cronky]

It's occured to me that the two Keegan wobblers both occurred after we'd been given a beating by top four clubs. The manner of the defeats emphasised the gap that exists between where we are and where we want to be, and after the Chelsea game, that certainly seemed to damage Keegan's morale. Keegan is vulnerable to these mood swings (eg as with England), and I reckon that it probably didn't take much to tip him over the edge.

 

Just a thought.

[Dave]

It's occured to me that the two Keegan wobblers both occurred after we'd been given a beating by top four clubs. The manner of the defeats emphasised the gap that exists between where we are and where we want to be, and after the Chelsea game, that certainly seemed to damage Keegan's morale. Keegan is vulnerable to these mood swings (eg as with England), and I reckon that it probably didn't take much to tip him over the edge.

 

Just a thought.

 

Good point, never really thought about it like that.

[Fatwax]

I wonder how things would have gone if we'd signed Modric.

[fredbob]

Who was it that was saying that Wise et al had presented him with player after player and he'd rejected them all out of hand? Sure someone said something along those lines.

 

**Conspiracy theory alert**

 

If for a moment you contemplate that being true and you combine it with the infamous list - I know, but my natural tendency to simply dismiss anything in the papers has been dealt a blow over the last few days - then you're left with a situation where the club was given the choice of:

 

Give Keegan what he wants and go after the big names, who would cost big, big money with little chance of ever getting any of it back, thereby going against the stated aim of the club's transfer policy. Not to mention that some of them are probably fading stars anyway and many of them would never consider coming here in the first place. If this was the chosen path, then there would be a serious risk of ending up with no-one coming in at all and if some did they would be unlikely to represent value for money. However you'd probably know what you were buying as the players would have proven track records.

 

Go against Keegan's wishes and bring in who "the club" thinks will benefit the team, namely young up-and-coming players from abroad for less money and on lower wages. If this was the chosen path, then there are risks too, firstly and most importantly that you run the risk of seriously pissing Keegan off, but also that you are taking a bit of a gamble that the players you buy will settle and be successful in the Premiership, as we know that's not always guaranteed. However if they did turn out to be a success then we have a bargain on our hands a la Jonas and we can't lose even if he decides he's outgrown us and moves on because we make a packet on the deal.

 

 

It seems to me that we started the window using option 2, hence Jonas, Bassong, Collo, Guthrie and all the youngsters, but then something happened and everything seemed to grind to a halt, before we grabbed a couple of late deals on deadline day. What was the hold up? Why did things seem to stall in the middle?

 

Perhaps, and this is entirely speculation, that was the point where Keegan really laid it on the line that he wasn't happy that no-one from his list was being brought in and started to reject anyone put before him that wasn't on it. This might explain the numerous players that we were linked with where nothing seemed to happen in the end and the seeming lack of action until deadline day.

 

It seems to me that if this was true then at least some effort was made to get the players Keegan wanted, hence his comments and positive reaction to the Milner sale, etc, but for whatever reason that didn't pay off, probably for one of the reasons listed above. Maybe that's wrong and they just spent a few weeks arguing amongst themselves rather than getting on with bringing players in, but I think that the gap in the middle shows that at least some consideration was given to Keegan's list. If they really didn't care about what he thought then they'd have just carried on bringing in the players they wanted and I reckon we'd have ended up with a good few additional signings to what we had. I don't for a second believe that it was anyone's intention to not sign a number of players this summer, almost certainly everyone wanted to end up with a bigger and what they thought was a better squad than what we've got.

 

So as the deadline started to loom and the impasse remained, due to the recruitment guys either being unable (due to them simply not being for sale or not wanting to come here), or unwilling to spend the kind of money required, to bring in the players on Keegan's list, I think that they may have just thought, "f*** him we need to get someone in, otherwise we're screwed" and signed Xisco and Nacho whether Keegan liked it or not.

 

I think Keegan might well have been playing brinkmanship with the club over signings, refusing to sanction anyone other than the players he had specifically identified, knowing that the deadline might force the club into caving in and breaking the bank to get someone like Henry, etc, the club was either unable or unwilling to do this and eventually called his bluff by bringing in the two deadline-day lads. Whether that was someone acting independently or it was all part of a cunning plan, I don't know, but I don't believe that there was ever a conspiracy to get rid of Keegan. I reckon a few people may not have given a s*** whether he quit or not, but I don't think the majority expected him to, certainly not Ashley, he wouldn't have said what he said and worn that shirt at Arsenal if he did.

 

Keegan is either a very stubborn or principled man depending upon your point of view, either way it amounts to the same thing and I think he forced the issue here until it reached breaking point and the club broke and brought in Xisco and Nacho without his express consent and he quit because of it. Where blame should be apportioned depends upon the answers to a few questions:

 

- Were Keegan's targets unrealistic or undesirable? (The three that have been quoted definitely fall into this category)

- Was there any effort to secure people on his list that weren't covered by the above?

- Was that effort sufficient?

- What was Keegan's response if it was? Was he realistic or was he intransigent?

 

 

I'd just like to remind you that this is assuming the two things stated at the beginning are correct and I'm not sure that they were. Also this isn't about what happened after Keegan stormed out as we've discussed that to death now and I'm bored of giving my opinion on it.

 

Whatdaya reckon?

 

Great post again. Was about to write a similar thing my self - to me the likes of Riise and Dunne (supposed keegan targets) represented a high risk strategy which didnt seem to fit in with the clubs percieved direction. I remember in January, Mort reiterating the point about hidden gems and looking at the arsenal model. It comes down to what people think is the most important thing for the club and who should have the most say on the direction of the club - should it be the owner who has the most say on the direction of the club or should it be the manager? Those of you who are pro keegan anti Ashley will belive that the manager should have most say - even if that compromises the direction that the owner of the clubs wants the club to go, which shouldnt be the case.

 

My personal opinion is that the owner should have the impetus on direction and it seems clear to me that this was the directio that the club wanted to go - it also seems clear to me that Keegans list may have been out of date, what should the club do?

 

 

[Mick]

It's occured to me that the two Keegan wobblers both occurred after we'd been given a beating by top four clubs. The manner of the defeats emphasised the gap that exists between where we are and where we want to be, and after the Chelsea game, that certainly seemed to damage Keegan's morale. Keegan is vulnerable to these mood swings (eg as with England), and I reckon that it probably didn't take much to tip him over the edge.

 

Just a thought.

 

I wonder why he didn't throw a "wobbler" after being pissed on by Villa last season, I'd say that was worse then losing to Chelsea or Arsenal.  What about 1-5 at home to Man U or 3-0 away to Liverpool, Everton away wasn't any better.

[Incognito]

When Wise told Keegan,his old mate Vinny Jones would be our playmaker,Kev flipped,possibly.

[Guest TheKingOfNewcastle]

In my opinion, the only way it could work is if the MANAGER has a budget (big) and the SCOUTING TEAM have a budget (not as big)

[The Bonk]

Did anyone honestly think this wasn't going to end in tears?  Even from the day he was appointed? 

He was away from the game for years, things fucking change KK.  It's reality, I've got to adapt to new

things at my job, I can't just fucking walk away. He was always going to walk away, he's done it before

and he did it, again. 

 

I love him for all he's done for Newcastle and no doubt he is a great man, but ending it like this let's Wise et all

get away with being cunts. 

 

 

I'm on two sides here, part of me is pissed he's walked away again,  but I also see his frustration.  Bahhh...

Thanks anyway, King Kev.  What you brought us in the 90's was nothing short of amazing.  All the best.