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

[SUPERTOON]

The thing is a top manager could well be appointed and work well with the system but he is fighting a losing battle already because he isnt KK

[Ally]

Not sure if this has been posted...

 

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_4112576,00.html

 

Its like a bad soap opera.

[La Parka]

Not sure if this has been posted...

 

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_4112576,00.html

 

Its like a bad soap opera.

 

[NG32]

Just read the recent club statement, fck me what is going on???

 

 

I cant believe KK would come back and mess NUFC and its fans about on purpose.

 

Arrrrrrrgggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

Why cant we just be normal!!!!!!!!!!

[Guest elbee909]

Not sure if this has been posted...

 

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_4112576,00.html

 

Its like a bad soap opera.

 

Yeah.  "Ream Team".

[Guest BooBoo]

I thought there was some excellent discussion over this farce on Sunday Supplement this morning.

[NG32]

I thought there was some excellent discussion over this farce on Sunday Supplement this morning.

 

Hmm, not so sure, Steve Curry came across as a complete cock who just seems to like to attack KK any chance he gets.

 

 

The other fat fucker from the express never really said much bu tthe younger guy from the mail give some ballanced views.

[Unbelievable]

I've read and re-read the clubs statement now, the only thing wrong with it is its shortness and the fact that it should have at least attempted to sound concillitory towards KK.

 

Much has been made of the quotes from Wise, can't argue with facts. He said it, he either meant it (at the time) or didn't. To give a flip to this, is it much different from KK going on to say he was happy with the set-up?

 

If you take the statement as true, or at least acknowledge that it's close to the truth then what were they supposed to do?

 

And another thought, and be honest, if it had been ANY manager apart from KK, who'd resigned, would we be so raged?

 

 

 

Oh dear, more crossed wires..

 

Wise said the system would work in such and such a way, Keegan said he was happy about it, then six months later Keegan is unhappy and the club come out and say the system now no longer works such and so and never has done, but it has always worked in quite a different way. From this turn of events, if you manage to conclude Keegan is the party doing the lying for having said he was happy with the system yet walking out six months later is ridiculous. As I´ve said before: there is a discrepancy between what he said then and what he said now because he was misled, like we all were.

 

No crossed wires here at all.

 

I presume you've made up your mind that KK is blameless in this and its all the clubs fault. Maybe it is, but maybe it isn't. I've said before I believe there is about a 50/50 split on this.

 

When Wise and KK said what they said (haven't got the actual quotes, but got the general gist of both) maybe one of them wasn't telling the whole truth, maybe both.......or maybe both were actually telling the truth at that time. If the latter, and i'm more inclined to go along with that, then you have to ask what changed. Did the club decide to change the DOF's role in spite of KK, or because of KK?

 

Of course Keegan isn't totally blameless, but from what we are seeing and from the different statements by the club and club representatives in Keegan´s tenure it´s clear to me that they have shifted the goal posts, and while that may have been acceptable to some other managers (not many mind you) everybody who knows Keegan knows he would have not accepted it. Which leaves me with only 3 options:

 

1) they didn't know or research KK before appointing him, in which case I would call that gross negligence and they deserve every ounce of shit they get for abusing a Toon legend

 

2) the did know this would happen, in which case I wonder what game they are playing at. They would have still abused KK's reputation for some ulteriour motive or

 

3) the change in structure wasn't planned from the offset but just kind of developped that way and it all came to burst on the last day of the transfer window. Whilst I think this is a very likely scenario, I would class this as a huge mistake in internal communication, and again the club deserves most of the blame.

 

The way they are currently handling the aftermath of this isn't doing them any favours either. They come across as two-faces snakes contradicting themselves publicly in the space of a few months..

[Guest sicko2ndbest]

Can you give a summary of what was said?

[sugoinufc]

didn´t know where else to post this?

 

really sad to see keegan go as i posted earlier.....but if his 3 main transfer targets where lampard, beckham and henry....im not so sure i really want him back?

 

henry would be ok, beckham not and lampard impossible!

 

prefer younger and cheaper players!

 

f... off wise

[fredbob]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premier_league/newcastle/article4692140.ece

 

NEWCASTLE UNITED lost patience with Kevin Keegan because they told him to manage the team in the style of Arsène Wenger and he wanted to do the job like Jose Mourinho. With the credit crunch looming, Keegan was given a £12m transfer budget in the summer, but produced a wish list that would have cost more than 10 times as much. His nominated transfer targets were David Beckham, Frank Lampard, Ronaldinho and Thierry Henry.

 

Tony Jimenez, Newcastle’s vice-president overseeing recruitment, instead proposed Samir Nasri, before he joined Arsenal, Sebastian Schweinsteiger of Bayern Munich, and Espanyol’s Valmir Valdo. The last straw, which led Keegan to walk out, is said to have been the sale of James Milner to Aston Villa, which the manager sanctioned on the basis that Schweinsteiger, who starred for Germany at Euro 2008, would be signed as a replacement. Newcastle agreed a deal with Bayern, only for the midfielder to turn down the move. The Sunday Times can reveal that neither Keegan nor Dennis Wise, the executive director with whom he fell out, were the original choices for their respective jobs. Club owner Mike Ashley wanted Harry Redknapp as manager and Terry Venables as his eminence gris, but both rebuffed him.

 

Anxious to set the record straight over the reasons behind Keegan’s departure, the club issued a statement yesterday refuting many of the claims made on his behalf. The most crucial of the points it makes is that Keegan accepted the job last January in the full knowledge he would have to report to a director of football and to the board. The statement insists that Keegan had specific duties relating to training, coaching, selection and motivation of the team and that he was allowed to carry them out without interference from any board member. It continues: “It is a fact that Newcastle is a business and operates, like all businesses, with financial constraints . . . and those constraints inform its transfer dealings. The structure at [the] club is clear and has been from January 16, 2008.”

 

A boardroom source told The Sunday Times last night: “Kevin says a manager should have the right to manage, and nobody would disagree with that, but not to manage regardless. In any business, people have to manage within the constraints and budgets applied by their company. Kevin couldn’t, or wouldn’t, do that.

 

“Right from the start, at his interview for the job, it was made perfectly clear the way the club wanted the job done. There was not going to be a Chelsea scenario, with Newcastle paying big money and massive wages for established stars. The club was going to be run like Arsenal, and the emphasis would be on scouring the world for the best emerging young talent, like Arsène Wenger has done with Cesc Fabregas and Emmanuel Adebayor. We talked of building the club up over three to five years. Kevin took the job on those terms.”

 

Against that background, the directors were gobsmacked when Keegan came up with the names of Beckham, Ronaldinho, Lampard and Henry. “It was so bizarre,” our source said, “that I wondered if he was doing it on purpose, to try to get sacked. There was no getting through to him. What he wanted would have cost the club £200m in transfer fees and wages, and he had been told that he had around £12m to spend. We have been looking for a centre-half. Kevin’s suggestions were Jonathan Woodgate, Sami Hyy-pia and Richard Dunne. Where’s the residual value in them?

 

“On the Milner issue, the truth is that Kevin sat in on a meeting where the sale was discussed. Kevin r e c k o n e d J a m e s w a s w o r t h £7m-£8m, and the plan was to use that cash to buy Schweinsteiger. Jimenez did the negotiations with Villa and managed to agree a fee of £12m. Everyone thought it was too good to turn down, so the deal was done. Unfortunately, Schweinsteiger then said he wouldn’t come.”

 

The board reject suggestions from the Keegan camp that they tried to sell Michael Owen behind the manager’s back. Our source said: “We definitely didn’t try to sell Michael and didn’t speak to any club about him. On the contrary, we have made him a very good offer to stay. It is an extended and improved contract, the richest ever offered to any Newcastle player. He has sent a letter back, saying he appreciates the offer, and talks are ongoing.”

 

Newcastle on the attack last night as Keegan row hots up

 

Anxious to set the record straight over Kevin Keegan’s departure on Thursday, Newcastle issued a statement late last night refuting many of the claims made on his behalf. Attempting to counter ‘inaccurate reporting of factual matters and inaccurate allegations’, the statement says:

 

It is a fact that Kevin Keegan, on appointment on January 16, 2008, agreed to report to a director of football and to the board. He worked within that structure until his resignation. As manager, [he] had specific duties in that he was responsible for the training, coaching, selection and motivation of the team. He was allowed to manage his specific duties without any interference from any board member

 

It is a fact that Kevin Keegan agreed only to deal with the media [about] matters relating to the team and not to communicate about the acquisition or disposal of players

 

It is a fact that Newcastle United Football Club is a business and operates, like all businesses, with financial constraints [that] inform its transfer dealings. The board have a responsibility to ensure that the club is able to meet its commitments, which include the wages and the transfer fees for players

 

 

Interesting article in the Times, backs up my theory of the unsuitable targets list - however the alledged transfer budget is truly astounding. Would be absolutley disagreaceful if that is true.

 

EDIT: sorry if posted somewhere else.

[Offshore]

I've read and re-read the clubs statement now, the only thing wrong with it is its shortness and the fact that it should have at least attempted to sound concillitory towards KK.

 

Much has been made of the quotes from Wise, can't argue with facts. He said it, he either meant it (at the time) or didn't. To give a flip to this, is it much different from KK going on to say he was happy with the set-up?

 

If you take the statement as true, or at least acknowledge that it's close to the truth then what were they supposed to do?

 

And another thought, and be honest, if it had been ANY manager apart from KK, who'd resigned, would we be so raged?

 

 

 

Oh dear, more crossed wires..

 

Wise said the system would work in such and such a way, Keegan said he was happy about it, then six months later Keegan is unhappy and the club come out and say the system now no longer works such and so and never has done, but it has always worked in quite a different way. From this turn of events, if you manage to conclude Keegan is the party doing the lying for having said he was happy with the system yet walking out six months later is ridiculous. As I´ve said before: there is a discrepancy between what he said then and what he said now because he was misled, like we all were.

 

No crossed wires here at all.

 

I presume you've made up your mind that KK is blameless in this and its all the clubs fault. Maybe it is, but maybe it isn't. I've said before I believe there is about a 50/50 split on this.

 

When Wise and KK said what they said (haven't got the actual quotes, but got the general gist of both) maybe one of them wasn't telling the whole truth, maybe both.......or maybe both were actually telling the truth at that time. If the latter, and i'm more inclined to go along with that, then you have to ask what changed. Did the club decide to change the DOF's role in spite of KK, or because of KK?

 

Of course Keegan isn't totally blameless, but from what we are seeing and from the different statements by the club and club representatives in Keegan´s tenure it´s clear to me that they have shifted the goal posts, and while that may have been acceptable to some other managers (not many mind you) everybody who knows Keegan knows he would have not accepted it. Which leaves me with only 3 options:

 

1) they didn't know or research KK before appointing him, in which case I would call that gross negligence and they deserve every ounce of s*** they get for abusing a Toon legend

 

2) the did know this would happen, in which case I wonder what game they are playing at. They would have still abused KK's reputation for some ulteriour motive or

 

3) the change in structure wasn't planned from the offset but just kind of developped that way and it all came to burst on the last day of the transfer window. Whilst I think this is a very likely scenario, I would class this as a huge mistake in internal communication, and again the club deserves most of the blame.

 

The way they are currently handling the aftermath of this isn't doing them any favours either. They come across as two-faces snakes contradicting themselves publicly in the space of a few months..

 

I agree, option 3 is the way I feel its gone so far, but until we get more than the short, sharp club statements and LMA press releases we're all going to have to wait and see 'why' it changed.

 

 

 

 

[Skirge]

The new official statement has just boiled my piss!!

 

I never read that or hard about that yesterday..

 

We were tld when Wise was taken on he was here to sign youth talent only and 1st team matter were upto Keegan, the club to,d us us that GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR he has made a bad situation worse with that statement..

[Bad Mongo]

You, Jonnypd and him, that's 3 people, counting is obviously not your strong point eh? Also, those 3 people have not pointed out any flaw in my logic, they totally missed the entire point of my logic, something you are obviously an expert at.

 

I've explained it for you a number of times now, if you're incapable of understanding it then I'm sorry for you.

 

Keep fishing though, you never know, I might just bite in the end, but don't count on it.

 

Pointing out flaws in your logic is exactly what we've been doing: You claim Keegan knew what he was getting into when what he and the club stated Dennis Wise would work under him (X), and what he was getting into was that he would work under Wise (Y). Your claim is that X = Y when clearly X  = !Y, ergo X != Y. That's the flaw in your logic, and if you can't see it, you're incapable of using logic at all. How old are you?

[colinmk]

I've read and re-read the clubs statement now, the only thing wrong with it is its shortness and the fact that it should have at least attempted to sound concillitory towards KK.

 

Much has been made of the quotes from Wise, can't argue with facts. He said it, he either meant it (at the time) or didn't. To give a flip to this, is it much different from KK going on to say he was happy with the set-up?

 

If you take the statement as true, or at least acknowledge that it's close to the truth then what were they supposed to do?

 

And another thought, and be honest, if it had been ANY manager apart from KK, who'd resigned, would we be so raged?

 

 

 

Oh dear, more crossed wires..

 

Wise said the system would work in such and such a way, Keegan said he was happy about it, then six months later Keegan is unhappy and the club come out and say the system now no longer works such and so and never has done, but it has always worked in quite a different way. From this turn of events, if you manage to conclude Keegan is the party doing the lying for having said he was happy with the system yet walking out six months later is ridiculous. As I´ve said before: there is a discrepancy between what he said then and what he said now because he was misled, like we all were.

 

No crossed wires here at all.

 

I presume you've made up your mind that KK is blameless in this and its all the clubs fault. Maybe it is, but maybe it isn't. I've said before I believe there is about a 50/50 split on this.

 

When Wise and KK said what they said (haven't got the actual quotes, but got the general gist of both) maybe one of them wasn't telling the whole truth, maybe both.......or maybe both were actually telling the truth at that time. If the latter, and i'm more inclined to go along with that, then you have to ask what changed. Did the club decide to change the DOF's role in spite of KK, or because of KK?

 

Of course Keegan isn't totally blameless, but from what we are seeing and from the different statements by the club and club representatives in Keegan´s tenure it´s clear to me that they have shifted the goal posts, and while that may have been acceptable to some other managers (not many mind you) everybody who knows Keegan knows he would have not accepted it. Which leaves me with only 3 options:

 

1) they didn't know or research KK before appointing him, in which case I would call that gross negligence and they deserve every ounce of s*** they get for abusing a Toon legend

 

2) the did know this would happen, in which case I wonder what game they are playing at. They would have still abused KK's reputation for some ulteriour motive or

 

3) the change in structure wasn't planned from the offset but just kind of developped that way and it all came to burst on the last day of the transfer window. Whilst I think this is a very likely scenario, I would class this as a huge mistake in internal communication, and again the club deserves most of the blame.

 

The way they are currently handling the aftermath of this isn't doing them any favours either. They come across as two-faces snakes contradicting themselves publicly in the space of a few months..

 

I agree, option 3 is the way I feel its gone so far, but until we get more than the short, sharp club statements and LMA press releases we're all going to have to wait and see 'why' it changed.

 

 

 

 

 

I think your right but it was also option 1 too. They would surely of not allowed the situation to develop into what it did if they knew much about him as a person.

[NG32]

didn´t know where else to post this?

 

really sad to see keegan go as i posted earlier.....but if his 3 main transfer targets where lampard, beckham and henry....im not so sure i really want him back?

 

henry would be ok, beckham not and lampard impossible!

 

prefer younger and cheaper players!

 

f... off wise

 

Where has it come out that KK wanted Lampard, Beckham etc?

 

 

[Offshore]

I've read and re-read the clubs statement now, the only thing wrong with it is its shortness and the fact that it should have at least attempted to sound concillitory towards KK.

 

Much has been made of the quotes from Wise, can't argue with facts. He said it, he either meant it (at the time) or didn't. To give a flip to this, is it much different from KK going on to say he was happy with the set-up?

 

If you take the statement as true, or at least acknowledge that it's close to the truth then what were they supposed to do?

 

And another thought, and be honest, if it had been ANY manager apart from KK, who'd resigned, would we be so raged?

 

 

 

Oh dear, more crossed wires..

 

Wise said the system would work in such and such a way, Keegan said he was happy about it, then six months later Keegan is unhappy and the club come out and say the system now no longer works such and so and never has done, but it has always worked in quite a different way. From this turn of events, if you manage to conclude Keegan is the party doing the lying for having said he was happy with the system yet walking out six months later is ridiculous. As I´ve said before: there is a discrepancy between what he said then and what he said now because he was misled, like we all were.

 

No crossed wires here at all.

 

I presume you've made up your mind that KK is blameless in this and its all the clubs fault. Maybe it is, but maybe it isn't. I've said before I believe there is about a 50/50 split on this.

 

When Wise and KK said what they said (haven't got the actual quotes, but got the general gist of both) maybe one of them wasn't telling the whole truth, maybe both.......or maybe both were actually telling the truth at that time. If the latter, and i'm more inclined to go along with that, then you have to ask what changed. Did the club decide to change the DOF's role in spite of KK, or because of KK?

 

Of course Keegan isn't totally blameless, but from what we are seeing and from the different statements by the club and club representatives in Keegan´s tenure it´s clear to me that they have shifted the goal posts, and while that may have been acceptable to some other managers (not many mind you) everybody who knows Keegan knows he would have not accepted it. Which leaves me with only 3 options:

 

1) they didn't know or research KK before appointing him, in which case I would call that gross negligence and they deserve every ounce of s*** they get for abusing a Toon legend

 

2) the did know this would happen, in which case I wonder what game they are playing at. They would have still abused KK's reputation for some ulteriour motive or

 

3) the change in structure wasn't planned from the offset but just kind of developped that way and it all came to burst on the last day of the transfer window. Whilst I think this is a very likely scenario, I would class this as a huge mistake in internal communication, and again the club deserves most of the blame.

 

The way they are currently handling the aftermath of this isn't doing them any favours either. They come across as two-faces snakes contradicting themselves publicly in the space of a few months..

 

I agree, option 3 is the way I feel its gone so far, but until we get more than the short, sharp club statements and LMA press releases we're all going to have to wait and see 'why' it changed.

 

 

 

 

 

I think your right but it was also option 1 too. They would surely of not allowed the situation to develop into what it did if they knew much about him as a person.

 

Possible, but not probable, KK's pro's and con's are well known by everyone, even those with no interest in football.

 

At best they either thought they could persuade him to accept the new order or its no.3, for reason's no-one's saying - yet.

 

 

 

[Raconteur]

Of course Keegan isn't totally blameless, but from what we are seeing and from the different statements by the club and club representatives in Keegan´s tenure it´s clear to me that they have shifted the goal posts, and while that may have been acceptable to some other managers (not many mind you) everybody who knows Keegan knows he would have not accepted it. Which leaves me with only 3 options:

 

1) they didn't know or research KK before appointing him, in which case I would call that gross negligence and they deserve every ounce of shit they get for abusing a Toon legend

 

2) the did know this would happen, in which case I wonder what game they are playing at. They would have still abused KK's reputation for some ulteriour motive or

 

3) the change in structure wasn't planned from the offset but just kind of developped that way and it all came to burst on the last day of the transfer window. Whilst I think this is a very likely scenario, I would class this as a huge mistake in internal communication, and again the club deserves most of the blame.

 

The way they are currently handling the aftermath of this isn't doing them any favours either. They come across as two-faces snakes contradicting themselves publicly in the space of a few months..

 

I think it's obvious the "rules" by which the club moved forward changed - in a reactionary manner too. For starters Keegan was hired knowing he'd be working under a DoF, but that person had not yet been appointed*. Just that simple fact effects the whole paradigm, from the very off. Indeed, the changeover from Mort to Llambias involved another significant shift given the (reportedly) sharply contrasting personalities

 

One snippet barely touched on in this gargantuan thread is the "showdown" talks in May. Even if you think Keegan agreed to any terms just to get the job, and planned to do his own thing once he had it, then the "showdown" talks would have reminded him very clearly what the rules were - and there is also scope in that conversation to say "Well, this facet isn't working and needs to be addressed". I remember thinking at the time there was no real danger of KK leaving then, that it was all a media beat-up. Well, in hindsight, it probably wasn't, which begs the question: Would it have been better for Keegan (and the club) to have left then?

 

Do Keegan's knights have a rebuttal for the claim that KK refused to work co-operatively with the acquisition team? Consider the Smith and Barton rumours - Keegan apparently (reluctantly) said they could be sold if they were replaced, but claimed Xisco and Gonzalez were not adequate replacements. To me, that demonstrates the acquisition team trying to accomodate Keegan who in return offered only intrastringence, recalcitrance and pure pig-headedness.

 

* The club's statement says that Kevin knew he would be working under a director of football - but NUFC doesn't have one! We have a Vice-President (Player Recruitment) and an Executive Director (Football) - the ambiguity of the titles is clearly intentional (ie they went to the effort of inventing titles!) But the very names point more towards Jimenez rather than Wise as the "underminer"

[bovineblue]

didn´t know where else to post this?

 

really sad to see keegan go as i posted earlier.....but if his 3 main transfer targets where lampard, beckham and henry....im not so sure i really want him back?

 

henry would be ok, beckham not and lampard impossible!

 

prefer younger and cheaper players!

 

f... off wise

 

Where has it come out that KK wanted Lampard, Beckham etc?

 

 

 

The club insider of course.

[Bad Mongo]

Do Keegan's knights have a rebuttal for the claim that KK refused to work co-operatively with the acquisition team? Consider the Smith and Barton rumours - Keegan apparently (reluctantly) said they could be sold if they were replaced, but claimed Xisco and Gonzalez were not adequate replacements. To me, that demonstrates the acquisition team trying to accomodate Keegan who in return offered only intrastringence, recalcitrance and pure pig-headedness.

If Xisco and Nacho were Smith's and Barton's replacement, we would have replaced eight players leaving with six new players, all while not getting that defender and midfielder we were supposed to get.

[Unbelievable]

Of course Keegan isn't totally blameless, but from what we are seeing and from the different statements by the club and club representatives in Keegan´s tenure it´s clear to me that they have shifted the goal posts, and while that may have been acceptable to some other managers (not many mind you) everybody who knows Keegan knows he would have not accepted it. Which leaves me with only 3 options:

 

1) they didn't know or research KK before appointing him, in which case I would call that gross negligence and they deserve every ounce of s*** they get for abusing a Toon legend

 

2) the did know this would happen, in which case I wonder what game they are playing at. They would have still abused KK's reputation for some ulteriour motive or

 

3) the change in structure wasn't planned from the offset but just kind of developped that way and it all came to burst on the last day of the transfer window. Whilst I think this is a very likely scenario, I would class this as a huge mistake in internal communication, and again the club deserves most of the blame.

 

The way they are currently handling the aftermath of this isn't doing them any favours either. They come across as two-faces snakes contradicting themselves publicly in the space of a few months..

 

I think it's obvious the "rules" by which the club moved forward changed - in a reactionary manner too. For starters Keegan was hired knowing he'd be working under a DoF, but that person had not yet been appointed*. Just that simple fact effects the whole paradigm, from the very off. Indeed, the changeover from Mort to Llambias involved another significant shift given the (reportedly) sharply contrasting personalities

 

One snippet barely touched on in this gargantuan thread is the "showdown" talks in May. Even if you think Keegan agreed to any terms just to get the job, and planned to do his own thing once he had it, then the "showdown" talks would have reminded him very clearly what the rules were - and there is also scope in that conversation to say "Well, this facet isn't working and needs to be addressed". I remember thinking at the time there was no real danger of KK leaving then, that it was all a media beat-up. Well, in hindsight, it probably wasn't, which begs the question: Would it have been better for Keegan (and the club) to have left then?

 

Do Keegan's knights have a rebuttal for the claim that KK refused to work co-operatively with the acquisition team? Consider the Smith and Barton rumours - Keegan apparently (reluctantly) said they could be sold if they were replaced, but claimed Xisco and Gonzalez were not adequate replacements. To me, that demonstrates the acquisition team trying to accomodate Keegan who in return offered only intrastringence, recalcitrance and pure pig-headedness.

 

* The club's statement says that Kevin knew he would be working under a director of football - but NUFC doesn't have one! We have a Vice-President (Player Recruitment) and an Executive Director (Football) - the ambiguity of the titles is clearly intentional (ie they went to the effort of inventing titles!) But the very names point more towards Jimenez rather than Wise as the "underminer"

 

You've almost got it figured out Raconteur, and you make some very valid points, but the word in bold is what this entire episode possibly revolves around.  In the initial statements they quite clearly indicate that Wise is there to help to and report to KK; a chain of command is set, but it is the reverse of what you are implying here. In the end KK must have felt that his "assistent chef" was suddenly telling the "head chef" which ingredients to use in which quantities, and I'm pretty certain this was not how they set it out to be. Which begs the questions, who instigated the shifting of the goal posts, and who sanctioned it?

[NG32]

didn´t know where else to post this?

 

really sad to see keegan go as i posted earlier.....but if his 3 main transfer targets where lampard, beckham and henry....im not so sure i really want him back?

 

henry would be ok, beckham not and lampard impossible!

 

prefer younger and cheaper players!

 

f... off wise

 

Where has it come out that KK wanted Lampard, Beckham etc?

 

 

 

The club insider of course.

 

 

Oh not that man of mystery again. I should have known better.  Keegan would have gettin away with it if it wasnt for that pesky club insider again!!! 

[merlin]

Just answer the question;- WOULD WENGER OR FERGUSON HAVE ACCEPTED THE TRANSFER POLICY, YES OR NO ?

There are far too many fans on here who think that by appointing a 'Foreign' manager, everything will be OK -

Interesting that some Bookies are now making KKs REPLACEMENT only 16/1 for being the NEXT Prem manager to be fired/leave..

 

 

[Parky]

What is on Dennis Wise's CV to inspire confidence that he can shop round Europe and bring the best players to St James' Park? He worked for Swindon, Millwall and Leeds. SBR quote. Mail on Sunday.

[NE5]

Its important not to be blinded by respect for KK into thinking he's 100% blameless for this situation. It appears the club were trying a sensible approcah to improving the club on a realistic budget, yet KK has hardly ever experienced this. For him its always been about superstars and mega deals. If KK was unwilling to play ball with the new club set up then he must shoulder that. You cant have a manager stamping his feet every time he doesnt get what or who he wants.

 

We all know KK isn't totally blameless, because he has just stamped his feet and walked out like he always does, I think alot of people understand and accept this.

 

My stance isn't blinded by my love of Keegan or everything, I can say that easily because I still feel some regret on his part that he didn't try to stick out negotiations for a bit longer.

 

The point is that he was undermined and humiliated because those 'above' him were just going out and buying and selling players behind his back, how was he to know that when he first came? "By the way Kevin, we will be hiring a DOF, probably Dennis Wise, who will say in public that he is just here to support you but really he gets the final decision" - would that have been said? I highly doubt it.

 

Noone could blame any manager in any career or profession for walking out because they were undermined. In any walk of life, the manager has to be given the opportunity to manage, not just act as a puppet.

 

thats absolutely spot on, and I just can't see where anybody can point the finger at Keegan here at all. No manager worth their salt would put up with it.

 

If anything, his stock is even higher than it was with me, in spite of me being completely pissed off with the whole business.