Did Keegan turn them all down?

[Baggio]

Quite a few of them I think.

 

He was using his position to be able to say yes or no to players so that he could try and force the boards hand near the end of the window to push for someone like Henry, even though they've pointed out to him from day one that this isn't the sort of route the club want to be taking and instead push for quality players under with at least some sort of long term future.

 

You do realise that adsolute tosh they report in the papers about keegan having a list with 'henry, beckham and lampard' in is all stemming from that interview on radio newcastle which he said he would luv to sign henry as a fantasy player if he could have one superstar. Total newspaper bollocks for thick minded people to read.

 

Do you really believe the likes of the mirror, scum and news of the world have insiders givving them info. It is a cover for making up a story with no quotes or slight truth in them. Dont beleive the rags!

 

Do you honestly think that keegan wouldnt have investigated players we were after, do you really think he wasnt told how much we could spend. As for the supposed 12 mill budget we had, well that is obviously made up as the players we have signed came to about 20 mill, and we made a big bid for modric and woodgate!

 

I hate people like you who read this shite and beleive it.

 

How do you know those names came from that interview? He only mentioned Henry iirc.

 

I base my thoughts on opinions from looking at the situation, what do you base yours on?

[dilligaf]

 

 

Tbh I think

 

I really doubt that you can

[Elliottman]

so all of a sudden we are blaming KK for not signing players who the media linked us with and none of us actually having a clue if we were in for them or not?

 

Yeah, see the logic there.

[johnnypd]

Keegan is a shrewd judge of player, better than anyone on here tbh. it's no better than slander to suggest he turned all of those players down - he'll know when he sees talent and if they'd improve/fit into our side. if keegan preferred Smith or Duff how come he rarely played them in his first choice XI? it's just a silly argument invented out of thin air with nothing to back it up. Why did he personally go and scout two strikers if he was not in the market for a striker? why was he so concerned with replacing Milner if he felt Duff was all we needed?

 

a more reasoned and factual analysis is to say the club failed to secure any of them because they were too stingy. the club spent, and has spent since ashley arrived, fuck all.

 

but you can make stuff up and ignore the facts if it makes you feel better.

[Guest fraser]

Quite a few of them I think.

 

He was using his position to be able to say yes or no to players so that he could try and force the boards hand near the end of the window to push for someone like Henry, even though they've pointed out to him from day one that this isn't the sort of route the club want to be taking and instead push for quality players under with at least some sort of long term future.

 

As the club maintains that since 16th January it was definitely not in Keegan's gift to say yes or no to players, how was he able to do this?

 

They didn't say that though.  Did they?

 

No they didn't.

 

It's been well documented that Keegan's opinion on players was taken into consideration, whether it was drawing up a list of players he liked to getting him to go scouting Gomis with Vetere, it's clear the club have tried to make the situation work and keep everyone happy.

 

They said he reported to the DoF, that the transfer policy was informed by financial constraints and that he worked within this system until his resignation. They don't say that Keegan had any other role except the running of the first team. How could he, then, have prevented the club from making any acquisition it wanted?

[Guest gggg]

Wait ... so how come none of the anti Ashley and anti board stuff isn't "rank" specualtion?

 

Have you all been down to Keegans for some tea and a chat?

 

Get real. This is just as plausible as all the other stuff being discussed at the moment regarding the current state of affairs.

 

If they have been squabbling about signings all summer, I'm pretty sure it caused us to miss out on a number of players, who fit the criteria of what the board wanted, because KK wasn't familiar with them, but then also wasn't able to identify alternatives who he knew of, that fit the criteria. When he identified Guthrie, the club brought him in.

 

He identified Warnock and we had months to sign him but they didn't. What aload of bollocks.

[Bad Mongo]

Wait ... so how come none of the anti Ashley and anti board stuff isn't "rank" specualtion?

 

That's easy: The club's latest statements contradict their statements before the closing of the transfer window. Now we know that they lied.

[tgarve]

Wait ... so how come none of the anti Ashley and anti board stuff isn't "rank" specualtion?

 

Have you all been down to Keegans for some tea and a chat?

 

Get real. This is just as plausible as all the other stuff being discussed at the moment regarding the current state of affairs.

 

If they have been squabbling about signings all summer, I'm pretty sure it caused us to miss out on a number of players, who fit the criteria of what the board wanted, because KK wasn't familiar with them, but then also wasn't able to identify alternatives who he knew of, that fit the criteria. When he identified Guthrie, the club brought him in.

 

Sorry mate forgot ud been round ashleys for tea and a chat, I was saying basically this is purely based on paper unfounded unquoted shite and a scetched view of what ashley and his cronies are like wheras most of the pro keegan mish mash is based on his personality, people i support of him who know him and quotes from the LMA and himself.

[Baggio]

Quite a few of them I think.

 

He was using his position to be able to say yes or no to players so that he could try and force the boards hand near the end of the window to push for someone like Henry, even though they've pointed out to him from day one that this isn't the sort of route the club want to be taking and instead push for quality players under with at least some sort of long term future.

 

As the club maintains that since 16th January it was definitely not in Keegan's gift to say yes or no to players, how was he able to do this?

 

They didn't say that though.  Did they?

 

No they didn't.

 

It's been well documented that Keegan's opinion on players was taken into consideration, whether it was drawing up a list of players he liked to getting him to go scouting Gomis with Vetere, it's clear the club have tried to make the situation work and keep everyone happy.

 

They said he reported to the DoF, that the transfer policy was informed by financial constraints and that he worked within this system until his resignation. They don't say that Keegan had any other role except the running of the first team. How could he, then, have prevented the club from making any acquisition it wanted?

 

As I've said they tried to take everyone's opinion into consideration, are you suggesting Keegan has never had any say in the transfer market? If that's the case then why did he walk so late in the window over players coming in that he didn't want?

[tgarve]

Wait ... so how come none of the anti Ashley and anti board stuff isn't "rank" specualtion?

 

That's easy: The club's latest statements contradict their statements before the closing of the transfer window. Now we know that they lied.

this aswell. the board said after keegan had resigned he had no say in this and that wheras while he was manager there were constant interviews with wise and co saying the final word was down to kev on transfers.

[KaKa]

 

 

Tbh I think

 

I really doubt that you can

 

We'll see soon enough won't we.

 

If this board stays in place, I'm sure they won't make a mistake with the next guy they bring in. Then we'll see soon enough how the playing staff evolves.

 

I'm just bringin up a point of discussion which is very, very plausible, bt because it isn't in line with the KK lovefest, you're getting frustrated.  Sucks for you.

 

You rubbish what I say then in return exclaim that it was due to the fact the board were too stingy. Well can you offer any proof of that? No you can't can you.

 

Ridiculous.

[SteveMc]

He said yes to Guthrie and Bassong and was consulted over the attempts to sign that Zayette guy. So I assume he said no to some as well. He had some power and sway on player acquisitons.  However, something went wrong in the window and led to a falling out and the last two lads being brought in without his consent.  It is a complicated situation and one in which we are nowhere near in receipt of the full facts.  But to say he had no power at all is churlish. However, to say that the board is above reproach is equally daft.

[Guest fraser]

Baggio, sorry, this thing is not letting me quote. I asked how he was able to stop the club recruiting quite a few of the players mentioned in the OP; this is not the same as merely offering his opinion. If you don't know the answer, that's fine.

[Guest gggg]

You rubbish what I say then in return exclaim that it was due to the fact the board were too stingy. Well can you offer any proof of that? No you can't can you.

 

Apart from everything they've done since they got here?

[KaKa]

Wait ... so how come none of the anti Ashley and anti board stuff isn't "rank" specualtion?

 

Have you all been down to Keegans for some tea and a chat?

 

Get real. This is just as plausible as all the other stuff being discussed at the moment regarding the current state of affairs.

 

If they have been squabbling about signings all summer, I'm pretty sure it caused us to miss out on a number of players, who fit the criteria of what the board wanted, because KK wasn't familiar with them, but then also wasn't able to identify alternatives who he knew of, that fit the criteria. When he identified Guthrie, the club brought him in.

 

He identified Warnock and we had months to sign him but they didn't. What aload of bollocks.

 

How the hell do you know that?

 

Do we know how much Blackburn were asking for Warnock? People on here all claimed he was average, so if it's true Blackburn were asking for £6 million, then the board probably thought, forget that! And rightly so.

 

Maybe, like many of us, they though Enrique, who they spent £6 million on, was just as good as Warnock! Ever consider that?Maybe they thought it would be better to just get a youngster in to give him competition? Maybe Insua? Maybe Pocgnoli?

 

See I can make assumptions too.

[mrmojorisin75]

probably some truth in that from kaka, very doubtful 100% as like johhnypd i've been a massive critic of the clubs spend & i doubt the bickering etc... would have stopped them spending if they intended to

 

isn't that basically proven by the last day when they signed 2 players KK knew fuck all about (iirc)?

[KaKa]

You rubbish what I say then in return exclaim that it was due to the fact the board were too stingy. Well can you offer any proof of that? No you can't can you.

 

Apart from everything they've done since they got here?

 

Like investing a ton of money in the academy? In revamping our scouting network? Clearing all of our debt?

[dilligaf]

 

 

Tbh I think

 

I really doubt that you can

 

We'll see soon enough won't we.

 

If this board stays in place, I'm sure they won't make a mistake with the next guy they bring in. Then we'll see soon enough how the playing staff evolves.

 

I'm just bringin up a point of discussion which is very, very plausible, bt because it isn't in line with the KK lovefest, you're getting frustrated.  Sucks for you.

 

You rubbish what I say then in return exclaim that it was due to the fact the board were too stingy. Well can you offer any proof of that? No you can't can you.

 

Ridiculous.

 

How much did we actually spend in the last transfer window? nothing! infact we made a profit. 15 teams in the PL spent a lot more than us, so yes I would say that was stingy.

Now can you actually prove any of that drivel you spouted in the opening post.

No you can't can you.

Ridiculous.

[tgarve]

You rubbish what I say then in return exclaim that it was due to the fact the board were too stingy. Well can you offer any proof of that? No you can't can you.

 

Apart from everything they've done since they got here?

 

Like investing a ton of money in the academy? In revamping our scouting network? Clearing all of our debt?

 

Well get large amounts of stock in before a closing down sale, shud make a tidy profit.

[Guest Edd]

Wait ... so how come none of the anti Ashley and anti board stuff isn't "rank" specualtion?

 

That's easy: The club's latest statements contradict their statements before the closing of the transfer window. Now we know that they lied.

 

And we've all seen the interview with Keegan where he said the final decision to sell Milner was his.  More lies?

[TRon]

You rubbish what I say then in return exclaim that it was due to the fact the board were too stingy. Well can you offer any proof of that? No you can't can you.

 

Apart from everything they've done since they got here?

 

Like investing a ton of money in the academy? In revamping our scouting network? Clearing all of our debt?

 

Well get large amounts of stock in before a closing down sale, shud make a tidy profit.

 

There's only one thing worse than having a shit team while making a profit:

 

Having an even more shit team while making a loss.

 

This was the scenario before our recent transfer activity.

[KaKa]

 

 

Tbh I think

 

I really doubt that you can

 

We'll see soon enough won't we.

 

If this board stays in place, I'm sure they won't make a mistake with the next guy they bring in. Then we'll see soon enough how the playing staff evolves.

 

I'm just bringin up a point of discussion which is very, very plausible, bt because it isn't in line with the KK lovefest, you're getting frustrated.  Sucks for you.

 

You rubbish what I say then in return exclaim that it was due to the fact the board were too stingy. Well can you offer any proof of that? No you can't can you.

 

Ridiculous.

 

How much did we actually spend in the last transfer window? nothing! infact we made a profit. 15 teams in the PL spent a lot more than us, so yes I would say that was stingy.

Now can you actually prove any of that drivel you spouted in the opening post.

No you can't can you.

Ridiculous.

 

How much money, how much money, how much moeny ...

 

First of all, a succesful window is not judged by how much money was spent, but the number of quality players that were broguht in. I have been extremely happy with every single player brought in this summer. Don't hold it against the club, because they were able to identify good players who hardly cost us anything.

 

Secondly, I would argue that we would probably have been able to bring in more of these types of players i.e. younger, more promising types who don't cost the Earth, if there wasn't this squabbling all summer.

 

 

[tgarve]

Wait ... so how come none of the anti Ashley and anti board stuff isn't "rank" specualtion?

 

That's easy: The club's latest statements contradict their statements before the closing of the transfer window. Now we know that they lied.

 

And we've all seen the interview with Keegan where he said the final decision to sell Milner was his.  More lies?

 

i honestly dont think the major falling out was over milner. i think it was more likely over the barton/ owen/ xisco/ gonzalez end day antics of the board

[Baggio]

Baggio, sorry, this thing is not letting me quote. I asked how he was able to stop the club recruiting quite a few of the players mentioned in the OP; this is not the same as merely offering his opinion. If you don't know the answer, that's fine.

 

He was able to stop the club recruiting them by saying he didn't like the players they had highlighted, now we all know if they wanted to go out and sign them then they could but it's clear to me that they've tried to make it work and not force any player on him that he didn't want, until they did at the end of the window which was why he walked out.

 

The question is why did they bring those players in that he didn't want on the last day of the window and not earlier? Th obvious answer to that is because up until then they didn't want to go behind his back and cause friction, but in the end they had little choice.

[Guest gggg]

You rubbish what I say then in return exclaim that it was due to the fact the board were too stingy. Well can you offer any proof of that? No you can't can you.

 

Apart from everything they've done since they got here?

 

Like investing a ton of money in the academy? In revamping our scouting network? Clearing all of our debt?

 

How much have we spent on our academy and why does it mean we can't afford to spend £6m on a premiership class left back when two different managers think the current one isn't up to it?