Howaythelads Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 To make it even clearer to you. I said the defence under Keegan was the weakest part of the team. It was a better defence than the current one. We have never had what I would call a top quality defence. If you go back to the Allchurch, White, Eastham days, we had a good attack but the defence was awful, I witnessed it numerous times. I would not have appointed any of Dalglish, Gullit, Souness, Roeder. Dalglish had his success at Liverpool, anything else was boring to him, Celtic you could manage. How long was he in management after us. Gullit was more involved in clashing with Shearer and his success as a manager before and since was a short spell at Chelsea. Souness and Roeder are not good enough. Thats my opinion and thats pretty clear to me. A lie, tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 To make it even clearer to you. I said the defence under Keegan was the weakest part of the team. It was a better defence than the current one. We have never had what I would call a top quality defence. If you go back to the Allchurch, White, Eastham days, we had a good attack but the defence was awful, I witnessed it numerous times. I would not have appointed any of Dalglish, Gullit, Souness, Roeder. Dalglish had his success at Liverpool, anything else was boring to him, Celtic you could manage. How long was he in management after us. Gullit was more involved in clashing with Shearer and his success as a manager before and since was a short spell at Chelsea. Souness and Roeder are not good enough. Thats my opinion and thats pretty clear to me. why would you not have appointed Dalglish on the basis of his track record ? And if you don't appoint managers on the basis of their track record, how would you choose them ? I take it that, on the basis of track record, that would rule out Wenger, Ferguson, Capello, Lippi etc who are all similar to what Dalglish was at the time ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 If he was such a brilliant appointment, why did Fat Freddy sack him? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 If he was such a brilliant appointment, why did Fat Freddy sack him? So you think he should have stuck to "the long term plan" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 If he was such a brilliant appointment, why did Fat Freddy sack him? So you think he should have stuck to "the long term plan" Can't answer the question, then. Big surprise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 If he was such a brilliant appointment, why did Fat Freddy sack him? So you think he should have stuck to "the long term plan" Can't answer the question, then. Big surprise. He sacked him because despite his outstanding track record of success, he didn't do well enough for my club. Now perhaps you can answer the perfectly valid questions in NE5's last post. To save you scrolling here it is again, slightly edited to help you and some others understand............. 1. Why would you not have appointed Dalglish given the strength of his track record ? 2. If you don't appoint managers on the basis of their track record, how would you choose them ? 3. On the basis of track record and Dalglish being a shite appointment, do you agree that would rule out Wenger, Ferguson, Capello, Lippi etc who are all similar to what Dalglish was at the time ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rehhagel Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 To make it even clearer to you. I said the defence under Keegan was the weakest part of the team. It was a better defence than the current one. We have never had what I would call a top quality defence. If you go back to the Allchurch, White, Eastham days, we had a good attack but the defence was awful, I witnessed it numerous times. I would not have appointed any of Dalglish, Gullit, Souness, Roeder. Dalglish had his success at Liverpool, anything else was boring to him, Celtic you could manage. How long was he in management after us. Gullit was more involved in clashing with Shearer and his success as a manager before and since was a short spell at Chelsea. Souness and Roeder are not good enough. Thats my opinion and thats pretty clear to me. why would you not have appointed Dalglish on the basis of his track record ? And if you don't appoint managers on the basis of their track record, how would you choose them ? I take it that, on the basis of track record, that would rule out Wenger, Ferguson, Capello, Lippi etc who are all similar to what Dalglish was at the time ? What was his track record at the time in comparison with Wenger, Ferguson, Capello and Lippi? You must have studied some stats to come to that conclusion as it's not self evident, so reveal all please. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Drymarker1 Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Please can we all be in full voice today................. WE WANT SHEPHERD OUT WE WANT SHEPHERD OUT Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Please can we all be in full voice today................. WE WANT SHEPHERD OUT WE WANT SHEPHERD OUT :roll: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 To make it even clearer to you. I said the defence under Keegan was the weakest part of the team. It was a better defence than the current one. We have never had what I would call a top quality defence. If you go back to the Allchurch, White, Eastham days, we had a good attack but the defence was awful, I witnessed it numerous times. I would not have appointed any of Dalglish, Gullit, Souness, Roeder. Dalglish had his success at Liverpool, anything else was boring to him, Celtic you could manage. How long was he in management after us. Gullit was more involved in clashing with Shearer and his success as a manager before and since was a short spell at Chelsea. Souness and Roeder are not good enough. Thats my opinion and thats pretty clear to me. why would you not have appointed Dalglish on the basis of his track record ? And if you don't appoint managers on the basis of their track record, how would you choose them ? I take it that, on the basis of track record, that would rule out Wenger, Ferguson, Capello, Lippi etc who are all similar to what Dalglish was at the time ? What was his track record at the time in comparison with Wenger, Ferguson, Capello and Lippi? You must have studied some stats to come to that conclusion as it's not self evident, so reveal all please. eerrr....4 league titles [with 2 different clubs], 2 FA Cups, 3 manager of the year awards. Manager of one of the best Liverpool sides during the European ban. You aren't one of the people I expected to not know this, I must say. Now Mick, and Ozzie, yes I expected them not to know Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Fox Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 To make it even clearer to you. I said the defence under Keegan was the weakest part of the team. It was a better defence than the current one. We have never had what I would call a top quality defence. If you go back to the Allchurch, White, Eastham days, we had a good attack but the defence was awful, I witnessed it numerous times. I would not have appointed any of Dalglish, Gullit, Souness, Roeder. Dalglish had his success at Liverpool, anything else was boring to him, Celtic you could manage. How long was he in management after us. Gullit was more involved in clashing with Shearer and his success as a manager before and since was a short spell at Chelsea. Souness and Roeder are not good enough. Thats my opinion and thats pretty clear to me. A lie, tbh. Well perhaps you would like to quote the post where I stated that the defence was bad under Keegan. As for NE5, A waste of time telling you anything as you do not understand plain English and I am not going to repeat clear answers that I've already given. I suggest you and HTL stop wasting your time inventing so called posts that people ahve made. If it wasn't so pathetic it would be comical. In fact it is comical. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rehhagel Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 I was looking for a more comprehensive answer, instead I'll ask wiki wiki wild west. Dalglish joined Newcastle in 1997/1998 season, 2 years since he last won anything (Premiership), 7 years since he won the Old Division One with Liverpool, and 8 years since he won the FA Cup with Liverpool. (8 years = 3 trophies) Dalglish was most successful during the mid to late 80's. Ferguson, by 1997 had over the same 8 year period won 4 Premiership titles included back to back, 4 FA Cup titles, in one season completing the double. 1 League Cup, 1 UEFA CUp and 1 European Cup Winners Cup. (8 years = 11 trophies) I take it that, on the basis of track record, that would rule out Wenger, Ferguson, Capello, Lippi etc who are all similar to what Dalglish was at the time ? The only similarity between Ferguson and Dalgish is that they had both won the Premiership and FA Cup, their track record is quite different, and the fact that at the time Newcastle signed Dalglish, his success was mainly from a previous decade, whereas Ferguson's kept on up to the point and past the point of the time Newcastle signed Dalglish. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Fox Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Absolutely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ToonFanNorway Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Now stop ya F**king whinging and start doing something :wullie: This cannot go on like this anymore :wullie: blueupset.gif blueupset.gif blueupset.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbers Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Now stop ya F**king whinging and start doing something :wullie: This cannot go on like this anymore :wullie: blueupset.gif blueupset.gif blueupset.gif What exactly do you want "us" to do? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ToonFanNorway Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Back the Campaign and join the forum bluecool.gif bluecool.gif bluecool.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbers Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 I already did a while ago,doesnt look like much is happening there though :winking: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ToonFanNorway Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 FOR THE ATTENTION OF ALL FANS bluebigeek.gif bluebigeek.gif bluebigeek.gif We have decided to name the campaign 'United For Change'. We have registered the domain www.unitedforchange.co.uk The website is still being constructed but with a bit of luck we can have it up and running over this weekend. What we need now is a logo for United For Change, this where we need your help. If you are any good with photoshop etc then please try and make a banner or logo for United For Change. Please remember not to include any NUFC copyrighted material. We also think it might be an idea to also register another domain and redirect it to united for change, something such as shepherd-out.org. What do you think about this? Apologies for the delay in getting the website up and running but everything should be up and running sooner rather than later and then we really can get the Shepherd Out campaign going. Please either PM me with feedback(NO S**T Invicta bluewink.gif) or visit link below and post on there bluecool.gif There you go Numbers !!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kasper Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 EveRy ONE gOO marching on the STREETS NOW EHH EHH. DO SOMETHIGN. :wullie: :wullie: :wullie: THIS HAS TO STOP NOW THERES NO GOING BACK IM LIKE SOOOO MAD AND DONT CARE THAT EVERYONE THINKS THIS IS SOOME 10 YEAR OLD WRITING EH EH blueupset.gif blueupset.gif blueupset.gif and just to force my opinion: :wullie: :wullie: :wullie: blueupset.gif blueupset.gif blueupset.gif blueupset.gif :wullie: :wullie: :wullie: blueupset.gif blueupset.gif blueupset.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Invicta_Toon Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 EveRy ONE gOO marching on the STREETS NOW EHH EHH. DO SOMETHIGN. :wullie: :wullie: :wullie: THIS HAS TO STOP NOW THERES NO GOING BACK IM LIKE SOOOO MAD AND DONT CARE THAT EVERYONE THINKS THIS IS SOOME 10 YEAR OLD WRITING EH EH blueupset.gif blueupset.gif blueupset.gif and just to force my opinion: :wullie: :wullie: :wullie: blueupset.gif blueupset.gif blueupset.gif blueupset.gif :wullie: :wullie: :wullie: blueupset.gif blueupset.gif blueupset.gif the smilies do sort of have an effect after a while Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 and getting only Shepherd out will achieve what? Both Shepherd and Roeder need to go tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Invicta_Toon Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 and getting only Shepherd out will achieve what? Both Shepherd and Roeder need to go tbh. no, no, no you get Shepherd out then promote Roeder to Chairman Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ToonFanNorway Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Invicta full of good ideas again bluelaugh.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest smoggeordie Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 I've just created the "Shepherd out" group on facebook. Anyone who has facebook should join. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 If he was such a brilliant appointment, why did Fat Freddy sack him? So you think he should have stuck to "the long term plan" Can't answer the question, then. Big surprise. He sacked him because despite his outstanding track record of success, he didn't do well enough for my club. Now perhaps you can answer the perfectly valid questions in NE5's last post. To save you scrolling here it is again, slightly edited to help you and some others understand............. 1. Why would you not have appointed Dalglish given the strength of his track record ? 2. If you don't appoint managers on the basis of their track record, how would you choose them ? 3. On the basis of track record and Dalglish being a shite appointment, do you agree that would rule out Wenger, Ferguson, Capello, Lippi etc who are all similar to what Dalglish was at the time ? Bumped for the benefit of omarse and the rest, who criticise but include no substance to their posts......... At least someone has had a go at point number 1, it would be good if omarse had a go at all 3. There's no point in the moaning bastard having a go at point 1, he knew in advance that Dalglish would fail so that's why he wouldn't have appointed him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts