Keegan to launch £9m unfair dismissal claim?

[Guest]

Buying and selling players needs to be done within the club's budget and that's never really been Keegan's forte unless he is allowed to spend pretty generously.

 

You don't buy into that surely do you?

 

It reads to me that you're trying to convince yourself of this in order to convince yourself that the set-up/system/structure Ashley put in place is the right thing for the club and if that really is the case you've lost it mate. Seriously.

 

 

 

that is the case with a lot of people.

 

 

Keegan walked out in 1997 because he couldn't work under a new structure...a structure which you keep defending to the hilt non-stop under Shepherd which did bring a relative amount of success.

[Dave]

I cant speak for anyone else but i'm for the club above any individual. My loyalty is to NUFC and not to an individual especially in a situation where no one knows the facts.

 

I don't think many have loyalties above the club as a whole tbf. I think all Skirge/cp's point is that where we don't know the facts, one is forced to ask who they trust on gut instinct and past experience alone.

 

Keegan has surely done much more for this club than Ashley has, and so many retain the view that the former is the one they choose to trust and therefore back. This may seem daft to some, but it doesn't to me.

 

If Keegan's compensation was going to come out of Ashley's pocket I'd go along with that. As it will come out of Newcastle United's coffers, I'd want the club to win.

 

Fair enough. It's probably because of the private ownership; people are just assuming 'the club' = 'Mike Ashley' right now.

[TRon]

How about refusing to back SBR's Keegan's judgement in going for Miguel Warnock, Portugal's RB Blackburn's LB and spending £2m on Carr £0m on nobody instead? That was a good call wasn't it?

 

It's easy this game.

 

Funny isn't it how so many chairman refuse to back their managers even though big claims are made on behalf of a certain former Chairman?

[ChezGiven]

I cant speak for anyone else but i'm for the club above any individual. My loyalty is to NUFC and not to an individual especially in a situation where no one knows the facts.

 

I don't think many have loyalties above the club as a whole tbf. I think all Skirge/cp's point is that where we don't know the facts, one is forced to ask who they trust on gut instinct and past experience alone.

 

Keegan has surely done much more for this club than Ashley has, and so many retain the view that the former is the one they choose to trust and therefore back. This may seem daft to some, but it doesn't to me.

 

It seems daft to me when the implications of the choice (based on no facts) is the implosion of the club. Thats quite an outcome based on the job someone did 10 years ago and ignoring the bad elements of that period.

 

[UV]

Its these types of loyalties that have held this club back for the last 15 years.

 

Eh? Examples?

Held the club back from the heady days of nearly dropping into the 3rd?

How does a supporter's loyalty to an ex-manager hold the club back exactly?

 

One a smallish scale not allowing the promising Bellamy/Kluivert partnership to grow in order to allow Shearer to get to the goal record?

 

Managerial choice, nothing to do with supporter loyalty.

 

Some managers are loyal to players who have done well in the past even when form dips and keep consistency in the team, others will swap and change the team based on form. Both methods have advantages and disadvantages, and both have worked successfully. When Butt came back from relegated Birmingham noone here held out any hope for him, yet he was very good that season and the same kind of faith in a player you're talking about with Shearer was rewarded.

 

/sidetrack

[merlin]

If KK really IS in line for a come-back as manager, he will certainly have to ditch this supposed compensation claim - a separate action against Ashley would seem to be the best he can hope for ; obviously, any new owners are NOT going to employ a man who is taking their new investment to court for millions of pounds, so he will have to ditch his action against NUFC..failure to do so would undoubtedly ruin any chance of his being reinstated as manager - and rightly so in my opinion ; if he has as much feeling for the club and its fans as he claims, his argument is with the previous owner and NOT the new ones...

I would NOT wish to see him back as manager IF he continues this suit against the club.

[Dave]

How about refusing to back SBR's Keegan's judgement in going for Miguel Warnock, Portugal's RB Blackburn's LB and spending £2m on Carr £0m on nobody instead? That was a good call wasn't it?

 

It's easy this game.

 

Funny isn't it how so many chairman refuse to back their managers even though big claims are made on behalf of a certain former Chairman?

 

I was merely being facetious.

 

Just making the point that it's easy to draw parallels between the different chairman/owners not backing their chosen manager at certain times. Which makes it strange your opinion differs now.

 

Shepherd sometimes didn't back the manager - bad.

Ashley/his system sometimes didn't back the manager - good?

[UV]

I cant speak for anyone else but i'm for the club above any individual. My loyalty is to NUFC and not to an individual especially in a situation where no one knows the facts.

 

I don't think many have loyalties above the club as a whole tbf. I think all Skirge/cp's point is that where we don't know the facts, one is forced to ask who they trust on gut instinct and past experience alone.

 

Keegan has surely done much more for this club than Ashley has, and so many retain the view that the former is the one they choose to trust and therefore back. This may seem daft to some, but it doesn't to me.

 

It seems daft to me when the implications of the choice (based on no facts) is the implosion of the club. Thats quite an outcome based on the job someone did 10 years ago and ignoring the bad elements of that period.

 

 

What's daft is the belief that anything supporters have done has caused the current situation.

[ChezGiven]

I cant speak for anyone else but i'm for the club above any individual. My loyalty is to NUFC and not to an individual especially in a situation where no one knows the facts.

 

I don't think many have loyalties above the club as a whole tbf. I think all Skirge/cp's point is that where we don't know the facts, one is forced to ask who they trust on gut instinct and past experience alone.

 

Keegan has surely done much more for this club than Ashley has, and so many retain the view that the former is the one they choose to trust and therefore back. This may seem daft to some, but it doesn't to me.

 

It seems daft to me when the implications of the choice (based on no facts) is the implosion of the club. Thats quite an outcome based on the job someone did 10 years ago and ignoring the bad elements of that period.

 

 

What's daft is the belief that anything supporters have done has caused the current situation.

 

Thats nonsense. We ARE the situation.

[Parky]

I cant speak for anyone else but i'm for the club above any individual. My loyalty is to NUFC and not to an individual especially in a situation where no one knows the facts.

 

I don't think many have loyalties above the club as a whole tbf. I think all Skirge/cp's point is that where we don't know the facts, one is forced to ask who they trust on gut instinct and past experience alone.

 

Keegan has surely done much more for this club than Ashley has, and so many retain the view that the former is the one they choose to trust and therefore back. This may seem daft to some, but it doesn't to me.

 

This.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Its these types of loyalties that have held this club back for the last 15 years.

 

Eh? Examples?

Held the club back from the heady days of nearly dropping into the 3rd?

How does a supporter's loyalty to an ex-manager hold the club back exactly?

 

One a smallish scale not allowing the promising Bellamy/Kluivert partnership to grow in order to allow Shearer to get to the goal record?

 

Managerial choice, nothing to do with supporter loyalty.

 

Some managers are loyal to players who have done well in the past even when form dips and keep consistency in the team, others will swap and change the team based on form. Both methods have advantages and disadvantages, and both have worked successfully. When Butt came back from relegated Birmingham noone here held out any hope for him, yet he was very good that season and the same kind of faith in a player you're talking about with Shearer was rewarded.

 

/sidetrack

 

Really?

 

Do you think that had Souness sat Shearer on the bench for a run of 5-10 games to allow Kluivert and Bellamy to have a run of games the crowd would have been supportive?

 

One loss and the pressure to recall Shearer would have been massive.

 

(The same goes if SBR had not been sacked and then proceded to give Shearer a prolonged sit down)

[Dave]

I cant speak for anyone else but i'm for the club above any individual. My loyalty is to NUFC and not to an individual especially in a situation where no one knows the facts.

 

I don't think many have loyalties above the club as a whole tbf. I think all Skirge/cp's point is that where we don't know the facts, one is forced to ask who they trust on gut instinct and past experience alone.

 

Keegan has surely done much more for this club than Ashley has, and so many retain the view that the former is the one they choose to trust and therefore back. This may seem daft to some, but it doesn't to me.

 

It seems daft to me when the implications of the choice (based on no facts) is the implosion of the club. Thats quite an outcome based on the job someone did 10 years ago and ignoring the bad elements of that period.

 

 

I'm not sure anyone could have predicted Ashley taking the protest so literally, and so quickly. Football fans are hysterically fickle; I'm reasonably convinced that if he had stuck to his guns (and his system), and a new manager had won a few games, Keegan would be soon forgotten as a bad idea.

[ChezGiven]

I cant speak for anyone else but i'm for the club above any individual. My loyalty is to NUFC and not to an individual especially in a situation where no one knows the facts.

 

I don't think many have loyalties above the club as a whole tbf. I think all Skirge/cp's point is that where we don't know the facts, one is forced to ask who they trust on gut instinct and past experience alone.

 

Keegan has surely done much more for this club than Ashley has, and so many retain the view that the former is the one they choose to trust and therefore back. This may seem daft to some, but it doesn't to me.

 

It seems daft to me when the implications of the choice (based on no facts) is the implosion of the club. Thats quite an outcome based on the job someone did 10 years ago and ignoring the bad elements of that period.

 

 

I'm not sure anyone could have predicted Ashley taking the protest so literally, and so quickly. Football fans are hysterically fickle; I'm reasonably convinced that if he had stuck to his guns (and his system), and a new manager had won a few games, Keegan would be soon forgotten as a bad idea.

 

You are fucking joking! NUSC would be dressed in balaclavas and carrying weapons by now.

[Dave]

I cant speak for anyone else but i'm for the club above any individual. My loyalty is to NUFC and not to an individual especially in a situation where no one knows the facts.

 

I don't think many have loyalties above the club as a whole tbf. I think all Skirge/cp's point is that where we don't know the facts, one is forced to ask who they trust on gut instinct and past experience alone.

 

Keegan has surely done much more for this club than Ashley has, and so many retain the view that the former is the one they choose to trust and therefore back. This may seem daft to some, but it doesn't to me.

 

It seems daft to me when the implications of the choice (based on no facts) is the implosion of the club. Thats quite an outcome based on the job someone did 10 years ago and ignoring the bad elements of that period.

 

 

I'm not sure anyone could have predicted Ashley taking the protest so literally, and so quickly. Football fans are hysterically fickle; I'm reasonably convinced that if he had stuck to his guns (and his system), and a new manager had won a few games, Keegan would be soon forgotten as a bad idea.

 

You are fucking joking! NUSC would be dressed in balaclavas and carrying weapons by now.

 

 

If they'd moved swiftly and got someone of decent pedigree/promise in then I'm pretty sure we would have moved on, yeah. A bit of communication might have helped the situation, of course.

[TRon]

How about refusing to back SBR's Keegan's judgement in going for Miguel Warnock, Portugal's RB Blackburn's LB and spending £2m on Carr £0m on nobody instead? That was a good call wasn't it?

 

It's easy this game.

 

Funny isn't it how so many chairman refuse to back their managers even though big claims are made on behalf of a certain former Chairman?

 

I was merely being facetious.

 

Just making the point that it's easy to draw parallels between the different chairman/owners not backing their chosen manager at certain times. Which makes it strange your opinion differs now.

 

Shepherd sometimes didn't back the manager - bad.

Ashley/his system sometimes didn't back the manager - good?

 

Maybe it's best we don't open this can of worms on second thoughts. We all know how it will end...> 

[UV]

I cant speak for anyone else but i'm for the club above any individual. My loyalty is to NUFC and not to an individual especially in a situation where no one knows the facts.

 

I don't think many have loyalties above the club as a whole tbf. I think all Skirge/cp's point is that where we don't know the facts, one is forced to ask who they trust on gut instinct and past experience alone.

 

Keegan has surely done much more for this club than Ashley has, and so many retain the view that the former is the one they choose to trust and therefore back. This may seem daft to some, but it doesn't to me.

 

It seems daft to me when the implications of the choice (based on no facts) is the implosion of the club. Thats quite an outcome based on the job someone did 10 years ago and ignoring the bad elements of that period.

 

 

What's daft is the belief that anything supporters have done has caused the current situation.

 

Thats nonsense. We ARE the situation.

 

So why aren't the Glazer's selling? Why hasn't Hicks buggered off? How did Shepherd last so long for that matter?

 

It's all been a bit too easy.

 

As I've said before, if Ashley's so prone to public opinion, just print up a few banners and go on a march asking him to stay.

[Cronky]

 

How anyone can question the motives of a man who when this club was on the bones of its arse on the verge of going bust when not even fans could be arsed with it anymore and with no money to pay people, he said yes to a job that would mean he would have to go without being paid with no guarantees he'd get recompensated and also have to pay Terry Mac's wages out of his own pocket.

 

 

Are you sure about your information here? You're saying that Keegan was effectively paying for the privelege of managing Newcastle United. That's a new one on me and I have to say it sounds a teeny weeny bit unlikely.

 

As we say - source?

[Dave]

Maybe it's best we don't open this can of worms on second thoughts. We all know how it will end...> 

 

Deal.

[ChezGiven]

I cant speak for anyone else but i'm for the club above any individual. My loyalty is to NUFC and not to an individual especially in a situation where no one knows the facts.

 

I don't think many have loyalties above the club as a whole tbf. I think all Skirge/cp's point is that where we don't know the facts, one is forced to ask who they trust on gut instinct and past experience alone.

 

Keegan has surely done much more for this club than Ashley has, and so many retain the view that the former is the one they choose to trust and therefore back. This may seem daft to some, but it doesn't to me.

 

It seems daft to me when the implications of the choice (based on no facts) is the implosion of the club. Thats quite an outcome based on the job someone did 10 years ago and ignoring the bad elements of that period.

 

 

What's daft is the belief that anything supporters have done has caused the current situation.

 

Thats nonsense. We ARE the situation.

 

So why aren't the Glazer's selling? Why hasn't Hicks buggered off? How did Shepherd last so long for that matter?

 

It's all been a bit too easy.

 

As I've said before, if Ashley's so prone to public opinion, just print up a few banners and go on a march asking him to stay.

 

Only the Glazers have had real problems and FC United was the upshot of that episode.

 

The point i'm making is that loyalty, agendas, small-minded anti-cockney feelings etc has set the current direction of this football club rather than a sober analysis of the footballing and financial realities.

 

The point is our furious reaction wasn't a reaction to a footballing issue, it was a reaction to a political and emotional issue. There are plenty examples of this type of behaviour at every level of the club from supporter to chairman over the past 15 years.

[Baggio]

I'm sure that if his lawyers had told him he had no case for constructive dismissal then he's have been more likely to come back.

 

What do you think he was doing in those few days after storming out and leaving the club in limbo? He didn't have any intention of coming back straight away as he refused an offer from the club to meet up to try and iron out their differences, he was too busy with his lawyers getting their heads together to see if he could push for constructive dismissal so that he could get his pay off.

 

 

Perhaps he didn't want to meet with Llmabias? Either way he chose to resign rather than meet up face to face with someone from the club to sort it out.

 

A Newcastle statement said the club was "sad and disappointed" that he had resigned.

 

It added: "Over the last few days, the club has devoted itself to the discussions it has held with Kevin and as a result of those discussions had put together a set of practical suggestions for how to move forward.

 

"The club made it clear to Kevin that if he had any outstanding concerns on its proposals, he should raise them with the club.

 

"The club regrets that Kevin has, instead of taking up that offer, chosen to resign."

 

 

That statement is from the 4th September, so is the club lying about the fact they had been in discussions with Keegan?

 

 

Keegan didn't leave the club in limbo, he resigned. It happens. You get a new manager and move on. The super duper system is supposed to make that easier, not harder. It's Ashley who is leaving the club in limbo while he made public his effort to look for a buyer while he can still profit from the mess he's caused..

 

Where does it say he met up with the club?

[Dokko]

5 weeks holiday at the start of the transfer window wasn't enough (couldn't give a shite then about being in charge of transfers then were you little Kev?) for him obviously he needs compo! And he needs it fast!

 

 

[ChezGiven]

5 weeks holiday at the start of the transfer window wasn't enough (couldn't give a shite then about being in charge of transfers then were you little Kev?) for him obviously he needs compo! And he needs it fast!

 

 

Thats a point!!

[Disco]

Not going to happen but i wish we could close the book on the whole Keegan thing, we have to move on.

[UV]

I cant speak for anyone else but i'm for the club above any individual. My loyalty is to NUFC and not to an individual especially in a situation where no one knows the facts.

 

I don't think many have loyalties above the club as a whole tbf. I think all Skirge/cp's point is that where we don't know the facts, one is forced to ask who they trust on gut instinct and past experience alone.

 

Keegan has surely done much more for this club than Ashley has, and so many retain the view that the former is the one they choose to trust and therefore back. This may seem daft to some, but it doesn't to me.

 

It seems daft to me when the implications of the choice (based on no facts) is the implosion of the club. Thats quite an outcome based on the job someone did 10 years ago and ignoring the bad elements of that period.

 

 

What's daft is the belief that anything supporters have done has caused the current situation.

 

Thats nonsense. We ARE the situation.

 

So why aren't the Glazer's selling? Why hasn't Hicks buggered off? How did Shepherd last so long for that matter?

 

It's all been a bit too easy.

 

As I've said before, if Ashley's so prone to public opinion, just print up a few banners and go on a march asking him to stay.

 

Only the Glazers have had real problems and FC United was the upshot of that episode.

 

The point i'm making is that loyalty, agendas, small-minded anti-cockney feelings etc has set the current direction of this football club rather than a sober analysis of the footballing and financial realities.

 

The point is our furious reaction wasn't a reaction to a footballing issue, it was a reaction to a political and emotional issue. There are plenty examples of this type of behaviour at every level of the club from supporter to chairman over the past 15 years.

 

Liverpool supporters have protested far more about Hicks than we have about Ashley, and some of the manc supporters went a lot further in setting up FC United than some of ours have by setting up NUSC.

 

The point I'm making is that supporter unrest is merely a convenient excuse for Ashley to do publicly what he was doing privately anyway, and as such is largely irrelevant to out current situation.

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

You're missing an important part of the reason why protests affected Ashley more than Hicks, Glazers and before them the likes of Doug Ellis.

 

Ashley bought the club for fun, because he wanted to go to the match and mix with normal people - enjoy himself. Now he can't do that there's no point in him hanging around.

 

The fact that he has folded so quickly suggests to me that he is anything but a ruthless businessman with regard to this. If he was he would have hung around, made the club a success and continued taking the money.