Keegan to launch £9m unfair dismissal claim?

[thomas]

I know I bitch about this roughly every 5 threads anymore but please guys.  please.  Kill the pyramids.

[Kitman]

Why do we need a DoF structure unless we are going to keep appointing crap managers?  I can see you really need it when you don't trust the manager to make decent transfer decisions and expect him to be through the revolving door within a season or so.  If we had a decent manager you wouldn't need fancy structures to provide continuity or make signings.  By all means get a decent scouting system to support them and put proper investment into the youth set-up to back fill the lack of young talent, but you don't need a DoF for that.

 

The main problem with the Shepherds & Halls was their choice of manager imo.  Like Role Model, the only appointments I really didn't want were Souness and Roeder.  Souness had disaster written all over him and we've never recovered.  We need a long term appointment to do the same job as SBR or Moyes at Everton in building the club up, that was the idea of Allardyce I think.  We don't need a DoF to do that imo.

 

We probably need to move on from Keegan for the same reason.  Would love to have seen what would have happened if he'd been in sole charge with the sort of net spend Souness enjoyed though.

 

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

 

 

I suppose the system that deliver the mighty Ramos is foolproof?

 

The system did something ours hasn't done since 1969, it delivered a trophy.

 

 

Ramos is still a clueless bufoon.

 

You're basing your opinion of his managerial skills entirely on the seven or so games played so far this season then I take it?

 

Where you take it is not my concern.

 

That a yes then?

 

 

No.

 

I said he'd fail in the Ramos thread as I got wind of the fact that they were going to sell their best 2 strikers from under his nose and replace them with shit. A manager who won't stand upto that or pays lip service to a system that has effectively destroyed Spurs hopes for a good season is a bufoon or has no self respect.

 

That's the difference between him and Keegan I guess.

 

That and winning half a dozen trophies.

 

and to think that I'm told I ruin threads.........

 

You said you were happy with Allardyce, when you could have told us about Ramos BTW

 

 

 

What are you on about? He was simply adding to a discussion me and Parky had going on.

 

selective clipping alert

 

not to mention lacking a wider grasp of mandy's usual non contribution.

 

 

 

Parky said Ramos is clueless. Ozzie countered that by saying that he's actually won some silverware in his time.

 

That was indeed the point of my thread-ruining post -- two consecutive UEFA cups is not the work of a complete buffoon. And he's already won more at Spurs than any Toon manager since Joe Harvey.

 

bottom of the premiership. The past counts for nothing, according to some, including you when you apply your usual hindsight.

 

Are you saying he was better qualified than Dalglish ?

 

 

 

I'm saying he's not a complete buffoon.

 

I'm sorry if this point is too difficult for you.

 

well, are you or are you not saying Ramos is a good candidate for the NUFC job ?

 

If you are, on what basis ?

 

If the basis is his past record, is it or is it not better than that of Dalglish ?

 

If you think that because someone has won a trophy, it makes them a better candidate than Keegan, do you therefore think that the likes of Joe Royle, Maurice Evans, Bobby Gould, Steve McLaren and Brian Little were/are better managers than Keegan ?

 

Take your time with this one.

 

 

 

Hmm. I don't know how I can put this more clearly.

 

I am saying that Ramos is not a complete buffoon. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

Would it help if I typed more slowly for you?

[madras]

 

 

I suppose the system that deliver the mighty Ramos is foolproof?

 

The system did something ours hasn't done since 1969, it delivered a trophy.

 

 

Ramos is still a clueless bufoon.

 

You're basing your opinion of his managerial skills entirely on the seven or so games played so far this season then I take it?

 

Where you take it is not my concern.

 

That a yes then?

 

 

No.

 

I said he'd fail in the Ramos thread as I got wind of the fact that they were going to sell their best 2 strikers from under his nose and replace them with s***. A manager who won't stand upto that or pays lip service to a system that has effectively destroyed Spurs hopes for a good season is a bufoon or has no self respect.

 

That's the difference between him and Keegan I guess.

 

That and winning half a dozen trophies.

 

and to think that I'm told I ruin threads.........

 

You said you were happy with Allardyce, when you could have told us about Ramos BTW

 

 

 

What are you on about? He was simply adding to a discussion me and Parky had going on.

 

selective clipping alert

 

not to mention lacking a wider grasp of mandy's usual non contribution.

 

 

 

Parky said Ramos is clueless. Ozzie countered that by saying that he's actually won some silverware in his time.

 

That was indeed the point of my thread-ruining post -- two consecutive UEFA cups is not the work of a complete buffoon. And he's already won more at Spurs than any Toon manager since Joe Harvey.

 

bottom of the premiership. The past counts for nothing, according to some, including you when you apply your usual hindsight.

 

Are you saying he was better qualified than Dalglish ?

 

 

 

I'm saying he's not a complete buffoon.

 

I'm sorry if this point is too difficult for you.

 

well, are you or are you not saying Ramos is a good candidate for the NUFC job ?

 

If you are, on what basis ?

 

If the basis is his past record, is it or is it not better than that of Dalglish ?

 

If you think that because someone has won a trophy, it makes them a better candidate than Keegan, do you therefore think that the likes of Joe Royle, Maurice Evans, Bobby Gould, Steve McLaren and Brian Little were/are better managers than Keegan ?

 

Take your time with this one.

 

 

 

Hmm. I don't know how I can put this more clearly.

 

I am saying that Ramos is not a complete buffoon. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

Would it help if I typed more slowly for you?

dont you get it ? ramos's team is below ours at the moment that means he's crap but a board who takes a team from 3rd to lower mid table isn't......got it yet ?

[sicsfingeredmong]

 

 

I suppose the system that deliver the mighty Ramos is foolproof?

 

The system did something ours hasn't done since 1969, it delivered a trophy.

 

 

Ramos is still a clueless bufoon.

 

You're basing your opinion of his managerial skills entirely on the seven or so games played so far this season then I take it?

 

Where you take it is not my concern.

 

That a yes then?

 

 

No.

 

I said he'd fail in the Ramos thread as I got wind of the fact that they were going to sell their best 2 strikers from under his nose and replace them with s***. A manager who won't stand upto that or pays lip service to a system that has effectively destroyed Spurs hopes for a good season is a bufoon or has no self respect.

 

That's the difference between him and Keegan I guess.

 

That and winning half a dozen trophies.

 

and to think that I'm told I ruin threads.........

 

You said you were happy with Allardyce, when you could have told us about Ramos BTW

 

 

 

What are you on about? He was simply adding to a discussion me and Parky had going on.

 

selective clipping alert

 

not to mention lacking a wider grasp of mandy's usual non contribution.

 

 

 

Parky said Ramos is clueless. Ozzie countered that by saying that he's actually won some silverware in his time.

 

That was indeed the point of my thread-ruining post -- two consecutive UEFA cups is not the work of a complete buffoon. And he's already won more at Spurs than any Toon manager since Joe Harvey.

 

 

Simplistic comparison drawn by somebody who still holds a grudge because another 'somebody' walked away during a time when many of the so-called Sky Generationers jumped aboard during the mid-90's bandwagon.

 

As for the comparison, which imo was one of your usual sly and pinheaded digs at Keegan. Ramos' Spanish CV, in addition to his solitary English Lge Cup, counts for nothing until he *guides Spurs to consecutive/or better top 3/top tier finishes - one of which KK led us to within one afternoon of a title - and revitalises the Londoners fortunes to the extent Keegan did in his 1st stint here.

 

*That's called sustained progress, as opposed to being a managerial flash in the pan based on period of a season or thereabouts.

[NE5]

 

 

I suppose the system that deliver the mighty Ramos is foolproof?

 

The system did something ours hasn't done since 1969, it delivered a trophy.

 

 

Ramos is still a clueless bufoon.

 

You're basing your opinion of his managerial skills entirely on the seven or so games played so far this season then I take it?

 

Where you take it is not my concern.

 

That a yes then?

 

 

No.

 

I said he'd fail in the Ramos thread as I got wind of the fact that they were going to sell their best 2 strikers from under his nose and replace them with s***. A manager who won't stand upto that or pays lip service to a system that has effectively destroyed Spurs hopes for a good season is a bufoon or has no self respect.

 

That's the difference between him and Keegan I guess.

 

That and winning half a dozen trophies.

 

and to think that I'm told I ruin threads.........

 

You said you were happy with Allardyce, when you could have told us about Ramos BTW

 

 

 

What are you on about? He was simply adding to a discussion me and Parky had going on.

 

selective clipping alert

 

not to mention lacking a wider grasp of mandy's usual non contribution.

 

 

 

Parky said Ramos is clueless. Ozzie countered that by saying that he's actually won some silverware in his time.

 

That was indeed the point of my thread-ruining post -- two consecutive UEFA cups is not the work of a complete buffoon. And he's already won more at Spurs than any Toon manager since Joe Harvey.

 

 

Simplistic comparison drawn by somebody who still holds a grudge because another 'somebody' walked away during a time when many of the so-called Sky Generationers jumped aboard during the mid-90's bandwagon.

 

As for the comparison, which imo was one of your usual sly and pinheaded digs at Keegan. Ramos' Spanish CV, in addition to his solitary English Lge Cup, counts for nothing until he *guides Spurs to consecutive/or better top 3/top tier finishes - one of which KK led us to within one afternoon of a title - and revitalises the Londoners fortunes to the extent Keegan did in his 1st stint here.

 

*That's called sustained progress, as opposed to being a managerial flash in the pan based on period of a season or thereabouts. 

 

this.

 

Far more sense than a handful of posters who simply spout rubbish, cliches and hindsight galore and drag the message forum down. It also applies to any future owners, the last ones may have done their time, but until someone matches their sustained best period, they haven't matched them either.

 

Does anybody think winning a one off trophy means its more successful than Keegan ? Does anybody think that Dalglish didn't have a track record to match anybody ?

 

Not many managers are suited to Newcastle more than Keegan, despite the sniping of him.

 

On topic. If someone is going to walk away with the clubs money, I would rather it was Keegan than Ashley. Thats football.

 

 

 

[magpie418]

Can you lot not quote properly anymore? just quote the text you're referring to and not a whole batch of previous quotes, it's bloody annoying man.

[Parky]

 

 

I suppose the system that deliver the mighty Ramos is foolproof?

 

The system did something ours hasn't done since 1969, it delivered a trophy.

 

 

Ramos is still a clueless bufoon.

 

You're basing your opinion of his managerial skills entirely on the seven or so games played so far this season then I take it?

 

Where you take it is not my concern.

 

That a yes then?

 

 

No.

 

I said he'd fail in the Ramos thread as I got wind of the fact that they were going to sell their best 2 strikers from under his nose and replace them with shit. A manager who won't stand upto that or pays lip service to a system that has effectively destroyed Spurs hopes for a good season is a bufoon or has no self respect.

 

That's the difference between him and Keegan I guess.

 

That and winning half a dozen trophies.

 

Helping him now aren' t they.

[Parky]

 

 

I suppose the system that deliver the mighty Ramos is foolproof?

 

The system did something ours hasn't done since 1969, it delivered a trophy.

 

 

Ramos is still a clueless bufoon.

 

You're basing your opinion of his managerial skills entirely on the seven or so games played so far this season then I take it?

 

Where you take it is not my concern.

 

That a yes then?

 

 

No.

 

I said he'd fail in the Ramos thread as I got wind of the fact that they were going to sell their best 2 strikers from under his nose and replace them with shit. A manager who won't stand upto that or pays lip service to a system that has effectively destroyed Spurs hopes for a good season is a bufoon or has no self respect.

 

That's the difference between him and Keegan I guess.

 

That and winning half a dozen trophies.

 

and to think that I'm told I ruin threads.........

 

You said you were happy with Allardyce, when you could have told us about Ramos BTW

 

 

 

What are you on about? He was simply adding to a discussion me and Parky had going on.

 

selective clipping alert

 

not to mention lacking a wider grasp of mandy's usual non contribution.

 

 

 

Parky said Ramos is clueless. Ozzie countered that by saying that he's actually won some silverware in his time.

 

That was indeed the point of my thread-ruining post -- two consecutive UEFA cups is not the work of a complete buffoon. And he's already won more at Spurs than any Toon manager since Joe Harvey.

 

Gone by Chrissy mas?  Bufoon. FACT.

 

In all honesty who hasn't won trophies in Spain? 

[Dave]

Can you lot not quote properly anymore? just quote the text you're referring to and not a whole batch of previous quotes, it's bloody annoying man.

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=57023.0

 

[OzzieMandias]

 

 

I suppose the system that deliver the mighty Ramos is foolproof?

 

The system did something ours hasn't done since 1969, it delivered a trophy.

 

 

Ramos is still a clueless bufoon.

 

You're basing your opinion of his managerial skills entirely on the seven or so games played so far this season then I take it?

 

Where you take it is not my concern.

 

That a yes then?

 

 

No.

 

I said he'd fail in the Ramos thread as I got wind of the fact that they were going to sell their best 2 strikers from under his nose and replace them with s***. A manager who won't stand upto that or pays lip service to a system that has effectively destroyed Spurs hopes for a good season is a bufoon or has no self respect.

 

That's the difference between him and Keegan I guess.

 

That and winning half a dozen trophies.

 

and to think that I'm told I ruin threads.........

 

You said you were happy with Allardyce, when you could have told us about Ramos BTW

 

 

 

What are you on about? He was simply adding to a discussion me and Parky had going on.

 

selective clipping alert

 

not to mention lacking a wider grasp of mandy's usual non contribution.

 

 

 

Parky said Ramos is clueless. Ozzie countered that by saying that he's actually won some silverware in his time.

 

That was indeed the point of my thread-ruining post -- two consecutive UEFA cups is not the work of a complete buffoon. And he's already won more at Spurs than any Toon manager since Joe Harvey.

 

 

Simplistic comparison drawn by somebody who still holds a grudge because another 'somebody' walked away during a time when many of the so-called Sky Generationers jumped aboard during the mid-90's bandwagon.

 

As for the comparison, which imo was one of your usual sly and pinheaded digs at Keegan. Ramos' Spanish CV, in addition to his solitary English Lge Cup, counts for nothing until he *guides Spurs to consecutive/or better top 3/top tier finishes - one of which KK led us to within one afternoon of a title - and revitalises the Londoners fortunes to the extent Keegan did in his 1st stint here.

 

*That's called sustained progress, as opposed to being a managerial flash in the pan based on period of a season or thereabouts.

 

It's a shame that you clueless buffoons can't stick up for each other.

[OzzieMandias]

 

 

I suppose the system that deliver the mighty Ramos is foolproof?

 

The system did something ours hasn't done since 1969, it delivered a trophy.

 

 

Ramos is still a clueless bufoon.

 

You're basing your opinion of his managerial skills entirely on the seven or so games played so far this season then I take it?

 

Where you take it is not my concern.

 

That a yes then?

 

 

No.

 

I said he'd fail in the Ramos thread as I got wind of the fact that they were going to sell their best 2 strikers from under his nose and replace them with shit. A manager who won't stand upto that or pays lip service to a system that has effectively destroyed Spurs hopes for a good season is a bufoon or has no self respect.

 

That's the difference between him and Keegan I guess.

 

That and winning half a dozen trophies.

 

and to think that I'm told I ruin threads.........

 

You said you were happy with Allardyce, when you could have told us about Ramos BTW

 

 

 

What are you on about? He was simply adding to a discussion me and Parky had going on.

 

selective clipping alert

 

not to mention lacking a wider grasp of mandy's usual non contribution.

 

 

 

Parky said Ramos is clueless. Ozzie countered that by saying that he's actually won some silverware in his time.

 

That was indeed the point of my thread-ruining post -- two consecutive UEFA cups is not the work of a complete buffoon. And he's already won more at Spurs than any Toon manager since Joe Harvey.

 

Gone by Chrissy mas?  Bufoon. FACT.

 

In all honesty who hasn't won trophies in Spain? 

 

Aye, and there are any number of clueless buffoons who've won two consecutive UEFA Cups.

[Parky]

 

 

I suppose the system that deliver the mighty Ramos is foolproof?

 

The system did something ours hasn't done since 1969, it delivered a trophy.

 

 

Ramos is still a clueless bufoon.

 

You're basing your opinion of his managerial skills entirely on the seven or so games played so far this season then I take it?

 

Where you take it is not my concern.

 

That a yes then?

 

 

No.

 

I said he'd fail in the Ramos thread as I got wind of the fact that they were going to sell their best 2 strikers from under his nose and replace them with shit. A manager who won't stand upto that or pays lip service to a system that has effectively destroyed Spurs hopes for a good season is a bufoon or has no self respect.

 

That's the difference between him and Keegan I guess.

 

That and winning half a dozen trophies.

 

and to think that I'm told I ruin threads.........

 

You said you were happy with Allardyce, when you could have told us about Ramos BTW

 

 

 

What are you on about? He was simply adding to a discussion me and Parky had going on.

 

selective clipping alert

 

not to mention lacking a wider grasp of mandy's usual non contribution.

 

 

 

Parky said Ramos is clueless. Ozzie countered that by saying that he's actually won some silverware in his time.

 

That was indeed the point of my thread-ruining post -- two consecutive UEFA cups is not the work of a complete buffoon. And he's already won more at Spurs than any Toon manager since Joe Harvey.

 

Gone by Chrissy mas?  Bufoon. FACT.

 

In all honesty who hasn't won trophies in Spain? 

 

Aye, and there are any number of clueless buffoons who've won two consecutive UEFA Cups.

 

Tbf I like the way he stands..Arms folded, looking all serious.

[OzzieMandias]

 

 

I suppose the system that deliver the mighty Ramos is foolproof?

 

The system did something ours hasn't done since 1969, it delivered a trophy.

 

 

Ramos is still a clueless bufoon.

 

You're basing your opinion of his managerial skills entirely on the seven or so games played so far this season then I take it?

 

Where you take it is not my concern.

 

That a yes then?

 

 

No.

 

I said he'd fail in the Ramos thread as I got wind of the fact that they were going to sell their best 2 strikers from under his nose and replace them with shit. A manager who won't stand upto that or pays lip service to a system that has effectively destroyed Spurs hopes for a good season is a bufoon or has no self respect.

 

That's the difference between him and Keegan I guess.

 

That and winning half a dozen trophies.

 

and to think that I'm told I ruin threads.........

 

You said you were happy with Allardyce, when you could have told us about Ramos BTW

 

 

 

What are you on about? He was simply adding to a discussion me and Parky had going on.

 

selective clipping alert

 

not to mention lacking a wider grasp of mandy's usual non contribution.

 

 

 

Parky said Ramos is clueless. Ozzie countered that by saying that he's actually won some silverware in his time.

 

That was indeed the point of my thread-ruining post -- two consecutive UEFA cups is not the work of a complete buffoon. And he's already won more at Spurs than any Toon manager since Joe Harvey.

 

Gone by Chrissy mas?  Bufoon. FACT.

 

In all honesty who hasn't won trophies in Spain? 

 

Aye, and there are any number of clueless buffoons who've won two consecutive UEFA Cups.

 

Tbf I like the way he stands..Arms folded, looking all serious.

 

I think he looks cross rather than serious.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

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.

 

you won't find a post by me defending the club going PLC

 

Apology accepted.

 

 

But you do defend Shepherd, and Keegan walked out first time not long after he took over as Chairman iirc, because of what was happening with the club. After a pretty average first few seasons, Shepherd started to get it right and we had a bit of success. Who's to say if Keegan hadn't stuck it out for a bit back then, that he couldn't have got us back to where we were when Hall was in sole charge? Same criteria applies for today.

 

Who's idea was it to go PLC ? Who had the power to make such a decision ? I don't think it was Shepherd, but in the context of it being a board thing [which is what I've always said] then you would have to say they all did it, but such a decision isn't a footballing one so it was even more unlikely to be a minor shareholder all on his own. The wheels to go PLC were in motion before Shepherd became chairman, but I'm not arguing about the merits of whoever was chairman and I never have.

 

One thing you need to be successful, more than anything else, is to back your manager, and this is why I've stuck with the old board, whoever the chairman is.

 

 

Or did Keegan walk that time because he knew that in the short-term he'd have to sell the likes of Ferdinand & Ginola?

 

And Dalglish even said himself that it was the club that accepted the money from Bolton for Robbie Elliott, not him. If he'd stuck out that first year or so, then the money was made available for him by Shepherd. (although to be fair to Dalglish, a fair bit of his early spending was buying in fringe players to help re-set up the reserve side which Keegan got rid of).

 

Who's to say the same thing wouldn't have applied here?

 

I said a few posts ago that you wouldn't find any posts by me agreeing with the club going PLC ?

 

As far as backing the manager goes, I have said that I had reservations about it until the continued backing their managers. This has been said before, its not really my fault that people don't see it [but I'm sure I'll still get the blame] and I'll say it again, who has backed their managers more than the Halls and Shepherd at NUFC.

 

Answer = nobody else has competed at the top levels while running this club for over 50 years.

 

Lastly, why do you persist in thinking that a minority shareholder has been running the club single handed ?

 

 

Agreed and they were able to continue backing their managers because they raised finances through the public offering.

 

So not Sky money, season ticket sales and income from European football, then?

 

They were able to back managers because of the money coming into the club from ST sales, Sky, European jaunts, sponsorship, other commercial ventures and not because of money raised by going public.

 

Off the top of my head I seem to remember the float raising around £40 million which was put into the club accounts.

 

Which helped us to keep getting into Europe etc etc and to outspend rivals that also had sky money coming in. The seaons ticket sales were dedicated to repaying the stadium loan immediately after the expansion. Therefore, to compete and spend above our rivals we needed to generate extra capital for players above and beyond the money from season tickets as that was tied to the stadium loan.

 

HTT is obviously so retarded he thinks the Halls and Shepherd pocketed the money from the floatation. 

 

 

 

The stadium expansion loans were what, £6m a year? That leaves another £20m or so a year (£500 average season ticket price) from the remaining ST money. Sky money was at the time £15-20m. Then you have all the sponsorship money, European football money, and other commercial ventures we were involved with etc. not to mention player sales which after going public happened a lot. In short that money was not tied up to the point the club were unable to spend any money in the transfer market which is what you claim the money from the floatation was used for. We didn't outspend our rivals either, Villa had a similar average net spend to us. So once again, in what way did becoming a PLC actually benefited us that remaining a private company couldn't do?

 

You've already conceded I'll have to ask Macbeth what happened to the money generated from going public, yet you're claiming it was used for transfers?

[Parky]

 

 

I suppose the system that deliver the mighty Ramos is foolproof?

 

The system did something ours hasn't done since 1969, it delivered a trophy.

 

 

Ramos is still a clueless bufoon.

 

You're basing your opinion of his managerial skills entirely on the seven or so games played so far this season then I take it?

 

Where you take it is not my concern.

 

That a yes then?

 

 

No.

 

I said he'd fail in the Ramos thread as I got wind of the fact that they were going to sell their best 2 strikers from under his nose and replace them with shit. A manager who won't stand upto that or pays lip service to a system that has effectively destroyed Spurs hopes for a good season is a bufoon or has no self respect.

 

That's the difference between him and Keegan I guess.

 

That and winning half a dozen trophies.

 

and to think that I'm told I ruin threads.........

 

You said you were happy with Allardyce, when you could have told us about Ramos BTW

 

 

 

What are you on about? He was simply adding to a discussion me and Parky had going on.

 

selective clipping alert

 

not to mention lacking a wider grasp of mandy's usual non contribution.

 

 

 

Parky said Ramos is clueless. Ozzie countered that by saying that he's actually won some silverware in his time.

 

That was indeed the point of my thread-ruining post -- two consecutive UEFA cups is not the work of a complete buffoon. And he's already won more at Spurs than any Toon manager since Joe Harvey.

 

Gone by Chrissy mas?  Bufoon. FACT.

 

In all honesty who hasn't won trophies in Spain? 

 

Aye, and there are any number of clueless buffoons who've won two consecutive UEFA Cups.

 

Tbf I like the way he stands..Arms folded, looking all serious.

 

I think he looks cross rather than serious.

 

Well...Quite. 

[Guest Howaythetoon]

 

So in the midst of all this - remind me again how was the Rt Hon. Keegan right to walk the first time? What exactly did he 'forsee' and how was his actions 'perfectly justified'?

 

Or are you just talking s***?

 

If he genuinly felt he couldn't work for the PLC is it not right and proper of him to say so and leave thus allowing the club to get in someone who can, rather than stick around getting paid for doing something he wasn't comfortable with or actually believed in?

 

You have to also factor in the probability that he needed a break. He'd been in the job 5 years which brought about unprecedented change at Newcastle United, much of which he was very much responsible for. Towards the end of the 95-96 campaign he was already showing signs of needing a break.

 

As for foreseeing things, as the manager he did predict even at the time that future managers would be hindered by the rules and structures of a PLC and you just have to read Sir Bobby's or Sir Alex Ferguson's autobiography to understand that. Both have questioned football clubs going public and Sir Alex even went as far in claiming that being a public company limited Man Utd's ability to win even more trophies and to compete for the very best players.

 

They still competed for top players and still won trophies of course but when he says they could have won even more and signed even better players had they not been a PLC, it speaks volumes and you only have to look at them since the Glazers took over and delisted the club.

 

As for being justified in walking away, again if he genuinely felt he wasn't able to lend his abilities fully to the club operating as a PLC then he was right in leaving, just as an unhappy player would be right in leaving rather than sitting around picking up a wage on the bench or in the reserves.

 

Of course that is hard to understand or make sense of, especially at the time, for fans who only saw what was in front of their eyes, a good team going places and a seemingly happy manager who still had a job to do.

 

Underneath the surface though we've since learned that first time around all was not well with KK and indeed the club at the time, with he and the board growing apart as colleagues and also with their respective goals for the club, just several factors behind the parting of ways.

[ChezGiven]

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.

 

you won't find a post by me defending the club going PLC

 

Apology accepted.

 

 

But you do defend Shepherd, and Keegan walked out first time not long after he took over as Chairman iirc, because of what was happening with the club. After a pretty average first few seasons, Shepherd started to get it right and we had a bit of success. Who's to say if Keegan hadn't stuck it out for a bit back then, that he couldn't have got us back to where we were when Hall was in sole charge? Same criteria applies for today.

 

Who's idea was it to go PLC ? Who had the power to make such a decision ? I don't think it was Shepherd, but in the context of it being a board thing [which is what I've always said] then you would have to say they all did it, but such a decision isn't a footballing one so it was even more unlikely to be a minor shareholder all on his own. The wheels to go PLC were in motion before Shepherd became chairman, but I'm not arguing about the merits of whoever was chairman and I never have.

 

One thing you need to be successful, more than anything else, is to back your manager, and this is why I've stuck with the old board, whoever the chairman is.

 

 

Or did Keegan walk that time because he knew that in the short-term he'd have to sell the likes of Ferdinand & Ginola?

 

And Dalglish even said himself that it was the club that accepted the money from Bolton for Robbie Elliott, not him. If he'd stuck out that first year or so, then the money was made available for him by Shepherd. (although to be fair to Dalglish, a fair bit of his early spending was buying in fringe players to help re-set up the reserve side which Keegan got rid of).

 

Who's to say the same thing wouldn't have applied here?

 

I said a few posts ago that you wouldn't find any posts by me agreeing with the club going PLC ?

 

As far as backing the manager goes, I have said that I had reservations about it until the continued backing their managers. This has been said before, its not really my fault that people don't see it [but I'm sure I'll still get the blame] and I'll say it again, who has backed their managers more than the Halls and Shepherd at NUFC.

 

Answer = nobody else has competed at the top levels while running this club for over 50 years.

 

Lastly, why do you persist in thinking that a minority shareholder has been running the club single handed ?

 

 

Agreed and they were able to continue backing their managers because they raised finances through the public offering.

 

So not Sky money, season ticket sales and income from European football, then?

 

They were able to back managers because of the money coming into the club from ST sales, Sky, European jaunts, sponsorship, other commercial ventures and not because of money raised by going public.

 

Off the top of my head I seem to remember the float raising around £40 million which was put into the club accounts.

 

Which helped us to keep getting into Europe etc etc and to outspend rivals that also had sky money coming in. The seaons ticket sales were dedicated to repaying the stadium loan immediately after the expansion. Therefore, to compete and spend above our rivals we needed to generate extra capital for players above and beyond the money from season tickets as that was tied to the stadium loan.

 

HTT is obviously so retarded he thinks the Halls and Shepherd pocketed the money from the floatation. 

 

 

 

The stadium expansion loans were what, £6m a year? That leaves another £20m or so a year (£500 average season ticket price) from the remaining ST money. Sky money was at the time £15-20m. Then you have all the sponsorship money, European football money, and other commercial ventures we were involved with etc. not to mention player sales which after going public happened a lot. In short that money was not tied up to the point the club were unable to spend any money in the transfer market which is what you claim the money from the floatation was used for. We didn't outspend our rivals either, Villa had a similar average net spend to us. So once again, in what way did becoming a PLC actually benefited us that remaining a private company couldn't do?

 

You've already conceded I'll have to ask Macbeth what happened to the money generated from going public, yet you're claiming it was used for transfers?

 

Floundering, making up stuff about what i'm saying. The floatation ensured that we had additional resources available and by issuing equity in NUFC, that finance was raised in the most cost-efficient manner possible. It gave us more money than we would have had, had we not floated.

 

If we had not floated, it is fairly obvious that we would not have had the same net spend as Villa unless finance was raised through debt.

 

The comment about macbeth was tongue in cheek, given that i am on record on numerous occassions criticising him for making financial claims about the business when he holds no qualifications to make such statements.

 

It is really simple but just like Keegan, you are incapable of making a judgement on whether going to a PLC was a good decision. In the end it was a phenomenal decision as a private investor came along and bought all the stock for 133m meaning all it did was raise finance at no cost to the business. *

 

You're desperately trying to justify Keegan walking out when you share his level of understanding of the benefits it could bring. The only thing that justifies him walking was the ultimatum he was handed, not the financial arrangement which every single person with a minimun knowledge of finance would agree, raised money for the club in an efficient manner.

 

I'm just going round in circles here, as you dont want to understand.

 

* well the dividends were a cost but as they represent 'earnings per share', its nothing compared to financing enormous loans.

[ChezGiven]

Newcastle United Football Club is considering a flotation to raise funds for its expansion plans, which include the construction of a multi-sports stadium in the city. 05-Jul-1996

 

Newcastle United Football Club is to repay debts with the proceeds from its April flotation, and will not use the funds to buy players or finance the cost of a new stadium. 17-Jan-1997

 

It doesnt matter what it was spent on, it went into the coffers and helped us continue to back our managers and spend like one of the biggest clubs in the premiership.

 

"The flotation had taken over everything," he said, "even the most important part of Newcastle United - the team."

 

Yes Kevin, that's right, club finances affect everything especially the team, thats how it works. Chelsea are big now because of MONEY. This is particularly how it works when you scrap the reserves so dont have youth coming through the ranks.

 

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Floundering, making up stuff about what i'm saying.

 

Like you have done with some of my own comments.

 

The floatation ensured that we had additional resources available and by issuing equity in NUFC, that finance was raised in the most cost-efficient manner possible. It gave us more money than we would have had, had we not floated.

 

I know all that and don't dispute it. How does that lend to the club not doing well as a PLC though which has always been my main point?

 

If we had not floated, it is fairly obvious that we would not have had the same net spend as Villa unless finance was raised through debt.

 

The same kind of debt the PLC took on to acquire players? That floatation money never went on players either as you claimed.

 

The comment about macbeth was tongue in cheek, given that i am on record on numerous occassions criticising him for making financial claims about the business when he holds no qualifications to make such statements.

 

Are you saying no-one can make claims about the business on here then, if they don't have the right qualifications?

 

It is really simple but just like Keegan, you are incapable of making a judgement on whether going to a PLC was a good decision. In the end it was a phenomenal decision as a private investor came along and bought all the stock for 133m meaning all it did was raise finance at no cost to the business.

 

You see, you haven't been reading have you. I never claimed going to a PLC was a bad thing in terms of the context you've been desperately trying to bring your knowledge into, i.e. what exactly a PLC can do for a business such as raising funds without having to borrow based on equity and what have you. Again I understand all that, you don't have to explain it Chez believe it or not. I do get it and actually have some experience of borrowing and raising funds through equity where my own business is concerned. What my point has been all along (using hindsight I might add) is that going to a PLC hasn't really helped the club because it hasn't achieved anything since where as beforehand as a private company it was performing much better, on and off the pitch. Becoming a PLC made a lot of people rich but made the football club poor.

 

You're desperately trying to justify Keegan walking out when you share his level of understanding of the benefits it could bring. The only thing that justifies him walking was the ultimatum he was handed, not the financial arrangement which every single person with a minimun knowledge of finance would agree, raised money for the club in an efficient manner.

 

I'm just going round in circles here, as you dont want to understand.

 

I'm not trying to justify KK walking out first time around either, I tried to explore the many reasons based on facts which all played a part in his decision to leave, decisions I don't think personally anyone could really disagree with admittedly after all if someone is unhappy with a setup, what do you want them to do? You can't force someone to stay or accept things they don't really believe in.

 

Do I think KK was right about his thoughts on becoming a PLC? Yes I do and I base that on how well the club was doing before and how poor it has done since. Is that the sole fault of becoming a PLC? No! Like you have listed there were many benefits to becoming a PLC but where football clubs are concerned I think the negatives outweigh the positives and as far as operating goes, I don't think a PLC has the upper hand over a private firm to justify going that way.

 

Maybe on the high street yes, but not at a football club.

 

A host of top managers, KK included, have came out and criticised the PLC football model, do they just not count because they don't have any qualifications?

[ChezGiven]

Becoming a PLC made a lot of people rich but made the football club poor.

 

Stunning. Just utterly stunning. You claim you understand everything yet get this so the wrong way round.

 

Are you saying no-one can make claims about the business on here then, if they don't have the right qualifications?

 

No, i was just explaining my sarcasm.

 

What my point has been all along (using hindsight I might add) is that going to a PLC hasn't really helped the club because it hasn't achieved anything since where as beforehand as a private company it was performing much better, on and off the pitch.

 

Genuine question; are you retarded? Are you assigning cause and effect in these simple observations? I think you are aren't you

[OzzieMandias]

Genuine question; are you retarded? 

 

Cruel.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Newcastle United Football Club is considering a flotation to raise funds for its expansion plans, which include the construction of a multi-sports stadium in the city. 05-Jul-1996

 

Newcastle United Football Club is to repay debts with the proceeds from its April flotation, and will not use the funds to buy players or finance the cost of a new stadium. 17-Jan-1997

 

It doesnt matter what it was spent on, it went into the coffers and helped us continue to back our managers and spend like one of the biggest clubs in the premiership.

 

"The flotation had taken over everything," he said, "even the most important part of Newcastle United - the team."

 

Yes Kevin, that's right, club finances affect everything especially the team, thats how it works. Chelsea are big now because of MONEY. This is particularly how it works when you scrap the reserves so dont have youth coming through the ranks.

 

 

Prior to floating, the club was debt free in loose terms according to SJH and turnover and profit had grown by over 100%, the stadium was finished and the team on the pitch was one of the most valuable in the league and was considered good enough to win trophies. The business didn't need a cash injection to repay debts or finance stadium plans despite your quotes because there was no real debt and there was no multi-sports stadium and now we know it didn't go on players. Where did it go I wonder.

 

It wasn't until 2 years later or so, when all that money from the float had been spent/disappeared I assume, did the club look at expanding the stadium again and this wasn't paid for by float money but via funding that the club didn't generated via equity but future revenue based on season ticket sales. I.e. proper debt.

 

As for KK and the reserves it wasn't his decision, although he backed it and if I remember right it was mor or less imposed on the club by the FA who were restructuring the reserve leagues. The club did have youth coming through the ranks by the way, as we still had an academy, they just didn't have a reserve side to play in, although they got games at under 16,17, 18 and 19 level still I imagine.

[ChezGiven]

Newcastle United Football Club is considering a flotation to raise funds for its expansion plans, which include the construction of a multi-sports stadium in the city. 05-Jul-1996

 

Newcastle United Football Club is to repay debts with the proceeds from its April flotation, and will not use the funds to buy players or finance the cost of a new stadium. 17-Jan-1997

 

It doesnt matter what it was spent on, it went into the coffers and helped us continue to back our managers and spend like one of the biggest clubs in the premiership.

 

"The flotation had taken over everything," he said, "even the most important part of Newcastle United - the team."

 

Yes Kevin, that's right, club finances affect everything especially the team, thats how it works. Chelsea are big now because of MONEY. This is particularly how it works when you scrap the reserves so dont have youth coming through the ranks.

 

 

Prior to floating, the club was debt free in loose terms according to SJH and turnover and profit had grown by over 100%, the stadium was finished and the team on the pitch was one of the most valuable in the league and was considered good enough to win trophies. The business didn't need a cash injection to repay debts or finance stadium plans despite your quotes because there was no real debt and there was no multi-sports stadium and now we know it didn't go on players. Where did it go I wonder.

 

It wasn't until 2 years later or so, when all that money from the float had been spent/disappeared I assume, did the club look at expanding the stadium again and this wasn't paid for by float money but via funding that the club didn't generated via equity but future revenue based on season ticket sales. I.e. proper debt.

 

As for KK and the reserves it wasn't his decision, although he backed it and if I remember right it was mor or less imposed on the club by the FA who were restructuring the reserve leagues. The club did have youth coming through the ranks by the way, as we still had an academy, they just didn't have a reserve side to play in, although they got games at under 16,17, 18 and 19 level still I imagine.

 

There's mine

 

http://www.ukbusinesspark.co.uk/ned66412.htm

 

Where's yours?

 

You're insane btw, where do you think all the money came from that was spent in the first few seasons in the premiership? From the money we earnt in the second division?

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Becoming a PLC made a lot of people rich but made the football club poor.

 

Stunning. Just utterly stunning. You claim you understand everything yet get this so the wrong way round.

 

The end result of the PLC - Halls and Shepherds = rich; NUFC = no money in the bank. I agree, stunning.

 

What my point has been all along (using hindsight I might add) is that going to a PLC hasn't really helped the club because it hasn't achieved anything since where as beforehand as a private company it was performing much better, on and off the pitch.

 

Genuine question; are you retarded? Are you assigning cause and effect in these simple observations? I think you are aren't you

 

The results speak for themselves: Prior to PLC NUFC on and off the pitch were doing great, after PLC not so great. I've already said I don't put the PLC at fault for that if that's what you're thinking I'm saying, but it hasn't helped us exactly has it.