Finances web-site

[NE5]

 

 

so you still think 30 years of selling your best players and being happy with just being in the top league is the same as buying England players and qualifying regularly for europe  :lol: only a true KK bandwagon jumper would say such a thing.

 

 

 

I wonder if your comfort blanket is going to have a go at you for only picking what you chose to respond to?  He's bound to as he doesn't apply double standards, does he?

 

The club has not made progress under Shepherd, -16 league places and £millions down the drain.

 

Kindly explain how regularly qualifying for europe and buying top England players isn't massively better than selling locally born England players, spending years in the 2nd division and sitting on the brink of the 3rd division ?

 

A reply today, before I head off to the match, would be nice, unless you have all day to think about it.

 

 

[Mick]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant

 

 

They're not constant at all. And whether it's right or wrong I do listen and take it in.

 

if you think so, alright, all I can say is that I am pointing out a possibility of it going wrong, which is very real. Replacing the board with one that guarantees trophies is a bit of a tall order, and that is the next step up rom regular qualification for europe and buying top England players. Can you see this ? Our own board pre-1992 and many other big clubs just like us are sitting, just existing, staying solvent, not showing this ambition and will never go anywhere as a result. If that is the type of club you want, then THAT is crap, believe me, so think about the type of board we could have waiting out there and balance out the odds on getting one who has a desire - and a guarantee - to go higher or one like all the others. This club could easily exist on 30,000 crowds, sitting in the bottom half of the table, paying a dividend, making a small operating profit and selling a player when things go slightly wrong, and that is what you might get.

 

 

 

How many past chairman dropped us 16 league places?

 

How many past chairman presided over a 12 million loss?

 

How many past chairman squandered something like £50 million on a manager who was clearly, for all to see, a shit manager?

 

How many past chairman called the fans mugs and dogs?

 

How many of the past chairman bragged that we were one of the top 8 jobs in football only to appoint a manager who has finished in the bottom 3 with all of his revious 3 clubs?

 

How many of the past chairman have had more than £80 million income to squander?

 

How many chairman/boards put the club on the brink of the 3rd division after 30 years of mismanagement and selling our best players ?

 

How many chairman/boards got us into a position where there was 16 places [to temporarily] drop to ? [this is the same rubbish as those who ridicule keegans "12 point lead" ]

 

How many chairman/boards tapped the fanbase and made big money to buy top players rather than sell their best players to raise it  instead ?

 

How many chairman/board took the piss out of you by selling our best players, running the ground down, and were happy with us building stands "to match the one at Watford"

 

How many chairman/board couldn't attract decent managers like Bobby Robson, Howard Kendall and had to make their 8th desperate choice in the end ?

 

Again - spoken like a true KK bandwagon jumper.

 

 

 

They aren't answers, they're your typical way of avoiding answering anything, again, pathetic.  I'm not bigging up past chairman, chairman which were on a par with the one we've got now, the one you'll defend until the very end, whatever that will be.

[NE5]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant, or both. You should also note that these sort of discussions aren't normally started by either myself of HTL, most of my posts are a response.

 

My comments towards Mick are based on the impression that I have, which is that he is a KK bandwagon jumper. That is not the same as younger lads like yourself and others who can't support the club for geographical, financial or other reasons. I didn't used to think he was but I do now due to his opinion that the has club not made massive progress under this board, which is complete rubbish, nobody who supported the club earlier says this. This is absolutely correct, and has been backed up with solid fact, whether it has gone pear shaped over the last few years is a different point, the attitude and setup of the club whatever its faults is light years superior to what it was, and we can advocate replacing the board if we like but there is no guarantee a new board will be better, have ambition, have the interests of the club at heart, and won't be after a quick killing and sell it on again quickly, any scenario is possible.

 

 

 

The club has not made progress under this chairman and that will not change, no matter how much you try to spin it out to look as if it has, 2nd to 17th is not progress, cash rich to debt is not progress.  You're pathetic, you're trying to give Shepherd credit for what Sir John did while chairman, the record under Shepherd is of failure except for 3 seasons while Robson was manager, the rest is shite.

 

 

Well said mate.

 

What happened in the past under Westwood, McKeag et al is completely irrelevant to how Shepherd has managed the club in all honesty. Like you say, he took over a financially healthy and vibrant football club from Sir John Hall and has slowly reduced us to an average club with apathetic support, that is up to it's eyes in debt...........whilst rewarding himself huge sums of money in the process.

 

I really can't see how people can honestly continue to support Shepherd.

 

nobody is "supporting" Shepherd, but I can't honestly see how "anyone but Fred" can be good for the club. There are people out there who are far worse and would be.

 

Do you think Shepherd/the current board would have sold Beardsley, Gazza and Waddle, or ran the club so poorly they would want to leave  ?

 

The club was run well until Souness was appointed mate, thats where it has gone wrong, we both know this but it will take time to put right.

 

 

 

[NE5]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant

 

 

They're not constant at all. And whether it's right or wrong I do listen and take it in.

 

if you think so, alright, all I can say is that I am pointing out a possibility of it going wrong, which is very real. Replacing the board with one that guarantees trophies is a bit of a tall order, and that is the next step up rom regular qualification for europe and buying top England players. Can you see this ? Our own board pre-1992 and many other big clubs just like us are sitting, just existing, staying solvent, not showing this ambition and will never go anywhere as a result. If that is the type of club you want, then THAT is crap, believe me, so think about the type of board we could have waiting out there and balance out the odds on getting one who has a desire - and a guarantee - to go higher or one like all the others. This club could easily exist on 30,000 crowds, sitting in the bottom half of the table, paying a dividend, making a small operating profit and selling a player when things go slightly wrong, and that is what you might get.

 

 

 

How many past chairman dropped us 16 league places?

 

How many past chairman presided over a 12 million loss?

 

How many past chairman squandered something like £50 million on a manager who was clearly, for all to see, a shit manager?

 

How many past chairman called the fans mugs and dogs?

 

How many of the past chairman bragged that we were one of the top 8 jobs in football only to appoint a manager who has finished in the bottom 3 with all of his revious 3 clubs?

 

How many of the past chairman have had more than £80 million income to squander?

 

How many chairman/boards put the club on the brink of the 3rd division after 30 years of mismanagement and selling our best players ?

 

How many chairman/boards got us into a position where there was 16 places [to temporarily] drop to ? [this is the same rubbish as those who ridicule keegans "12 point lead" ]

 

How many chairman/boards tapped the fanbase and made big money to buy top players rather than sell their best players to raise it  instead ?

 

How many chairman/board took the piss out of you by selling our best players, running the ground down, and were happy with us building stands "to match the one at Watford"

 

How many chairman/board couldn't attract decent managers like Bobby Robson, Howard Kendall and had to make their 8th desperate choice in the end ?

 

Again - spoken like a true KK bandwagon jumper.

 

 

 

They aren't answers, they're your typical way of avoiding answering anything, again, pathetic.  I'm not bigging up past chairman, chairman which were on a par with the one we've got now, the one you'll defend until the very end, whatever that will be.

 

When your hedge fund takes over the club and sells our best players, when instant trophies and success doesn't come, we will see what you say.

 

 

[Mick]

 

 

so you still think 30 years of selling your best players and being happy with just being in the top league is the same as buying England players and qualifying regularly for europe  :lol: only a true KK bandwagon jumper would say such a thing.

 

 

 

I wonder if your comfort blanket is going to have a go at you for only picking what you chose to respond to?  He's bound to as he doesn't apply double standards, does he?

 

The club has not made progress under Shepherd, -16 league places and £millions down the drain.

 

Kindly explain how regularly qualifying for europe and buying top England players isn't massively better than selling locally born England players, spending years in the 2nd division and sitting on the brink of the 3rd division ?

 

A reply today, before I head off to the match, would be nice, unless you have all day to think about it.

 

 

 

We've qualified for Europe 3 times by league position, the rest through the back door under Shepherd, that from a base of 3rd, 6th, 2nd & 2nd.  The best under Shepherd and a one off is 3rd which is the second worst Premiership finish under Sir John Hall.

[Howaythelads]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

I've no problem with you and never have had.

 

My son is younger than 19 and is a Newcastle supporter, I know not every supporter is older than 19.  I do not disrespect anyone based on their age, however old or young they may be. In the case of Dave, he automatically posts shite in response to anyone obviously older than himself posting something he disagrees with. A strange attitude, but I know not all young people are immature like Dave is.

 

My problem with people such as Mick is that he claimed to be a lifelong supporter but later let the cat out of the bag that in fact he wasn't. Simple as that. He did that himself. To people who were going to matches when there was only 15,000-20,000 it was a galling period when suddenly we get to a FA Cup Final and 50,000 suddenly become supporters, and are trying to grab tickets and indeed did grab tickets from people who had been going for years. The club recognised it, hence why they brought in the voucher scheme in order to try to ensure the hangers on were at the back of the queue. They do it a different way now, but the principle is the same.

[NE5]

 

 

so you still think 30 years of selling your best players and being happy with just being in the top league is the same as buying England players and qualifying regularly for europe  :lol: only a true KK bandwagon jumper would say such a thing.

 

 

 

I wonder if your comfort blanket is going to have a go at you for only picking what you chose to respond to?  He's bound to as he doesn't apply double standards, does he?

 

The club has not made progress under Shepherd, -16 league places and £millions down the drain.

 

Kindly explain how regularly qualifying for europe and buying top England players isn't massively better than selling locally born England players, spending years in the 2nd division and sitting on the brink of the 3rd division ?

 

A reply today, before I head off to the match, would be nice, unless you have all day to think about it.

 

 

 

We've qualified for Europe 3 times by league position, the rest through the back door under Shepherd, that from a base of 3rd, 6th, 2nd & 2nd.  The best under Shepherd and a one off is 3rd which is the second worst Premiership finish under Sir John Hall.

 

and we qualified for europe in the previous 30 years, through finishing in the top 5, how many times exactly ?

 

You still don't explain why we Gazza, Waddle and Beardsley wanted to leave the club .....

 

 

[Mick]

 

nobody is "supporting" Shepherd, but I can't honestly see how "anyone but Fred" can be good for the club. There are people out there who are far worse and would be.

 

Do you think Shepherd/the current board would have sold Beardsley, Gazza and Waddle ?

 

 

 

"Nobody is supporting Shepherd," does anybody have a smiley that falls down and pisses itself laughing?

[Mick]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant

 

 

They're not constant at all. And whether it's right or wrong I do listen and take it in.

 

if you think so, alright, all I can say is that I am pointing out a possibility of it going wrong, which is very real. Replacing the board with one that guarantees trophies is a bit of a tall order, and that is the next step up rom regular qualification for europe and buying top England players. Can you see this ? Our own board pre-1992 and many other big clubs just like us are sitting, just existing, staying solvent, not showing this ambition and will never go anywhere as a result. If that is the type of club you want, then THAT is crap, believe me, so think about the type of board we could have waiting out there and balance out the odds on getting one who has a desire - and a guarantee - to go higher or one like all the others. This club could easily exist on 30,000 crowds, sitting in the bottom half of the table, paying a dividend, making a small operating profit and selling a player when things go slightly wrong, and that is what you might get.

 

 

 

How many past chairman dropped us 16 league places?

 

How many past chairman presided over a 12 million loss?

 

How many past chairman squandered something like £50 million on a manager who was clearly, for all to see, a shit manager?

 

How many past chairman called the fans mugs and dogs?

 

How many of the past chairman bragged that we were one of the top 8 jobs in football only to appoint a manager who has finished in the bottom 3 with all of his revious 3 clubs?

 

How many of the past chairman have had more than £80 million income to squander?

 

How many chairman/boards put the club on the brink of the 3rd division after 30 years of mismanagement and selling our best players ?

 

How many chairman/boards got us into a position where there was 16 places [to temporarily] drop to ? [this is the same rubbish as those who ridicule keegans "12 point lead" ]

 

How many chairman/boards tapped the fanbase and made big money to buy top players rather than sell their best players to raise it  instead ?

 

How many chairman/board took the piss out of you by selling our best players, running the ground down, and were happy with us building stands "to match the one at Watford"

 

How many chairman/board couldn't attract decent managers like Bobby Robson, Howard Kendall and had to make their 8th desperate choice in the end ?

 

Again - spoken like a true KK bandwagon jumper.

 

 

 

They aren't answers, they're your typical way of avoiding answering anything, again, pathetic.  I'm not bigging up past chairman, chairman which were on a par with the one we've got now, the one you'll defend until the very end, whatever that will be.

 

When your hedge fund takes over the club and sells our best players, when instant trophies and success doesn't come, we will see what you say.

 

 

 

My hedge fund?  I don't have a hedge fund, what are you on about?

[NE5]

 

nobody is "supporting" Shepherd, but I can't honestly see how "anyone but Fred" can be good for the club. There are people out there who are far worse and would be.

 

Do you think Shepherd/the current board would have sold Beardsley, Gazza and Waddle ?

 

 

 

 

"Nobody is supporting Shepherd," does anybody have a smiley that falls down and pisses itself laughing?

 

Odd, but the fact that you avoid the fundamental question - again - makes me smile.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

 

Good points, Macbeth, as ever.

 

But I think you need to consider reducing the size of those graphics.

 

For one or two people, the pictures are obviously too big to see.

 

I think you need to consider extracting yourself from his back end.

 

Going to try making some points of your own?? You know, points that have some SUBSTANCE behind them.

 

What is it about these facts and figures concerning our steadily declining income and dangerously spiralling ratio of wages to turnover that strikes you as insubstantial, exactly?

 

And what is it that you don't understand about this decline coming about due to the dropping off of performances on the field of play, rather than consistent mismanagment of the clubs finances by the Board? This isn't difficult stuff.

 

If you can't even see that the two things are intricately related – mismanagement of the club doesn't stop at finances, while finances affect our performances on the field of play as much as performances on the field of play affect finances – then it's not surprising that you can't recognise the vicious circle we've been in since Partizan, which marked the end of the good work Bobby Robson had managed to do, pretty much against the run of play.

 

Surprising that you recognise when it began, unlike your mate Macbeth. Now all you have to do is make that giant leap to accept that the Board hasn't been mismanaging things since they took over, that it's down to mismanagement on the pitch and we're home and dry. From the  point of view of the Board, throwing £50m at a team that was still good enough to finish 5th should not have seen a decline. They did their bit but the manager fúcked it up. The correct replacement will put it right and that's what's underway right now, it won't happen overnight.  Look at the link in my sig'.

[Howaythelads]

 

 

 

Be careful what you wish for, as ever.

 

Glad to see you've learnt your lesson

 

wtf are you on about?

[thedudeabides]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant, or both. You should also note that these sort of discussions aren't normally started by either myself of HTL, most of my posts are a response.

 

My comments towards Mick are based on the impression that I have, which is that he is a KK bandwagon jumper. That is not the same as younger lads like yourself and others who can't support the club for geographical, financial or other reasons. I didn't used to think he was but I do now due to his opinion that the has club not made massive progress under this board, which is complete rubbish, nobody who supported the club earlier says this. This is absolutely correct, and has been backed up with solid fact, whether it has gone pear shaped over the last few years is a different point, the attitude and setup of the club whatever its faults is light years superior to what it was, and we can advocate replacing the board if we like but there is no guarantee a new board will be better, have ambition, have the interests of the club at heart, and won't be after a quick killing and sell it on again quickly, any scenario is possible.

 

 

 

The club has not made progress under this chairman and that will not change, no matter how much you try to spin it out to look as if it has, 2nd to 17th is not progress, cash rich to debt is not progress.  You're pathetic, you're trying to give Shepherd credit for what Sir John did while chairman, the record under Shepherd is of failure except for 3 seasons while Robson was manager, the rest is shite.

 

 

Well said mate.

 

What happened in the past under Westwood, McKeag et al is completely irrelevant to how Shepherd has managed the club in all honesty. Like you say, he took over a financially healthy and vibrant football club from Sir John Hall and has slowly reduced us to an average club with apathetic support, that is up to it's eyes in debt...........whilst rewarding himself huge sums of money in the process.

 

I really can't see how people can honestly continue to support Shepherd.

 

nobody is "supporting" Shepherd, but I can't honestly see how "anyone but Fred" can be good for the club. There are people out there who are far worse and would be.

 

Do you think Shepherd/the current board would have sold Beardsley, Gazza and Waddle ?

 

 

 

Like I said, what the previous boards did is totally irrelevant to how Shepherd has managed the club.

 

You're right, it could be a whole lot worse with another Chairman........but it could and should be a whole lot better. I can think of at least 10 Chairmen in the Premier League who have done a much better job at their respective clubs than Shepherd has. Why should we settle for second rate management just because we had it in the past?

 

The club is dying on it's feet and only heading in one direction, so personally, I'd rather take a gamble on a new owner than continue with the fucking shambolic state that the club is in at present.

 

 

[Mick]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

I've no problem with you and never have had.

 

My son is younger than 19 and is a Newcastle supporter, I know not every supporter is older than 19.  I do not disrespect anyone based on their age, however old or young they may be. In the case of Dave, he automatically posts shite in response to anyone obviously older than himself posting something he disagrees with. A strange attitude, but I know not all young people are immature like Dave is.

 

My problem with people such as Mick is that he claimed to be a lifelong supporter but later let the cat out of the bag that in fact he wasn't. Simple as that. He did that himself. To people who were going to matches when there was only 15,000-20,000 it was a galling period when suddenly we get to a FA Cup Final and 50,000 suddenly become supporters, and are trying to grab tickets and indeed did grab tickets from people who had been going for years. The club recognised it, hence why they brought in the voucher scheme in order to try to ensure the hangers on were at the back of the queue. They do it a different way now, but the principle is the same.

 

When did we get to a FA Cup final with crowds of 15,000-20,000?

 

More spin by somebody who claims to know everything.

[Howaythelads]

Says the 50 year old who posts bluesleep.gif as a response to something he disagrees with.

 

I cringed at your post to melanchronic, which is why I posted all those links.

 

Thanks for the advice though.

 

Did NE5 text you, btw?

 

48.

 

Couldn't care less if you cringe at my posts or not, tbh. The point is, you'll cringe at your own in years to come.

 

It's obvious you aren't able to accept others have a different opinion, you aren't able to properly debate the points, instead taking the easy way out by generally highlighting small portions of a post in order to make a personal point, rather than addressing the debate. I post an opinion and I generally try to back it up with why I have that opinion. I know I could be wrong, you on other hand believe you can't be wrong while rarely supplying any reasons for an opinion you hold. When you do state a reason for an opinion which is then questioned in debate, you turn the post into a personal one rather than continue the debate. You aren't the only one and you aren't the worst.

 

I used to think your opinions were worthwhile reading but you appear to have such a chip on your shoulder these days I really can't be arsed with what you post. You're a joke to me, Dave. Never used to be.

 

 

That is very ironic, considering my 'OMG saddo!' post yesterday was clearly pointing out the numerous times that you have refused to debate and purely posted a yawning smilie.

 

And if I entertain you i'm glad.

 

You can't be arsed with what I post, but you bite every time. Sort it out!

 

Bite?

 

Sounds like you're admitting that you deliberately post off topic personal shite because you don't agree with me and don't know how to debate and convince me I'm wrong.......Good one, Davie boy.

 

When I say I can't be arsed with what you post, what I'm on about is when you do try to post something about football. It's usually nonsense and that is what I can't be arsed with. When you come back with your silly snipes I reply just because I want to and have nowt else to do lately. It's not causiing me any grief, it's not an angry 'bite'. Get it?

[Mick]

 

nobody is "supporting" Shepherd, but I can't honestly see how "anyone but Fred" can be good for the club. There are people out there who are far worse and would be.

 

Do you think Shepherd/the current board would have sold Beardsley, Gazza and Waddle ?

 

 

 

 

"Nobody is supporting Shepherd," does anybody have a smiley that falls down and pisses itself laughing?

 

Odd, but the fact that you avoid the fundamental question - again - makes me smile.

 

 

 

Odd that I've answered that question more than once but your memory fails you once again as you try to avoid questions by waffling on about irrelevant rubbish.

[NE5]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant, or both. You should also note that these sort of discussions aren't normally started by either myself of HTL, most of my posts are a response.

 

My comments towards Mick are based on the impression that I have, which is that he is a KK bandwagon jumper. That is not the same as younger lads like yourself and others who can't support the club for geographical, financial or other reasons. I didn't used to think he was but I do now due to his opinion that the has club not made massive progress under this board, which is complete rubbish, nobody who supported the club earlier says this. This is absolutely correct, and has been backed up with solid fact, whether it has gone pear shaped over the last few years is a different point, the attitude and setup of the club whatever its faults is light years superior to what it was, and we can advocate replacing the board if we like but there is no guarantee a new board will be better, have ambition, have the interests of the club at heart, and won't be after a quick killing and sell it on again quickly, any scenario is possible.

 

 

 

The club has not made progress under this chairman and that will not change, no matter how much you try to spin it out to look as if it has, 2nd to 17th is not progress, cash rich to debt is not progress.  You're pathetic, you're trying to give Shepherd credit for what Sir John did while chairman, the record under Shepherd is of failure except for 3 seasons while Robson was manager, the rest is shite.

 

 

Well said mate.

 

What happened in the past under Westwood, McKeag et al is completely irrelevant to how Shepherd has managed the club in all honesty. Like you say, he took over a financially healthy and vibrant football club from Sir John Hall and has slowly reduced us to an average club with apathetic support, that is up to it's eyes in debt...........whilst rewarding himself huge sums of money in the process.

 

I really can't see how people can honestly continue to support Shepherd.

 

nobody is "supporting" Shepherd, but I can't honestly see how "anyone but Fred" can be good for the club. There are people out there who are far worse and would be.

 

Do you think Shepherd/the current board would have sold Beardsley, Gazza and Waddle ?

 

 

 

Like I said, what the previous boards did is totally irrelevant to how Shepherd has managed the club.

 

You're right, it could be a whole lot worse with another Chairman........but it could and should be a whole lot better. I can think of at least 10 Chairmen in the Premier League who have done a much better job at their respective clubs than Shepherd has. Why should we settle for second rate management just because we had it in the past?

 

The club is dying on it's feet and only heading in one direction, so personally, I'd rather take a gamble on a new owner than continue with the fucking shambolic state that the club is in at present.

 

 

Slightly edited the last post...I agree that it could be better or worse, of course it could be better. The club has gone wrong since appointing Souness, before that we were moving along and doing quite well but were in a position where we could have moved upwards further if a better choice of manager had been made. Replacing the board with someone of doubtful intention is a huge gamble it will happen someday but as I've said before they can't get away with many more bad choices of manager so time will tell.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

 

What a shame you don't see how finance and quality of player on the pitch is really linked.

 

 

 

So you put the near oubling of wages in 4 years down to the quality of players on the pitch ? The team today is twice as good as the team from 2002 ?

 

OMG. Is this a pisstake or do you REALLY not understand football and what has happened in the last few years?

[Mick]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant, or both. You should also note that these sort of discussions aren't normally started by either myself of HTL, most of my posts are a response.

 

My comments towards Mick are based on the impression that I have, which is that he is a KK bandwagon jumper. That is not the same as younger lads like yourself and others who can't support the club for geographical, financial or other reasons. I didn't used to think he was but I do now due to his opinion that the has club not made massive progress under this board, which is complete rubbish, nobody who supported the club earlier says this. This is absolutely correct, and has been backed up with solid fact, whether it has gone pear shaped over the last few years is a different point, the attitude and setup of the club whatever its faults is light years superior to what it was, and we can advocate replacing the board if we like but there is no guarantee a new board will be better, have ambition, have the interests of the club at heart, and won't be after a quick killing and sell it on again quickly, any scenario is possible.

 

 

 

The club has not made progress under this chairman and that will not change, no matter how much you try to spin it out to look as if it has, 2nd to 17th is not progress, cash rich to debt is not progress.  You're pathetic, you're trying to give Shepherd credit for what Sir John did while chairman, the record under Shepherd is of failure except for 3 seasons while Robson was manager, the rest is shite.

 

 

Well said mate.

 

What happened in the past under Westwood, McKeag et al is completely irrelevant to how Shepherd has managed the club in all honesty. Like you say, he took over a financially healthy and vibrant football club from Sir John Hall and has slowly reduced us to an average club with apathetic support, that is up to it's eyes in debt...........whilst rewarding himself huge sums of money in the process.

 

I really can't see how people can honestly continue to support Shepherd.

 

nobody is "supporting" Shepherd, but I can't honestly see how "anyone but Fred" can be good for the club. There are people out there who are far worse and would be.

 

Do you think Shepherd/the current board would have sold Beardsley, Gazza and Waddle ?

 

 

 

Like I said, what the previous boards did is totally irrelevant to how Shepherd has managed the club.

 

You're right, it could be a whole lot worse with another Chairman........but it could and should be a whole lot better. I can think of at least 10 Chairmen in the Premier League who have done a much better job at their respective clubs than Shepherd has. Why should we settle for second rate management just because we had it in the past?

 

The club is dying on it's feet and only heading in one direction, so personally, I'd rather take a gamble on a new owner than continue with the ****ing shambolic state that the club is in at present.

 

 

Slightly edited the last post...I agree that it could be better or worse, of course it could be better. The club has gone wrong since appointing Souness, before that we were moving along and doing quite well but were in a position where we could have moved upwards further if a better choice of manager had been made. Replacing the board with someone of doubtful intention is a huge gamble it will happen someday but as I've said before they can't get away with many more bad choices of manager so time will tell.

 

 

 

Stop trying to change history, we dropped from being 2nd in the league to finish 11th and 13th twice in the first 4 years of Shepherd as chairman, it hasn't just gone wrong since he appointed Souness, he only got it right once.

[Mick]

 

What a shame you don't see how finance and quality of player on the pitch is really linked.

 

 

 

So you put the near oubling of wages in 4 years down to the quality of players on the pitch ? The team today is twice as good as the team from 2002 ?

 

OMG. Is this a pisstake or do you REALLY not understand football and what has happened in the last few years?

 

I'm just guessing but he's probably noticed our decline, unlike some people who appear not to have noticed the larger part of our last 10 years.  How many other club have posted record losses this season?

 

Everything that our club could be measured on is heading in a negative direction.

[NE5]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

thats a fair comment, so I'll give you a straight answer. If you want to know about the club before your time and learn from its history, why no try listening and taking it in ? FWIW, I don't mind and wouldn't mind at all - observations you make, but constant  bluesleep.gif signs aren't contributing to anything other than giving the impression that you think what we say about the clubs history to be either incorrect or irrelevant, or both. You should also note that these sort of discussions aren't normally started by either myself of HTL, most of my posts are a response.

 

My comments towards Mick are based on the impression that I have, which is that he is a KK bandwagon jumper. That is not the same as younger lads like yourself and others who can't support the club for geographical, financial or other reasons. I didn't used to think he was but I do now due to his opinion that the has club not made massive progress under this board, which is complete rubbish, nobody who supported the club earlier says this. This is absolutely correct, and has been backed up with solid fact, whether it has gone pear shaped over the last few years is a different point, the attitude and setup of the club whatever its faults is light years superior to what it was, and we can advocate replacing the board if we like but there is no guarantee a new board will be better, have ambition, have the interests of the club at heart, and won't be after a quick killing and sell it on again quickly, any scenario is possible.

 

 

 

The club has not made progress under this chairman and that will not change, no matter how much you try to spin it out to look as if it has, 2nd to 17th is not progress, cash rich to debt is not progress.  You're pathetic, you're trying to give Shepherd credit for what Sir John did while chairman, the record under Shepherd is of failure except for 3 seasons while Robson was manager, the rest is shite.

 

 

Well said mate.

 

What happened in the past under Westwood, McKeag et al is completely irrelevant to how Shepherd has managed the club in all honesty. Like you say, he took over a financially healthy and vibrant football club from Sir John Hall and has slowly reduced us to an average club with apathetic support, that is up to it's eyes in debt...........whilst rewarding himself huge sums of money in the process.

 

I really can't see how people can honestly continue to support Shepherd.

 

nobody is "supporting" Shepherd, but I can't honestly see how "anyone but Fred" can be good for the club. There are people out there who are far worse and would be.

 

Do you think Shepherd/the current board would have sold Beardsley, Gazza and Waddle ?

 

 

 

Like I said, what the previous boards did is totally irrelevant to how Shepherd has managed the club.

 

You're right, it could be a whole lot worse with another Chairman........but it could and should be a whole lot better. I can think of at least 10 Chairmen in the Premier League who have done a much better job at their respective clubs than Shepherd has. Why should we settle for second rate management just because we had it in the past?

 

The club is dying on it's feet and only heading in one direction, so personally, I'd rather take a gamble on a new owner than continue with the ****ing shambolic state that the club is in at present.

 

 

Slightly edited the last post...I agree that it could be better or worse, of course it could be better. The club has gone wrong since appointing Souness, before that we were moving along and doing quite well but were in a position where we could have moved upwards further if a better choice of manager had been made. Replacing the board with someone of doubtful intention is a huge gamble it will happen someday but as I've said before they can't get away with many more bad choices of manager so time will tell.

 

 

 

Stop trying to change history, we dropped from being 2nd in the league to finish 11th and 13th twice in the first 4 years of Shepherd as chairman, it hasn't just gone wrong since he appointed Souness, he only got it right once.

 

Oh dear.....

 

If a manager who had won 4 league titles, 2 FA Cups and 3 manager of the year awards isn't qualified enough for you, please explain who would have been ....

 

A small matter of our first FA Cup Final in 22 years is of course nothing of importance, we should have lost in the 3rd round like all the other years  bluebigeek.gif

 

You were happy to finish 2 points above relegation and reach Wembley in 1974, so who changed your expectations ?

 

 

 

 

[NE5]

 

What a shame you don't see how finance and quality of player on the pitch is really linked.

 

 

 

So you put the near oubling of wages in 4 years down to the quality of players on the pitch ? The team today is twice as good as the team from 2002 ?

 

OMG. Is this a pisstake or do you REALLY not understand football and what has happened in the last few years?

 

I'm just guessing but he's probably noticed our decline, unlike some people who appear not to have noticed the larger part of our last 10 years.  How many other club have posted record losses this season?

 

 

well the mackems made a record points loss...beating their own record.....sadly thats what comes from putting finance and prudence first, having zero ambition and no courage to attempt to tap your big fanbase ...

 

Which of course brings in the customers in their thousands  :roll:

[Howaythelads]

HTL, due to my age (19), location (Lincoln) and income (I don't really have any), I don't pretend to have anywhere near as vast a knowledge of Newcastle United, or football in general as some do. I'm always willing and actively trying to learn more and more about the club and it's history and I do respect you, NE5 etc for the amount of knowledge you do have about the club.

 

I just find the roundabout arguments dull and boring, sure I don't have to say anything in that case but when it comes to things like NE5's tired "well those of us around before 1992" comments (as if younger fans are inferior, or especially when they're aimed at fans like Mick who were around before then and don't need to be condescended to) I see nothing I can really say to that other than a little, easily ignorable smilie or short sentence. And of these I do them extremely rarely, just about all of my posts on here and relevant and contribute towards healthy discussion.

 

I've no problem with you and never have had.

 

My son is younger than 19 and is a Newcastle supporter, I know not every supporter is older than 19.  I do not disrespect anyone based on their age, however old or young they may be. In the case of Dave, he automatically posts shite in response to anyone obviously older than himself posting something he disagrees with. A strange attitude, but I know not all young people are immature like Dave is.

 

My problem with people such as Mick is that he claimed to be a lifelong supporter but later let the cat out of the bag that in fact he wasn't. Simple as that. He did that himself. To people who were going to matches when there was only 15,000-20,000 it was a galling period when suddenly we get to a FA Cup Final and 50,000 suddenly become supporters, and are trying to grab tickets and indeed did grab tickets from people who had been going for years. The club recognised it, hence why they brought in the voucher scheme in order to try to ensure the hangers on were at the back of the queue. They do it a different way now, but the principle is the same.

 

When did we get to a FA Cup final with crowds of 15,000-20,000?

 

More spin by somebody who claims to know everything.

 

Unable to address the point again. What a surprise. No doubt you'd continue this tack unless I post an exact average attendance figure or would you even then change the period over which it was calculated.

 

We had crowds around that time of 15k-20k, it makes no difference if the average in a particular season is 25k, the point you're trying to avoid is that thousands of people who previously took the piss out of the club, AND IT'S SUPPORT, suddenly wanted a ticket. Thousands suddenly claimed to be lifelong fans. My belief is that you're one of them.

[Mick]

 

Oh dear.....

 

If a manager who had won 4 league titles, 2 FA Cups and 3 manager of the year awards isn't qualified enough for you, please explain who would have been ....

 

A small matter of our first FA Cup Final in 22 years is of course nothing of importance, we should have lost in the 3rd round like all the other years  bluebigeek.gif

 

You were happy to finish 2 points above relegation and reach Wembley in 1974, so who changed your expectations ?

 

 

 

 

 

Dalglish was the opposite to what we had so tried to change everything that the team had been built around, I wanted Bobby Robson because I felt that he would tinker with the team and win something.

 

Dalglish was also partly to blame for the collapse of Liverpool from regular league champions to also rans, Souness finished what Dalglish started.

[Mick]

 

well the mackems made a record points loss...beating their own record.....sadly thats what comes from putting finance and prudence first, having zero ambition and no courage to attempt to tap your big fanbase ...

 

Which of course brings in the customers in their thousands  :roll:

 

I'm not defending the mackems but the first time they set the record was after splashing cash on shite, something we've become good at.  Another thing, we've splashed the cash and we're not far off doing what the mackems did after they decided to spend.