Fat Ash - "Kinnear is better than Capello and will lead us to Europe"

[Guest firetotheworks]

Oh my very fucking god. This messageboard is losing its appeal with you lot spouting the same shite in every thread.

[Syrette]

I get the feeling one or two would be gutted if Ashley managed to get Owen to sign this new contract.

 

you're not going down the "hope they fail" route I hope ?

 

At my age now, I've seen far worse than this, and even the suggestion of it is pretty sad. Sorry but that is true and how I see it.

 

For the record, I'll say what I've always said. The more "trophy players" the club sign ie just like the other trophy winners do, the better.

 

If Owen DOES sign, is it a sign of a change or direction or Ashley trying to paper over the cracks and get deluded people on his side ?

 

Do you think it would be a sign of him realising he has been wrong and is prepared to attempt to match the european qualifications of his predecessors ?

 

What do you think ?

 

 

 

 

I think you're trying to imply that we were "trophy winners" under the old board.

 

That, or you're too drunk to think straight.

 

ah, you're back.

 

I meant "trophy winners" as in managers who win titles with 2 different club, things like that, and looking at a record like that hoping they can do it again.

 

 

 

Feeble excuse. You were talking bollocks, let's face it.

 

don't really wish to derail the thread, but perhaps rather than saying I'm talking bollocks, you could finally respond to the comment about appointing a manager who won 4 titles with 2 different clubs - in the other one where I've asked you about 20 times if you prefer.

 

 

 

 

 

Take it to PMs Grandad.

[TRon]

I get the feeling one or two would be gutted if Ashley managed to get Owen to sign this new contract.

 

you're not going down the "hope they fail" route I hope ?

 

At my age now, I've seen far worse than this, and even the suggestion of it is pretty sad. Sorry but that is true and how I see it.

 

For the record, I'll say what I've always said. The more "trophy players" the club sign ie just like the other trophy winners do, the better.

 

If Owen DOES sign, is it a sign of a change or direction or Ashley trying to paper over the cracks and get deluded people on his side ?

 

Do you think it would be a sign of him realising he has been wrong and is prepared to attempt to match the european qualifications of his predecessors ?

 

What do you think ?

 

 

 

I doubt very much that Ashley is going to spend big for a few reasons:

 

firstly, the club is still up for sale. Secondly he hasn't got the money to compete with the top 4, only City have tbh. The other option would be to borrow money against the club and spend big like Liverpool, Manu and Villa. I don't think he was ever going to do that in the first place and definitely not now the clubs for sale.

 

He's probably going to carry on trying to buy value players and build the squad gradually on players who won't go downhill quickly.

 

So far as I'm aware, the vast majority of players we brought to the club by the last owners fell into that category and I can quite easily list a lot of them if you wish ?

 

 

 

If your list is going to include players bought under Sir John Hall's time as Chairman then don't bother. If you can make a list of value players bought under Shepherd's reign as chairman then by all means go ahead as that's the period we are generally considered to have spent badly in the transfer market.

 

there are plenty of players under the chairmanship of both, but as nobody at any time had a controlling interest in the club and neither at any time was ever in a position to run the club single handed without the other, there is no point seperating them. I understand that you want to find a way to slate Shepherd here, but sadly for you, it has little basis for the reasons I've just given.

 

You can, in the meantime, ignore the fact that Woodgate was also a record transfer at the time, and the acid test is that Ashley is unlikely to match the Champions League and european qualifications, [which is what REALLY matters], if he ever was at all.

 

You are obviously ignoring the fact that Milner was sold to essentially finance the transfer of Colocinni while failing to back their appointed manager while making a profit in the transfer window, something that didn't happen under the Halls and shepherd, or the Halls OR Shepherd if you are determined to try and seperate the regimes.

 

You can defend Ashley until you are blue in the face, but the penny pinching manner in which the club has been run since he came, will never match what the club has done in the last 15 years even if you live until you are 200.

 

To get back on topic, buying players who's value is hoped to rise, is nothing new, and you're spouting rubbish if you say or imply that it is.

 

 

 

oh and here is your list, not including the time of Dalglish and Gullit either, which adds shay given, Nobby Solano, Andy Griffin, Domi, Pistone, Goma, Glass, Hamman, Speed and Ferguson to the list, without even thinking.

 

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,57178.msg1598810.html#msg1598810

 

 

Those were all players bought by managers hired and fired by Shepherd, without even mentioning players bought by Souness who blew most of the money made available by Freddie on players like Boumsong, Luque, Carr and Bowyer. In fact SBR was over-ruled on buying Miguel so we could buy Carr for £3m less. Freddie sure showed his ambition with that decision

 

 

[Dave]

Why bite?

 

*sigh*

[Crumpy Gunt]

Anyway, Kinnear is in the hunt for central midfielder after finding out Barton is out til March.

[mrmojorisin75]

I get the feeling one or two would be gutted if Ashley managed to get Owen to sign this new contract.

 

you're not going down the "hope they fail" route I hope ?

 

At my age now, I've seen far worse than this, and even the suggestion of it is pretty sad. Sorry but that is true and how I see it.

 

For the record, I'll say what I've always said. The more "trophy players" the club sign ie just like the other trophy winners do, the better.

 

If Owen DOES sign, is it a sign of a change or direction or Ashley trying to paper over the cracks and get deluded people on his side ?

 

Do you think it would be a sign of him realising he has been wrong and is prepared to attempt to match the european qualifications of his predecessors ?

 

What do you think ?

 

 

 

I doubt very much that Ashley is going to spend big for a few reasons:

 

firstly, the club is still up for sale. Secondly he hasn't got the money to compete with the top 4, only City have tbh. The other option would be to borrow money against the club and spend big like Liverpool, Manu and Villa. I don't think he was ever going to do that in the first place and definitely not now the clubs for sale.

 

He's probably going to carry on trying to buy value players and build the squad gradually on players who won't go downhill quickly.

 

So far as I'm aware, the vast majority of players we brought to the club by the last owners fell into that category and I can quite easily list a lot of them if you wish ?

 

 

 

If your list is going to include players bought under Sir John Hall's time as Chairman then don't bother. If you can make a list of value players bought under Shepherd's reign as chairman then by all means go ahead as that's the period we are generally considered to have spent badly in the transfer market.

 

there are plenty of players under the chairmanship of both, but as nobody at any time had a controlling interest in the club and neither at any time was ever in a position to run the club single handed without the other, there is no point seperating them. I understand that you want to find a way to slate Shepherd here, but sadly for you, it has little basis for the reasons I've just given.

 

You can, in the meantime, ignore the fact that Woodgate was also a record transfer at the time, and the acid test is that Ashley is unlikely to match the Champions League and european qualifications, [which is what REALLY matters], if he ever was at all.

 

You are obviously ignoring the fact that Milner was sold to essentially finance the transfer of Colocinni while failing to back their appointed manager while making a profit in the transfer window, something that didn't happen under the Halls and shepherd, or the Halls OR Shepherd if you are determined to try and seperate the regimes.

 

You can defend Ashley until you are blue in the face, but the penny pinching manner in which the club has been run since he came, will never match what the club has done in the last 15 years even if you live until you are 200.

 

To get back on topic, buying players who's value is hoped to rise, is nothing new, and you're spouting rubbish if you say or imply that it is.

 

 

 

oh and here is your list, not including the time of Dalglish and Gullit either, which adds shay given, Nobby Solano, Andy Griffin, Domi, Pistone, Goma, Glass, Hamman, Speed and Ferguson to the list, without even thinking.

 

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,57178.msg1598810.html#msg1598810

 

 

Those were all players bought by managers hired and fired by Shepherd, without even mentioning players bought by Souness who blew most of the money made available by Freddie on players like Boumsong, Luque, Carr and Bowyer. In fact SBR was over-ruled on buying Miguel so we could buy Carr for £3m less. Freddie sure showed his ambition with that decision

 

 

 

that last bit can't be true?  it just can't, fucking hell

[David Icke - Son of God]

I get the feeling one or two would be gutted if Ashley managed to get Owen to sign this new contract.

 

you're not going down the "hope they fail" route I hope ?

 

At my age now, I've seen far worse than this, and even the suggestion of it is pretty sad. Sorry but that is true and how I see it.

 

For the record, I'll say what I've always said. The more "trophy players" the club sign ie just like the other trophy winners do, the better.

 

If Owen DOES sign, is it a sign of a change or direction or Ashley trying to paper over the cracks and get deluded people on his side ?

 

Do you think it would be a sign of him realising he has been wrong and is prepared to attempt to match the european qualifications of his predecessors ?

 

What do you think ?

 

 

 

I doubt very much that Ashley is going to spend big for a few reasons:

 

firstly, the club is still up for sale. Secondly he hasn't got the money to compete with the top 4, only City have tbh. The other option would be to borrow money against the club and spend big like Liverpool, Manu and Villa. I don't think he was ever going to do that in the first place and definitely not now the clubs for sale.

 

He's probably going to carry on trying to buy value players and build the squad gradually on players who won't go downhill quickly.

 

So far as I'm aware, the vast majority of players we brought to the club by the last owners fell into that category and I can quite easily list a lot of them if you wish ?

 

 

 

If your list is going to include players bought under Sir John Hall's time as Chairman then don't bother. If you can make a list of value players bought under Shepherd's reign as chairman then by all means go ahead as that's the period we are generally considered to have spent badly in the transfer market.

 

there are plenty of players under the chairmanship of both, but as nobody at any time had a controlling interest in the club and neither at any time was ever in a position to run the club single handed without the other, there is no point seperating them. I understand that you want to find a way to slate Shepherd here, but sadly for you, it has little basis for the reasons I've just given.

 

You can, in the meantime, ignore the fact that Woodgate was also a record transfer at the time, and the acid test is that Ashley is unlikely to match the Champions League and european qualifications, [which is what REALLY matters], if he ever was at all.

 

You are obviously ignoring the fact that Milner was sold to essentially finance the transfer of Colocinni while failing to back their appointed manager while making a profit in the transfer window, something that didn't happen under the Halls and shepherd, or the Halls OR Shepherd if you are determined to try and seperate the regimes.

 

You can defend Ashley until you are blue in the face, but the penny pinching manner in which the club has been run since he came, will never match what the club has done in the last 15 years even if you live until you are 200.

 

To get back on topic, buying players who's value is hoped to rise, is nothing new, and you're spouting rubbish if you say or imply that it is.

 

 

 

oh and here is your list, not including the time of Dalglish and Gullit either, which adds shay given, Nobby Solano, Andy Griffin, Domi, Pistone, Goma, Glass, Hamman, Speed and Ferguson to the list, without even thinking.

 

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,57178.msg1598810.html#msg1598810

 

 

Those were all players bought by managers hired and fired by Shepherd, without even mentioning players bought by Souness who blew most of the money made available by Freddie on players like Boumsong, Luque, Carr and Bowyer. In fact SBR was over-ruled on buying Miguel so we could buy Carr for £3m less. Freddie sure showed his ambition with that decision

 

 

 

that last bit can't be true?  it just can't, fucking hell

 

It is. He also wouldn't sign Carrick and went for Butt instead.

[NE5]

I get the feeling one or two would be gutted if Ashley managed to get Owen to sign this new contract.

 

you're not going down the "hope they fail" route I hope ?

 

At my age now, I've seen far worse than this, and even the suggestion of it is pretty sad. Sorry but that is true and how I see it.

 

For the record, I'll say what I've always said. The more "trophy players" the club sign ie just like the other trophy winners do, the better.

 

If Owen DOES sign, is it a sign of a change or direction or Ashley trying to paper over the cracks and get deluded people on his side ?

 

Do you think it would be a sign of him realising he has been wrong and is prepared to attempt to match the european qualifications of his predecessors ?

 

What do you think ?

 

 

 

I doubt very much that Ashley is going to spend big for a few reasons:

 

firstly, the club is still up for sale. Secondly he hasn't got the money to compete with the top 4, only City have tbh. The other option would be to borrow money against the club and spend big like Liverpool, Manu and Villa. I don't think he was ever going to do that in the first place and definitely not now the clubs for sale.

 

He's probably going to carry on trying to buy value players and build the squad gradually on players who won't go downhill quickly.

 

So far as I'm aware, the vast majority of players we brought to the club by the last owners fell into that category and I can quite easily list a lot of them if you wish ?

 

 

 

If your list is going to include players bought under Sir John Hall's time as Chairman then don't bother. If you can make a list of value players bought under Shepherd's reign as chairman then by all means go ahead as that's the period we are generally considered to have spent badly in the transfer market.

 

there are plenty of players under the chairmanship of both, but as nobody at any time had a controlling interest in the club and neither at any time was ever in a position to run the club single handed without the other, there is no point seperating them. I understand that you want to find a way to slate Shepherd here, but sadly for you, it has little basis for the reasons I've just given.

 

You can, in the meantime, ignore the fact that Woodgate was also a record transfer at the time, and the acid test is that Ashley is unlikely to match the Champions League and european qualifications, [which is what REALLY matters], if he ever was at all.

 

You are obviously ignoring the fact that Milner was sold to essentially finance the transfer of Colocinni while failing to back their appointed manager while making a profit in the transfer window, something that didn't happen under the Halls and shepherd, or the Halls OR Shepherd if you are determined to try and seperate the regimes.

 

You can defend Ashley until you are blue in the face, but the penny pinching manner in which the club has been run since he came, will never match what the club has done in the last 15 years even if you live until you are 200.

 

To get back on topic, buying players who's value is hoped to rise, is nothing new, and you're spouting rubbish if you say or imply that it is.

 

 

 

oh and here is your list, not including the time of Dalglish and Gullit either, which adds shay given, Nobby Solano, Andy Griffin, Domi, Pistone, Goma, Glass, Hamman, Speed and Ferguson to the list, without even thinking.

 

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,57178.msg1598810.html#msg1598810

 

 

Those were all players bought by managers hired and fired by Shepherd, without even mentioning players bought by Souness who blew most of the money made available by Freddie on players like Boumsong, Luque, Carr and Bowyer. In fact SBR was over-ruled on buying Miguel so we could buy Carr for £3m less. Freddie sure showed his ambition with that decision

 

 

 

that last bit can't be true?  it just can't, fucking hell

 

fantastically ironic the people who slate the old board for the "debts " and "pushing us the way of Leeds" for spending money they didn't have and then criticising them for not spending money they probably didn't have having already spent most of our rivals.

 

I'm not in the slightest bit surprised at the hypocrisy though.

 

 

[NE5]

I get the feeling one or two would be gutted if Ashley managed to get Owen to sign this new contract.

 

you're not going down the "hope they fail" route I hope ?

 

At my age now, I've seen far worse than this, and even the suggestion of it is pretty sad. Sorry but that is true and how I see it.

 

For the record, I'll say what I've always said. The more "trophy players" the club sign ie just like the other trophy winners do, the better.

 

If Owen DOES sign, is it a sign of a change or direction or Ashley trying to paper over the cracks and get deluded people on his side ?

 

Do you think it would be a sign of him realising he has been wrong and is prepared to attempt to match the european qualifications of his predecessors ?

 

What do you think ?

 

 

 

 

I think you're trying to imply that we were "trophy winners" under the old board.

 

That, or you're too drunk to think straight.

 

ah, you're back.

 

I meant "trophy winners" as in managers who win titles with 2 different club, things like that, and looking at a record like that hoping they can do it again.

 

 

 

Feeble excuse. You were talking bollocks, let's face it.

 

don't really wish to derail the thread, but perhaps rather than saying I'm talking bollocks, you could finally respond to the comment about appointing a manager who won 4 titles with 2 different clubs - in the other one where I've asked you about 20 times if you prefer.

 

 

 

 

 

Take it to PMs Grandad.

 

how immature.

 

 

[NE5]

I get the feeling one or two would be gutted if Ashley managed to get Owen to sign this new contract.

 

you're not going down the "hope they fail" route I hope ?

 

At my age now, I've seen far worse than this, and even the suggestion of it is pretty sad. Sorry but that is true and how I see it.

 

For the record, I'll say what I've always said. The more "trophy players" the club sign ie just like the other trophy winners do, the better.

 

If Owen DOES sign, is it a sign of a change or direction or Ashley trying to paper over the cracks and get deluded people on his side ?

 

Do you think it would be a sign of him realising he has been wrong and is prepared to attempt to match the european qualifications of his predecessors ?

 

What do you think ?

 

 

 

I doubt very much that Ashley is going to spend big for a few reasons:

 

firstly, the club is still up for sale. Secondly he hasn't got the money to compete with the top 4, only City have tbh. The other option would be to borrow money against the club and spend big like Liverpool, Manu and Villa. I don't think he was ever going to do that in the first place and definitely not now the clubs for sale.

 

He's probably going to carry on trying to buy value players and build the squad gradually on players who won't go downhill quickly.

 

So far as I'm aware, the vast majority of players we brought to the club by the last owners fell into that category and I can quite easily list a lot of them if you wish ?

 

 

 

If your list is going to include players bought under Sir John Hall's time as Chairman then don't bother. If you can make a list of value players bought under Shepherd's reign as chairman then by all means go ahead as that's the period we are generally considered to have spent badly in the transfer market.

 

there are plenty of players under the chairmanship of both, but as nobody at any time had a controlling interest in the club and neither at any time was ever in a position to run the club single handed without the other, there is no point seperating them. I understand that you want to find a way to slate Shepherd here, but sadly for you, it has little basis for the reasons I've just given.

 

You can, in the meantime, ignore the fact that Woodgate was also a record transfer at the time, and the acid test is that Ashley is unlikely to match the Champions League and european qualifications, [which is what REALLY matters], if he ever was at all.

 

You are obviously ignoring the fact that Milner was sold to essentially finance the transfer of Colocinni while failing to back their appointed manager while making a profit in the transfer window, something that didn't happen under the Halls and shepherd, or the Halls OR Shepherd if you are determined to try and seperate the regimes.

 

You can defend Ashley until you are blue in the face, but the penny pinching manner in which the club has been run since he came, will never match what the club has done in the last 15 years even if you live until you are 200.

 

To get back on topic, buying players who's value is hoped to rise, is nothing new, and you're spouting rubbish if you say or imply that it is.

 

 

 

oh and here is your list, not including the time of Dalglish and Gullit either, which adds shay given, Nobby Solano, Andy Griffin, Domi, Pistone, Goma, Glass, Hamman, Speed and Ferguson to the list, without even thinking.

 

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,57178.msg1598810.html#msg1598810

 

 

Those were all players bought by managers hired and fired by Shepherd, without even mentioning players bought by Souness who blew most of the money made available by Freddie on players like Boumsong, Luque, Carr and Bowyer. In fact SBR was over-ruled on buying Miguel so we could buy Carr for £3m less. Freddie sure showed his ambition with that decision

 

 

 

you are insinuating that the club never bought players who had "potential" to get better and I've gave you a long list to prove you're talking complete bollocks.

 

 

[Mick]

 

fantastically ironic the people who slate the old board for the "debts " and "pushing us the way of Leeds" for spending money they didn't have and then criticising them for not spending money they probably didn't have having already spent most of our rivals.

 

I'm not in the slightest bit surprised at the hypocrisy though.

 

 

 

The club made a profit on transfers of £10,400,000 in 2004, the year Sir Bobby was after Miguel and they gave it to Souness.  If we didn't have the money for Miguel in 2004 where did it come from in 2005?

[Dave]

Why bite?

 

*sigh*

 

You're all as bad as each other.

[NE5]

 

fantastically ironic the people who slate the old board for the "debts " and "pushing us the way of Leeds" for spending money they didn't have and then criticising them for not spending money they probably didn't have having already spent most of our rivals.

 

I'm not in the slightest bit surprised at the hypocrisy though.

 

 

 

The club made a profit on transfers of £10,400,000 in 2004, the year Sir Bobby was after Miguel and they gave it to Souness.  If we didn't have the money for Miguel in 2004 where did it come from in 2005?

 

Maybe they didn't have it in 2004 but had it in 2005 ? Dearie dearie me ......... 

 

you still think that the Halls and Shepherd were no better than all the others before or since don't you ? How dumb can it get 

 

I hope you still think that we are better off without the fat bastard, has anybody matched those Champions League qualifications yet ? Isn't it embarrassing 

 

 

 

[Dave]

Thread ends. Can't be arsed.

 

You're all sad as fuck, boring cunts.