Llambias Q&A with Chronicle: OP updated with Thursday's articles

[Baggio]

I was reading some of the stuff Llambias said in these interviews, and that bit about wanting to adopt the same model as Villa in particular.

 

But he then goes on to say the Dennis Wise / manager / DoF style seperation of roles works very well.

 

Ironically, probably the main reason Lerner and MON have done so well at Villa is because there is a chairman who trusts his manager's judgement 100 percent and makes the money available, and lets the manager get on with running the club.

 

Having complications like Wise will never let that kind of situation flourish.

 

He also says that no player will come into this club without the managers approval which makes the outcome of the Keegan situation even more interesting.

 

I don't think he said he wants Newcastle to be an exact replica of Villa btw, just that we want to be in your position of being able to push on when we're on solid footings.

[Syrette]

Sebastien Bassong and Jonas Gutierrez have been good signings to be fair, but will they still be at Newcastle next season given the current trend of selling our best players?

 

All the "best" players that have left thus far wanted to leave. Why can't people realise that?

 

why are you incapable of realising whey they "all" want to leave ?

 

 

 

Would you like to point where I've not realised that and said things to the contrary?

 

do you realise why they want to leave ?

 

Do you understand why Keegan left ?

 

 

 

 

Of course I do. What a stupid question.

[Guest Mucky01]

I was reading some of the stuff Llambias said in these interviews, and that bit about wanting to adopt the same model as Villa in particular.

 

But he then goes on to say the Dennis Wise / manager / DoF style seperation of roles works very well.

 

Ironically, probably the main reason Lerner and MON have done so well at Villa is because there is a chairman who trusts his manager's judgement 100 percent and makes the money available, and lets the manager get on with running the club.

 

Having complications like Wise will never let that kind of situation flourish.

 

agreed Brummie, but unfortunately they’re so stupid they can’t see this and the comparison too Villa is hilarious on so many levels.

 

But unlike Lerner, Ashley was stupid enough to buy a football club without realising there was £100m+ additional debt and without any idea of how to run a football club would employ a bunch of inexperienced ‘mates’ – ooooops!

[Guest toonlass]

Do you have a season ticket NE5? If so are you going to renew it come the end of the season?

[DJ_NUFC]

FFS is anyone actually discussing the Q&A? Can we please keep the usual arguments for all the other soapbox threads where they're usually found?

 

A few positives from all this: they claim to have a plan -- whatever the plan may be. They want the club to be self-sufficient.

 

The Guardian article is scathing of the previous regime and compares, simply financially, where the two regimes differ.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2009/feb/10/newcastle-united-mike-ashley-john-hall-freddy-shepherd

 

I've spent the last year clutching at straws for positives, so when I get a glimpse of them, I wish to hang on like fuck.

 

Only time, of course, can tell what the real plan is, but I'm willing to give these guys another chance simply because we have no other alternative.

 

 

[madras]

I was reading some of the stuff Llambias said in these interviews, and that bit about wanting to adopt the same model as Villa in particular.

 

But he then goes on to say the Dennis Wise / manager / DoF style seperation of roles works very well.

 

Ironically, probably the main reason Lerner and MON have done so well at Villa is because there is a chairman who trusts his manager's judgement 100 percent and makes the money available, and lets the manager get on with running the club.

 

Having complications like Wise will never let that kind of situation flourish.

 

agreed Brummie, but unfortunately they’re so stupid they can’t see this and the comparison too Villa is hilarious on so many levels.

 

But unlike Lerner, Ashley was stupid enough to buy a football club without realising there was £100m+ additional debt and without any idea of how to run a football club would employ a bunch of inexperienced ‘mates’ – ooooops!

i think they mean in the way they buy younger players and look for long term value with their purchases rather than the set up of the staff.

[thomas]

I wonder if any opinions have been changed by this interview or if all parties involved have just walked away with their viewpoints reinforced. 

 

 

[80]

I was reading some of the stuff Llambias said in these interviews, and that bit about wanting to adopt the same model as Villa in particular.

 

But he then goes on to say the Dennis Wise / manager / DoF style seperation of roles works very well.

 

Ironically, probably the main reason Lerner and MON have done so well at Villa is because there is a chairman who trusts his manager's judgement 100 percent and makes the money available, and lets the manager get on with running the club.

 

Having complications like Wise will never let that kind of situation flourish.

 

It wouldn't be quite so bad if there was anything in the world to suggest Wise was appropriate for the job. Ultimately, he's just a lower division manager with some friends in the game. Might as well have gone for Tony Adams.

[Baggio]

I wonder if any opinions have been changed by this interview or if all parties involved have just walked away with their viewpoints reinforced. 

 

 

 

I think his opinions have been too honest at times and would have preferred him not to say that people at the club valued Milner at £6 million and named the likes of Elano as players we tried to sign, it's been a good read so far but they could have done themselves a favour and explained the financial situation and their long term aims 12 months ago.

 

The only question he didn't answer was about Keegan and that was for legal reasons so fair play to him for not dodging anything or selecting certain questions to avoid.

[madras]

I was reading some of the stuff Llambias said in these interviews, and that bit about wanting to adopt the same model as Villa in particular.

 

But he then goes on to say the Dennis Wise / manager / DoF style seperation of roles works very well.

 

Ironically, probably the main reason Lerner and MON have done so well at Villa is because there is a chairman who trusts his manager's judgement 100 percent and makes the money available, and lets the manager get on with running the club.

 

Having complications like Wise will never let that kind of situation flourish.

 

It wouldn't be quite so bad if there was anything in the world to suggest Wise was appropriate for the job. Ultimately, he's just a lower division manager with some friends in the game. Might as well have gone for Tony Adams.

it's a lottery don't you know, when you make appointments so it's a bit pointless taking someones ability into account.

[thomas]

I wonder if any opinions have been changed by this interview or if all parties involved have just walked away with their viewpoints reinforced. 

I think his opinions have been too honest at times and would have preferred him not to say that people at the club valued Milner at £6 million and named the likes of Elano as players we tried to sign, it's been a good read so far but they could have done themselves a favour and explained the financial situation and their long term aims 12 months ago.

 

The only question he didn't answer was about Keegan and that was for legal reasons so fair play to him for not dodging anything or selecting certain questions to avoid.

  Too late to edit it in I suppose but I meant if any opinions on here (n-o) had been changed.

 

Sadly I think people, no matter what they might profess, are not approaching anything regarding ash/wise/llamb with anything like an open mind and have instead already made up their mind about everything.  Which obviously makes this interview pointless, but not for the reasons one might think. 

[TRon]

I was reading some of the stuff Llambias said in these interviews, and that bit about wanting to adopt the same model as Villa in particular.

 

But he then goes on to say the Dennis Wise / manager / DoF style seperation of roles works very well.

 

Ironically, probably the main reason Lerner and MON have done so well at Villa is because there is a chairman who trusts his manager's judgement 100 percent and makes the money available, and lets the manager get on with running the club.

 

Having complications like Wise will never let that kind of situation flourish.

 

It wouldn't be quite so bad if there was anything in the world to suggest Wise was appropriate for the job. Ultimately, he's just a lower division manager with some friends in the game. Might as well have gone for Tony Adams.

 

Having said that I'm glad we didn't go for Adams. No one outside the club really knows whether Wise is doing a good job or a bad job, he's just an easy target being a cross-eyed dwarf with an attitude problem.

[NE5]

Get back in your own thread NE5.

 

nowt to say then ?

 

 

Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton.

 

on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him.

 

When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ?

 

 

 

It's a lottery getting a good manager?

 

No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill.

 

is it now ?

 

We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson.

 

Or Everton replace Moyes ..........

 

 

 

Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory.

 

Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual.

 

you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp.

 

 

were you happy with the kinnear appointment ?

 

hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ?

 

(conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works)

 

 

i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ?

 

often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in.

 

silly.

 

Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back.

 

Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved.

 

Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ?

 

 

[NE5]

I was reading some of the stuff Llambias said in these interviews, and that bit about wanting to adopt the same model as Villa in particular.

 

But he then goes on to say the Dennis Wise / manager / DoF style seperation of roles works very well.

 

Ironically, probably the main reason Lerner and MON have done so well at Villa is because there is a chairman who trusts his manager's judgement 100 percent and makes the money available, and lets the manager get on with running the club.

 

Having complications like Wise will never let that kind of situation flourish.

 

It wouldn't be quite so bad if there was anything in the world to suggest Wise was appropriate for the job. Ultimately, he's just a lower division manager with some friends in the game. Might as well have gone for Tony Adams.

it's a lottery don't you know, when you make appointments so it's a bit pointless taking someones ability into account.

 

Well, lets put it another way. Appointing a manager who has won 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards, is quite worthy of having a good chance, as is an up and coming manager who won the FA Cup and left his team in the top 3 of the league and 2nd phase of the Champions League. As is appointing a World Cup winner. What is your thoughts on Scolari being sacked or are you sticking to your previous criteria and claim Abramovic should step down for taking the club backwards ?

 

 

[Happy Face]

We were "told" the Ashley would invest £20M a season in the first team.

 

Why do you keep saying this despite people telling you that we were "told" no such thing?

 

http://www.thespoiler.co.uk/index.php/mike-ashley-statement

 

"I was always prepared to bankroll Newcastle up to the tune of £20m per year."

 

OK it's not on the first team.

 

But does this not contradict Lambarse's stated intention of having the club run at an overall loss of just £7M in 2 years?

 

Has Ashley channged his mind on what he's willing to spend since taking us off the market and wanting to make a go of it?

 

Currently: Loss of £20m = Ashley puts in £20m to cover

2 Years Time: Loss of £7m = Ashley puts in £7m to cover and £13m for squad building

 

I see.

 

So where's this £8M for summer spending come from?  Considering the loss last year was supposed to be £36M.  Is he pumping £44M in?

 

Why double the investment in the summer if you want to decrease losses and tighten your belt?

 

Nothing they say adds up.

 

Might god your complaining because he's spent MORE money !! He said he would cover at least £20m a season. During his interview when he said he would sell he said he would still cover this but nothing else. Yet he is paying out more money and your complaining.  Do you even know what your complaint is ?

 

He never said "at least".  He said "up to".  See the link above.

 

I'm complaining that they're liars.

 

They lied by spending more though have I got that bit right ?

 

What has Ashley spent?

 

£100 million as a loan,

£70 million of that was used to clear the old debt

£30 million has been put in to keep the club going.

Since the 30th June he has put in a further £10 million of cash as working capital.

£138 million to buy the club

total investment is £248 million so far.

 

Who knows if they will spend more, but the accounts we've seen only mention an ongoing investment of £10m, so it's half the maximum amount he harked on about in the first place.

 

It's yet to be seen if he coughs up the money needed to buy in the Summer and keep our losses down to £20M.

 

Again, I'll not hold my breath.

 

So in 6 months he has paid £10m for ongoing investment.

 

In the 12 months to June 08 he paid £30m for ongoing costs.

 

So even if he doesn't put another penny in he has put in £20m a year on average.

 

Of course that is assuming that the club has no more bills to pay between now and June and therefore would not require any further cash injection

 

£100M to clear debt according to Mort.

 

Then Mike Ashley says "I paid £134 million out of my own pocket for the club. I then poured another £110 million into the club not to pay off the debt but just to reduce it. The club is still in debt. Even worse than that, the club still owes millions of pounds in transfer fees....  Before I had spent a penny on wages or buying players Newcastle United had cost me more than a quarter of a billion pounds."

 

But the accounts show it's just £70M of debt and £30M of ongoing costs.

 

If he wants to claim he's spent £20M a year keeping us afloat that's fine, but he can't double count it and claim he's spent a quarter of a billion BEFORE that further investment.

are those accounts covering just 1 year ?

 

Aye.  Summer 2007 to June 2008.

 

Since the 30th June he has put in a further £10 million of cash as working capital.  As well as earning about £9M on transfers

what about before 30th june 2007 ?

 

I belive they cover prior to then, hence "Summer 2007".

[TRon]

Get back in your own thread NE5.

 

nowt to say then ?

 

 

Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton.

 

on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him.

 

When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ?

 

 

 

It's a lottery getting a good manager?

 

No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill.

 

is it now ?

 

We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson.

 

Or Everton replace Moyes ..........

 

 

 

Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory.

 

Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual.

 

you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp.

 

 

were you happy with the kinnear appointment ?

 

hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ?

 

(conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works)

 

 

i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ?

 

often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in.

 

silly.

 

Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back.

 

Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved.

 

Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ?

 

 

 

Especially after walking away from Newcastle with £140million between the pair of them.

[madras]

Get back in your own thread NE5.

 

nowt to say then ?

 

 

Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton.

 

on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him.

 

When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ?

 

 

 

It's a lottery getting a good manager?

 

No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill.

 

is it now ?

 

We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson.

 

Or Everton replace Moyes ..........

 

 

 

Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory.

 

Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual.

 

you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp.

 

 

were you happy with the kinnear appointment ?

 

hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ?

 

(conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works)

 

 

i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ?

 

often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in.

 

silly.

 

Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back.

 

Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved.

 

Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ?

 

 

BORING !

 

we've covered the euro qualifications to death as that has little to do with the position we were in spring 2007.

 

defending ashley to the bitter end......like you defending fred ?

 

i never mentioned being embarassed by fred's utterences.

 

 

nice to see you keep your head in the sand re our position when fred left.

[80]

I was reading some of the stuff Llambias said in these interviews, and that bit about wanting to adopt the same model as Villa in particular.

 

But he then goes on to say the Dennis Wise / manager / DoF style seperation of roles works very well.

 

Ironically, probably the main reason Lerner and MON have done so well at Villa is because there is a chairman who trusts his manager's judgement 100 percent and makes the money available, and lets the manager get on with running the club.

 

Having complications like Wise will never let that kind of situation flourish.

 

It wouldn't be quite so bad if there was anything in the world to suggest Wise was appropriate for the job. Ultimately, he's just a lower division manager with some friends in the game. Might as well have gone for Tony Adams.

 

Having said that I'm glad we didn't go for Adams. No one outside the club really knows whether Wise is doing a good job or a bad job, he's just an easy target being a cross-eyed dwarf with an attitude problem.

 

If we know that to be true, we already know he isn't right for the job - the relationship between DoFs and 'Coaches' is absolutely critical.

 

As madras has already driven at, though, its the original decision to appoint him that I take the greatest issue with. Where was the rationale behind having him before anyone else?

[NE5]

Do you have a season ticket NE5? If so are you going to renew it come the end of the season?

 

how many times do I need to say I bought my first season ticket in the 70's, supported the club home and away through the 80's when I lived down south, and have paid for the next 3 years to stay in the same seat I have sat in since the new stand at the Leazes End opened for our first game in the premiership ?

 

Meanwhile, how come someone as experienced a match attender as yourself doesn't understand that managers like Arsene Wenger say they don't see things because they are protecting their players in public ie outside the dressing room ?

 

Not to mention, that you appear unaware of the progress made under the Halls and Shepherd hence your criticism of them ? Or do you think they are responsible for bringing an end to decades of glory winning silverware and 60,000 crowds ?

 

 

 

 

[madras]

I was reading some of the stuff Llambias said in these interviews, and that bit about wanting to adopt the same model as Villa in particular.

 

But he then goes on to say the Dennis Wise / manager / DoF style seperation of roles works very well.

 

Ironically, probably the main reason Lerner and MON have done so well at Villa is because there is a chairman who trusts his manager's judgement 100 percent and makes the money available, and lets the manager get on with running the club.

 

Having complications like Wise will never let that kind of situation flourish.

 

It wouldn't be quite so bad if there was anything in the world to suggest Wise was appropriate for the job. Ultimately, he's just a lower division manager with some friends in the game. Might as well have gone for Tony Adams.

it's a lottery don't you know, when you make appointments so it's a bit pointless taking someones ability into account.

 

Well, lets put it another way. Appointing a manager who has won 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards, is quite worthy of having a good chance, as is an up and coming manager who won the FA Cup and left his team in the top 3 of the league and 2nd phase of the Champions League. As is appointing a World Cup winner. What is your thoughts on Scolari being sacked or are you sticking to your previous criteria and claim Abramovic should step down for taking the club backwards ?

 

 

BEWARE...STRAIGHT ANSWER ALERT...STRAIGHT ANSWER ALERT.

 

 

i thought scolari was an ok appointment but his lack of league experience anywhere was going to be a risk.......can you find many who thought souness or roeder were decent appointments ? if chelsea were a business and they made huge losses and that weren't affordable and appointed souness i think that yes, i'd be looking for someone to take over from whoever was running the club.......straight enough of an answer for you ? give it a go you may feel cleansed.

 

 

oh remember i backed the dalglish appointment and thought they got rid of him too early (don't want you confusing me with someone else)

[fredbob]

Get back in your own thread NE5.

 

nowt to say then ?

 

 

Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton.

 

on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him.

 

When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ?

 

 

 

It's a lottery getting a good manager?

 

No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill.

 

is it now ?

 

We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson.

 

Or Everton replace Moyes ..........

 

 

 

Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory.

 

Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual.

 

you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp.

 

 

were you happy with the kinnear appointment ?

 

hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ?

 

(conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works)

 

 

i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ?

 

often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in.

 

silly.

 

Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back.

 

Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved.

 

Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ?

 

 

 

 

Either that or "Im pleased for you that you think it was a bad thing qualifying for the CL and top 5 finishes, hopefully soopa Mike will get us back up there with his masterplan"

[NE5]

Get back in your own thread NE5.

 

nowt to say then ?

 

 

Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton.

 

on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him.

 

When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ?

 

 

 

It's a lottery getting a good manager?

 

No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill.

 

is it now ?

 

We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson.

 

Or Everton replace Moyes ..........

 

 

 

Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory.

 

Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual.

 

you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp.

 

 

were you happy with the kinnear appointment ?

 

hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ?

 

(conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works)

 

 

i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ?

 

often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in.

 

silly.

 

Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back.

 

Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved.

 

Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ?

 

 

BORING !

 

we've covered the euro qualifications to death as that has little to do with the position we were in spring 2007.

 

defending ashley to the bitter end......like you defending fred ?

 

i never mentioned being embarassed by fred's utterences.

 

 

nice to see you keep your head in the sand re our position when fred left.

 

you mentioned Shepherd, not me, with a silly childish comment.

 

Yep, I will "defend" anybody who gave me the only 15 years out of 45 that tried to compete at the levels this club should always compete at, and thus gave me the best most consistent and highest league positions as a result.  As I've said before. 

 

 

[NE5]

I was reading some of the stuff Llambias said in these interviews, and that bit about wanting to adopt the same model as Villa in particular.

 

But he then goes on to say the Dennis Wise / manager / DoF style seperation of roles works very well.

 

Ironically, probably the main reason Lerner and MON have done so well at Villa is because there is a chairman who trusts his manager's judgement 100 percent and makes the money available, and lets the manager get on with running the club.

 

Having complications like Wise will never let that kind of situation flourish.

 

It wouldn't be quite so bad if there was anything in the world to suggest Wise was appropriate for the job. Ultimately, he's just a lower division manager with some friends in the game. Might as well have gone for Tony Adams.

it's a lottery don't you know, when you make appointments so it's a bit pointless taking someones ability into account.

 

Well, lets put it another way. Appointing a manager who has won 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards, is quite worthy of having a good chance, as is an up and coming manager who won the FA Cup and left his team in the top 3 of the league and 2nd phase of the Champions League. As is appointing a World Cup winner. What is your thoughts on Scolari being sacked or are you sticking to your previous criteria and claim Abramovic should step down for taking the club backwards ?

 

 

BEWARE...STRAIGHT ANSWER ALERT...STRAIGHT ANSWER ALERT.

 

 

i thought scolari was an ok appointment but his lack of league experience anywhere was going to be a risk.......can you find many who thought souness or roeder were decent appointments ? if chelsea were a business and they made huge losses and that weren't affordable and appointed souness i think that yes, i'd be looking for someone to take over from whoever was running the club.......straight enough of an answer for you ? give it a go you may feel cleansed.

 

 

oh remember i backed the dalglish appointment and thought they got rid of him too early (don't want you confusing me with someone else)

 

There was a lot of people on here who defended and supported everything Souness did, and you know it.

 

And you admit that abramovic made a dodgy appointment that has taken his club backwards, so do you also think he should step down for his gross incompetence ?

 

 

 

[madras]

Get back in your own thread NE5.

 

nowt to say then ?

 

 

Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton.

 

on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him.

 

When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ?

 

 

 

It's a lottery getting a good manager?

 

No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill.

 

is it now ?

 

We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson.

 

Or Everton replace Moyes ..........

 

 

 

Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory.

 

Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual.

 

you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp.

 

 

were you happy with the kinnear appointment ?

 

hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ?

 

(conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works)

 

 

i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ?

 

often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in.

 

silly.

 

Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back.

 

Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved.

 

Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ?

 

 

BORING !

 

we've covered the euro qualifications to death as that has little to do with the position we were in spring 2007.

 

defending ashley to the bitter end......like you defending fred ?

 

i never mentioned being embarassed by fred's utterences.

 

 

nice to see you keep your head in the sand re our position when fred left.

 

you mentioned Shepherd, not me, with a silly childish comment.

 

Yep, I will "defend" anybody who gave me the only 15 years out of 45 that tried to compete at the levels this club should always compete at, and thus gave me the best most consistent and highest league positions as a result.  As I've said before. 

 

 

the problem being you will defend them against everything including the position we were i when fred left.

[madras]

I was reading some of the stuff Llambias said in these interviews, and that bit about wanting to adopt the same model as Villa in particular.

 

But he then goes on to say the Dennis Wise / manager / DoF style seperation of roles works very well.

 

Ironically, probably the main reason Lerner and MON have done so well at Villa is because there is a chairman who trusts his manager's judgement 100 percent and makes the money available, and lets the manager get on with running the club.

 

Having complications like Wise will never let that kind of situation flourish.

 

It wouldn't be quite so bad if there was anything in the world to suggest Wise was appropriate for the job. Ultimately, he's just a lower division manager with some friends in the game. Might as well have gone for Tony Adams.

it's a lottery don't you know, when you make appointments so it's a bit pointless taking someones ability into account.

 

Well, lets put it another way. Appointing a manager who has won 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards, is quite worthy of having a good chance, as is an up and coming manager who won the FA Cup and left his team in the top 3 of the league and 2nd phase of the Champions League. As is appointing a World Cup winner. What is your thoughts on Scolari being sacked or are you sticking to your previous criteria and claim Abramovic should step down for taking the club backwards ?

 

 

BEWARE...STRAIGHT ANSWER ALERT...STRAIGHT ANSWER ALERT.

 

 

i thought scolari was an ok appointment but his lack of league experience anywhere was going to be a risk.......can you find many who thought souness or roeder were decent appointments ? if chelsea were a business and they made huge losses and that weren't affordable and appointed souness i think that yes, i'd be looking for someone to take over from whoever was running the club.......straight enough of an answer for you ? give it a go you may feel cleansed.

 

 

oh remember i backed the dalglish appointment and thought they got rid of him too early (don't want you confusing me with someone else)

 

There was a lot of people on here who defended and supported everything Souness did, and you know it.

 

 

how many supported his original appointment.

 

ever heard of the maxim...he might be shit but he's our shit ?