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

[Dr Venkman]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

[NE5]

The old board taking stock and trying to get back on a sound financial footing - fine.

The new board taking stock and trying to get back on a sound financial footing - not fine.

 

Why?

 

This is exactly my question to NE5, and he will not answer it except to say Ashley is a clueless knobjockey etcetera etcetera

 

Looks like you're right. Oh well.

 

He won't answer because he can't answer it. Just keep on harping back to the 70's and 80's and the glory champions league nights which none of us have the slightest clue about.

 

eeerrr.....exactly.

 

Now, toonlass. I know I said this yesterday, but rather than get accused by somebody of "derailing the thread" when I didn't, I'll at least try to make it debateable now that its gone in this direction.

 

Genuine question.

 

You have yourself, Colos short and curlies [sorry if thats not quite right mate I still think of you as Scott parkers 60's haircut], madras, whatthefunk, a few others, taking the side of outright prudency in one corner. In the other, you have me, UV, Spence [maybe], johnnypd, and one or two others, and Dave sort of in the middle but wavering over to "our" side because he's very bothered by the current position and other things.

 

We were all very pleased when Keegan walked through the door, weren't we ? [apart from one or two like ozzie and Baggio who have expressed their opinions of him ie quitter and all of that bollocks, IMO]. Why were you pleased. Was it because you envisaged the club spending some money to back him and getting back into europe and better ? If that were still the case, what would you now be saying ?

 

Also - if Ashley had kept Given, and spent say 20m quid not just to get away from the foot of the table, but with a concrete desire to improve the fortunes of the club, which also improve the financial position if these new players are successful [which is the key].

 

What would you be saying ? Would you be pleased, or would you be saying that we shouldn't be doing this because of the debts ?

 

I'm going out now, I don't give a toss about the snow. I don't want to derail, but hopefully there will be some good honest replies.

 

 

 

well, this is now 4 days later, and it would appear nobody ie those who continue to say that I'm wrong and they are right, has replied to what was a genuine question.

 

 

Even you know why nobody answers you, right?

 

As I've said before (and you've said you don't care), you'd get a lot more respect if you took time to answer questions rather than being the smug, intolerant, self righteous old man you've become.

 

silly comments like that only show me that its pointless debating anything with you.

 

The reason why they haven't answered it, is because if he had backed his manager, they would be jumping up and down and not giving a toss about this debt that they are so outraged about, and they know it.

 

 

 

that's a moot point though. for whatever reason keegan left, and so we're adapting to it and everyone's deciding which parts of whats going on they can come to terms with and understand. i personally can understand a cut back in spending at this point, whereas i cannot understand the handing of a long term contract to kinnear. in the same way that i was unhappy with shepherds time as chairman and i'm also unhappy with ashleys time as owner so far.

 

its not always one way or the other you know, there are many grey areas, how have you got through life so far not realising this?

 

I've always said they made mistakes. But they backed their managers, which is how they bounced back from "mediocrity" and got back up the league again. Ashley won't do it mate, with his current approach, he just won't, thats what I have against him, and I'm convinced he doesn't really "want" to. He wants the revenue, without the expenditure, probably hoping for a sale. But he's going to get a shock, if he believed we would get 50,000 supporters no matter what.

 

 

[NE5]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

[TRon]

The old board taking stock and trying to get back on a sound financial footing - fine.

The new board taking stock and trying to get back on a sound financial footing - not fine.

 

Why?

 

This is exactly my question to NE5, and he will not answer it except to say Ashley is a clueless knobjockey etcetera etcetera

 

Looks like you're right. Oh well.

 

He won't answer because he can't answer it. Just keep on harping back to the 70's and 80's and the glory champions league nights which none of us have the slightest clue about.

 

eeerrr.....exactly.

 

Now, toonlass. I know I said this yesterday, but rather than get accused by somebody of "derailing the thread" when I didn't, I'll at least try to make it debateable now that its gone in this direction.

 

Genuine question.

 

You have yourself, Colos short and curlies [sorry if thats not quite right mate I still think of you as Scott parkers 60's haircut], madras, whatthefunk, a few others, taking the side of outright prudency in one corner. In the other, you have me, UV, Spence [maybe], johnnypd, and one or two others, and Dave sort of in the middle but wavering over to "our" side because he's very bothered by the current position and other things.

 

We were all very pleased when Keegan walked through the door, weren't we ? [apart from one or two like ozzie and Baggio who have expressed their opinions of him ie quitter and all of that bollocks, IMO]. Why were you pleased. Was it because you envisaged the club spending some money to back him and getting back into europe and better ? If that were still the case, what would you now be saying ?

 

Also - if Ashley had kept Given, and spent say 20m quid not just to get away from the foot of the table, but with a concrete desire to improve the fortunes of the club, which also improve the financial position if these new players are successful [which is the key].

 

What would you be saying ? Would you be pleased, or would you be saying that we shouldn't be doing this because of the debts ?

 

I'm going out now, I don't give a toss about the snow. I don't want to derail, but hopefully there will be some good honest replies.

 

 

 

well, this is now 4 days later, and it would appear nobody ie those who continue to say that I'm wrong and they are right, has replied to what was a genuine question.

 

 

Even you know why nobody answers you, right?

 

As I've said before (and you've said you don't care), you'd get a lot more respect if you took time to answer questions rather than being the smug, intolerant, self righteous old man you've become.

 

silly comments like that only show me that its pointless debating anything with you.

 

The reason why they haven't answered it, is because if he had backed his manager, they would be jumping up and down and not giving a toss about this debt that they are so outraged about, and they know it.

 

 

 

that's a moot point though. for whatever reason keegan left, and so we're adapting to it and everyone's deciding which parts of whats going on they can come to terms with and understand. i personally can understand a cut back in spending at this point, whereas i cannot understand the handing of a long term contract to kinnear. in the same way that i was unhappy with shepherds time as chairman and i'm also unhappy with ashleys time as owner so far.

 

its not always one way or the other you know, there are many grey areas, how have you got through life so far not realising this?

 

I've always said they made mistakes. But they backed their managers, which is how they bounced back from "mediocrity" and got back up the league again. Ashley won't do it mate, with his current approach, he just won't, thats what I have against him, and I'm convinced he doesn't really "want" to. He wants the revenue, without the expenditure, probably hoping for a sale. But he's going to get a shock, if he believed we would get 50,000 supporters no matter what.

 

 

 

I agree, Ashley hasn't backed his managers with enough cash. I would like him to spend millions on players, and if he won't (understanbly considering you can't keep spending indefinitely) I would like someone else to buy the club and do it instead. I would be more than happy for John Hall and Freddie Shepherd to come back and spend their cash on the club so we are in agreement. Can we hold a rally to get them back?

 

 

[Dr Venkman]

The old board taking stock and trying to get back on a sound financial footing - fine.

The new board taking stock and trying to get back on a sound financial footing - not fine.

 

Why?

 

This is exactly my question to NE5, and he will not answer it except to say Ashley is a clueless knobjockey etcetera etcetera

 

Looks like you're right. Oh well.

 

He won't answer because he can't answer it. Just keep on harping back to the 70's and 80's and the glory champions league nights which none of us have the slightest clue about.

 

eeerrr.....exactly.

 

Now, toonlass. I know I said this yesterday, but rather than get accused by somebody of "derailing the thread" when I didn't, I'll at least try to make it debateable now that its gone in this direction.

 

Genuine question.

 

You have yourself, Colos short and curlies [sorry if thats not quite right mate I still think of you as Scott parkers 60's haircut], madras, whatthefunk, a few others, taking the side of outright prudency in one corner. In the other, you have me, UV, Spence [maybe], johnnypd, and one or two others, and Dave sort of in the middle but wavering over to "our" side because he's very bothered by the current position and other things.

 

We were all very pleased when Keegan walked through the door, weren't we ? [apart from one or two like ozzie and Baggio who have expressed their opinions of him ie quitter and all of that bollocks, IMO]. Why were you pleased. Was it because you envisaged the club spending some money to back him and getting back into europe and better ? If that were still the case, what would you now be saying ?

 

Also - if Ashley had kept Given, and spent say 20m quid not just to get away from the foot of the table, but with a concrete desire to improve the fortunes of the club, which also improve the financial position if these new players are successful [which is the key].

 

What would you be saying ? Would you be pleased, or would you be saying that we shouldn't be doing this because of the debts ?

 

I'm going out now, I don't give a toss about the snow. I don't want to derail, but hopefully there will be some good honest replies.

 

 

 

well, this is now 4 days later, and it would appear nobody ie those who continue to say that I'm wrong and they are right, has replied to what was a genuine question.

 

 

Even you know why nobody answers you, right?

 

As I've said before (and you've said you don't care), you'd get a lot more respect if you took time to answer questions rather than being the smug, intolerant, self righteous old man you've become.

 

silly comments like that only show me that its pointless debating anything with you.

 

The reason why they haven't answered it, is because if he had backed his manager, they would be jumping up and down and not giving a toss about this debt that they are so outraged about, and they know it.

 

 

 

that's a moot point though. for whatever reason keegan left, and so we're adapting to it and everyone's deciding which parts of whats going on they can come to terms with and understand. i personally can understand a cut back in spending at this point, whereas i cannot understand the handing of a long term contract to kinnear. in the same way that i was unhappy with shepherds time as chairman and i'm also unhappy with ashleys time as owner so far.

 

its not always one way or the other you know, there are many grey areas, how have you got through life so far not realising this?

 

I've always said they made mistakes. But they backed their managers, which is how they bounced back from "mediocrity" and got back up the league again. Ashley won't do it mate, with his current approach, he just won't, thats what I have against him, and I'm convinced he doesn't really "want" to. He wants the revenue, without the expenditure, probably hoping for a sale. But he's going to get a shock, if he believed we would get 50,000 supporters no matter what.

 

 

 

but by backing their managers the debt snow balled and thats how we got into the position we find ourselves in today, and i'm not even going into warehouse renting or paying themselves fortunes, it was spending but it was reckless spending and greed.

 

you can try and justify it all you want but the fact remains that we are where we are and the people you praise (sometimes rightly) were directly responsible for the approach that got us here, and no matter how many time you say it the fact that they are no longer in charge is not in any way being 'held accountable'. they took A LOT of money out of the club in their time on charge and when leaving, thats not being held accountable, thats cutting and running.

 

as far as ashleys approach goes, given the state of the finances and the limited information available to me, i can accept it, for now. you obviously cant and thats just where we have to agree to disagree.

[Dr Venkman]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

absolutely not. but the champions league qualifications were a result of the big spending, had it been big spending that was manageable then there'd be no need for scorn, but it wasnt manageable, it was reckless. and thats why we are where we are.

[Shearergol]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

So do you think Shepherd was leading us back there, with his big spending?

[NE5]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

So do you think Shepherd was leading us back there, with his big spending?

 

you won't get there without it.

 

Do you think Ashley will ever match the Halls and shepherd ?

 

 

[TRon]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

So do you think Shepherd was leading us back there, with his big spending?

 

you won't get there without it.

 

Do you think Ashley will ever match the Halls and shepherd ?

 

 

 

The Halls and Shepherd were superb, I'm surprised that with the club being up for sale, they didn't pool their geordie resources and attempt to buy the club when Ashley wanted out. It surely makes sense for the NUSC to start a public campaign to bring back the old board?

 

[NE5]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

absolutely not. but the champions league qualifications were a result of the big spending, had it been big spending that was manageable then there'd be no need for scorn, but it wasnt manageable, it was reckless. and thats why we are where we are.

 

ah, now. I was one of the few people on here who urged caution when loads of posters were urging the club to "splash the cash" after every defeat, and to back Souness, because they said he would get it right just like Alex Ferguson did at ManU. Probably the same people who are now condemning this approach for what it caused. But I don't do hindsight, thats for others, so are denying u-turns and double standarsds.

 

Fact is, whatever the circumstance, you don't succeed in football without spending. I don't want the club to behave like the charltons of this world and - having the 17th biggest turnover [courtesy of the last regime, and down from 14th since Ashley came in, a downturn which will continue and will drop significantly if nothing is done to arrest it] I think it is not the course we should be taking either.

 

 

[NE5]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

So do you think Shepherd was leading us back there, with his big spending?

 

you won't get there without it.

 

Do you think Ashley will ever match the Halls and shepherd ?

 

 

 

The Halls and Shepherd were superb, I'm surprised that with the club being up for sale, they didn't pool their geordie resources and attempt to buy the club when Ashley wanted out. It surely makes sense for the NUSC to start a public campaign to bring back the old board?

 

 

Well, taking a club with one foot in the 3rd division, and unable to sell for 1.25m quid into one that qualifies for europe more than anybody but 4 clubs and a value of between 100m and 200m quid, isn't too bad going like. Is it ?

 

Does anybody actually read this, or do you think I'm making it up ?

 

 

[Shearergol]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

So do you think Shepherd was leading us back there, with his big spending?

 

you won't get there without it.

 

Do you think Ashley will ever match the Halls and shepherd ?

 

 

 

I agree, you won't get there without it.

 

No, Ashley will never match them. However, Shepherd was never going to match that period again either.

 

So do you think we were going to get there with it? When we finished 25 points short of qualifying, before Ashley was even mentioned, did you sit there looking forward to the next year when you thought we'd be in the top 4? Honest question....

[madras]

Why can't you f***ing understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

absolutely not. but the champions league qualifications were a result of the big spending, had it been big spending that was manageable then there'd be no need for scorn, but it wasnt manageable, it was reckless. and thats why we are where we are.

 

ah, now. I was one of the few people on here who urged caution when loads of posters were urging the club to "splash the cash" after every defeat, and to back Souness, because they said he would get it right just like Alex Ferguson did at ManU. Probably the same people who are now condemning this approach for what it caused. But I don't do hindsight, thats for others, so are denying u-turns and double standarsds.

 

Fact is, whatever the circumstance, you don't succeed in football without spending. I don't want the club to behave like the charltons of this world and - having the 17th biggest turnover [courtesy of the last regime, and down from 14th since Ashley came in, a downturn which will continue and will drop significantly if nothing is done to arrest it] I think it is not the course we should be taking either.

 

 

17th biggest turnover.

 

i wonder how many of those numbered 1 to 16 run at a loss even with those turnovers ?

[Guest fading star]

Why can't you f***ing understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

Whatever you call it, it worked very well for at least ten years and if shepherd hadn’t fucked up replacing SBR it would probably be still working now. If he’d got a decent manager in at the right time the £50m Souness wasted would have probably seen us knocking on the door of the top four again. The revenue generated by being a moderately successful club would probably have covered a very large chunk of the debt Ashley inherited.

 

Shepherd’s faith in Souness was misguided, his overall strategy wasn’t.

[TRon]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

So do you think Shepherd was leading us back there, with his big spending?

 

you won't get there without it.

 

Do you think Ashley will ever match the Halls and shepherd ?

 

 

 

The Halls and Shepherd were superb, I'm surprised that with the club being up for sale, they didn't pool their geordie resources and attempt to buy the club when Ashley wanted out. It surely makes sense for the NUSC to start a public campaign to bring back the old board?

 

 

Well, taking a club with one foot in the 3rd division, and unable to sell for 1.25m quid into one that qualifies for europe more than anybody but 4 clubs and a value of between 100m and 200m quid, isn't too bad going like. Is it ?

 

Does anybody actually read this, or do you think I'm making it up ?

 

 

 

Which is why I'm asking why don't they do it again? Why leave the club in the hands of an outsider when they could buy the club from Ashley and show how it should be done? With the backing of the NUSC how could they fail?

[NE5]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

So do you think Shepherd was leading us back there, with his big spending?

 

you won't get there without it.

 

Do you think Ashley will ever match the Halls and shepherd ?

 

 

 

I agree, you won't get there without it.

 

No, Ashley will never match them. However, Shepherd was never going to match that period again either.

 

So do you think we were going to get there with it? When we finished 25 points short of qualifying, before Ashley was even mentioned, did you sit there looking forward to the next year when you thought we'd be in the top 4? Honest question....

 

I've answered this. I think Allardyce was an attempt to re-structure the club with a manager who had proved he could put together a decent team without needing big money until they could challenge again. The crowds would continue to be big because whatever you say or think of the old regime the public knew they had ambition. The opposite is true of Ashley, the public now know he doesn't, so when crowds dive, and we have another relegation fight or worse, then the point about choosing to show ambition or not, which has been pointed out in the past, will become clearer still as it still obviously isn't clear enough after the events of the last 18 months.

 

 

[Shearergol]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

So do you think Shepherd was leading us back there, with his big spending?

 

you won't get there without it.

 

Do you think Ashley will ever match the Halls and shepherd ?

 

 

 

I agree, you won't get there without it.

 

No, Ashley will never match them. However, Shepherd was never going to match that period again either.

 

So do you think we were going to get there with it? When we finished 25 points short of qualifying, before Ashley was even mentioned, did you sit there looking forward to the next year when you thought we'd be in the top 4? Honest question....

 

I've answered this. I think Allardyce was an attempt to re-structure the club with a manager who had proved he could put together a decent team without needing big money until they could challenge again. The crowds would continue to be big because whatever you say or think of the old regime the public knew they had ambition. The opposite is true of Ashley, the public now know he doesn't, so when crowds dive, and we have another relegation fight or worse, then the point about choosing to show ambition or not, which has been pointed out in the past, will become clearer still as it still obviously isn't clear enough after the events of the last 18 months.

 

 

 

Woah woah woah, you're claiming Shepherd had changed his approach of spending big to get us back there, the very approach you want Ashley to go down? So really, you think Ashley is doing the right thing by putting together a decent team without needing big money until we could challenge again, it's really just the choice of manager which is the problem? Yeah, I'd agree with that.

 

Allardyce wasn't the right man either though, neither was Keegan with that approach.

[Guest fading star]

There’s a world of difference between not spending big money and spending fuck all.

[Dr Venkman]

Why can't you f***ing understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

Whatever you call it, it worked very well for at least ten years and if shepherd hadn’t fucked up replacing SBR it would probably be still working now. If he’d got a decent manager in at the right time the £50m Souness wasted would have probably seen us knocking on the door of the top four again. The revenue generated by being a moderately successful club would probably have covered a very large chunk of the debt Ashley inherited.

 

Shepherd’s faith in Souness was misguided, his overall strategy wasn’t.

 

no point in even bothering with that speculative load

[Dr Venkman]

There’s a world of difference between not spending big money and spending fuck all.

 

there's a world of difference between responsible spending and reckless spending, and where they get you when things dont turn out like you hoped they would.

[Parky]

Why can't you f***ing understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

absolutely not. but the champions league qualifications were a result of the big spending, had it been big spending that was manageable then there'd be no need for scorn, but it wasnt manageable, it was reckless. and thats why we are where we are.

 

ah, now. I was one of the few people on here who urged caution when loads of posters were urging the club to "splash the cash" after every defeat, and to back Souness, because they said he would get it right just like Alex Ferguson did at ManU. Probably the same people who are now condemning this approach for what it caused. But I don't do hindsight, thats for others, so are denying u-turns and double standarsds.

 

Fact is, whatever the circumstance, you don't succeed in football without spending. I don't want the club to behave like the charltons of this world and - having the 17th biggest turnover [courtesy of the last regime, and down from 14th since Ashley came in, a downturn which will continue and will drop significantly if nothing is done to arrest it] I think it is not the course we should be taking either.

 

 

17th biggest turnover.

 

i wonder how many of those numbered 1 to 16 run at a loss even with those turnovers ?

 

For the 10 millionth time half the PL are in debt and most struggle to cover player wages. FACT.

[Dr Venkman]

Why can't you f***ing understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

absolutely not. but the champions league qualifications were a result of the big spending, had it been big spending that was manageable then there'd be no need for scorn, but it wasnt manageable, it was reckless. and thats why we are where we are.

 

ah, now. I was one of the few people on here who urged caution when loads of posters were urging the club to "splash the cash" after every defeat, and to back Souness, because they said he would get it right just like Alex Ferguson did at ManU. Probably the same people who are now condemning this approach for what it caused. But I don't do hindsight, thats for others, so are denying u-turns and double standarsds.

 

Fact is, whatever the circumstance, you don't succeed in football without spending. I don't want the club to behave like the charltons of this world and - having the 17th biggest turnover [courtesy of the last regime, and down from 14th since Ashley came in, a downturn which will continue and will drop significantly if nothing is done to arrest it] I think it is not the course we should be taking either.

 

 

17th biggest turnover.

 

i wonder how many of those numbered 1 to 16 run at a loss even with those turnovers ?

 

For the 10 millionth time half the PL are in debt and most struggle to cover player wages. FACT.

 

isnt there a difference though between being able to manage debt and being very restricted by it? genuine question btw, i dont claim to have anything more than common knowledge of finance.

[indi]

Why can't you f***ing understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

absolutely not. but the champions league qualifications were a result of the big spending, had it been big spending that was manageable then there'd be no need for scorn, but it wasnt manageable, it was reckless. and thats why we are where we are.

 

ah, now. I was one of the few people on here who urged caution when loads of posters were urging the club to "splash the cash" after every defeat, and to back Souness, because they said he would get it right just like Alex Ferguson did at ManU. Probably the same people who are now condemning this approach for what it caused. But I don't do hindsight, thats for others, so are denying u-turns and double standarsds.

 

Fact is, whatever the circumstance, you don't succeed in football without spending. I don't want the club to behave like the charltons of this world and - having the 17th biggest turnover [courtesy of the last regime, and down from 14th since Ashley came in, a downturn which will continue and will drop significantly if nothing is done to arrest it] I think it is not the course we should be taking either.

 

 

17th biggest turnover.

 

i wonder how many of those numbered 1 to 16 run at a loss even with those turnovers ?

 

For the 10 millionth time half the PL are in debt and most struggle to cover player wages. FACT.

 

Resorting to the dreaded "FACT" now are we? For shame Parkster, for shame.

 

Just because everyone's fucked doesn't make it okay, especially as we're more fucked than they are despite having bigger resources and a higher turnover.

[Guest toonlass]

Why can't you fucking understand that people can be unhappy with Shepherd and it doesn't automatically mean they approve of Ashley?

 

That's a genuine question too.

 

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are.

 

Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced.

 

I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him.

 

 

 

the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

 

you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there.

 

 

 

So do you think Shepherd was leading us back there, with his big spending?

 

you won't get there without it.

 

Do you think Ashley will ever match the Halls and shepherd ?

 

 

 

And seeing that John Hall was desperate to cash in and leave, had Shepherd been able to raise the cash to buy Hall out, how much spending do you think he would have been able to do, with the club mortgaged up to the hilt and in 13th place?

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Theres a world of difference between not spending big money and spending fuck all.

 

And there is a world of difference between spending fuck all and spending £10m on a first choice centre back but recouping that money through selling players who don't want to play for the club.

 

If we hadn't sold Milner, hadn't got £6m for Dyer, £7m for Parker, £4m (ish) for Emre, £6m for Zoggy etc etc, instead lets say like under the old board we got a couple of million each for them would you be more satisfied with the outgoings?

 

We've essentially broken even in transfer windows pre January due to good negotiating in the sales of players - the vast majority of who most people were happy to see leave and even more happy with the fees we brought in.

 

Is Colo better than Bramble? Bassong better than Rozenthal? Is Beye better than Carr? Jonas better than Milner?

 

Of course I'd loved to see us bring in a pair of dynamic centre midfielders, you would have to be stupid not to. But in general our lack of spending has improved on what was there before