NUSC - Good or Bad?

[NE5]

They're different.

 

So, tell us. You think protesting about a situation can be effective, and you fully support such actions when you think is necessary

 

Clarify for us. Having fully supported protesting when we were playing in europe, why exactly do you not support it now ? Is it because you think Mike Ashley is doing well enough not to deserve it and we should all be happy with the current position of the club ?

 

You've harped on about "intelligent responses" etc etc, blah blah. Now is your chance, again.

 

You can even apply your usual, remarkable gift of hindsight it you like.

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

So you agree that circumstances are not the same.

 

Well done for admitting that you were talking out of your arse! I didn't think you had sufficient strength of character.

 

 

 

 

[merlin]

i wonder if the same idiots who thought nusc destabilised the club will now give them credit for forcing a 9% reduction in season ticket prices.

 

in reality neither is true but it would be nice to have some consistency on the part of those who criticise an insignificant volunteer ran amatuer fan's club while giving the professional board of the football club an easy ride.

 

Why mention it then?

 

I won't be giving NUSC credit for the price reduction, because there's no evidence it's anything to do with them. And I will criticise the fans that caused chaos after KK left, because I don't agree with what they did.

 

because a bunch of people on here got all hot and bothered that 'the fans' are to blame for the state we are in, really laughable stuff like 'the banner made us lose' on one occasion. people are more than willing to point out how much damage an insignificant fan club are doing (and how badly run they are whilst giving the professional club board lots of slack). nusc must be very influential if they can cause such damage!

 

so i just wondered if the same people would also dish out the credit for putting pressure on the board to try and win fans round. you do both or you do none.

 

So you're arguing that fans can have no effect upon the club at the same time as arguing in favour of an organisation whose relevance and reason for existing is based entirely upon the opposite being true.

 

 

Well said. I was reading today's posts on this thread and working up to posting about precisely this logical disconnect.

 

The very people who argue most strongly in favour of protest, of "doing something" -- ie insisting that fan action of this nature can have a positive effect -- are also the most keen to deny that fan action can have any kind of negative effect at all.

 

In reality, if one is true, so must be the other.

 

Worrying about the effect of protest on the team is horse s*** to tell the truth.

 

24 points in 22 games without any protests?

 

Christ!  What level of confidence are we concerned about denting by having a go at the owner?

 

 

 

 

 

An already extremely fragile confidence.

 

However, you miss the point. Chez was saying upthread, and I agree, that the atmosphere of outraged protest following the departure of Keegan was one of the factors making it impossible for us to find a better manager than Joe Kinnear. The NUSC meanwhile seem to think that they can somehow oust Mike Ashley from the club. All this is about stuff that happens off the pitch.

 

The fuss surrounding KK's departure would NOT have mattered to a prospective manager of stature PROVIDED he felt the club structure was right and he would be allowed to do the job HIS WAY ; look at what has happened at a successful club(Liverpool), where Parry has been shown the door because Benitez didn't want him interfering in transfers etc...isn't that exactly why KK walked out, and didn't both Fergie & Wenger agree with him ?

We ended up with the Kinnears of this world because nobody else wanted to work with the structure Ashley has put in place...can you imagine the likes of Hiddink being worried about taking over from KK? Not a chance, the guy has faith in his own ability to deliver.

[Happy Face]

i wonder if the same idiots who thought nusc destabilised the club will now give them credit for forcing a 9% reduction in season ticket prices.

 

in reality neither is true but it would be nice to have some consistency on the part of those who criticise an insignificant volunteer ran amatuer fan's club while giving the professional board of the football club an easy ride.

 

Why mention it then?

 

I won't be giving NUSC credit for the price reduction, because there's no evidence it's anything to do with them. And I will criticise the fans that caused chaos after KK left, because I don't agree with what they did.

 

because a bunch of people on here got all hot and bothered that 'the fans' are to blame for the state we are in, really laughable stuff like 'the banner made us lose' on one occasion. people are more than willing to point out how much damage an insignificant fan club are doing (and how badly run they are whilst giving the professional club board lots of slack). nusc must be very influential if they can cause such damage!

 

so i just wondered if the same people would also dish out the credit for putting pressure on the board to try and win fans round. you do both or you do none.

 

So you're arguing that fans can have no effect upon the club at the same time as arguing in favour of an organisation whose relevance and reason for existing is based entirely upon the opposite being true.

 

 

Well said. I was reading today's posts on this thread and working up to posting about precisely this logical disconnect.

 

The very people who argue most strongly in favour of protest, of "doing something" -- ie insisting that fan action of this nature can have a positive effect -- are also the most keen to deny that fan action can have any kind of negative effect at all.

 

In reality, if one is true, so must be the other.

 

Worrying about the effect of protest on the team is horse s*** to tell the truth.

 

24 points in 22 games without any protests?

 

Christ!  What level of confidence are we concerned about denting by having a go at the owner?

 

 

 

 

 

An already extremely fragile confidence.

 

However, you miss the point. Chez was saying upthread, and I agree, that the atmosphere of outraged protest following the departure of Keegan was one of the factors making it impossible for us to find a better manager than Joe Kinnear. The NUSC meanwhile seem to think that they can somehow oust Mike Ashley from the club. All this is about stuff that happens off the pitch.

 

The fuss surrounding KK's departure would NOT have mattered to a prospective manager of stature PROVIDED he felt the club structure was right and he would be allowed to do the job HIS WAY ; look at what has happened at a successful club(Liverpool), where Parry has been shown the door because Benitez didn't want him interfering in transfers etc...isn't that exactly why KK walked out, and didn't both Fergie & Wenger agree with him ?

We ended up with the Kinnears of this world because nobody else wanted to work with the structure Ashley has put in place...can you imagine the likes of Hiddink being worried about taking over from KK? Not a chance, the guy has faith in his own ability to deliver.

 

I know your point is more to do with the current situation, but Benitez has been fighting that battle for 2 years, and has come closer than ever to having a chance in the league.

 

Isn't it a shame Keegan just walked.  :-[

[NE5]

So you agree that circumstances are not the same.

 

Well done for admitting that you were talking out of your arse! I didn't think you had sufficient strength of character.

 

 

 

 

the only difference being that the team was doing much better, yet you backed a protest quite strongly

 

Question remains. Why do you not back this one, do you think Ashley is undeserving of it while the previous regime did ?

 

Why can't you reply, you've harped on about having an intelligent discussion 

[Rich]

So you agree that circumstances are not the same.

 

Well done for admitting that you were talking out of your arse! I didn't think you had sufficient strength of character.

 

 

 

 

the only difference being that the team was doing much better, yet you backed a protest quite strongly

 

Question remains. Why do you not back this one, do you think Ashley is undeserving of it while the previous regime did ?

 

Why can't you reply, you've harped on about having an intelligent discussion 

 

Do you not just reckon that a lot of people, not just Ozzie, had become fairly spoiled in the period that you refer to and that after blaming players and managers the last step was to blame the directors? I'd openly admit that I for one was guilty of this and can see the takeover going much the way of the Souness appointment in the annals, for how it will be remembered, unless they sort it out of course.

 

Like I've said elsewhere, Freddy was a victim of the raised expectations he had helped create, much like Bobby Robson, and as I've also said "if you live by the sword, you die by the sword". Like Shepherd said himself (with a wry smile) on the recent program he was on, "it's business".

 

I do tend to think you have a lot of solid foundations for your opinions to be honest and as time goes by (especially while Ashley and Co. are performing worse than the former bunch) people's stances will soften with the benefit of hindsight. Personally I do think a change was needed, mainly from a financial aspect (as I believe we've discussed before) and I'm gutted that so far Mike Ashley with all of his money hasn't appeared to be an instant solution. At the current time it's hard to argue with your anger towards those who thought any Tom, Dick or Harry would come in and improve things (still relatively early days, mind).

 

It sounds insane when you consider his wealth, but even Ashley may not have the type of money required to compete at the top level of the PL in a hurry now, much like it started to appear Fred and Co. didn't as the likes of Abramovich et al. appeared onto the scene. All we can hope for is that either Ashley turns it around with his current "plan" or that we're taken over by an individual or a group who has much more money and much more know-how when it comes to running a football club.

 

The latter certainly doesn't look like happening, so what choice do we have other than to continue to support what is already there? I genuinely don't see what protesting and moaning incessantly does to help things at the current point in time.

[NE5]

So you agree that circumstances are not the same.

 

Well done for admitting that you were talking out of your arse! I didn't think you had sufficient strength of character.

 

 

 

 

the only difference being that the team was doing much better, yet you backed a protest quite strongly

 

Question remains. Why do you not back this one, do you think Ashley is undeserving of it while the previous regime did ?

 

Why can't you reply, you've harped on about having an intelligent discussion 

 

Do you not just reckon that a lot of people, not just Ozzie, had become fairly spoiled in the period that you refer to and that after blaming players and managers the last step was to blame the directors? I'd openly admit that I for one was guilty of this and can see the takeover going much the way of the Souness appointment in the annals, for how it will be remembered, unless they sort it out of course.

 

Like I've said elsewhere, Freddy was a victim of the raised expectations he had helped create, much like Bobby Robson, and as I've also said "if you live by the sword, you die by the sword". Like Shepherd said himself (with a wry smile) on the recent program he was on, "it's business".

 

I do tend to think you have a lot of solid foundations for your opinions to be honest and as time goes by (especially while Ashley and Co. are performing worse than the former bunch) people's stances will soften with the benefit of hindsight. Personally I do think a change was needed, mainly from a financial aspect (as I believe we've discussed before) and I'm gutted that so far Mike Ashley with all of his money hasn't appeared to be an instant solution. At the current time it's hard to argue with your anger towards those who thought any Tom, Dick or Harry would come in and improve things (still relatively early days, mind).

 

sound post. Why not encourage ozzie and your mate to be honest and simply admit that their almost permanent obsessed slating of the old regime, was - in hindsight in Ozzie's case, which he should have no difficulty whatsoever in applying as it's his speciality, and in your mates case pretty dumb as he should have known better - shall we say, misplaced ?

 

It sounds insane when you consider his wealth, but even Ashley may not have the type of money required to compete at the top level of the PL in a hurry now, much like it started to appear Fred and Co. didn't as the likes of Abramovich et al. appeared onto the scene. All we can hope for is that either Ashley turns it around with his current "plan" or that we're taken over by an individual or a group who has much more money and much more know-how when it comes to running a football club.

 

The latter certainly doesn't look like happening, so what choice do we have other than to continue to support what is already there? I genuinely don't see what protesting and moaning incessantly does to help things at the current point in time.

 

have you forgotten how full of moaning and whinging it was when the old regime was here ? Did you criticise that ? Remember that I was one of the few people who told people to stop moaning ........

 

 

 

 

[Rich]

I haven't forgotten, not at all mate, the place was horrific even then for people having a whinge. Even when we were 3rd/4th there'd be people going on about something or other. I have no doubt that I've had a little moan at certain things during those good times myself, and I certainly will admit to having some grievances after Robson went and during the following reigns of Souness/Roeder, which I thought were justified at the time considering how far we fell in just one season. I certainly remember having a pop at various people for doom-mongering even back then though, Phil K is one that immediately springs to mind... I appreciated those years at the time greatly and I still do now.

 

One main thing that sticks out as a bone of contention from the time was the "Bowyer summer" and the subsequent failure to qualify for the Champions' League again. Which obviously looking back seems to support the "spoiled brats" theory, but when we were in the heat of the moment it seemed a crime that we didn't build upon all of the good work that we'd put in the previous season. That 02/03 season, despite "only" coming 3rd, possibly rivals or even outdoes the 95/96 campaign in the fact that it had an amazing CL run added into it.

 

The whole thing is so complex though, muddied even further as time goes by and memories fade, but it's vitally important that neither side begins rewriting history, which is what I have taken exception to in the past. I'm not going to sit here and hark back to the days of Shepherd thinking that all was rosy in the garden because it wasn't, things were evidently on the slide, the financial situation was becoming a worry and we seemed to be slipping behind while clubs all around us pushed on with new investment and new (better) managers. That slide, for me, started before Ashley arrived here - not afterwards - which is why I tend to be more neutral in the whole debate. I do agree with you when you say people are quick to criticise Shepherd without giving him credit for those achievements though and I would like to see Mick and Ozzie soften on this point in particular, much like you are the other way at times though, they appear to be too entrenched/too far gone to do so, which is a right bugger.

 

Of course we had some great, great times under the last regime - but there were also times where things felt as low as they do now, probably because the peaks had been so euphoric. During Shepherd's final year or two and since Ashley came in there haven't really been those massive highs to offset the lows (bar Keegan's return and the miniature run we went on last season, which you must credit Ashley and Co. for making happen in the first place before they messed it up), which has led to a decimated and fractured support, hurt and apathetic at the way in which the club appears to have been handled from the top down (not just the fault of one or two men, however).

 

I could go on for pages on this topic, to be honest, and I'd love to know more of the ins and outs of it all as far as the financial situation at the club goes and the reasons for certain things happening, but to avoid doing so and to try and tie things up a little bit I can only conclude from my own personal perspective: it was probably time for new owners or at the least new investment (with Fred remaining to run the club even if he wasn't the name above the door, so to speak), unfortunately the new owners we did get haven't provided the big-spending/instant fix that many (including myself) had hoped for - or even expected, they've made a horrendous error with the Kevin Keegan situation when it looked for all intents and purposes that we were getting back on the right track and have looked naive elsewhere as well.

 

However they have only been here 18 months and have arguably taken over a club that had a lot of positives along with a lot of very real negatives too (waning, ageing support, a massive wage bill, a perennially-injured squad, etc.). IF we stay up this season and no investment/takeover is forthcoming then we have no alternative but to support them. For all that has went pear-shaped it hasn't been all bad and there is an argument to say that IF they can get the financial side sorted out while maintaining our Premiership status and making small strides forward (can't really go backwards at the minute, can they?) then we could still be onto a winner. You might totally disagree here, but I still see a little bit of light at the end of the tunnel if they are good to their recent word and continue to invest without taking anything out of the football club.

[Tooj]

I must admit during the same old arguments (even from myself) reading your posts is always a pleasure Rich.

[cp40]

I haven't forgotten, not at all mate, the place was horrific even then for people having a whinge. Even when we were 3rd/4th there'd be people going on about something or other. I have no doubt that I've had a little moan at certain things during those good times myself, and I certainly will admit to having some grievances after Robson went and during the following reigns of Souness/Roeder, which I thought were justified at the time considering how far we fell in just one season. I certainly remember having a pop at various people for doom-mongering even back then though, Phil K is one that immediately springs to mind... I appreciated those years at the time greatly and I still do now.

 

One main thing that sticks out as a bone of contention from the time was the "Bowyer summer" and the subsequent failure to qualify for the Champions' League again. Which obviously looking back seems to support the "spoiled brats" theory, but when we were in the heat of the moment it seemed a crime that we didn't build upon all of the good work that we'd put in the previous season. That 02/03 season, despite "only" coming 3rd, possibly rivals or even outdoes the 95/96 campaign in the fact that it had an amazing CL run added into it.

 

The whole thing is so complex though, muddied even further as time goes by and memories fade, but it's vitally important that neither side begins rewriting history, which is what I have taken exception to in the past. I'm not going to sit here and hark back to the days of Shepherd thinking that all was rosy in the garden because it wasn't, things were evidently on the slide, the financial situation was becoming a worry and we seemed to be slipping behind while clubs all around us pushed on with new investment and new (better) managers. That slide, for me, started before Ashley arrived here - not afterwards - which is why I tend to be more neutral in the whole debate. I do agree with you when you say people are quick to criticise Shepherd without giving him credit for those achievements though and I would like to see Mick and Ozzie soften on this point in particular, much like you are the other way at times though, they appear to be too entrenched/too far gone to do so, which is a right bugger.

 

Of course we had some great, great times under the last regime - but there were also times where things felt as low as they do now, probably because the peaks had been so euphoric. During Shepherd's final year or two and since Ashley came in there haven't really been those massive highs to offset the lows (bar Keegan's return and the miniature run we went on last season, which you must credit Ashley and Co. for making happen in the first place before they messed it up), which has led to a decimated and fractured support, hurt and apathetic at the way in which the club appears to have been handled from the top down (not just the fault of one or two men, however).

 

I could go on for pages on this topic, to be honest, and I'd love to know more of the ins and outs of it all as far as the financial situation at the club goes and the reasons for certain things happening, but to avoid doing so and to try and tie things up a little bit I can only conclude from my own personal perspective: it was probably time for new owners or at the least new investment (with Fred remaining to run the club even if he wasn't the name above the door, so to speak), unfortunately the new owners we did get haven't provided the big-spending/instant fix that many (including myself) had hoped for - or even expected, they've made a horrendous error with the Kevin Keegan situation when it looked for all intents and purposes that we were getting back on the right track and have looked naive elsewhere as well.

 

However they have only been here 18 months and have arguably taken over a club that had a lot of positives along with a lot of very real negatives too (waning, ageing support, a massive wage bill, a perennially-injured squad, etc.). IF we stay up this season and no investment/takeover is forthcoming then we have no alternative but to support them. For all that has went pear-shaped it hasn't been all bad and there is an argument to say that IF they can get the financial side sorted out while maintaining our Premiership status and making small strides forward (can't really go backwards at the minute, can they?) then we could still be onto a winner. You might totally disagree here, but I still see a little bit of light at the end of the tunnel if they are good to their recent word and continue to invest without taking anything out of the football club.

 

 

good post Rich,

 

i can summarise for you,

 

Bad leadership since the Halls left.

[Rich]

Not sure it's as simple as that mate, which is why it took me about 1000 words to get it across!!

 

Saying "bad leadership since the Halls left" doesn't really do it justice and will just get people's backs up re: Shepherd and Ashley, the former who it could be argued outdid the Halls on occasions in terms of where the club went and the latter who it could be argued hasn't had long enough to be judged completely as of yet, despite some hideous errors of judgement so far. There has certainly been a lot of "bad leadership" at vital times though, especially when hindsight is utilised, so you're not wrong there!

 

Basically, if we all posted HTT-style analyses in every post, there'd probably be less in-fighting as there'd be less open to conjecture. Of course we'd all be ridiculed by the tl;dr merchants as well, but it's swings and roundabouts

[Stu]

excellent couple of posts Rich, spot on as well and worth the read - can't disagree with a word you've said.

 

:claps:

[Parky]

I haven't forgotten, not at all mate, the place was horrific even then for people having a whinge. Even when we were 3rd/4th there'd be people going on about something or other. I have no doubt that I've had a little moan at certain things during those good times myself, and I certainly will admit to having some grievances after Robson went and during the following reigns of Souness/Roeder, which I thought were justified at the time considering how far we fell in just one season. I certainly remember having a pop at various people for doom-mongering even back then though, Phil K is one that immediately springs to mind... I appreciated those years at the time greatly and I still do now.

 

One main thing that sticks out as a bone of contention from the time was the "Bowyer summer" and the subsequent failure to qualify for the Champions' League again. Which obviously looking back seems to support the "spoiled brats" theory, but when we were in the heat of the moment it seemed a crime that we didn't build upon all of the good work that we'd put in the previous season. That 02/03 season, despite "only" coming 3rd, possibly rivals or even outdoes the 95/96 campaign in the fact that it had an amazing CL run added into it.

 

The whole thing is so complex though, muddied even further as time goes by and memories fade, but it's vitally important that neither side begins rewriting history, which is what I have taken exception to in the past. I'm not going to sit here and hark back to the days of Shepherd thinking that all was rosy in the garden because it wasn't, things were evidently on the slide, the financial situation was becoming a worry and we seemed to be slipping behind while clubs all around us pushed on with new investment and new (better) managers. That slide, for me, started before Ashley arrived here - not afterwards - which is why I tend to be more neutral in the whole debate. I do agree with you when you say people are quick to criticise Shepherd without giving him credit for those achievements though and I would like to see Mick and Ozzie soften on this point in particular, much like you are the other way at times though, they appear to be too entrenched/too far gone to do so, which is a right bugger.

 

Of course we had some great, great times under the last regime - but there were also times where things felt as low as they do now, probably because the peaks had been so euphoric. During Shepherd's final year or two and since Ashley came in there haven't really been those massive highs to offset the lows (bar Keegan's return and the miniature run we went on last season, which you must credit Ashley and Co. for making happen in the first place before they messed it up), which has led to a decimated and fractured support, hurt and apathetic at the way in which the club appears to have been handled from the top down (not just the fault of one or two men, however).

 

I could go on for pages on this topic, to be honest, and I'd love to know more of the ins and outs of it all as far as the financial situation at the club goes and the reasons for certain things happening, but to avoid doing so and to try and tie things up a little bit I can only conclude from my own personal perspective: it was probably time for new owners or at the least new investment (with Fred remaining to run the club even if he wasn't the name above the door, so to speak), unfortunately the new owners we did get haven't provided the big-spending/instant fix that many (including myself) had hoped for - or even expected, they've made a horrendous error with the Kevin Keegan situation when it looked for all intents and purposes that we were getting back on the right track and have looked naive elsewhere as well.

 

However they have only been here 18 months and have arguably taken over a club that had a lot of positives along with a lot of very real negatives too (waning, ageing support, a massive wage bill, a perennially-injured squad, etc.). IF we stay up this season and no investment/takeover is forthcoming then we have no alternative but to support them. For all that has went pear-shaped it hasn't been all bad and there is an argument to say that IF they can get the financial side sorted out while maintaining our Premiership status and making small strides forward (can't really go backwards at the minute, can they?) then we could still be onto a winner. You might totally disagree here, but I still see a little bit of light at the end of the tunnel if they are good to their recent word and continue to invest without taking anything out of the football club.

 

Not refreshing the first team adequately 'that summer' was a catastrophic mistake.

[Rich]

But has it ever come out in the wash why we didn't though? It may just be my memory but I certainly don't remember Robson appearing too upset with just the addition of Bowyer and of course we had just spent £9M on Woodgate. It may have simply been that there was no money there to re-invest, or that Robson didn't feel he needed much else... if it was the former then this is what I understand about people being frustrated with Freddy. If the pot was empty or money couldn't be found after we'd just finished 3rd and had the potential to secure more big income by qualifying for the CL again then there must have been some bad management going on. However, it's one of those straw-man arguments at the minute because it can't be certain that it was the case.

 

I must add that the more I'm thinking on this, the more negatives are appearing in my mind about Shepherd after the highs of 2001/02 and 2002/03 - particularly the Woodgate/Rooney summer, the circumstances regarding Gary Speed, Michael Carrick and Nicky Butt and the appointment of Souness and later slagging of Robson through the press. ADD: The fallout of the Bellamy situation, the dodgy dealings re: Boumsong and Faye, etc...

 

Time does make you look back more fondly, generally, doesn't it?

[OzzieMandias]

So you agree that circumstances are not the same.

 

Well done for admitting that you were talking out of your arse! I didn't think you had sufficient strength of character.

 

 

 

 

the only difference being that the team was doing much better, yet you backed a protest quite strongly

 

Question remains. Why do you not back this one, do you think Ashley is undeserving of it while the previous regime did ?

 

Why can't you reply, you've harped on about having an intelligent discussion 

 

Do you not just reckon that a lot of people, not just Ozzie, had become fairly spoiled in the period that you refer to and that after blaming players and managers the last step was to blame the directors? I'd openly admit that I for one was guilty of this and can see the takeover going much the way of the Souness appointment in the annals, for how it will be remembered, unless they sort it out of course.

 

Like I've said elsewhere, Freddy was a victim of the raised expectations he had helped create, much like Bobby Robson, and as I've also said "if you live by the sword, you die by the sword". Like Shepherd said himself (with a wry smile) on the recent program he was on, "it's business".

 

I do tend to think you have a lot of solid foundations for your opinions to be honest and as time goes by (especially while Ashley and Co. are performing worse than the former bunch) people's stances will soften with the benefit of hindsight. Personally I do think a change was needed, mainly from a financial aspect (as I believe we've discussed before) and I'm gutted that so far Mike Ashley with all of his money hasn't appeared to be an instant solution. At the current time it's hard to argue with your anger towards those who thought any Tom, Dick or Harry would come in and improve things (still relatively early days, mind).

 

It sounds insane when you consider his wealth, but even Ashley may not have the type of money required to compete at the top level of the PL in a hurry now, much like it started to appear Fred and Co. didn't as the likes of Abramovich et al. appeared onto the scene. All we can hope for is that either Ashley turns it around with his current "plan" or that we're taken over by an individual or a group who has much more money and much more know-how when it comes to running a football club.

 

The latter certainly doesn't look like happening, so what choice do we have other than to continue to support what is already there? I genuinely don't see what protesting and moaning incessantly does to help things at the current point in time.

 

It certainly doesn't. As I've been saying, the circumstances have changed and that's the main difference regarding the sense of protest.

 

You're right that Ashley hasn't proved wealthy enough to provide a one-stop solution. But at least he has enough cash in his pocket to keep us out of insolvency. In this crucial sense we are of course better off than we were under the old lot, who did not have the resources to deal with the situation they had created -- as SJH had obviously recognised.

[Rich]

In no way is it certain that money was a problem though, especially to the extent that some claim. Obviously Ashley has a bigger personal fortune than the previous incumbents but who's to say Freddy didn't have a trick or two up his sleeve to get some more funds in? He himself said recently that money "wasn't a problem", although you obviously can take that with as big a pinch of salt as you like. He's hardly going to admit he could have been buggered.

 

When people deal in definitives when there are no solid facts to support their evidence is when problems happen. You may well be right, but there's no guarantee that we're better of now than we would have been had Fred remained in control.

 

 

[Mick]

In no way is it certain that money was a problem though, especially to the extent that some claim. Obviously Ashley has a bigger personal fortune than the previous incumbents but who's to say Freddy didn't have a trick or two up his sleeve to get some more funds in? He himself said recently that money "wasn't a problem", although you obviously can take that with as big a pinch of salt as you like. He's hardly going to admit he could have been buggered.

 

When people deal in definitives when there are no solid facts to support their evidence is when problems happen. You may well be right, but there's no guarantee that we're better of now than we would have been had Fred remained in control.

 

 

 

A solid fact that we had no money is the club accounts, not just the balance but also the fact that we'd spent £millions trying to and failing to re-finance the debt.

[Rich]

So right, he'd brought Sam Allardyce in to try and run things on a tighter leash... there was the increased TV money upcoming, the potential sales of numerous players (while possibly not spending as much as Ashley has, if you can imagine such a thing), the potential expansion of SJP and the sale/redevelopment of the land around the stadium, a potential casino deal... was this it, do you reckon? The grand plan? Was there anything else I've forgotten? (Anyone?)

 

We're getting somewhere here, away from the usual shite. We're at the point now where Freddy Shepherd has hired Allardyce, he's in hospital and he comes out without there having been a takeover from Mike Ashley. You'd assume Viduka and Barton would have both still arrived as they were already in motion and that the likes of Distin and others were targets too (where is this money coming from??) Now, things could obviously go either way, but we can't just base that on opinion. What solid evidence is there either way to say we would have been alright or we would have crashed and burned?

 

You've set us off by saying he's failed to re-finance the debt, so on the other side of the coin what does NE5 have to make him so sure that we're worse off now under Ashley?

 

I'm not looking to catch anybody out here, I'm not playing any games, I am genuinely interested to know one way or another to try and get a better picture in my mind of where we might have ended up. The club accounts apparently had no money, yet we were talking about taking SJP to 60k and were on our way to getting Viduka and Joey Barton in on considerable money with considerable wages as well as looking at the likes of Distin who you would imagine wouldn't come cheap as well... what am I missing?

[NE5]

I haven't forgotten, not at all mate, the place was horrific even then for people having a whinge. Even when we were 3rd/4th there'd be people going on about something or other. I have no doubt that I've had a little moan at certain things during those good times myself, and I certainly will admit to having some grievances after Robson went and during the following reigns of Souness/Roeder, which I thought were justified at the time considering how far we fell in just one season. I certainly remember having a pop at various people for doom-mongering even back then though, Phil K is one that immediately springs to mind... I appreciated those years at the time greatly and I still do now.

 

One main thing that sticks out as a bone of contention from the time was the "Bowyer summer" and the subsequent failure to qualify for the Champions' League again. Which obviously looking back seems to support the "spoiled brats" theory, but when we were in the heat of the moment it seemed a crime that we didn't build upon all of the good work that we'd put in the previous season. That 02/03 season, despite "only" coming 3rd, possibly rivals or even outdoes the 95/96 campaign in the fact that it had an amazing CL run added into it.

 

The whole thing is so complex though, muddied even further as time goes by and memories fade, but it's vitally important that neither side begins rewriting history, which is what I have taken exception to in the past. I'm not going to sit here and hark back to the days of Shepherd thinking that all was rosy in the garden because it wasn't, things were evidently on the slide, the financial situation was becoming a worry and we seemed to be slipping behind while clubs all around us pushed on with new investment and new (better) managers. That slide, for me, started before Ashley arrived here - not afterwards - which is why I tend to be more neutral in the whole debate. I do agree with you when you say people are quick to criticise Shepherd without giving him credit for those achievements though and I would like to see Mick and Ozzie soften on this point in particular, much like you are the other way at times though, they appear to be too entrenched/too far gone to do so, which is a right bugger.

 

Of course we had some great, great times under the last regime - but there were also times where things felt as low as they do now, probably because the peaks had been so euphoric. During Shepherd's final year or two and since Ashley came in there haven't really been those massive highs to offset the lows (bar Keegan's return and the miniature run we went on last season, which you must credit Ashley and Co. for making happen in the first place before they messed it up), which has led to a decimated and fractured support, hurt and apathetic at the way in which the club appears to have been handled from the top down (not just the fault of one or two men, however).

 

I could go on for pages on this topic, to be honest, and I'd love to know more of the ins and outs of it all as far as the financial situation at the club goes and the reasons for certain things happening, but to avoid doing so and to try and tie things up a little bit I can only conclude from my own personal perspective: it was probably time for new owners or at the least new investment (with Fred remaining to run the club even if he wasn't the name above the door, so to speak), unfortunately the new owners we did get haven't provided the big-spending/instant fix that many (including myself) had hoped for - or even expected, they've made a horrendous error with the Kevin Keegan situation when it looked for all intents and purposes that we were getting back on the right track and have looked naive elsewhere as well.

 

However they have only been here 18 months and have arguably taken over a club that had a lot of positives along with a lot of very real negatives too (waning, ageing support, a massive wage bill, a perennially-injured squad, etc.). IF we stay up this season and no investment/takeover is forthcoming then we have no alternative but to support them. For all that has went pear-shaped it hasn't been all bad and there is an argument to say that IF they can get the financial side sorted out while maintaining our Premiership status and making small strides forward (can't really go backwards at the minute, can they?) then we could still be onto a winner. You might totally disagree here, but I still see a little bit of light at the end of the tunnel if they are good to their recent word and continue to invest without taking anything out of the football club.

 

 

good post Rich,

 

i can summarise for you,

 

Bad leadership since the Halls left.

 

I agree with most of it too, but as the thread is about the NUSC, I don't get why people don't see that the NUSC is showing its discontent and providing a vehicle for people to show they aren't happy. While not being a black and white situation, anyone who was unhappy with the old regime must surely be unhappy now. Excuses for, and avoidance of admitting that they are, just isn't really good enough. In fact its damn pathetic.

 

They have a personal agenda, and they know it.

 

I stand by my view that Ashley has little ambition for the club, and has already created a club where good players see it as a stepping stone with no future for them, just like we had for years before 1992. Older people ought to be able to see this, if they supported the club back then, and at least now admit it is the case.

 

 

[Pilko]

The NUSC is an anti-Ashley organization before it is a pro-Newcastle United organization.

[Mick]

So right, he'd brought Sam Allardyce in to try and run things on a tighter leash... there was the increased TV money upcoming, the potential sales of numerous players (while possibly not spending as much as Ashley has, if you can imagine such a thing), the potential expansion of SJP and the sale/redevelopment of the land around the stadium, a potential casino deal... was this it, do you reckon? The grand plan? Was there anything else I've forgotten? (Anyone?)

 

We're getting somewhere here, away from the usual s****. We're at the point now where Freddy Shepherd has hired Allardyce, he's in hospital and he comes out without there having been a takeover from Mike Ashley. You'd assume Viduka and Barton would have both still arrived as they were already in motion and that the likes of Distin and others were targets too (where is this money coming from??) Now, things could obviously go either way, but we can't just base that on opinion. What solid evidence is there either way to say we would have been alright or we would have crashed and burned?

 

You've set us off by saying he's failed to re-finance the debt, so on the other side of the coin what does NE5 have to make him so sure that we're worse off now under Ashley?

 

I'm not looking to catch anybody out here, I'm not playing any games, I am genuinely interested to know one way or another to try and get a better picture in my mind of where we might have ended up. The club accounts apparently had no money, yet we were talking about taking SJP to 60k and were on our way to getting Viduka and Joey Barton in on considerable money with considerable wages as well as looking at the likes of Distin who you would imagine wouldn't come cheap as well... what am I missing?

 

I've got to go out but will respond when I get back, but I think we may have spent and ran out of money later in the year.  Remember the casino had already fallen through and we had nobody lined up to build a hotel and since that time, but not long after, the whole global financial position changed. 

[Mick]

 

I agree with most of it too, but as the thread is about the NUSC, I don't get why people don't see that the NUSC is showing its discontent and providing a vehicle for people to show they aren't happy. While not being a black and white situation, anyone who was unhappy with the old regime must surely be unhappy now. Excuses for, and avoidance of admitting that they are, just isn't really good enough. In fact its damn pathetic.

 

They have a personal agenda, and they know it.

 

I stand by my view that Ashley has little ambition for the club, and has already created a club where good players see it as a stepping stone with no future for them, just like we had for years before 1992. Older people ought to be able to see this, if they supported the club back then, and at least now admit it is the case.

 

 

 

Shepherd was given time to put right his mistakes, some people are going to give Ashley time to get it right.  If we'd all kicked off after either, or both of Dalglish and Gullit we wouldn't have had Sir Bobby and what he gave us.

[Rich]

I haven't forgotten, not at all mate, the place was horrific even then for people having a whinge. Even when we were 3rd/4th there'd be people going on about something or other. I have no doubt that I've had a little moan at certain things during those good times myself, and I certainly will admit to having some grievances after Robson went and during the following reigns of Souness/Roeder, which I thought were justified at the time considering how far we fell in just one season. I certainly remember having a pop at various people for doom-mongering even back then though, Phil K is one that immediately springs to mind... I appreciated those years at the time greatly and I still do now.

 

One main thing that sticks out as a bone of contention from the time was the "Bowyer summer" and the subsequent failure to qualify for the Champions' League again. Which obviously looking back seems to support the "spoiled brats" theory, but when we were in the heat of the moment it seemed a crime that we didn't build upon all of the good work that we'd put in the previous season. That 02/03 season, despite "only" coming 3rd, possibly rivals or even outdoes the 95/96 campaign in the fact that it had an amazing CL run added into it.

 

The whole thing is so complex though, muddied even further as time goes by and memories fade, but it's vitally important that neither side begins rewriting history, which is what I have taken exception to in the past. I'm not going to sit here and hark back to the days of Shepherd thinking that all was rosy in the garden because it wasn't, things were evidently on the slide, the financial situation was becoming a worry and we seemed to be slipping behind while clubs all around us pushed on with new investment and new (better) managers. That slide, for me, started before Ashley arrived here - not afterwards - which is why I tend to be more neutral in the whole debate. I do agree with you when you say people are quick to criticise Shepherd without giving him credit for those achievements though and I would like to see Mick and Ozzie soften on this point in particular, much like you are the other way at times though, they appear to be too entrenched/too far gone to do so, which is a right bugger.

 

Of course we had some great, great times under the last regime - but there were also times where things felt as low as they do now, probably because the peaks had been so euphoric. During Shepherd's final year or two and since Ashley came in there haven't really been those massive highs to offset the lows (bar Keegan's return and the miniature run we went on last season, which you must credit Ashley and Co. for making happen in the first place before they messed it up), which has led to a decimated and fractured support, hurt and apathetic at the way in which the club appears to have been handled from the top down (not just the fault of one or two men, however).

 

I could go on for pages on this topic, to be honest, and I'd love to know more of the ins and outs of it all as far as the financial situation at the club goes and the reasons for certain things happening, but to avoid doing so and to try and tie things up a little bit I can only conclude from my own personal perspective: it was probably time for new owners or at the least new investment (with Fred remaining to run the club even if he wasn't the name above the door, so to speak), unfortunately the new owners we did get haven't provided the big-spending/instant fix that many (including myself) had hoped for - or even expected, they've made a horrendous error with the Kevin Keegan situation when it looked for all intents and purposes that we were getting back on the right track and have looked naive elsewhere as well.

 

However they have only been here 18 months and have arguably taken over a club that had a lot of positives along with a lot of very real negatives too (waning, ageing support, a massive wage bill, a perennially-injured squad, etc.). IF we stay up this season and no investment/takeover is forthcoming then we have no alternative but to support them. For all that has went pear-shaped it hasn't been all bad and there is an argument to say that IF they can get the financial side sorted out while maintaining our Premiership status and making small strides forward (can't really go backwards at the minute, can they?) then we could still be onto a winner. You might totally disagree here, but I still see a little bit of light at the end of the tunnel if they are good to their recent word and continue to invest without taking anything out of the football club.

 

 

good post Rich,

 

i can summarise for you,

 

Bad leadership since the Halls left.

 

I agree with most of it too, but as the thread is about the NUSC, I don't get why people don't see that the NUSC is showing its discontent and providing a vehicle for people to show they aren't happy. While not being a black and white situation, anyone who was unhappy with the old regime must surely be unhappy now. Excuses for, and avoidance of admitting that they are, just isn't really good enough. In fact its damn pathetic.

 

They have a personal agenda, and they know it.

 

I stand by my view that Ashley has little ambition for the club, and has already created a club where good players see it as a stepping stone with no future for them, just like we had for years before 1992. Older people ought to be able to see this, if they supported the club back then, and at least now admit it is the case.

 

 

 

For what it's worth, I'm as unhappy now as I remember being at any point under the last regime and I was certainly more unhappy when KK left in September. However, I don't share your view about ambition (at least yet), preferring to believe that he's been hamstrung by the financial situation he inherited at the club and his lack of understanding about football itself and particularly the nature of the beast up here at NUFC.

 

For this reason, I am willing to hope to hell we survive relegation and sort the finances out and see where we go from there. I haven't completely called time on Ashley and Co. yet, much like I never did with Freddy Shepherd. It takes a hell of a lot for people to go past the point of no return for me usually, and Ashley isn't there yet. He's not beyond redemption. If nothing else they should leave us with a more solid foundation for new owners to come in on with the high-earning chaff offloaded. However, if they get us relegated with their lack of know-how and their terrible handling of Kevin Keegan, etc. then they deserve all the shit that comes their way, much like the previous board would have been strung up.

 

They're all crooks to me, to be honest, none of them care about the club as much as I do (or a lot of you lot do) and for that reason alone they'll never be good enough. Until someone is in the job who bleeds black and white AND has the personal finance to support it, while not taking anything out themselves/looking to make money off it, they'll all be held in contempt. I just want a club that is run properly and efficiently at all levels, which isn't too much to ask.

 

The NUSC should exist to ensure that is what we get, at the moment my problem with them is that they appear to be a one-trick pony and that they themselves are run in a fairly poor, incoherent manner. I wouldn't want to be a member or be proud to be a member right now (I can't really do much anyway from Hull), but I hope that with time (like with Ashley) they get a handle on things and fill the role that they should rightly fill. We should always be striving for the best owners possible and for the current owners to run the club as best they can, that should be our role as supporters. It's just that personally I don't agree that protests and demonstrations are the best thing for the club at this point in time (I also never took part in any anti-Shepherd protests, for the record, even though I probably would have done post-Sheff Utd under Roeder if I'd been sat in another part of the ground... or with Shak.)

[Rich]

So right, he'd brought Sam Allardyce in to try and run things on a tighter leash... there was the increased TV money upcoming, the potential sales of numerous players (while possibly not spending as much as Ashley has, if you can imagine such a thing), the potential expansion of SJP and the sale/redevelopment of the land around the stadium, a potential casino deal... was this it, do you reckon? The grand plan? Was there anything else I've forgotten? (Anyone?)

 

We're getting somewhere here, away from the usual s****. We're at the point now where Freddy Shepherd has hired Allardyce, he's in hospital and he comes out without there having been a takeover from Mike Ashley. You'd assume Viduka and Barton would have both still arrived as they were already in motion and that the likes of Distin and others were targets too (where is this money coming from??) Now, things could obviously go either way, but we can't just base that on opinion. What solid evidence is there either way to say we would have been alright or we would have crashed and burned?

 

You've set us off by saying he's failed to re-finance the debt, so on the other side of the coin what does NE5 have to make him so sure that we're worse off now under Ashley?

 

I'm not looking to catch anybody out here, I'm not playing any games, I am genuinely interested to know one way or another to try and get a better picture in my mind of where we might have ended up. The club accounts apparently had no money, yet we were talking about taking SJP to 60k and were on our way to getting Viduka and Joey Barton in on considerable money with considerable wages as well as looking at the likes of Distin who you would imagine wouldn't come cheap as well... what am I missing?

 

I've got to go out but will respond when I get back, but I think we may have spent and ran out of money later in the year.  Remember the casino had already fallen through and we had nobody lined up to build a hotel and since that time, but not long after, the whole global financial position changed. 

 

Yeah, exactly. The global climate would be the biggest worry for me and in fairness to NE5 in the past (a good while back when Shepherd was still here) he himself raised the concern that we were already falling behind others financially, so Lord knows how the crisis would have hit us. Nobody knows what would have went on though, which is why it frustrates me to see some people adament it would have been better or worse, he could have found other investors or anything, or alternatively we could have hit the skids.

[NE5]

 

I agree with most of it too, but as the thread is about the NUSC, I don't get why people don't see that the NUSC is showing its discontent and providing a vehicle for people to show they aren't happy. While not being a black and white situation, anyone who was unhappy with the old regime must surely be unhappy now. Excuses for, and avoidance of admitting that they are, just isn't really good enough. In fact its damn pathetic.

 

They have a personal agenda, and they know it.

 

I stand by my view that Ashley has little ambition for the club, and has already created a club where good players see it as a stepping stone with no future for them, just like we had for years before 1992. Older people ought to be able to see this, if they supported the club back then, and at least now admit it is the case.

 

 

 

Shepherd was given time to put right his mistakes, some people are going to give Ashley time to get it right.  If we'd all kicked off after either, or both of Dalglish and Gullit we wouldn't have had Sir Bobby and what he gave us.

 

if we had kept our best players, who didn't want to go ala Owen, Given and zoggy for starters, backed our managers and therefore kept them, and reached 2 FA Cup Finals, then I daresay Ashley would have been given more time by people like me too.