Liam Liam Liam O Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 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. Priceless Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 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. where did i argue in favour of them? i said they're trying to do good, in their own way, without much success. i dont agree with the stance they are taking, im not a member, i dont support them, but i dont see why some on this forum are so interested in what is a fairly insignificant, impotent group, or why people go to such extreme lengths to personally attack those involved. especially when those same individuals won't apply the same level of scrutiny to the way the club is being ran, you know, the thing that's actually important. good on the NUSC lot for giving it a go, and i broadly agree that we need a proper fan's group to represent us, if only to provide a better voice to the media than frank gilmore, steve wraith, or the young lads that skysports pick out from the streets. it's been a bit misguided in my view, but since they are a newly formed amateur group i'll cut them a bit of slack, and they have moderated their views since the initial setup which shows they are capable of taking on board a range of views. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 A well publicised fan group can make a big effect on certain players' morale, but it doesn't mean it the group is particularly good or effective overall. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 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 shit 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? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 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. somewhat ironic that this was the point of my initial post, only from the opposite perspective, that those who criticise NUSC most strongly (or any group of anti-ashley fans they happen to disagree with) accuse them of both destabilising the club and being incompetent. you can't really do or be both, either you are effective or not, and likewise, if such and such are responsible for damage, they must also be responsible for anything positive that their pressure has precipitated. my other point is about the disconnect between the daft level of scrutnity they are being subjected to, considering what they are, which is curiously absent when the same people look at the nufc board, far more worthy of such scrutiny due to the importance and required professionalism of that entity. personally i dont think NUSC are going to have much effect the route they've taken ie trying to force ashley out, its basically futile as ashley has demonstrated he is not willing to sell in this economic situation. they may have some positive impact on how we're being ran if they try to institute change within the club, though again, its extremely unlikely they'll do anything other than provide a more legitimate outlet for the fans when liaising with the media (or, hopefully, deal with minor fan issues such as stewarding, amenities at the stadium etc). but good luck to them, maybe a few years down the line when they have a solid base and a more structured outlook they'll be of some use. if their existence bothers people so much, or people think they are so influential, then engage with them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 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 shit 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 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. and you agree that such action is worthwhile and can work http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,31195.msg582620.html#msg582620 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 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 shit 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. I don't agree. I'm a better manager than Joe Kinnear and I'd have done it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 You're certainly as much of a clown. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 You're certainly as much of a clown. http://www.oneinchpunch.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/extreme-ironing-04.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 You're certainly as much of a clown. Your thoughts were on par NUSC when someone was in charge you didn't like: " There should be banners and chants, things people will notice on television, stuff commentators and reporters will have to mention, so that the next time even someone as shameless as he is can't chunder on about "the people of Tyneside" or the importance of having someone "who understands the club". We will have made it very clear what he's supposed to "understand". Declining attendances would also concentrate his mind wonderfully." You got to admit that is a good find by NE5. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 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 shit 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 one reason why british managers, or those wishing to have that sort of control at a club, wouldnt join is boardroom interference. Ketsbaia and Shearer said as much. The one reason why anyone else would not join is down to Ashley deciding to try and sell up and therefore not being able to offer a long-term contract. Venables confirmed this. Meanwhile a foreign manager less clued up on events wouldnt give a shit who is hanging around the gallowgate end at teatime, or even if Wise works for us, as Zico explains below: Following his departure last week, Keegan claimed it was the signing of players without his consent that forced him to quit St James' Park. But Zico is adamant there would be no such acrimony were he in charge. "The Newcastle job is one that I would be very interested in taking. It would be a privilege and an honour," he told the Daily Mail. "I've always wanted to experience the Premier League as I believe I could enjoy much success coaching in England. "I am used to working alongside technical directors so this isn't an issue for me. It's normal for me to work in those conditions." http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/zico-interested-in-newcastle-job-924066.html then there's fatih terim whose agent outlined that he'd be interested in the job. there were a range of options open to ashley and ever since late august he's basically botched every decision he's had to make. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 So you're one of these advocates of protest who doesn't believe that the actions of fans has any effect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 So you're one of these advocates of protest who doesn't believe that the actions of fans has any effect. i am? i havent protested myself, but i certainly wouldnt stop anyone else doing so, or call them cunts for doing that. just dont think the fans protesting back then meant we could only get kinnear, i think that's down to Ashley. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 So you're one of these advocates of protest who doesn't believe that the actions of fans has any effect. isn't this what you are saying in post 758, including the link to your own comments ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 No. Don't be stupid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 This thread has finally prompted me to join up. Thanks Got my badge, keyring, car sticker & membership card today. Smart Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brummiemag Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 This thread has finally prompted me to join up. Thanks Got my badge, keyring, car sticker & membership card today. Smart Nice one Glad to know theres some other members on here! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 No. Don't be stupid. well, whats your stance then. Do you think protesting can work ? It certainly looks like it, going by what you say here ? http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,31195.msg582620.html#msg582620 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 That's about the twentieth time he's posted it, or a link to it. He seems to think that if you think it's a good idea to protest about one thing, at one time, in one set of circumstances, then you must protest everything, at all times, in any set of circumstances. That's right, he's a moron. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 That's about the twentieth time he's posted it, or a link to it. He seems to think that if you think it's a good idea to protest about one thing, at one time, in one set of circumstances, then you must protest everything, at all times, in any set of circumstances. That's right, he's a moron. circumstances = same. Personalities = different. You quite clearly support protesting when you think it is worthwhile. Does this mean that you think the situation of the club in 2006 under [when we were playing in europe] is worse than the current position and/or you think Ashley is improving the club so don't think it is worthwhile to protest now ? You can't even respond to a relevant reply to your own post. And not for the first time. You're without a doubt the boards village idiot. And there is some hot competition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Circumstances = not same. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Circumstances = not same. They're worse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 They're different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now