Guest thenorthumbrian Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/sport/columnists/scottwilson/4121523.Vow_of_silence_finally_broken_at_St_James__Park/ SO Derek Llambias has finally broken his silence, and said he’s sorry. What Newcastle’s embattled managing director hasn’t said, though, is what he’s sorry for, or what he’s willing to do to repair the damage. As befits a regime that appeared to have taken a collective vow of silence following its takeover of Newcastle United, this week’s offensive in the ongoing propaganda war was more notable for what was not said than what was. At no stage was there an acceptance that the structure at St James’ Park is flawed, or an acknowledgement that Newcastle supporters’ grievances run far deeper than an emotional yearning for Kevin Keegan’s return. There was no commitment to provide supporters with a meaningful input into the running of their club, only a suggestion that talks were already ongoing with the Newcastle United Supporters’ Club – a claim that was later denied by the fans’ group. And there was no grand plan for how to get Newcastle out of the mess they currently inhabit. So if Llambias, pictured below, failed to address a number of key issues that have turned Newcastle supporters against their own club, what did he say? Plenty that was predictable. There was a commitment to improve dialogue between the management and the fans, but no sense of how this was going to happen, and certainly nothing that suggested that Mike Ashley was going to become the public face that Newcastle desperately need. There was a series of attacks on the former regime – the club was in financial trouble, transfer fees were outstanding even though deals had been concluded years previously, sponsorship money had already been squandered on the purchase of Michael Owen – but no admission that all of this should have been known before Ashley put his business plan in place. Newcastle supporters should not be paying the price for their owner’s impetuosity. A failure to complete a meaningful process of due diligence meant that crippling financial problems only came to light when it was too late to modify expenditure to deal with them. Freddy Shepherd’s stewardship has clearly saddled Newcastle with a myriad of debts, but if you buy a car and it breaks down the following day, it’s your problem not the previous owner’s. Ashley appears to have splashed the cash without even checking there was an engine under the bonnet. He also introduced a controversial management model that ultimately led to the departure of Keegan, yet Llambias was quick to defend a system that has been dismantled at every other Premier League club at which it had previously been deployed. “It’s been tore up at Tottenham and they’ve dismissed it to go back to the old-fashioned style, but for us we still thinks it works,” said Llambias. It works so well, it seems, that the departure of one of the most iconic managers in Newcastle’s history and a transfer policy that has seen James Milner, Shay Given and Charles N’Zogbia depart for a combined total of about £24m can be deemed a success. And what of Dennis Wise, Newcastle’s million-pounda- year man? What does an executive director (football) do to justify his salary when the only players to arrive last month were a free agent who was being touted around the Premier League and two players who could be seen on Match of the Day every Saturday night? Despite a supposed new era of openness, your guess is still as good as mine. If there were positives to come out of Llambias’ address they were the fact that the interview took place at all – any information has to be better than none, even if the recipients of said information were carefully controlled – and a promise to reinvest the £8m-or-so that is outstanding from transfer receipts in the summer transfer window. Provided, of course, Newcastle retain their Premier League status between now and then. Ultimately, though, this was a case of too little, too late. Too late, because a significant section of supporters have already delivered their verdict on the regime and intend to vote with their feet next season. And too little, because contrary to the popular song lyric, sorry is not the hardest word. An apology means nothing without a commitment to change. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Silence of the Llambiarse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 It's the usual old guff, but there's a particular point in there that I keep coming across - namely, the way the point that the old regime landed the club in a tricky financial position gets somehow dismissed by the fact that Ashley didn't take the time to discover the full extent of the debt before he took over. I just don't get the logic here. Whether or not Ashley checked the books well enough, the debt was still there and the responsbility is the previous Board's. That is what is hampering the club, not the fact that Ashley didn't check properly. In many ways, for our sakes, it's just as well that he didn't. I can only think that those who make this particular point are in the mindset that because Ashley made this particular mistake, the altogether different sorts of mistakes that Shepherd made are somehow balanced out. Or something like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcmk Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 It's the usual old guff, but there's a particular point in there that I keep coming across - namely, the way the point that the old regime landed the club in a tricky financial position gets somehow dismissed by the fact that Ashley didn't take the time to discover the full extent of the debt before he took over. I just don't get the logic here. Whether or not Ashley checked the books well enough, the debt was still there and the responsbility is the previous Board's. That is what is hampering the club, not the fact that Ashley didn't check properly. In many ways, for our sakes, it's just as well that he didn't. I can only think that those who make this particular point are in the mindset that because Ashley made this particular mistake, the altogether different sorts of mistakes that Shepherd made are somehow balanced out. Or something like that. I don't get how you can blame Shepherd at all to be honest. Every club has debt, Mike Ashley - being a top businessman apparently - bought us without even checking everything and then after realizing started to blame the previous owners. You couldn't make it up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Silence of the Llambiarse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 It's the usual old guff, but there's a particular point in there that I keep coming across - namely, the way the point that the old regime landed the club in a tricky financial position gets somehow dismissed by the fact that Ashley didn't take the time to discover the full extent of the debt before he took over. I just don't get the logic here. Whether or not Ashley checked the books well enough, the debt was still there and the responsbility is the previous Board's. That is what is hampering the club, not the fact that Ashley didn't check properly. In many ways, for our sakes, it's just as well that he didn't. I can only think that those who make this particular point are in the mindset that because Ashley made this particular mistake, the altogether different sorts of mistakes that Shepherd made are somehow balanced out. Or something like that. I agree. I don't get the logic either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Shepherd is history. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 It's the usual old guff, but there's a particular point in there that I keep coming across - namely, the way the point that the old regime landed the club in a tricky financial position gets somehow dismissed by the fact that Ashley didn't take the time to discover the full extent of the debt before he took over. I just don't get the logic here. Whether or not Ashley checked the books well enough, the debt was still there and the responsbility is the previous Board's. That is what is hampering the club, not the fact that Ashley didn't check properly. In many ways, for our sakes, it's just as well that he didn't. I can only think that those who make this particular point are in the mindset that because Ashley made this particular mistake, the altogether different sorts of mistakes that Shepherd made are somehow balanced out. Or something like that. I agree. I don't get the logic either. Totally agree. Whoever had taken on the club would have had the financial mess to sort out. Ok Ashley didn't check the books well enough, but those who had shown interest before him scarpered pretty quickly once they realised what they were taking on. Ashley is trying to sort out the financial mess we are in, he might be a total arse, who hasn't the first clue about football but he is putting his money into our club to try and repair the damage done by Shepherd and Hall. The football we saw in the 90's was fabulous but the cost of it has turned out to be massive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 "There was a commitment to improve dialogue between the management and the fans, but no sense of how this was going to happen, and certainly nothing that suggested that Mike Ashley was going to become the public face that Newcastle desperately need." Desperately need? I don't get the calls for this, since when have owners been the public face of clubs? Leave the day to day bullshitting to Managers and players, the business side of things can only be measured over the long term. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest michaelfoster Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I just don't get the logic here. Whether or not Ashley checked the books well enough, the debt was still there and the responsbility is the previous Board's. That is what is hampering the club, not the fact that Ashley didn't check properly. In many ways, for our sakes, it's just as well that he didn't. Dont encourage NE5 ffs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SellSholaFor1M Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 It's the usual old guff, but there's a particular point in there that I keep coming across - namely, the way the point that the old regime landed the club in a tricky financial position gets somehow dismissed by the fact that Ashley didn't take the time to discover the full extent of the debt before he took over. I just don't get the logic here. Whether or not Ashley checked the books well enough, the debt was still there and the responsbility is the previous Board's. That is what is hampering the club, not the fact that Ashley didn't check properly. In many ways, for our sakes, it's just as well that he didn't. I can only think that those who make this particular point are in the mindset that because Ashley made this particular mistake, the altogether different sorts of mistakes that Shepherd made are somehow balanced out. Or something like that. Guff? Why is that then? Because there is no supposition and no character assinations of actual Newcastle United Legends? Im quite surprised you havent bored everyone with a personal attack on Shay Given to complete your holy trinity. This article is spot on, there is a massive distrust of this regime, people are apathetic and plenty simply wont put up with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 It's the usual old guff, but there's a particular point in there that I keep coming across - namely, the way the point that the old regime landed the club in a tricky financial position gets somehow dismissed by the fact that Ashley didn't take the time to discover the full extent of the debt before he took over. I just don't get the logic here. Whether or not Ashley checked the books well enough, the debt was still there and the responsbility is the previous Board's. That is what is hampering the club, not the fact that Ashley didn't check properly. In many ways, for our sakes, it's just as well that he didn't. I can only think that those who make this particular point are in the mindset that because Ashley made this particular mistake, the altogether different sorts of mistakes that Shepherd made are somehow balanced out. Or something like that. Guff? Why is that then? Because there is no supposition and no character assinations of actual Newcastle United Legends? Im quite surprised you havent bored everyone with a personal attack on Shay Given to complete your holy trinity. This article is spot on, there is a massive distrust of this regime, people are apathetic and plenty simply wont put up with it. You didn't actually read his post did you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SellSholaFor1M Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Erm yes I did thanks Terence, are there no bins need empting son? Jog along. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Do you think this guy might be bitter because The Northern Echo journalists didn't get invited for an interview? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElDiablo Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQQAlqOQ878 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mistle17 Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Because of our current financial plight, I can kind of understand Ashley resenting spending money in abundance, but what really, really annoys me is this bullshit attitude towards the DOF system. It pisses me off no end. Why cant you just realise that it doesnt work in England and that we wont get a good manager with it in place, Mike?!!! I'd get off his case a hell of a lot more if he told Wise to fuck off and let the manager do the business. Its so simple yet he makes it so bloody hard... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 It's the usual old guff, but there's a particular point in there that I keep coming across - namely, the way the point that the old regime landed the club in a tricky financial position gets somehow dismissed by the fact that Ashley didn't take the time to discover the full extent of the debt before he took over. I just don't get the logic here. Whether or not Ashley checked the books well enough, the debt was still there and the responsbility is the previous Board's. That is what is hampering the club, not the fact that Ashley didn't check properly. In many ways, for our sakes, it's just as well that he didn't. I can only think that those who make this particular point are in the mindset that because Ashley made this particular mistake, the altogether different sorts of mistakes that Shepherd made are somehow balanced out. Or something like that. Guff? Why is that then? Because there is no supposition and no character assinations of actual Newcastle United Legends? Im quite surprised you havent bored everyone with a personal attack on Shay Given to complete your holy trinity. This article is spot on, there is a massive distrust of this regime, people are apathetic and plenty simply wont put up with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 The article tells it like it is - once again, some people just don't like facing the truth. The Echo are quite right - if Ashley didn't check into the club's financial position properly, he has no-one to blame but himself ; a novice could have worked out that there must be massive debts because;- 1. We hadn't been the the CL for 4 years - 5 if you include the proper stages, so there was none of the large income that results from that 2. We had been wasting money on horrendous signings such as Boumsong, and sacking managers who needed compensation pay-outs 3.We had paid well over the odds for Owen 4.We had players on ridiculous salaries who patently DIDN'T deserve them 5. There was a large debt still owing on the ground development Even discounting all of this, Ashley apparently still had 100m to gamble on the shares of a bust Building Society...as I said yesterday, even half of this could have put the team in a better position... As most people are beginning to realise, the DOF system they have put in place is not, and WILL NOT, work.Its jobs for the boys... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Slippery Sam Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 The article tells it like it is - once again, some people just don't like facing the truth. The Echo are quite right - if Ashley didn't check into the club's financial position properly, he has no-one to blame but himself ; a novice could have worked out that there must be massive debts because;- 1. We hadn't been the the CL for 4 years - 5 if you include the proper stages, so there was none of the large income that results from that 2. We had been wasting money on horrendous signings such as Boumsong, and sacking managers who needed compensation pay-outs 3.We had paid well over the odds for Owen 4.We had players on ridiculous salaries who patently DIDN'T deserve them 5. There was a large debt still owing on the ground development Even discounting all of this, Ashley apparently still had 100m to gamble on the shares of a bust Building Society...as I said yesterday, even half of this could have put the team in a better position... As most people are beginning to realise, the DOF system they have put in place is not, and WILL NOT, work.Its jobs for the boys... I read the other day he's after buying an outdoor clothing firm (Blacks - which he already has 30% stake in), so there must be money sloshing around somewhere for him. Not enough to invest in NUFC though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offshore Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 The article tells it like it is - once again, some people just don't like facing the truth. The Echo are quite right - if Ashley didn't check into the club's financial position properly, he has no-one to blame but himself ; a novice could have worked out that there must be massive debts because;- 1. We hadn't been the the CL for 4 years - 5 if you include the proper stages, so there was none of the large income that results from that 2. We had been wasting money on horrendous signings such as Boumsong, and sacking managers who needed compensation pay-outs 3.We had paid well over the odds for Owen 4.We had players on ridiculous salaries who patently DIDN'T deserve them 5. There was a large debt still owing on the ground development Even discounting all of this, Ashley apparently still had 100m to gamble on the shares of a bust Building Society...as I said yesterday, even half of this could have put the team in a better position... As most people are beginning to realise, the DOF system they have put in place is not, and WILL NOT, work.Its jobs for the boys... So add a minimum of £50m on top of the 'crippling financial problems' (their words), is that what you're really saying you want him to do? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 To me, the most relevant observation in that article is this one: As befits a regime that appeared to have taken a collective vow of silence following its takeover of Newcastle United, this week’s offensive in the ongoing propaganda war was more notable for what was not said than what was. Despite the interview being lengthy and stretched out over four days, there are mainly just hollow statements, without an explanation as to how the aims will be achieved: - it is confirmed that Wise is here to stay in the DoF role, yet the role itself is not explained further than as a glorified scout. If that's what it is, that's what should have been said, and there would be no need to hang on to the "system". Also, why not explain which capabilities Mr Wise possesses that make him qualified to be our DoF? - we will challenge for EVERYTHING in five years time. Surely, this can't be for real? What is said is we will be looking to bring in/through top youngsters from the academy. Well, so does every other club in the world. What makes our setup so special that we will be challenging for major prizes without major investment in a couple of years time? What will happen if one or two of these youngsters actually do turn out to be stars? Will we be selling for a profit, or do we plan to keep onto our best players then (how else will we challenge for EVERYTHING?) - there seems to be a contented stance as to the goings on in the january transfer window: Kinnear got everything he asked for, or at least we bid for them. Inexplicably this focuses primarily on the very last day of the transfer window, and there is even the acknowledgement that the injuries to Owen and Barton vs Man City forced them into squad reinforcements that would otherwise probably not have come.. Baffling to be honest, but an explanation as to why they did nothing for the most part of the transfer window is missing completely.. - they explain that it was agreed with Ashley that Lambias would keep a low profile, as opposed to Mort. Why? At that time the supporters of the club were mostly quite happy with the communication from the club and the way it was apparently heading. Why alter course to such drastic effect? - pending court case or not, as fans and customers we are entitled to an explanation as to what happened with Keegan leaving. It doesn't have to be detailed, or too revealing as to damage their case in court, but keeping their mouth shut on this issue is certainly not doing them any favours? - there is the acknowledgement of the Kinnear contract extension, but no explanation as to why they feel he is the right man to take us forward to a position where we will challenge for EVERYTHING in five years time.. - we want to be like Aston Villa.. That would be with regards to league position I suppose, because Villa are certainly not going about business the way we currently are. Almost their entire first team has been bought in the past two or three years and they are buying young players ready for the first team for significant transfer fees, not youngsters who need to be developed from lower league level to top Premiership.. - we aren't a selling club, we're a buying club. How does that explain the profit we have made two transfer windows running on players transfers..? - what is Lambias' role as chairman? The way he explains it he deals with the prices for pies and drinks, and leaves the football side (our "core business"!) to others.. I can't for the life of me understand how our board is set up and why our chairman would not know the first thing about our core business? He doesn't communicate, he doesn't understand football, but he does know how to run a pub. How does this make him qualified to run NUFC? Also, in light of this, I would like to know his remit. Does he deal with apointing managers for example? Et cetera.. This interview could have been and should have been regarded as an opportunity to clear things up to the fans. Only very little has been cleared up, and we are left with more questions than answers I feel.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 The article tells it like it is - once again, some people just don't like facing the truth. The Echo are quite right - if Ashley didn't check into the club's financial position properly, he has no-one to blame but himself ; a novice could have worked out that there must be massive debts because;- 1. We hadn't been the the CL for 4 years - 5 if you include the proper stages, so there was none of the large income that results from that 2. We had been wasting money on horrendous signings such as Boumsong, and sacking managers who needed compensation pay-outs 3.We had paid well over the odds for Owen 4.We had players on ridiculous salaries who patently DIDN'T deserve them 5. There was a large debt still owing on the ground development Even discounting all of this, Ashley apparently still had 100m to gamble on the shares of a bust Building Society...as I said yesterday, even half of this could have put the team in a better position... As most people are beginning to realise, the DOF system they have put in place is not, and WILL NOT, work.Its jobs for the boys... So add a minimum of £50m on top of the 'crippling financial problems' (their words), is that what you're really saying you want him to do? I wanted him to invest the 50m into making sure the ream was not involved in a relegation battle - Oh, wait - that would have meant allowing the manager to manage.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brazilianbob Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Because of our current financial plight, I can kind of understand Ashley resenting spending money in abundance, but what really, really annoys me is this bullshit attitude towards the DOF system. It pisses me off no end. Why cant you just realise that it doesnt work in England and that we wont get a good manager with it in place, Mike?!!! I'd get off his case a hell of a lot more if he told Wise to f*** off and let the manager do the business. Its so simple yet he makes it so bloody hard... And you base this opinion on what? I would suggest you have a long hard look at Spurs who don't seem to be faring any better since they abandoned the DOF system. The problem with football today is fans are all used to living by the credit card culture, namely buy today and pay tomorrow, and they don't see why football clubs don't do the same. All Ashley is pointing out is that the previous regime did just that and now a price has to be paid or we will eventually go to the wall, and I personally thank our lucky stars we have an owner who has the financial acumen to resolve our debts. And lets not forget that Llambias has pointed out that our debt will be reducing year on year and the club will be clear of debt within three more seasons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Because of our current financial plight, I can kind of understand Ashley resenting spending money in abundance, but what really, really annoys me is this bullshit attitude towards the DOF system. It pisses me off no end. Why cant you just realise that it doesnt work in England and that we wont get a good manager with it in place, Mike?!!! I'd get off his case a hell of a lot more if he told Wise to f*** off and let the manager do the business. Its so simple yet he makes it so bloody hard... And you base this opinion on what? I would suggest you have a long hard look at Spurs who don't seem to be faring any better since they abandoned the DOF system. The problem with football today is fans are all used to living by the credit card culture, namely buy today and pay tomorrow, and they don't see why football clubs don't do the same. All Ashley is pointing out is that the previous regime did just that and now a price has to be paid or we will eventually go to the wall, and I personally thank our lucky stars we have an owner who has the financial acumen to resolve our debts. And lets not forget that Llambias has pointed out that our debt will be reducing year on year and the club will be clear of debt within three more seasons. And then what? Ashley to make a profit while we continue to fight relegation season after season? Would that make you happy in the long run? 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