January Transfer Window

[Mick]

 

its called cherry picking the bits that suit you, or not knowing what he's talking about as he usually doesn't

 

 

 

If you want to see some good "cherry picking" at work then just look at most of your replies to questions. bluebiggrin.gif

 

you mean like : Please tell us how you think staring at the 3rd division and selling your best players is the same as being 3rd bottom of the premiership for a few weeks. Or, please tell us how selling your best players and England players for decades is the same as buying England players ? Or, please tell us why Cox, Lee left Newcastle and saw Everton and Derby as upward moves in their managerial careers  ?

 

You could actually respond to his question, and tell us how you accidentally forgot to mention Martins and Duff 

 

You are slow aren't you, how do you know we'll only be 3rd bottom for a few weeks?

 

OK, you don't "cherry pick" Here's a few you accidently missed.

 

Ellis is a "shit chairman" according to you, what does that make Shepherd who has finished below Ellis more times than above while spending more money?

 

Shepherd has taken us down 17 league places while chairman, name any other of our shit chairman who have done this.

 

Name our other chairman who have made a £12 million loss, base it over 12 months, not the 11 that the latest figures were based on.

[Cajun]

Im not taking the piss or looking for an argument but don't you people get bored of having the same argument day in day out?

 

If we still had the boards from 3 years ago I bet there would still be pretty much exactly the same arguments going on for pages and pages...

 

Why don't you ask the people who go on and on about summer 2003 why they keep bringing it up? I don't post my response until they babble on about it first. Hadn't you noticed? I mean, wtf would I put up a post showing the stuff I've just done totally out of the blue?

 

I said "people" not HTL, why do you always assume every post is directed solely at you?

 

FFS, just because I replied doesn't mean I think a post is directed SOLELY at me. Are you mental, or something? You said 'people' and I'm a person.

 

Doh!

 

Your reply was very much a "why are you having a go at ME!? He started it"

 

Get a life, man. It was nothing like that at all. Talk about making shit up as you go along.......

 

[Mick]

Question from Mick, my full reply below" Post #155

 

<snip>

For 32 months from March 2001 through to Jan 2004 the only players who left the club were fringe players,

many new players were brought in to boost the team and also to boost the squad. In fact, the players who

departed weren’t even fringe players imo. There was an incoming transfer fee in March 2001 of  £3.5m for Goma,

the next significant incoming transfer fee was £2m for Cort in Jan 2004. The only other fees I can find record

of was £150,000 for Stuart Green and £150,000 for David Beharall when they left the club. Nobody else left for

a fee during that time.

 

During that same time period ~£45m was spent on the following players:

O’Brien, Bellamy, Robert, Distin (loan fee), Jenas, Viana, Bramble, Woodgate and Ambrose. Bowyer also joined

the club a few months later for nowt. These 10 players all draw wages, of course, increasing the wages/turnover

ratio etc.

 

I make that a deficit of £43.7 million in 32 months, but this propelled the club into achieving those 3 top 5 finishes,

positions where many of you claim we belong although we actually don't, it has to be earned. I think this expenditure

was well controlled, proven by the consolidation period of summer 2003. Don't forget that Woodgate, Ambrose and Bowyer all signed earlier that year, those signings could have been left to the summer to keep some of you happy, but they were brought in sooner for the greater benefit of the team, rather than later to satisfy the desire of some to sign a big name every summer.

<snip>

 

Wouldn't it be good if others would debate? Remember, we don't have to agree, just give it a shot at disputing this information without spit and bile. Given this expenditure tell me why the club is automatically slated for not bringing in more players in summer 2003, perhaps it really was a time for prudence, a time for consolidation. Think about that against the recent beating up of the Board regarding the latest financial report.

 

The source for this info was nufc.com, if it's incorrect then I'm happy to be told about it.

 

I'd agree with the sentiment behind that reply, but to use Goma (£3.5m) and Cort (£2m) as examples of 'not even fringe players' but then include Ambrose in the list of players bought is not really fair.

 

What I replied to was 32 months prior to the summer of 2003, 2004 was after that.

 

Using .com for the 32 months prior to the summer of 2003 shows we spent a net figure of £41.5 million, a lot of money by anybodies standards but almost 20% below the quoted figure of "nearly £50m quid net."

[NE5]

 

its called cherry picking the bits that suit you, or not knowing what he's talking about as he usually doesn't

 

 

 

If you want to see some good "cherry picking" at work then just look at most of your replies to questions. bluebiggrin.gif

 

you mean like : Please tell us how you think staring at the 3rd division and selling your best players is the same as being 3rd bottom of the premiership for a few weeks. Or, please tell us how selling your best players and England players for decades is the same as buying England players ? Or, please tell us why Cox, Lee left Newcastle and saw Everton and Derby as upward moves in their managerial careers  ?

 

You could actually respond to his question, and tell us how you accidentally forgot to mention Martins and Duff 

 

You are slow aren't you, how do you know we'll only be 3rd bottom for a few weeks?

 

OK, you don't "cherry pick" Here's a few you accidently missed.

 

Ellis is a "shit chairman" according to you, what does that make Shepherd who has finished below Ellis more times than above while spending more money?

 

Shepherd has taken us down 17 league places while chairman, name any other of our shit chairman who have done this.

 

Name our other chairman who have made a £12 million loss, base it over 12 months, not the 11 that the latest figures were based on.

 

I think you should read the thread about the Halls and the takeover, but don't start saying that the Halls are to blame for the decisions that don't work out, as majority shareholders, when the penny drops.

 

As for thinking we will be in the bottom 3 for only a few weeks.....I can categorically state that we won't sell our best players for decades and end up where we were pre-1992, unless of course you know we will. But of course, you think its the same thing don't you.

 

 

 

[Howaythelads]

Question from Mick, my full reply below" Post #155

 

<snip>

For 32 months from March 2001 through to Jan 2004 the only players who left the club were fringe players,

many new players were brought in to boost the team and also to boost the squad. In fact, the players who

departed weren’t even fringe players imo. There was an incoming transfer fee in March 2001 of  £3.5m for Goma,

the next significant incoming transfer fee was £2m for Cort in Jan 2004. The only other fees I can find record

of was £150,000 for Stuart Green and £150,000 for David Beharall when they left the club. Nobody else left for

a fee during that time.

 

During that same time period ~£45m was spent on the following players:

O’Brien, Bellamy, Robert, Distin (loan fee), Jenas, Viana, Bramble, Woodgate and Ambrose. Bowyer also joined

the club a few months later for nowt. These 10 players all draw wages, of course, increasing the wages/turnover

ratio etc.

 

I make that a deficit of £43.7 million in 32 months, but this propelled the club into achieving those 3 top 5 finishes,

positions where many of you claim we belong although we actually don't, it has to be earned. I think this expenditure

was well controlled, proven by the consolidation period of summer 2003. Don't forget that Woodgate, Ambrose and Bowyer all signed earlier that year, those signings could have been left to the summer to keep some of you happy, but they were brought in sooner for the greater benefit of the team, rather than later to satisfy the desire of some to sign a big name every summer.

<snip>

 

Wouldn't it be good if others would debate? Remember, we don't have to agree, just give it a shot at disputing this information without spit and bile. Given this expenditure tell me why the club is automatically slated for not bringing in more players in summer 2003, perhaps it really was a time for prudence, a time for consolidation. Think about that against the recent beating up of the Board regarding the latest financial report.

 

The source for this info was nufc.com, if it's incorrect then I'm happy to be told about it.

 

I'd agree with the sentiment behind that reply, but to use Goma (£3.5m) and Cort (£2m) as examples of 'not even fringe players' but then include Ambrose in the list of players bought is not really fair.

 

What I replied to was 32 months prior to the summer of 2003, 2004 was after that.

 

Using .com for the 32 months prior to the summer of 2003 shows we spent a net figure of £41.5 million, a lot of money by anybodies standards but almost 20% below the quoted figure of "nearly £50m quid net."

 

The dates are based around the sales of Cort and Goma, sales that brought in significant sums of money while during the intervening period hardly anything came in from the sale of players. These dates could be anything, but they happen to be the dates I posted because that's when those players were sold. Why do you want to go back 32 months from summer 2003? Why not 1 month, why not 60 months? Whatever it is, what is your basis for selection of the time span. Mine is as stated, the date boundaries set by the sales of Cort and Goma, during which time the club brought in a lot of players for a lot of money but is being criticised for not bringing in more. I'm trying to show that during a long period of time not much came in but a lot went out. What is it you don't understand about that concept?

 

You are typically evading the main point.

 

By the way, the figure I posted earlier in this thread was rushed, view it as people talking over a pint or something and someine just throwing a rough figure in. The real figure is on this forum and I'm not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes here by saying "nearly £50m". I'm not surprised you've used that as your escape from trying to answer the point though. The figure is £43.7m by the way, as I quoted later showing there was no intent to mislead in the earlier comment.

 

Thanks for **** all because as usual you've proven you can't debate.

 

PS Have you ever bought something for £90 and said to someone it cost "nearly £100".

[Skirge]

The January transfer kitty will all come down to how much the FA give us over the Owen affiar, Fred wnats £20 mill of them but I do not see that happening.

It was clear at the start of the season that we did not have cash to throw around, so what makes anyone think we will have come January?

[Mick]

 

You are slow aren't you, how do you know we'll only be 3rd bottom for a few weeks?

 

OK, you don't "cherry pick" Here's a few you accidently missed.

 

Ellis is a "shit chairman" according to you, what does that make Shepherd who has finished below Ellis more times than above while spending more money?

 

Shepherd has taken us down 17 league places while chairman, name any other of our shit chairman who have done this.

 

Name our other chairman who have made a £12 million loss, base it over 12 months, not the 11 that the latest figures were based on.

 

I think you should read the thread about the Halls and the takeover, but don't start saying that the Halls are to blame for the decisions that don't work out, as majority shareholders, when the penny drops.

 

As for thinking we will be in the bottom 3 for only a few weeks.....I can categorically state that we won't sell our best players for decades and end up where we were pre-1992, unless of course you know we will. But of course, you think its the same thing don't you.

 

 

 

 

Answer the three simple questions, hypocrite.

 

You’ve said I “cherry pick,” prove you don’t do the same by answering the question that I’ve repeatedly asked you and you've repeatedly failed to spot, you lose more credibility by the day.

[Howaythelads]

Mick

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,31684.msg612492.html#msg612492

 

Cheers

[BottledDog]

The January transfer kitty will all come down to how much the FA give us over the Owen affiar, Fred wnats £20 mill of them but I do not see that happening.

It was clear at the start of the season that we did not have cash to throw around, so what makes anyone think we will have come January?

 

Possibly because we were still trying to make big money bids at the end of the last trasfer window, and Shepherd has said that we will.

 

He is not (as some might have it) a perennial liar, and when he says that we are after a quality striker and a defender then you can assume there must be money available. I don't think he has much choice other than to find the funds somehow.

 

I just hope to God it is a better period than the last time we had to dig deep to get a new manager out of a hole midseason, and end up with the likes of Faye, Babayaro, and Boumsong.

[Guest geordieracer]

if we are already in debt so i hear

 

and we throw money at players in january

 

but still go down

 

will we become leeds united?

[Skirge]

I think thats why I am so woried, I have no faith in Fred at all.

All that at the start of the season with the "its not like it used to be you cannot sign a lpayer in a few hours anymore it takes weeks"

Yet we saw so many other clubs doing deals in the same day and getting good players.

Fred can promise us the world fine but will he deliver ?

[BottledDog]

I think thats why I am so woried, I have no faith in Fred at all.

All that at the start of the season with the "its not like it used to be you cannot sign a lpayer in a few hours anymore it takes weeks"

Yet we saw so many other clubs doing deals in the same day and getting good players.

Fred can promise us the world fine but will he deliver ?

 

One possibly positive point (depending on how you interpret it) that comes out of Sheps latest quotes is that he is dying to tell us something regarding transfers but say's that he cannot because of stock exchange rules. He might be bullshitting, but you never know.

[Skirge]

I think thats why I am so woried, I have no faith in Fred at all.

All that at the start of the season with the "its not like it used to be you cannot sign a lpayer in a few hours anymore it takes weeks"

Yet we saw so many other clubs doing deals in the same day and getting good players.

Fred can promise us the world fine but will he deliver ?

 

One possibly positive point (depending on how you interpret it) that comes out of Sheps latest quotes is that he is dying to tell us something regarding transfers but say's that he cannot because of stock exchange rules. He might be bullshitting, but you never know.

Yeah we never do know with him, but I just find it very hard to be positive right now. Its one thing targeting a player but its a whole other thing to get them to sign. We are not exactly an atractive club right now.

[Mick]

 

The dates are based around the sales of Cort and Goma, sales that brought in significant sums of money. They could be anything but they happen to be the dates I posted. Why do you want to go back 32 months from summer 2003 exactly? Why not 1 month, why not 60 months? What is your basis for selection of the time span. Mine is as stated, the date boundaries set by the sales of Cort and Goma, during which time the club brought in a lot of players for a lot of money but is being criticised for not bringing in more.

 

You are typically evading the main point.

 

By the way, the figure I posted earlier in this thread was rushed, view it as people talking over a pint or something and someine just throwing a rough figure in. The real figure is on this forum and I'm not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes here by saying "nearly £50m". I'm not surprised you've used that as your escape from trying to answer the point though. The figure is £43.7m by the way, as I quoted later showing there was no intent to mislead in the earlier comment.

 

Thanks for **** all because as usual you've proven you can't debate, you're a total waste of my time and a fool.

 

PS Have you ever bought something for £90 and said to someone it cost "nearly £100". Don't lie now, I know you'll be tempted as you have a history of it.

 

I went back 32 months before the summer of 2003 because that's the period you mentioned in the thread I replied to.       

 

Here's a link to post #135 http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,31684.msg610984.html#msg610984 where you mentioned the figure I responed to, you didn't mention 2004 anywhere.  If you meant another time then I would have expected that you mentioned it, it's not difficuilt, at least it doesn't seem to be from where I am.

 

If you meant another time then I can only apologise for not being able to read minds, it's always been a flaw of mine, a flaw I stopped trying to correct years ago. 

[NE5]

 

You are slow aren't you, how do you know we'll only be 3rd bottom for a few weeks?

 

OK, you don't "cherry pick" Here's a few you accidently missed.

 

Ellis is a "shit chairman" according to you, what does that make Shepherd who has finished below Ellis more times than above while spending more money?

 

Shepherd has taken us down 17 league places while chairman, name any other of our shit chairman who have done this.

 

Name our other chairman who have made a £12 million loss, base it over 12 months, not the 11 that the latest figures were based on.

 

I think you should read the thread about the Halls and the takeover, but don't start saying that the Halls are to blame for the decisions that don't work out, as majority shareholders, when the penny drops.

 

As for thinking we will be in the bottom 3 for only a few weeks.....I can categorically state that we won't sell our best players for decades and end up where we were pre-1992, unless of course you know we will. But of course, you think its the same thing don't you.

 

 

 

 

Answer the three simple questions, hypocrite.

 

You’ve said I “cherry pick,” prove you don’t do the same by answering the question that I’ve repeatedly asked you and you've repeatedly failed to spot, you lose more credibility by the day.

 

I have answered your questions, Ellis took over Villa when they were champions of europe, and ran them for 26 years, spending many years fighting relegation, being relegated, and during all that time penny pinched in the way he ran the club and with his transfer funds. You are obviously not looking properly. So answer my questions hypocrite, why did Lee and Cox consider Everton and Derby as upward career moves ? And why did Waddle, Gazza, Beardsley, and before them Pop Robson all local lads, want to leave Newcastle and the area of their birth ?

 

And why do you consider buying England players and regular european football to be no different to spending decades in the bottom half of the 1st division, 2nd division and selling your best players replacing them with cheaper players from the likes of Oxford, Luton etc etc.....and a board who were proud of a stand "that was similar to Watfords"

 

Zero credibility, and more so all the time. Every time you fail to see the rubbish you post shows clearly that you have no recollection of this period at all, and hence the depths this club was at in 1992 when the board you rubbish saved this club and dragged it up to what he have done in the last decade, proves you are nothing but a liar.

 

 

[Mick]

Mick

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,31684.msg612492.html#msg612492

 

Cheers

 

And the point of that is what?

[Howaythelads]

 

The dates are based around the sales of Cort and Goma, sales that brought in significant sums of money. They could be anything but they happen to be the dates I posted. Why do you want to go back 32 months from summer 2003 exactly? Why not 1 month, why not 60 months? What is your basis for selection of the time span. Mine is as stated, the date boundaries set by the sales of Cort and Goma, during which time the club brought in a lot of players for a lot of money but is being criticised for not bringing in more.

 

You are typically evading the main point.

 

By the way, the figure I posted earlier in this thread was rushed, view it as people talking over a pint or something and someine just throwing a rough figure in. The real figure is on this forum and I'm not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes here by saying "nearly £50m". I'm not surprised you've used that as your escape from trying to answer the point though. The figure is £43.7m by the way, as I quoted later showing there was no intent to mislead in the earlier comment.

 

Thanks for **** all because as usual you've proven you can't debate, you're a total waste of my time and a fool.

 

PS Have you ever bought something for £90 and said to someone it cost "nearly £100". Don't lie now, I know you'll be tempted as you have a history of it.

 

I went back 32 months before the summer of 2003 because that's the period you mentioned in the thread I replied to.       

 

Here's a link to post #135 http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,31684.msg610984.html#msg610984 where you mentioned the figure I responed to, you didn't mention 2004 anywhere.  If you meant another time then I would have expected that you mentioned it, it's not difficuilt, at least it doesn't seem to be from where I am.

 

If you meant another time then I can only apologise for not being able to read minds, it's always been a flaw of mine, a flaw I stopped trying to correct years ago. 

 

A typo basically, caused by how many times I've posted the figures and the continual reference to summer 2003...... you should have seen the posts before with all of the detail that shows the dates. The dates are relevant and encompass summer 2003.

 

Do you or do you not understand the point I'm making about the availability of transfer funds during the summer of 2003?

 

How low will you go to avoid addressing a legitimate point?

[Mick]

 

You are slow aren't you, how do you know we'll only be 3rd bottom for a few weeks?

 

OK, you don't "cherry pick" Here's a few you accidently missed.

 

Ellis is a "shit chairman" according to you, what does that make Shepherd who has finished below Ellis more times than above while spending more money?

 

Shepherd has taken us down 17 league places while chairman, name any other of our shit chairman who have done this.

 

Name our other chairman who have made a £12 million loss, base it over 12 months, not the 11 that the latest figures were based on.

 

I think you should read the thread about the Halls and the takeover, but don't start saying that the Halls are to blame for the decisions that don't work out, as majority shareholders, when the penny drops.

 

As for thinking we will be in the bottom 3 for only a few weeks.....I can categorically state that we won't sell our best players for decades and end up where we were pre-1992, unless of course you know we will. But of course, you think its the same thing don't you.

 

 

 

 

Answer the three simple questions, hypocrite.

 

You’ve said I “cherry pick,” prove you don’t do the same by answering the question that I’ve repeatedly asked you and you've repeatedly failed to spot, you lose more credibility by the day.

 

I have answered your questions, Ellis took over Villa when they were champions of europe, and ran them for 26 years, spending many years fighting relegation, being relegated, and during all that time penny pinched in the way he ran the club and with his transfer funds. You are obviously not looking properly. So answer my questions hypocrite, why did Lee and Cox consider Everton and Derby as upward career moves ? And why did Waddle, Gazza, Beardsley, and before them Pop Robson all local lads, want to leave Newcastle and the area of their birth ?

 

And why do you consider buying England players and regular european football to be no different to spending decades in the bottom half of the 1st division, 2nd division and selling your best players replacing them with cheaper players from the likes of Oxford, Luton etc etc.....and a board who were proud of a stand "that was similar to Watfords"

 

Zero credibility, and more so all the time. Every time you fail to see the rubbish you post shows clearly that you have no recollection of this period at all, and hence the depths this club was at in 1992 when the board you rubbish saved this club and dragged it up to what he have done in the last decade, proves you are nothing but a liar.

 

 

 

You're "cherry picking" again, where were Villa in the league when Ellis took over?

 

You always preach league position as being the measure of success so who has done more damage to the club they ran when looking at league position?

 

I've told you in the past where Villa were when Ellis took over so it should be straight forward enough for you to find the answer.  I'll give you something of a clue, the man who won the European Cup as Villa manager wasn't the same one who managed them to qualification, he moved on because of league position, league position, your holy grail when measuring success.

 

Try and answer this and I might go looking for the replies to the above questions you've repeated again, replies that you have either missed in the past or have chosen to ignore.

[Mick]

 

The dates are based around the sales of Cort and Goma, sales that brought in significant sums of money. They could be anything but they happen to be the dates I posted. Why do you want to go back 32 months from summer 2003 exactly? Why not 1 month, why not 60 months? What is your basis for selection of the time span. Mine is as stated, the date boundaries set by the sales of Cort and Goma, during which time the club brought in a lot of players for a lot of money but is being criticised for not bringing in more.

 

You are typically evading the main point.

 

By the way, the figure I posted earlier in this thread was rushed, view it as people talking over a pint or something and someine just throwing a rough figure in. The real figure is on this forum and I'm not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes here by saying "nearly £50m". I'm not surprised you've used that as your escape from trying to answer the point though. The figure is £43.7m by the way, as I quoted later showing there was no intent to mislead in the earlier comment.

 

Thanks for **** all because as usual you've proven you can't debate, you're a total waste of my time and a fool.

 

PS Have you ever bought something for £90 and said to someone it cost "nearly £100". Don't lie now, I know you'll be tempted as you have a history of it.

 

I went back 32 months before the summer of 2003 because that's the period you mentioned in the thread I replied to.       

 

Here's a link to post #135 http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,31684.msg610984.html#msg610984 where you mentioned the figure I responed to, you didn't mention 2004 anywhere.  If you meant another time then I would have expected that you mentioned it, it's not difficuilt, at least it doesn't seem to be from where I am.

 

If you meant another time then I can only apologise for not being able to read minds, it's always been a flaw of mine, a flaw I stopped trying to correct years ago. 

 

A typo basically, caused by how many times I've posted the figures and the continual reference to summer 2003...... you should have seen the posts before with all of the detail that shows the dates. The dates are relevant and encompass summer 2003.

 

Do you or do you not understand the point I'm making about the availability of transfer funds during the summer of 2003?

 

How low will you go to avoid addressing a legitimate point?

 

You can hardly complain about my answer though when you now admit to making a typo', I can only respond to what I read

 

It's a pity that you assume others are liars when they make a mistake then put down a repeated typo' as a simple mistake.

 

The point you are trying to make is fair to a certain degree but it's also one that could be argued.

 

The time to push the boat out would have been during the summer of 2003 as we were peaking and within striking distance of major honours in both domestic and European competitions, that would have been time to blow £50 million, not on Souness.

 

I know I've brought Souness into it but only to show that we spend at the wrong time, Sir Bobby had the most success while he was given less than £6 million net per year, the lowest annual net spend of any manager under Shepherd, it doesn't make sense.

 

We seem eager to spend to get out of trouble but not to take the club forward, we react at the wrong time and that tells me that our priority isn't for success, it's for survival.

[NE5]

 

You are slow aren't you, how do you know we'll only be 3rd bottom for a few weeks?

 

OK, you don't "cherry pick" Here's a few you accidently missed.

 

Ellis is a "shit chairman" according to you, what does that make Shepherd who has finished below Ellis more times than above while spending more money?

 

Shepherd has taken us down 17 league places while chairman, name any other of our shit chairman who have done this.

 

Name our other chairman who have made a £12 million loss, base it over 12 months, not the 11 that the latest figures were based on.

 

I think you should read the thread about the Halls and the takeover, but don't start saying that the Halls are to blame for the decisions that don't work out, as majority shareholders, when the penny drops.

 

As for thinking we will be in the bottom 3 for only a few weeks.....I can categorically state that we won't sell our best players for decades and end up where we were pre-1992, unless of course you know we will. But of course, you think its the same thing don't you.

 

 

 

 

Answer the three simple questions, hypocrite.

 

You’ve said I “cherry pick,” prove you don’t do the same by answering the question that I’ve repeatedly asked you and you've repeatedly failed to spot, you lose more credibility by the day.

 

I have answered your questions, Ellis took over Villa when they were champions of europe, and ran them for 26 years, spending many years fighting relegation, being relegated, and during all that time penny pinched in the way he ran the club and with his transfer funds. You are obviously not looking properly. So answer my questions hypocrite, why did Lee and Cox consider Everton and Derby as upward career moves ? And why did Waddle, Gazza, Beardsley, and before them Pop Robson all local lads, want to leave Newcastle and the area of their birth ?

 

And why do you consider buying England players and regular european football to be no different to spending decades in the bottom half of the 1st division, 2nd division and selling your best players replacing them with cheaper players from the likes of Oxford, Luton etc etc.....and a board who were proud of a stand "that was similar to Watfords"

 

Zero credibility, and more so all the time. Every time you fail to see the rubbish you post shows clearly that you have no recollection of this period at all, and hence the depths this club was at in 1992 when the board you rubbish saved this club and dragged it up to what he have done in the last decade, proves you are nothing but a liar.

 

 

 

You're "cherry picking" again, where were Villa in the league when Ellis took over?

 

You always preach league position as being the measure of success so who has done more damage to the club they ran when looking at league position?

 

I've told you in the past where Villa were when Ellis took over so it should be straight forward enough for you to find the answer.  I'll give you something of a clue, the man who won the European Cup as Villa manager wasn't the same one who managed them to qualification, he moved on because of league position, league position, your holy grail when measuring success.

 

Try and answer this and I might go looking for the replies to the above questions you've repeated again, replies that you have either missed in the past or have chosen to ignore.

 

the man who led Newcastle to 2nd in the league wasn't the same as the one when Shepherd took over as chairman either  Thanks for pointing that out, which I knew of course.......

 

Villas manager was Tony Barton, and the previous manager was Ron Saunders.

 

However, as you said, there is "going backwards", and there is "going backwards". Backwards from being European Cup holders is most definitely as high as it gets .... however I know you will base your "opinion" on something other than fact, as usual.

 

What about the questions regarding Lee, Cox, Waddle, Gazza, Beardsley, and Robson. You can draw a comparison with Shearer staying if you like ... 

 

As usual, I don't expect you to even attempt to answer this, basically, like all KK bandwagon jumpers, because you don't understand it.

 

 

[Mick]

 

the man who led Newcastle to 2nd in the league wasn't the same as the one when Shepherd took over as chairman either  Thanks for pointing that out, which I knew of course.......

 

Villas manager was Tony Barton, and the previous manager was Ron Saunders.

 

However, as you said, there is "going backwards", and there is "going backwards". Backwards from being European Cup holders is most definitely as high as it gets .... however I know you will base your "opinion" on something other than fact, as usual.

 

What about the questions regarding Lee, Cox, Waddle, Gazza, Beardsley, and Robson. You can draw a comparison with Shearer staying if you like ... 

 

As usual, I don't expect you to even attempt to answer this, basically, like all KK bandwagon jumpers, because you don't understand it.

 

 

It might just be me but that post looks like gibberish; I'll leave others to decide.

[WhatTheFunk]

 

LM, as fun as it can be debating with you, i'm sorry to say that you're a right patronising old git. Get over your fucking self and stop thinking you're a better supporter just because you're 105 yrs old.

 

KK bandwagon jumpers? What an idiotic comment. If people who started to support Newcastle at the time of Keegan were "bandwagon jumpers", believe me they have jumped ship already. Those of us who've stuck it out for the past 13 years or so (due to AGE constraints) are here to stay. If that pisses you off, then great.

[Mick]

 

LM, as fun as it can be debating with you, i'm sorry to say that you're a right patronising old git. Get over your ****ing self and stop thinking you're a better supporter just because you're 105 yrs old.

 

KK bandwagon jumpers? What an idiotic comment. If people who started to support Newcastle at the time of Keegan were "bandwagon jumpers", believe me they have jumped ship already. Those of us who've stuck it out for the past 13 years or so (due to AGE constraints) are here to stay. If that pisses you off, then great.

 

A Keegan bandwagon jumper is someone who went before during and after Keegan.

[Howaythelads]

 

LM, as fun as it can be debating with you, i'm sorry to say that you're a right patronising old git. Get over your ****ing self and stop thinking you're a better supporter just because you're 105 yrs old.

 

KK bandwagon jumpers? What an idiotic comment. If people who started to support Newcastle at the time of Keegan were "bandwagon jumpers", believe me they have jumped ship already. Those of us who've stuck it out for the past 13 years or so (due to AGE constraints) are here to stay. If that pisses you off, then great.

 

It's been mentioned before, but here it is again to clear up any misinterpretation of what I mean when I talk about KK bandwagon jumpers.

 

A KK bandwagon jumper is someone who COULD have gone before Keegan arrived but didn't go by choice because we were shit. This type took the piss out of the 20,000 hard core support who did go. My son started going to matches in the late 90's, he was only 7 so you have to start sometime.

 

If they are old enough they also queued for tickets for the FA Cup final in 74, taking the ticket that should have gone to real supporters. This is why the club have brought in various methods of ticket allocation, in an attempt to ensure these tickets go to genuine supporters and not bandwagon jumpers.

 

This has been said before, I'm not surprised some still don't get it although it's really not hard to understand.

[Guest Knightrider]

You could say I'm a KK bandwagon jumper as I started supporting the Toon when I was 11, quite a late age to be getting into football especially when my dad, his brothers and all my mates were into football, well most of them. I used to hate it, watching it and playing it. "Turn it over" was what I used to say whenever match of the day came on. Mind I used to love the old vidiprinter, that was exciting. Me father would turn the radio off with 5 minutes to go if we were drawing or losing one-nil, he couldn't bear listening to the end of matches and waited by the telly waiting for a flash up to say "Newcastle have equalised, or "grabbed a late winner", or "a goal at SJP" or whatever. I remember loads of times us coming back late on and my dad was adamant it was all down to him switching the radio off for good luck. People and their superstitions eh