RIP sale thread.

[J7]

I struggle to understand how Newcastle are being fooled. Some mackem twat goes to extraordinary sad lengths to create a joke, the papers jump on it, then its found to be a hoax. Did anyone even bat an eyelid at this 'bid'? Ive just found out about it.

 

Its quite obvious the mackems care more about us failing than their own team.

[NG32]

No quick sale likely for Newcastle United

http://www.journallive.co.uk/nufc/newcastle-united-news/2009/06/13/no-quick-sale-likely-for-newcastle-united-61634-23866689/

 

Not suprised, I cant see us being sold before the season starts tbh.  Ashley bang on form again.

 

The man is an arse.

[JH]

'We're only doing what they would have done, and have done for a good few years.'

 

Funny that, I don't remember us ever making up road signs or putting together time-consuming takeover hoaxes

 

Fact is, most people rumbled it in about 2 minutes and if media outlets had acted with some intelligence, it probably wouldn't have even made it further than gossip pages like tribal football.

 

Mackems actually care more about criticising us than supporting Sunderland it's great

[Mr Logic]

This latest decision by Ashley to NOT appoint a manager - is it the biggest fuck up he's made to date considering the massive negative impact it has on next season? 

 

Is he really so ignorant of football that he does not comprehend the ramifications of this decision?

[Dave]

Aren't the Journal and the Chronicle in the same building? Be nice if they spoke to each other.

[Howaythelads]

I don't think anyone is supporting Ashley HTL, that's just your pathetic attempt at trying to justify your support of Shepherd.

 

Daft post, so nowt's changed.

 

I don't support Shepherd, I don't give a shite who is the figurehead 'cos that's all he was. What I'm telling you is the previous Board is the best the club has seen for at least 60 years. You disagree and think they were crap. Now that's pathetic.

 

 

[quayside]

This latest decision by Ashley to NOT appoint a manager - is it the biggest f*** up he's made to date considering the massive negative impact it has on next season? 

 

Is he really so ignorant of football that he does not comprehend the ramifications of this decision?

 

He's never really understood the fact that decisions in football are time critical and you continually need to think and plan ahead. In his other business dealings he's obviously never had that pressure and done things in his own knee- jerk way and at his own speed. It's quite staggering to see how thick he is when operating outside his own sports retail orbit.

[JH]

Aren't the Journal and the Chronicle in the same building? Be nice if they spoke to each other.

 

f*** that, they're actually in the same ROOM

[STM]

Aren't the Journal and the Chronicle in the same building? Be nice if they spoke to each other.

 

As you well know Dave, they deliberately write different things so they have different stories. When they do things like this it normally indicates that they haven't got alot to write about at the moment.

 

You will notice when there is "real" news that they start writing the same things again.

[Skirge]

Drags on and on and on and on and on

[Teasy]

How were Newcastle fooled by it like?   And how was this made up bloke a leading contender simply because the papers were taken in?   The papers in this country really are as amature amateur as it gets, no proof reading or editing, facts don't matter, reality doesn't seem to matter..  They just twist the facts in whatever way will give them an entertaining story for the moronic general public.

 

Proof read your post. 

 

It was 4 in the morning and I was pissed for fuck sake, give as a break sad lad!

[Dinho lad]

the only time i heard about that hoax was when it was reviled that it was a hoax.

[indi]

It has to be said that given the plight the club is in due to Ashley anyone who doesn't want to see Fred back at the helm is a nutcase.

 

It seems some still haven't learned a thing. What is it going to take for some people to get it? Administration?

 

What's it going to take for some people to get that we're not going to be put into administration?

 

One more time:

 

The point of going into administration is to protect yourself from your creditors.

 

We have only one major creditor, his name is Mike Ashley.

 

Why would Mike Ashley want to protect Mike Ashley from Mike Ashley?

 

As far as I'm concerned the absolute duty of an administrator is to get as much back for the creditors as possible.

 

So what does that mean? It means selling off the whole shebang, the players, facilities, knocking the stadium down for some other development for which money may be paid, the whole lot going into the pocket of Ashley, the bloke people wanted 'cos he was better than Fred. He could hardly just go ahead and do it off his own back with the club a going concern.

 

Erm, did you miss the point when he bought the club outright? He could have done that from the moment he bought the club, why would he bring an administrator in to do that when he could simply have done it himself? The fact that he hasn't done anything like that, kinda suggests that he's not going to, don't you think?

 

Also, I think you have "administrator" and "liquidator" mixed up. The first duty of an administrator is to rescue the company as a going concern, whereas the role of a liquidator is similar to what you describe. However, the question remains as to why Mike Ashley would do that and you've not answered that I notice.

 

I'd have thought that someone who's followed the club for as long as you have would know that it doesn't own the land the stadium is built upon and therefore couldn't sell it off for redevelopment even if it wanted to. But hey, don't let reality get in the way of a good rant, eh?

 

1. It kinda takes the pressure off him if someone else does it. It's called "passing the buck" in some circles. I'm sure you've heard of it.

 

2. An administrator only has to justify to the creditors why the company can't be maintained as a going concern before it is liquidated.

 

2a. "You've not answered that I notice" ..... Hmm, that's a rather dumb remark. Why would I answer something I haven't read? I hadn't answered earlier because I've just seen your post. I'm not joined at the hip with my laptop. Obviously.

 

3. Yup, fair point. However, don't get complacent about what Ashley may do to the club. People like you got complacent about regular European finishes, thinking it was shite so you wanted Ashley 'cos he could only do better. Well, it seems you're going to try to cling to the bitter end onto the idea he's better than the previous lot. You're wrong, cos he's not. This bloke might do anything to this football club and as he doesn't give a damn about it that's scary to a supporter like me. He no doubt has very clever people advising him on the economic side of things, people far cleverer than you, if there is a way for him to get rid of the club and get enough money back he'll do anything to achieve that imo. Anything. No amount of wriggling on your part is going is to change that fact.

 

1. Yeah, right.

 

2. I give up, continue believing that the masochistic fantasy that is NUFC going into administration is likely, if you wish. In the real world it's never going to happen.

 

2a. It was a question I asked in the post you quoted. Do you usually not read the posts you reply too?

 

3. That's just a ridiculous thing to say, it would be like me saying people like you got complacent about Fairs Cup winning campaigns when you welcomed SJH's take over of the club. I'd say it was much more complacent for people to whitewash the failings of the latter part of the Shepherd regime, due to fond memories of European finishes in the past. Those European finishes were history and the club was heading in only one direction, Ashley came in and failed to change that direction, ranking each regime in order of who failed more is pointless and irrelevant. I have no special bond with Mike Ashley, I have no interest in him whatsoever outside of him owning NUFC, so when that no longer applies I'll pay him no attention. I certainly won't be banging on and on about how good he was and wasting my time arguing with those who disagree for years afterwards, I certainly won't hate the next owners due to some kind of love of him. As for wiggling, well that's somewhat ironic coming from someone who has in one breath accused Ashley of being an incompetent and in the next portrayed him as some kind of evil mastermind who's going to take the club for all it's got. In the end I think it's pretty much certain that it'll be the club that's taken Ashley for a hefty chink of what he's got, rather than the other way round.

 

Your analogy in para 3 is ridiculous.

 

Were you one of those saying it was impossible for the club to have a worse Board than the previous one? If so, I suggest you think carefully before you dismiss the possibility of the club going to the wall. You appear to believe it's impossible....it isn't.

 

Carry on supporting Ashley all you like mate.  I don't know what it's going to take for people like you to see reality.

 

I'm not in the mood to get involved in some bullshit back and forth with you where I say something then you either ignore it completely or wilfully misrepresent it at the moment, so this will probably be my last response in this particular conversation as I have much better things to do.

 

I did not say that it was impossible for the club to have a board worse than the previous one, I said that I was prepared to take the risk in order to rid the club of the failed leadership of Freddy Shepherd. As far as I'm concerned failure is failure, arguing over who failed more is pointless bullshit, but you carry on if you wish.

 

You should perhaps consider whether your seeming belief that it is impossible for the club to have a better board than the previous one makes you a hypocrite or not. Just for the record my belief is that the club could always have a better or worse board than the previous one, or any other for that matter. I'll never be happy with the least worst option - like you seem to be - to the extent that I couldn't even give a shit who that is and therefore I'm not going to engage in a debate about it with you. Freddy = failure. Ashley = failure. Now either of those two things could change given time, but at present that's how it is. If either were to change, then I'm not stubborn enough to refuse to acknowledge that - unlike some - but at present that history of failure means that I'd prefer to see someone new have a chance and see if they can lead  us out of the situation we now find ourselves in, for which both of the previous regimes are responsible.

 

I didn't say that there was no danger of the club going to the wall, I simply said that administration was highly unlikely due to fact that it makes no sense for Ashley do use that particular tool. The only reason you are arguing with me is because you don't know what administration is - you seem to think it's the same thing as liquidation, it isn't - and you've just heard of it happening to other clubs and assumed that must be what always happens when a club gets into trouble, it isn't. You've read about it in the media and have assumed that they actually know what they're on about any more than you do. Sorry, but they're sports journalists, they know jack shit about business.

 

The only thing I support is NUFC and what I think is best for it. As I have already said, I have no emotional attachment to Ashley, why would I? When he leaves the club I will no longer have any interest in him whatsoever. The only person who has an emotional attachment to any individual is you, you have maintained that attachment even when that individual ceased to have anything at all to do with the club and now you are actively supporting his return without even considering if he is the best option for the club at this time. You are a Freddy Shepherd supporter. I'm not going to stoop to the level of questioning whether you're also an NUFC supporter, that goes without saying, but I am going to put a question to you: Of the two things you support which is most important, and if there are conflicts between them which side are you going to come down on? Sometimes it seems to me that your support of Shepherd is absolute and unquestioning, regardless of the effect on NUFC, and I'm pretty sure that a lot of people would agree that that's the way you come across, so if that isn't how it is you might want to put people straight.

 

I hope you respond to this in an accurate way, but if you try and twist what I say again I'm just going to let you get on with it and rely on people having enough brain capacity to read what I've written and make up their own minds about what I meant, rather than be sucked in by your deliberately inaccurate depiction of it. If you're prepared to drop the bullshit and talk about things in a mature way then fine, but if not, have a nice day wasting your time with the same old shite on here I'm off out to do stuff in the real world.

[Pilko]

Once again, indi

[Howaythelads]

It has to be said that given the plight the club is in due to Ashley anyone who doesn't want to see Fred back at the helm is a nutcase.

 

It seems some still haven't learned a thing. What is it going to take for some people to get it? Administration?

 

What's it going to take for some people to get that we're not going to be put into administration?

 

One more time:

 

The point of going into administration is to protect yourself from your creditors.

 

We have only one major creditor, his name is Mike Ashley.

 

Why would Mike Ashley want to protect Mike Ashley from Mike Ashley?

 

As far as I'm concerned the absolute duty of an administrator is to get as much back for the creditors as possible.

 

So what does that mean? It means selling off the whole shebang, the players, facilities, knocking the stadium down for some other development for which money may be paid, the whole lot going into the pocket of Ashley, the bloke people wanted 'cos he was better than Fred. He could hardly just go ahead and do it off his own back with the club a going concern.

 

Erm, did you miss the point when he bought the club outright? He could have done that from the moment he bought the club, why would he bring an administrator in to do that when he could simply have done it himself? The fact that he hasn't done anything like that, kinda suggests that he's not going to, don't you think?

 

Also, I think you have "administrator" and "liquidator" mixed up. The first duty of an administrator is to rescue the company as a going concern, whereas the role of a liquidator is similar to what you describe. However, the question remains as to why Mike Ashley would do that and you've not answered that I notice.

 

I'd have thought that someone who's followed the club for as long as you have would know that it doesn't own the land the stadium is built upon and therefore couldn't sell it off for redevelopment even if it wanted to. But hey, don't let reality get in the way of a good rant, eh?

 

1. It kinda takes the pressure off him if someone else does it. It's called "passing the buck" in some circles. I'm sure you've heard of it.

 

2. An administrator only has to justify to the creditors why the company can't be maintained as a going concern before it is liquidated.

 

2a. "You've not answered that I notice" ..... Hmm, that's a rather dumb remark. Why would I answer something I haven't read? I hadn't answered earlier because I've just seen your post. I'm not joined at the hip with my laptop. Obviously.

 

3. Yup, fair point. However, don't get complacent about what Ashley may do to the club. People like you got complacent about regular European finishes, thinking it was shite so you wanted Ashley 'cos he could only do better. Well, it seems you're going to try to cling to the bitter end onto the idea he's better than the previous lot. You're wrong, cos he's not. This bloke might do anything to this football club and as he doesn't give a damn about it that's scary to a supporter like me. He no doubt has very clever people advising him on the economic side of things, people far cleverer than you, if there is a way for him to get rid of the club and get enough money back he'll do anything to achieve that imo. Anything. No amount of wriggling on your part is going is to change that fact.

 

1. Yeah, right.

 

2. I give up, continue believing that the masochistic fantasy that is NUFC going into administration is likely, if you wish. In the real world it's never going to happen.

 

2a. It was a question I asked in the post you quoted. Do you usually not read the posts you reply too?

 

3. That's just a ridiculous thing to say, it would be like me saying people like you got complacent about Fairs Cup winning campaigns when you welcomed SJH's take over of the club. I'd say it was much more complacent for people to whitewash the failings of the latter part of the Shepherd regime, due to fond memories of European finishes in the past. Those European finishes were history and the club was heading in only one direction, Ashley came in and failed to change that direction, ranking each regime in order of who failed more is pointless and irrelevant. I have no special bond with Mike Ashley, I have no interest in him whatsoever outside of him owning NUFC, so when that no longer applies I'll pay him no attention. I certainly won't be banging on and on about how good he was and wasting my time arguing with those who disagree for years afterwards, I certainly won't hate the next owners due to some kind of love of him. As for wiggling, well that's somewhat ironic coming from someone who has in one breath accused Ashley of being an incompetent and in the next portrayed him as some kind of evil mastermind who's going to take the club for all it's got. In the end I think it's pretty much certain that it'll be the club that's taken Ashley for a hefty chink of what he's got, rather than the other way round.

 

Your analogy in para 3 is ridiculous.

 

Were you one of those saying it was impossible for the club to have a worse Board than the previous one? If so, I suggest you think carefully before you dismiss the possibility of the club going to the wall. You appear to believe it's impossible....it isn't.

 

Carry on supporting Ashley all you like mate.  I don't know what it's going to take for people like you to see reality.

I'm not in the mood to get involved in some bullshit back and forth with you where I say something then you either ignore it completely or wilfully misrepresent it at the moment, so this will probably be my last response in this particular conversation as I have much better things to do.

 

I did not say that it was impossible for the club to have a board worse than the previous one, I said that I was prepared to take the risk in order to rid the club of the failed leadership of Freddy Shepherd. As far as I'm concerned failure is failure, arguing over who failed more is pointless bullshit, but you carry on if you wish.

 

You should perhaps consider whether your seeming belief that it is impossible for the club to have a better board than the previous one makes you a hypocrite or not. Just for the record my belief is that the club could always have a better or worse board than the previous one, or any other for that matter. I'll never be happy with the least worst option - like you seem to be - to the extent that I couldn't even give a shit who that is and therefore I'm not going to engage in a debate about it with you. Freddy = failure. Ashley = failure. Now either of those two things could change given time, but at present that's how it is. If either were to change, then I'm not stubborn enough to refuse to acknowledge that - unlike some - but at present that history of failure means that I'd prefer to see someone new have a chance and see if they can lead  us out of the situation we now find ourselves in, for which both of the previous regimes are responsible.

 

I didn't say that there was no danger of the club going to the wall, I simply said that administration was highly unlikely due to fact that it makes no sense for Ashley do use that particular tool. The only reason you are arguing with me is because you don't know what administration is - you seem to think it's the same thing as liquidation, it isn't - and you've just heard of it happening to other clubs and assumed that must be what always happens when a club gets into trouble, it isn't. You've read about it in the media and have assumed that they actually know what they're on about any more than you do. Sorry, but they're sports journalists, they know jack shit about business.

 

The only thing I support is NUFC and what I think is best for it. As I have already said, I have no emotional attachment to Ashley, why would I? When he leaves the club I will no longer have any interest in him whatsoever. The only person who has an emotional attachment to any individual is you, you have maintained that attachment even when that individual ceased to have anything at all to do with the club and now you are actively supporting his return without even considering if he is the best option for the club at this time. You are a Freddy Shepherd supporter. I'm not going to stoop to the level of questioning whether you're also an NUFC supporter, that goes without saying, but I am going to put a question to you: Of the two things you support which is most important, and if there are conflicts between them which side are you going to come down on? Sometimes it seems to me that your support of Shepherd is absolute and unquestioning, regardless of the effect on NUFC, and I'm pretty sure that a lot of people would agree that that's the way you come across, so if that isn't how it is you might want to put people straight.

 

I hope you respond to this in an accurate way, but if you try and twist what I say again I'm just going to let you get on with it and rely on people having enough brain capacity to read what I've written and make up their own minds about what I meant, rather than be sucked in by your deliberately inaccurate depiction of it. If you're prepared to drop the bullshit and talk about things in a mature way then fine, but if not, have a nice day wasting your time with the same old shite on here I'm off out to do stuff in the real world.

 

I wasn't aware we were having a "conversation" tbh. I made a couple of posts indicating the obvious that Ashley is worse than the previous Board and you've decided to start on an epic to rival War And Peace about it because you disagree.

 

I don't give a shite who is in charge of the club and never have done, all I want to see is some ambition and an attempt to take the club/team forward.  You seemingly aren't interested in that and neither is Ashley, so it's no wonder you think the knacker is better than the previous Board.

 

A significant number of people on this forum don't recognise ambition when they see it and you're one of them. There are no guarantees of success, there simply are not enough trophies. All the Board/owner can do is show the required ambition to make an attempt to challenge for those trophies and that's it. They can do no more. There are loads of other factors that make the difference between going on to win something and not winning something, but challenging for trophies is not a sign of failure of a board or owner. What Ashley has managed since he came here is total and abject failure. To compare him favourably or even equally with the previous Board is an absolute joke.

 

Cheers

[indi]

It has to be said that given the plight the club is in due to Ashley anyone who doesn't want to see Fred back at the helm is a nutcase.

 

It seems some still haven't learned a thing. What is it going to take for some people to get it? Administration?

 

What's it going to take for some people to get that we're not going to be put into administration?

 

One more time:

 

The point of going into administration is to protect yourself from your creditors.

 

We have only one major creditor, his name is Mike Ashley.

 

Why would Mike Ashley want to protect Mike Ashley from Mike Ashley?

 

As far as I'm concerned the absolute duty of an administrator is to get as much back for the creditors as possible.

 

So what does that mean? It means selling off the whole shebang, the players, facilities, knocking the stadium down for some other development for which money may be paid, the whole lot going into the pocket of Ashley, the bloke people wanted 'cos he was better than Fred. He could hardly just go ahead and do it off his own back with the club a going concern.

 

Erm, did you miss the point when he bought the club outright? He could have done that from the moment he bought the club, why would he bring an administrator in to do that when he could simply have done it himself? The fact that he hasn't done anything like that, kinda suggests that he's not going to, don't you think?

 

Also, I think you have "administrator" and "liquidator" mixed up. The first duty of an administrator is to rescue the company as a going concern, whereas the role of a liquidator is similar to what you describe. However, the question remains as to why Mike Ashley would do that and you've not answered that I notice.

 

I'd have thought that someone who's followed the club for as long as you have would know that it doesn't own the land the stadium is built upon and therefore couldn't sell it off for redevelopment even if it wanted to. But hey, don't let reality get in the way of a good rant, eh?

 

1. It kinda takes the pressure off him if someone else does it. It's called "passing the buck" in some circles. I'm sure you've heard of it.

 

2. An administrator only has to justify to the creditors why the company can't be maintained as a going concern before it is liquidated.

 

2a. "You've not answered that I notice" ..... Hmm, that's a rather dumb remark. Why would I answer something I haven't read? I hadn't answered earlier because I've just seen your post. I'm not joined at the hip with my laptop. Obviously.

 

3. Yup, fair point. However, don't get complacent about what Ashley may do to the club. People like you got complacent about regular European finishes, thinking it was shite so you wanted Ashley 'cos he could only do better. Well, it seems you're going to try to cling to the bitter end onto the idea he's better than the previous lot. You're wrong, cos he's not. This bloke might do anything to this football club and as he doesn't give a damn about it that's scary to a supporter like me. He no doubt has very clever people advising him on the economic side of things, people far cleverer than you, if there is a way for him to get rid of the club and get enough money back he'll do anything to achieve that imo. Anything. No amount of wriggling on your part is going is to change that fact.

 

1. Yeah, right.

 

2. I give up, continue believing that the masochistic fantasy that is NUFC going into administration is likely, if you wish. In the real world it's never going to happen.

 

2a. It was a question I asked in the post you quoted. Do you usually not read the posts you reply too?

 

3. That's just a ridiculous thing to say, it would be like me saying people like you got complacent about Fairs Cup winning campaigns when you welcomed SJH's take over of the club. I'd say it was much more complacent for people to whitewash the failings of the latter part of the Shepherd regime, due to fond memories of European finishes in the past. Those European finishes were history and the club was heading in only one direction, Ashley came in and failed to change that direction, ranking each regime in order of who failed more is pointless and irrelevant. I have no special bond with Mike Ashley, I have no interest in him whatsoever outside of him owning NUFC, so when that no longer applies I'll pay him no attention. I certainly won't be banging on and on about how good he was and wasting my time arguing with those who disagree for years afterwards, I certainly won't hate the next owners due to some kind of love of him. As for wiggling, well that's somewhat ironic coming from someone who has in one breath accused Ashley of being an incompetent and in the next portrayed him as some kind of evil mastermind who's going to take the club for all it's got. In the end I think it's pretty much certain that it'll be the club that's taken Ashley for a hefty chink of what he's got, rather than the other way round.

 

Your analogy in para 3 is ridiculous.

 

Were you one of those saying it was impossible for the club to have a worse Board than the previous one? If so, I suggest you think carefully before you dismiss the possibility of the club going to the wall. You appear to believe it's impossible....it isn't.

 

Carry on supporting Ashley all you like mate.  I don't know what it's going to take for people like you to see reality.

I'm not in the mood to get involved in some bullshit back and forth with you where I say something then you either ignore it completely or wilfully misrepresent it at the moment, so this will probably be my last response in this particular conversation as I have much better things to do.

 

I did not say that it was impossible for the club to have a board worse than the previous one, I said that I was prepared to take the risk in order to rid the club of the failed leadership of Freddy Shepherd. As far as I'm concerned failure is failure, arguing over who failed more is pointless bullshit, but you carry on if you wish.

 

You should perhaps consider whether your seeming belief that it is impossible for the club to have a better board than the previous one makes you a hypocrite or not. Just for the record my belief is that the club could always have a better or worse board than the previous one, or any other for that matter. I'll never be happy with the least worst option - like you seem to be - to the extent that I couldn't even give a shit who that is and therefore I'm not going to engage in a debate about it with you. Freddy = failure. Ashley = failure. Now either of those two things could change given time, but at present that's how it is. If either were to change, then I'm not stubborn enough to refuse to acknowledge that - unlike some - but at present that history of failure means that I'd prefer to see someone new have a chance and see if they can lead  us out of the situation we now find ourselves in, for which both of the previous regimes are responsible.

 

I didn't say that there was no danger of the club going to the wall, I simply said that administration was highly unlikely due to fact that it makes no sense for Ashley do use that particular tool. The only reason you are arguing with me is because you don't know what administration is - you seem to think it's the same thing as liquidation, it isn't - and you've just heard of it happening to other clubs and assumed that must be what always happens when a club gets into trouble, it isn't. You've read about it in the media and have assumed that they actually know what they're on about any more than you do. Sorry, but they're sports journalists, they know jack shit about business.

 

The only thing I support is NUFC and what I think is best for it. As I have already said, I have no emotional attachment to Ashley, why would I? When he leaves the club I will no longer have any interest in him whatsoever. The only person who has an emotional attachment to any individual is you, you have maintained that attachment even when that individual ceased to have anything at all to do with the club and now you are actively supporting his return without even considering if he is the best option for the club at this time. You are a Freddy Shepherd supporter. I'm not going to stoop to the level of questioning whether you're also an NUFC supporter, that goes without saying, but I am going to put a question to you: Of the two things you support which is most important, and if there are conflicts between them which side are you going to come down on? Sometimes it seems to me that your support of Shepherd is absolute and unquestioning, regardless of the effect on NUFC, and I'm pretty sure that a lot of people would agree that that's the way you come across, so if that isn't how it is you might want to put people straight.

 

I hope you respond to this in an accurate way, but if you try and twist what I say again I'm just going to let you get on with it and rely on people having enough brain capacity to read what I've written and make up their own minds about what I meant, rather than be sucked in by your deliberately inaccurate depiction of it. If you're prepared to drop the bullshit and talk about things in a mature way then fine, but if not, have a nice day wasting your time with the same old shite on here I'm off out to do stuff in the real world.

 

I wasn't aware we were having a "conversation" tbh. I made a couple of posts indicating the obvious that Ashley is worse than the previous Board and you've decided to start on an epic to rival War And Peace about it because you disagree.

 

I don't give a shite who is in charge of the club and never have done, all I want to see is some ambition and an attempt to take the club/team forward.  You seemingly aren't interested in that and neither is Ashley, so it's no wonder you think the knacker is better than the previous Board.

 

A significant number of people on this forum don't recognise ambition when they see it and you're one of them. There are no guarantees of success, there simply are not enough trophies. All the Board/owner can do is show the required ambition to make an attempt to challenge for those trophies and that's it. They can do no more. There are loads of other factors that make the difference between going on to win something and not winning something, but challenging for trophies is not a sign of failure of a board or owner. What Ashley has managed since he came here is total and abject failure. To compare him favourably or even equally with the previous Board is an absolute joke.

 

Cheers

 

Thanks for answering at least one of my questions; the one about whether or not you were going to discuss things maturely.

 

Oh well, never mind.

 

[Guest]

Saw a fantastic point in The Mirror of all places from Oliver Holt this morning which I thought was spot on.

 

He was saying how Sir John Hall was saying that the whole squad should see it as an obligation to all negotiate pay reductions for next season, and yet he was the one who sold his shares first chance he got as soon as Ashley gave him £80m without knowing anything about him.

 

Perhaps if those players don't re-negotiate their contracts, then with the £80m he's sitting on he can pay the difference instead.

[dcmk]

Saw a fantastic point in The Mirror of all places from Oliver Holt this morning which I thought was spot on.

 

He was saying how Sir John Hall was saying that the whole squad should see it as an obligation to all negotiate pay reductions for next season, and yet he was the one who sold his shares first chance he got as soon as Ashley gave him £80m without knowing anything about him.

 

Perhaps if those players don't re-negotiate their contracts, then with the £80m he's sitting on he can pay the difference instead.

 

Their his shares he can do what he wants with them, he saw the warning signs and protected his own skin doesn't make him an accessory in our plummet under Ashley one bit. 

 

The players are on astronomical wages and did fuck all last season and the worst offenders are hinting they want to stay whilst they are on 50k a week, if they want to stay take a paycut.. they should prove it.  Totally different imo.

[Ronaldo]

SJH is a fucking hypocrite for suggesting the players should put the interests of the club first when he did anything but 2 years ago

[JH]

SJH is a f***ing hypocrite for suggesting the players should put the interests of the club first when he did anything but 2 years ago

 

Surely he wasn't to know that a struggling billionaire who had no knowledge of running football clubs or this area was going to fail?....oh wait...

[Howaythelads]

It has to be said that given the plight the club is in due to Ashley anyone who doesn't want to see Fred back at the helm is a nutcase.

 

It seems some still haven't learned a thing. What is it going to take for some people to get it? Administration?

 

What's it going to take for some people to get that we're not going to be put into administration?

 

One more time:

 

The point of going into administration is to protect yourself from your creditors.

 

We have only one major creditor, his name is Mike Ashley.

 

Why would Mike Ashley want to protect Mike Ashley from Mike Ashley?

 

As far as I'm concerned the absolute duty of an administrator is to get as much back for the creditors as possible.

 

So what does that mean? It means selling off the whole shebang, the players, facilities, knocking the stadium down for some other development for which money may be paid, the whole lot going into the pocket of Ashley, the bloke people wanted 'cos he was better than Fred. He could hardly just go ahead and do it off his own back with the club a going concern.

 

Erm, did you miss the point when he bought the club outright? He could have done that from the moment he bought the club, why would he bring an administrator in to do that when he could simply have done it himself? The fact that he hasn't done anything like that, kinda suggests that he's not going to, don't you think?

 

Also, I think you have "administrator" and "liquidator" mixed up. The first duty of an administrator is to rescue the company as a going concern, whereas the role of a liquidator is similar to what you describe. However, the question remains as to why Mike Ashley would do that and you've not answered that I notice.

 

I'd have thought that someone who's followed the club for as long as you have would know that it doesn't own the land the stadium is built upon and therefore couldn't sell it off for redevelopment even if it wanted to. But hey, don't let reality get in the way of a good rant, eh?

 

1. It kinda takes the pressure off him if someone else does it. It's called "passing the buck" in some circles. I'm sure you've heard of it.

 

2. An administrator only has to justify to the creditors why the company can't be maintained as a going concern before it is liquidated.

 

2a. "You've not answered that I notice" ..... Hmm, that's a rather dumb remark. Why would I answer something I haven't read? I hadn't answered earlier because I've just seen your post. I'm not joined at the hip with my laptop. Obviously.

 

3. Yup, fair point. However, don't get complacent about what Ashley may do to the club. People like you got complacent about regular European finishes, thinking it was shite so you wanted Ashley 'cos he could only do better. Well, it seems you're going to try to cling to the bitter end onto the idea he's better than the previous lot. You're wrong, cos he's not. This bloke might do anything to this football club and as he doesn't give a damn about it that's scary to a supporter like me. He no doubt has very clever people advising him on the economic side of things, people far cleverer than you, if there is a way for him to get rid of the club and get enough money back he'll do anything to achieve that imo. Anything. No amount of wriggling on your part is going is to change that fact.

 

1. Yeah, right.

 

2. I give up, continue believing that the masochistic fantasy that is NUFC going into administration is likely, if you wish. In the real world it's never going to happen.

 

2a. It was a question I asked in the post you quoted. Do you usually not read the posts you reply too?

 

3. That's just a ridiculous thing to say, it would be like me saying people like you got complacent about Fairs Cup winning campaigns when you welcomed SJH's take over of the club. I'd say it was much more complacent for people to whitewash the failings of the latter part of the Shepherd regime, due to fond memories of European finishes in the past. Those European finishes were history and the club was heading in only one direction, Ashley came in and failed to change that direction, ranking each regime in order of who failed more is pointless and irrelevant. I have no special bond with Mike Ashley, I have no interest in him whatsoever outside of him owning NUFC, so when that no longer applies I'll pay him no attention. I certainly won't be banging on and on about how good he was and wasting my time arguing with those who disagree for years afterwards, I certainly won't hate the next owners due to some kind of love of him. As for wiggling, well that's somewhat ironic coming from someone who has in one breath accused Ashley of being an incompetent and in the next portrayed him as some kind of evil mastermind who's going to take the club for all it's got. In the end I think it's pretty much certain that it'll be the club that's taken Ashley for a hefty chink of what he's got, rather than the other way round.

 

Your analogy in para 3 is ridiculous.

 

Were you one of those saying it was impossible for the club to have a worse Board than the previous one? If so, I suggest you think carefully before you dismiss the possibility of the club going to the wall. You appear to believe it's impossible....it isn't.

 

Carry on supporting Ashley all you like mate.  I don't know what it's going to take for people like you to see reality.

 

I'm not in the mood to get involved in some bullshit back and forth with you where I say something then you either ignore it completely or wilfully misrepresent it at the moment, so this will probably be my last response in this particular conversation as I have much better things to do.

 

I did not say that it was impossible for the club to have a board worse than the previous one, I said that I was prepared to take the risk in order to rid the club of the failed leadership of Freddy Shepherd. As far as I'm concerned failure is failure, arguing over who failed more is pointless bullshit, but you carry on if you wish.

 

You should perhaps consider whether your seeming belief that it is impossible for the club to have a better board than the previous one makes you a hypocrite or not. Just for the record my belief is that the club could always have a better or worse board than the previous one, or any other for that matter. I'll never be happy with the least worst option - like you seem to be - to the extent that I couldn't even give a shit who that is and therefore I'm not going to engage in a debate about it with you. Freddy = failure. Ashley = failure. Now either of those two things could change given time, but at present that's how it is. If either were to change, then I'm not stubborn enough to refuse to acknowledge that - unlike some - but at present that history of failure means that I'd prefer to see someone new have a chance and see if they can lead  us out of the situation we now find ourselves in, for which both of the previous regimes are responsible.

 

I didn't say that there was no danger of the club going to the wall, I simply said that administration was highly unlikely due to fact that it makes no sense for Ashley do use that particular tool. The only reason you are arguing with me is because you don't know what administration is - you seem to think it's the same thing as liquidation, it isn't - and you've just heard of it happening to other clubs and assumed that must be what always happens when a club gets into trouble, it isn't. You've read about it in the media and have assumed that they actually know what they're on about any more than you do. Sorry, but they're sports journalists, they know jack shit about business.

 

The only thing I support is NUFC and what I think is best for it. As I have already said, I have no emotional attachment to Ashley, why would I? When he leaves the club I will no longer have any interest in him whatsoever. The only person who has an emotional attachment to any individual is you, you have maintained that attachment even when that individual ceased to have anything at all to do with the club and now you are actively supporting his return without even considering if he is the best option for the club at this time. You are a Freddy Shepherd supporter. I'm not going to stoop to the level of questioning whether you're also an NUFC supporter, that goes without saying, but I am going to put a question to you: Of the two things you support which is most important, and if there are conflicts between them which side are you going to come down on? Sometimes it seems to me that your support of Shepherd is absolute and unquestioning, regardless of the effect on NUFC, and I'm pretty sure that a lot of people would agree that that's the way you come across, so if that isn't how it is you might want to put people straight.

 

I hope you respond to this in an accurate way, but if you try and twist what I say again I'm just going to let you get on with it and rely on people having enough brain capacity to read what I've written and make up their own minds about what I meant, rather than be sucked in by your deliberately inaccurate depiction of it. If you're prepared to drop the bullshit and talk about things in a mature way then fine, but if not, have a nice day wasting your time with the same old shite on here I'm off out to do stuff in the real world.

 

I wasn't aware we were having a "conversation" tbh. I made a couple of posts indicating the obvious that Ashley is worse than the previous Board and you've decided to start on an epic to rival War And Peace about it because you disagree.

 

I don't give a shite who is in charge of the club and never have done, all I want to see is some ambition and an attempt to take the club/team forward.  You seemingly aren't interested in that and neither is Ashley, so it's no wonder you think the knacker is better than the previous Board.

 

A significant number of people on this forum don't recognise ambition when they see it and you're one of them. There are no guarantees of success, there simply are not enough trophies. All the Board/owner can do is show the required ambition to make an attempt to challenge for those trophies and that's it. They can do no more. There are loads of other factors that make the difference between going on to win something and not winning something, but challenging for trophies is not a sign of failure of a board or owner. What Ashley has managed since he came here is total and abject failure. To compare him favourably or even equally with the previous Board is an absolute joke.

 

Cheers

 

Thanks for answering at least one of my questions; the one about whether or not you were going to discuss things maturely.

 

Oh well, never mind.

 

 

Eh? Questions! What questions? I see one question (it's in bold now to help you spot it, spose you may count it as two) and I answered it (also in bold.)

 

Perhaps if your posts weren't 5 times as long as they need to be due to you "debating" stuff I haven't said you may have noticed it yourself.

[Howaythelads]

SJH is a fucking hypocrite for suggesting the players should put the interests of the club first when he did anything but 2 years ago

 

Totally agree.

[Tooj]

Can someone please summarise what's been going on as of late then? Been canny busy lately and can't be arsed to trawl through this thread.

[Pilko]

Can someone please summarise what's been going on as of late then? Been canny busy lately and can't be arsed to trawl through this thread.

 

We've been bought out by some bloke called Rick Parkinson.

[Dokko]

Can someone please summarise what's been going on as of late then? Been canny busy lately and can't be arsed to trawl through this thread.

 

Fuk all.