Keegan vs Ashley and Co case settled - KK awarded 2m

[thewellander]

Speaking solely about this Nacho Fonzalez deal. It was supposedly a shady deal designed to get us in the good books of two, presumably prominent, agents in South America, with the aim of getting first refusal on up and coming players.

 

Well the Nacho deal went ahead, so where are these other South American players? Gonzalez was signed well over a year ago, two transfer windows have passed since and there's been no activity. Does anyone expect us to start signing these other players any time soon?

 

For the sake of losing a manager it was hardly done for "the greater good" as Wise put it. The fallout from this episode has ended up in relegation.

 

These people are clueless. It's a wonder that we all still marvel over it. Even after the fact, Ashley, Wise, et al, still have their heads up their own arses.

[Village Idiot]

The Nacho González business always looked very shady, many eyebrows were raised when he signed for Valencia, and Emery - while never saying openly - has never wanted him there. Same agent represented a couple of players Valencia wanted rid of, so it's said it was a compensation.

 

I hate agents. Cancerous leeches.

[Tooj]

Kevin Keegan is the most positive influence on Newcastle United in the last 50 years. Don’t give me Sir John Hall and the other puffed up, self regarding greedy bastards whose part in our decline is often undersold by a local media still beholden to them. It was KK. It was KK who inspired the fight against relegation to Div 3 in 92. It was KK who forced Sir John Hall’s hand to release money for the players we’d need to get promoted. It was KK who put the team together which ripped the arse out of the old Second Division that season. It was KK whose team brought the masses back to SJP after years, decades of failure and who forced the construction of one of the greatest stadiums in Europe. It was KK’s team which ripped through the old order of the PL and came so close to winning a title his team so richly deserved. It was KK’s team of entertainers which shifted the SKY packages, which sold out stadiums around the country as Cole, Beardsley and later Ferdinand, Ginola, Asprilla, Lee et al played the kind of football which lit up the country and which supporters want to see rather than the grind put out by Bolton, Sunderland, Blackburn, Stoke et al.

 

[Skirge]

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11688_5608614,00.html

[Cronky]

I've been anti-Keegan over the whole affair and my opinion hasn't changed. I won't repeat myself but I posted on the other Keegan thread.

 

There was a good discussion on Sunday Supplement about the Keegan affair. Anyone else see it?

 

Fine if people want to still support Keegan on this, but I'd be intrigued to know whether notwithstanding that any of you are just a teeny-weeny-weeny bit bothered that he tried to take £25 million out of the club (about a third of our entire annual turnover I'd think), particularly when his contract only entitled him to £2 million?

 

Likewise that the resignation issue was over one relatively insignificant loan signing, and none of the permanent ones that were made?

 

I think these are the two elephants in the room.

 

 

the resignation was not just over the loan signing, which has been pointed out numerous times. you make it sound like everything was rosy and then, bang, he resigns over one little thing. the pdf of the judgement specifically says that keegan was not being opportunistic in this. you may repeat your claim as many times as you wish, but clause 34 PROVES, actually proves in a court of law, that you are quite simply wrong.

 

The pdf further outlines that there were numerous other issues leading up to this which made the Nacho deal the 'final straw' (clause 33). Not only was it without keegan's say but it was done in a corrupt fashion, while Wise's childish behaviour (telling keegan to watch youtube) undermined the working relationship. Furthermore the document also outlines that there was a 'final final straw' (clause 40) which was the club trying to codify the fact that Keegan would have no control over transfers. This would've made his situation untenable as, rather than being one single transfer, it would've taken control out of keegan's hands for every single transfer the club made from that point onward.

 

It is also worth pointing out that it was only after keegan went to resign that the club tried to codify this - before that there had been no clear structure - amazingly amatuer - as we were basically being ran as a lad's club, friends appointed here, favours done there etc. In fact the situation was so bad and unprofessional that the club could not even produce a coherent outline of the managerial structure at the tribunal, having had many months to get their arguments straight. If you feel you disagree with any of what i've just wrote then don't bother to respond to me personally but take it up with the relevant legal authorities, as that is who your beef is actually with.

 

anyway you're a good one to talk about elephants. the fact is this issue isn't primarily ABOUT kevin keegan, a bloke who is no longer at the club, but about the people running newcastle united. you've singularly failed to address this and it's getting to a comical stage now that you're so obviously hiding from the issue.

 

So do you think that other players were foisted on Keegan, in the same way as Gonzalez?

 

I'd really like an answer to that question. Anyone else is welcome to chip in.

 

I don't know, the document for the court case only focused on the Gonzalez deal as the 'final straw'. I'd imagine there were similar deals, yes, but none quite so blatant and clear cut, as corrupt and devious, as unprofessional and stupid, as extreme and unexpected, as this particular one.

 

of course, you are entirely free to question the performance of mike ashley and the board over the past year and a bit, or to respond to the few dozen points that other people have raised. or you can continue to stick your head in the sand. i know it is your preferred method of debate to ignore a whole wealth of arguments that expose your view to be ridiculous, or to try and avoid any question you may be asked, in favour of focusing on pointless tiny details. but i suppose everyone's different. 

 

The distinctive feature of the Nacho deal was that Keegan came right out and said - no, I don't want the player, and I'm not consenting to his signing. Wise went out and signed him anyway. Do you think that happened with any of the other signings?

[NJS]

I haven't read this whole thread, so sorry if this has been mentioned (and I'm sure it has), but this verdict and Wise's explanation makes me really feel bad for young Nacho. He was basically treated like a piece of property by the agents and Ashley and co., and he ended up wasting a year at NUFC when he could have been playing regular football somewhere else. I wonder if he was aware of the nature of his loan deal.

 

He couldn't have played anywhere else - he had a serious underlying injury which they were aware of - another point in their "favour".

 

[Howaythelads]

I've been anti-Keegan over the whole affair and my opinion hasn't changed. I won't repeat myself but I posted on the other Keegan thread.

 

There was a good discussion on Sunday Supplement about the Keegan affair. Anyone else see it?

 

Fine if people want to still support Keegan on this, but I'd be intrigued to know whether notwithstanding that any of you are just a teeny-weeny-weeny bit bothered that he tried to take £25 million out of the club (about a third of our entire annual turnover I'd think), particularly when his contract only entitled him to £2 million?

 

Likewise that the resignation issue was over one relatively insignificant loan signing, and none of the permanent ones that were made?

 

I think these are the two elephants in the room.

 

What a load of bollocks.

[Howaythelads]

To be honest, there's not a massive amount of difference between Shepherd & Ashley when you look at the facts. Roeder admitted Shepherd bought him Duff without him necessarily wanting him...basically because he could. Souness admitted to basically being tricked into allowing the Luque transfer as pointed out in another thread because he said he'd be cheaper than he was, as well as the whole Anelka/Owen affair, and as for dodgy agent dealings, two words...Willie McKay.

 

Hopefully both of these shady, dodgy characters are in the club's history...and also hope Ashley's failings don't give Shepherd a rosier reputation than he should have.

 

[Howaythelads]

I've been very busy just lately and haven't logged on for awhile, so I'll go through this thread when I get a chance. All I'd like to say right now before I read the thread is that I hope all those morons who have slagged Keegan have had the decency and the balls to admit they were talking s****, like they were told they were doing, of course. I won't be surprised if they're still backing Ashley though and stupidly slagging Keegan.

 

I guess I was one of those 'morons' that refused to condemn Ashley without any evidence... and I openly said that Keegan had gone down a lot in my estimation because he walked out on us.

 

As I've said in this thread (sure you'll read it when you can be arsed), I now think a lot better of KK over this whole farce and it's now clear that Ashley's running of the club was a shambles.

 

I still don't think I was wrong to take the stance I did at the time though, we had no facts then.

 

Believing anything from Ashely (given what can be seen of the state of the club) ahead of Keegan =

 

Besides that, it's mildly interesting that you say you refused to condemn Ashely without evidence yet you were willing to condemn Keegan without evidence. So as I said...

 

 

I never condemed Keegan, I just thought he had let us down to a certain extent... I thought he could have stuck it out. After the truth has come out, I still think that would have been possible but I now don't blame him for what he did.

 

It wasn't a matter of choosing Ashley's side either by the way, I never did that. So to say it was 'ahead of Keegan' doesn't make any sense.

 

Nice use of the smilies though.

 

Err, ok.

 

Still no idea. Keegan didn't let anybody down. The morons running the club let everybody down except their mates. That you still can't see it is shocking.

[Howaythelads]

I've been anti-Keegan over the whole affair and my opinion hasn't changed. I won't repeat myself but I posted on the other Keegan thread.

 

There was a good discussion on Sunday Supplement about the Keegan affair. Anyone else see it?

 

Fine if people want to still support Keegan on this, but I'd be intrigued to know whether notwithstanding that any of you are just a teeny-weeny-weeny bit bothered that he tried to take £25 million out of the club (about a third of our entire annual turnover I'd think), particularly when his contract only entitled him to £2 million?

 

Likewise that the resignation issue was over one relatively insignificant loan signing, and none of the permanent ones that were made?

 

I think these are the two elephants in the room.

 

 

the resignation was not just over the loan signing, which has been pointed out numerous times. you make it sound like everything was rosy and then, bang, he resigns over one little thing. the pdf of the judgement specifically says that keegan was not being opportunistic in this. you may repeat your claim as many times as you wish, but clause 34 PROVES, actually proves in a court of law, that you are quite simply wrong.

 

The pdf further outlines that there were numerous other issues leading up to this which made the Nacho deal the 'final straw' (clause 33). Not only was it without keegan's say but it was done in a corrupt fashion, while Wise's childish behaviour (telling keegan to watch youtube) undermined the working relationship. Furthermore the document also outlines that there was a 'final final straw' (clause 40) which was the club trying to codify the fact that Keegan would have no control over transfers. This would've made his situation untenable as, rather than being one single transfer, it would've taken control out of keegan's hands for every single transfer the club made from that point onward.

 

It is also worth pointing out that it was only after keegan went to resign that the club tried to codify this - before that there had been no clear structure - amazingly amatuer - as we were basically being ran as a lad's club, friends appointed here, favours done there etc. In fact the situation was so bad and unprofessional that the club could not even produce a coherent outline of the managerial structure at the tribunal, having had many months to get their arguments straight. If you feel you disagree with any of what i've just wrote then don't bother to respond to me personally but take it up with the relevant legal authorities, as that is who your beef is actually with.

 

anyway you're a good one to talk about elephants. the fact is this issue isn't primarily ABOUT kevin keegan, a bloke who is no longer at the club, but about the people running newcastle united. you've singularly failed to address this and it's getting to a comical stage now that you're so obviously hiding from the issue.

 

So do you think that other players were foisted on Keegan, in the same way as Gonzalez?

 

I'd really like an answer to that question. Anyone else is welcome to chip in.

 

Other than trying to deflect comment away from your continued ignorance of facts, why are you interested in an answer to this irrelvant question anyway?

[biggs]

Kinda silly really but after all thats happened with Keegan in the past i would have him back in a heart beat i must be needing care in the community help but its hard to let go even thought i ripped into him when he walked out last season there is a apart of me that wants him back

[Robster]

There's a ridiculous piece in tomorrow's Mirror by Stan Collymore about this. I'd post it but that would give it the attention it craves.

 

All I can say is: cunt.

I love how 1 fan has left a comment and called themselves "DUCKULRIKA"

[Robster]

Do you think that happened with any of the other signings?

Does it matter if it didnt ?

[timnufc22]

Kinda silly really but after all thats happened with Keegan in the past i would have him back in a heart beat i must be needing care in the community help but its hard to let go even thought i ripped into him when he walked out last season there is a apart of me that wants him back

 

Becuase when he was forced out, everyone was chuffed he was here and had confidence in him carrying on doing what was a good job. The only thing that has changed since then and now regarding KK is that its a fact he was stitched up. Why should peoples opinion of him be any different now, then it was last year?

[Skirge]

Crazy as it is I would have him back in a heart beat, the only thing I would hate is the media frenzy it would bring, we are a circus of a club and KK coming back AGAIN would be mental.

[Optimistic Nut]

To be honest, there's not a massive amount of difference between Shepherd & Ashley when you look at the facts. Roeder admitted Shepherd bought him Duff without him necessarily wanting him...basically because he could. Souness admitted to basically being tricked into allowing the Luque transfer as pointed out in another thread because he said he'd be cheaper than he was, as well as the whole Anelka/Owen affair, and as for dodgy agent dealings, two words...Willie McKay.

 

Hopefully both of these shady, dodgy characters are in the club's history...and also hope Ashley's failings don't give Shepherd a rosier reputation than he should have.

 

 

Brilliant, well constructed argument.

[stalker]

Speaking solely about this Nacho Fonzalez deal. It was supposedly a shady deal designed to get us in the good books of two, presumably prominent, agents in South America, with the aim of getting first refusal on up and coming players.

 

Well the Nacho deal went ahead, so where are these other South American players? Gonzalez was signed well over a year ago, two transfer windows have passed since and there's been no activity. Does anyone expect us to start signing these other players any time soon?

 

For the sake of losing a manager it was hardly done for "the greater good" as Wise put it. The fallout from this episode has ended up in relegation.

 

Its a good point. Also surely work permit rules make it nigh on impossible to sign young south american players?

 

They're argument about not paying the agents anything is pretty ropey as well, surely they were taking a cut of his salary as his agents (I know some will argue this is different to paying them directly, but clearly the agents were still benefitting very well from the deal).

[timnufc22]

Crazy as it is I would have him back in a heart beat, the only thing I would hate is the media frenzy it would bring, we are a circus of a club and KK coming back AGAIN would be mental.

 

The thing is about that - remember what every talks about with Man U, and what we need? That seige mentality. Bring it all on if people are blinded by media spin, brilliant, because if its us against the world we would have that seige mentality that would work for us, just like Man U. 'know likes us, we dont care, because what we do on the pitch speaks for itself'. That would very much apply.

[Skirge]

I guess at the end of the day its going to be Shearer not Keegain IF the club is sold, so its all just a pipedream.

[Keefaz]

I guess at the end of the day its going to be Shearer not Keegain IF the club is sold, so its all just a pipedream.

 

Can't we perform a mind-meld in this day and age? The best of both worlds, then.

[Skirge]

I think both Keegan and Shearer agree'd they could not work together as Manager and No.2, its one or the other I am afriad.

[Keefaz]

I think both Keegan and Shearer agree'd they could not work together as Manager and No.2, its one or the other I am afriad.

 

They'd have no choice if their hybrid mind inhabited the same physical body.

[Optimistic Nut]

I think both Keegan and Shearer agree'd they could not work together as Manager and No.2, its one or the other I am afriad.

 

Keegan's tried both ends of this system, and it's failed both times. At Fulham Wilkins left because he felt undermined by Keegan, and as manager Keegan left because those above him shat on him.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

KK's successful claim of constructive dismissal and the findings within has proved once and for all that he wasn't motivated by money (regardless of the £25m figure) nor that he had somehow used the undermining of his authority as an opportunity to walk away (one of the many claims levelled against him).

 

It would be a shame if some fans allowed their disappointment at his walking away to cloud the reality of the situation he was faced with and of course to dent any good feelings towards the man. He stood up for our club's honour and his own in that courtroom against people who have tried their level best to ruin both.

 

By walking away he has opened the eyes of many to the ways of Ashley and co and what life under their ownership and management would be like. He basically exposed the sham that they are, their so-called system and their so-called plans for this club.

 

How the hell was KK supposed to work under a system that those who put the thing together and were charged with making it work couldn't even explain it to an independent panel?

 

How the hell was KK supposed to look fans in the eyes and talk about a good future when behind the scenes his ability to make that happen was being taken away from him or would be with every passing window or agent's call?

 

How the hell is a man renowned for honesty and integrity expected to work and therefore inadvertently approve of dishonest, scheming, lying and dodgy people and their equally dodgy deals?

 

I believe KK when he says he loves NUFC, I also believe him when he says this wasn't about money. This was about clearing his name and doing what was right for himself, the club and the fans.

 

I never expected anything less of the man. There is no way on earth KK would ever work with such idiots or be associated with such dodgy deals, he has too much self respect for that and too much respect for NUFC and the fans.

 

And for that I thank him. We all should. His second coming ended in tears but in years to come when Ashley and his cronies are long gone, we'll look back on the day KK walked away as the start of a new Newcastle United, I firmly believe that.

[nobby_solano]

it's a bit like the fascists, sacking the programme editor after it was pointed out in the legal papers that the club (dennis wise) had said keegan was in charge of transfers in the programme. ashley : 'we can't trust that programme fella again...'