Jump to content
Newcastle-Online

Michael Owen (now retired)

Keefaz

by Keefaz
in Football

 Share

One a scale of 1-5, how excited are you for Michael Owen on TV every week?  

648 members have voted

  1. 1. One a scale of 1-5, how excited are you for Michael Owen on TV every week?

    • 1
      0
    • 2
      0
    • 3
      0
    • 4
      0
    • 5
      0
    • I envy the deaf.
      43

Recommended Posts

Baggio

Baggio

Posted
Posted

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/250504/Michael-Owen-out-of-Toon

 

Wonder who is telling the truth in this article.  Shepherd says we were paying him £90k a week whilst Llambias claims it was £133k a week.  Owen's salary was usually always quoted around £100k. 

 

while they're both nincompoops, i'd be more likely to believe shepherd. the fact that Llambias chose to preface the amount of pay with 'under kevin keegans management' should tell you all you need to know

 

Well Llambias has yet again broken the 11th commandment and criticised Keegan, but it's interesting to note Keegan's comments on the Owen situation from March 2008 -

.................................

 

I'm not here to defend Lambias but has it occurred to you two he may have been stating a fact? Owen could have been signed on an initial £90K a week with a year on year rise to take it up to £133K when Keegan was here.

 

I really can't see how anything Lambias has said this time is a slur on Keegan.

 

I wasn't doubting what Llambias was saying, and while including the 'Keegan' detail wasn't a 'slur', I think his reason for putting it in is more than just for stating a passing fact. I think he's irritated by the high esteem that Keegan and Shearer are held in by so many supporters, and he wanted to include a subtle reminder that Keegan was lobbying hard, in public and private, for Owen not to be sold and to be offered a new contract.

 

All perfectly true and, because I'm no fan of Keegan's, I've personally no problem with it. But Llambias would be better off keeping quiet because he's not going to win anybody round that way.

 

I don't think anyone can have much argument with this, there's no doubt that Keegan done enough public rallying to put pressure on the club to give Owen a new contract, if people wondered why the club didn't want to rush into giving him anything it looks like now we know.

 

It's also worth pointing out that while Owen had a great run of form towards the end of the season playing in the hole behind the 2 strikers, it was a formation that he went on to scrap in the last game of the season and went back to a conventional 4-4-2 which he stuck with through pre season and in the opening league and cup games.

 

As for his signing, I thought it was great at the time but looking back now it was always destined to fail as if he avoided injury he would have jumped ship at the first chance anyway.

 

Keegan didn't scrap the formation.  It was just that lanky fat aussie bastard got himself injured as usual.

 

So he was only going to use it when he had Viduka, Martins and Owen all fit at the same time?

 

Good job none of them were injury prone then. :lol: :fishing:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest neesy111

Guest neesy111

Posted
Posted

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/250504/Michael-Owen-out-of-Toon

 

Wonder who is telling the truth in this article.  Shepherd says we were paying him £90k a week whilst Llambias claims it was £133k a week.  Owen's salary was usually always quoted around £100k. 

 

while they're both nincompoops, i'd be more likely to believe shepherd. the fact that Llambias chose to preface the amount of pay with 'under kevin keegans management' should tell you all you need to know

 

Well Llambias has yet again broken the 11th commandment and criticised Keegan, but it's interesting to note Keegan's comments on the Owen situation from March 2008 -

.................................

 

I'm not here to defend Lambias but has it occurred to you two he may have been stating a fact? Owen could have been signed on an initial £90K a week with a year on year rise to take it up to £133K when Keegan was here.

 

I really can't see how anything Lambias has said this time is a slur on Keegan.

 

I wasn't doubting what Llambias was saying, and while including the 'Keegan' detail wasn't a 'slur', I think his reason for putting it in is more than just for stating a passing fact. I think he's irritated by the high esteem that Keegan and Shearer are held in by so many supporters, and he wanted to include a subtle reminder that Keegan was lobbying hard, in public and private, for Owen not to be sold and to be offered a new contract.

 

All perfectly true and, because I'm no fan of Keegan's, I've personally no problem with it. But Llambias would be better off keeping quiet because he's not going to win anybody round that way.

 

I don't think anyone can have much argument with this, there's no doubt that Keegan done enough public rallying to put pressure on the club to give Owen a new contract, if people wondered why the club didn't want to rush into giving him anything it looks like now we know.

 

It's also worth pointing out that while Owen had a great run of form towards the end of the season playing in the hole behind the 2 strikers, it was a formation that he went on to scrap in the last game of the season and went back to a conventional 4-4-2 which he stuck with through pre season and in the opening league and cup games.

 

As for his signing, I thought it was great at the time but looking back now it was always destined to fail as if he avoided injury he would have jumped ship at the first chance anyway.

 

Keegan didn't scrap the formation.  It was just that lanky fat aussie bastard got himself injured as usual.

 

So he was only going to use it when he had Viduka, Martins and Owen all fit at the same time?

 

Good job none of them were injury prone then. :lol: :fishing:

 

Who else was he going to use instead of the fat aussie, Shola who amazingly is less mobile than Viduka and Carroll was never ready for Premiership football then.  Maybe he could have used Alan Smith. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
wacko

wacko

Posted
Posted

One great thing about football is that every pair of teams have one thing in common. For example, despite my hatred of Liverpool, we share a wonderful dislike of Michael Owen. It's genuinely touching.

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
David28

David28

Posted
Posted

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/250504/Michael-Owen-out-of-Toon

 

Wonder who is telling the truth in this article.  Shepherd says we were paying him £90k a week whilst Llambias claims it was £133k a week.  Owen's salary was usually always quoted around £100k. 

 

while they're both nincompoops, i'd be more likely to believe shepherd. the fact that Llambias chose to preface the amount of pay with 'under kevin keegans management' should tell you all you need to know

 

Well Llambias has yet again broken the 11th commandment and criticised Keegan, but it's interesting to note Keegan's comments on the Owen situation from March 2008 -

.................................

 

I'm not here to defend Lambias but has it occurred to you two he may have been stating a fact? Owen could have been signed on an initial £90K a week with a year on year rise to take it up to £133K when Keegan was here.

 

I really can't see how anything Lambias has said this time is a slur on Keegan.

 

I wasn't doubting what Llambias was saying, and while including the 'Keegan' detail wasn't a 'slur', I think his reason for putting it in is more than just for stating a passing fact. I think he's irritated by the high esteem that Keegan and Shearer are held in by so many supporters, and he wanted to include a subtle reminder that Keegan was lobbying hard, in public and private, for Owen not to be sold and to be offered a new contract.

 

All perfectly true and, because I'm no fan of Keegan's, I've personally no problem with it. But Llambias would be better off keeping quiet because he's not going to win anybody round that way.

 

I don't think anyone can have much argument with this, there's no doubt that Keegan done enough public rallying to put pressure on the club to give Owen a new contract, if people wondered why the club didn't want to rush into giving him anything it looks like now we know.

 

It's also worth pointing out that while Owen had a great run of form towards the end of the season playing in the hole behind the 2 strikers, it was a formation that he went on to scrap in the last game of the season and went back to a conventional 4-4-2 which he stuck with through pre season and in the opening league and cup games.

 

As for his signing, I thought it was great at the time but looking back now it was always destined to fail as if he avoided injury he would have jumped ship at the first chance anyway.

 

Keegan didn't scrap the formation.  It was just that lanky fat aussie bastard got himself injured as usual.

 

So he was only going to use it when he had Viduka, Martins and Owen all fit at the same time?

 

Good job none of them were injury prone then. :lol: :fishing:

 

Who else was he going to use instead of the fat aussie, Shola who amazingly is less mobile than Viduka and Carroll was never ready for Premiership football then.  Maybe he could have used Alan Smith. :lol:

 

Which he even did against Chelsea (?) in one of the last matches in the 07/08 season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Geordiesned

Guest Geordiesned

Posted
Posted

@themichaelowen:

 

How bad is the tv tonight? Flicking through the channels with no success. Any ideas anyone?

Twitter for iPhone • 21/06/2011 20:16

 

Boring!

 

Is it wrong that I suggested he takes an overdose??

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pilko

Pilko

Posted
Posted

Tuesday's actually a really good day for telly as well, the clueless cunt.

 

Hindi Hen Do on BBC1, Lead Balloon on BBC2, Family Guy, Newsnight, all sorts!

 

He'll probably just flip over to attheraces and rub one out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Interpolic

Interpolic

Posted
Posted

Tuesday's actually a really good day for telly as well, the clueless cunt.

 

Hindi Hen Do on BBC1, Lead Balloon on BBC2, Family Guy, Newsnight, all sorts!

 

He'll probably just flip over to attheraces and rub one out.

 

Four Rooms, Luther, Geordie Shore, Angry Boys.  There's too much telly if anything.  What a cunt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pilko

Pilko

Posted
Posted

Can't forget Compete for the Meat.

 

I watched the first episode of that shit. 21 minutes of a self-professed 'pub quiz' format show, including a commercial break, and he hadn't even asked a fucking question.

Link to post
Share on other sites
wormy

wormy

Posted
Posted

Can't forget Compete for the Meat.

 

I watched the first episode of that shit. 21 minutes of a self-professed 'pub quiz' format show, including a commercial break, and he hadn't even asked a fucking question.

 

:lol: It's cringeworthy to fuck, no argument. I despised it first episode, grown quite fond of it though :blush: And when Zoe Salmon's legs are on screen I can't turn the fuck over. Fuck knows why she's had to degrade herself to this bullshit but God bless her for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...