Alan Shearer

[Guest]

Interesting but talking bollocks about relegation was always going to happen. 

[Superior Acuña]

Also he's saying Bobby wanted to sell him too? I've heard that, but wasn't that years later when he was getting on? Doesn't really seem relevant to that period, when Shearer was in his prime and would be banging them in for next few years.

[Mikky]

18 minutes ago, 80 said:

 

Thought this was interesting, with three of our favourite people. Take it for what it's worth as it totally avoids certain subjects, like Rob Lee's treatment, and essentially makes up others e.g. the relevancy of our relegation a decade later.

 

But still, interesting to hear his take on things including Gary Speed.

We had 4 of the best years after he left

[Vinny Green Balls]

4 minutes ago, Mikky said:

We had 4 of the best years after he left

I mean, he scored 30 goals and had 13 assists in all competitions that same season when Gullitt left. Those stats are hard ot avoid.

[80]

6 minutes ago, Superior Acuña said:

Also he's saying Bobby wanted to sell him too? I've heard that, but wasn't that years later when he was getting on? Doesn't really seem relevant to that period, when Shearer was in his prime and would be banging them in for next few years.

Yes, what came more immediately was Robson coaching Shearer on his game to help him make the best of what he still had post-ACL, using his strength and nous more than bursts of pace. Something Gullit patently didn't. Successfully, at any rate.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Vinny Green Balls said:

I mean, he scored 30 goals and had 13 assists in all competitions that same season when Gullitt left. Those stats are hard ot avoid.

 

He scored 14 and got 5 assists after Gullit took over in 27 games in the 98/99 season too. 

[Geordie Ahmed]

I don't mind Gullit so much, actually admire that he walked away without taking a penny but that clip is annoying as he talks a bit of shite

 

 

[TheBrownBottle]

There’s a little bit of rose-tinted glasses from all parties on the Gullit-Shearer issue.  I can remember The Mag’s printed opinions, the callers to radio stations and conversations in the pub before and after games.  It was the Sunderland game that turned absolutely everyone against Gullit on the Shearer issue - before that, there were plenty who thought he had a point re Shearer’s performances.  
 

That Shearer continued scoring goals is a testament to his character and ability, but the Shearer of August ‘99 was very different to the one we’d signed in August ‘96.   There were plenty of solid rumours in the first year or so of Robson if Shearer being sold to Liverpool and later Villa. 

[Astroblack]

Relegation was always going to happen? Yeah, 11 years after you left with multiple European placements in between. Hate how no one remembers the SBR years. Like we went from “The Entertainers” to “Ashley FC” overnight. 

[sushimonster85]

12 hours ago, Superior Acuña said:

Also he's saying Bobby wanted to sell him too? I've heard that, but wasn't that years later when he was getting on? Doesn't really seem relevant to that period, when Shearer was in his prime and would be banging them in for next few years.

 

Yeah, there were whispers about this at the time. I'm sure it was the season before Bobby ended up going himself. Want to say Celtic were the team being mentioned. 

[PCW1983]

7 minutes ago, sushimonster85 said:

 

Yeah, there were whispers about this at the time. I'm sure it was the season before Bobby ended up going himself. Want to say Celtic were the team being mentioned. 

Wasn’t it Liverpool, Bobby wanted to replace Shearer with Emile Mpenza….can’t remember the source. 

[Kid Icarus]

Gullit strikes me as one of those ex-player managers who suffered from not being able to comprehend how players couldn't do the things he found simple. Steve Howey said as much in his Under the Cosh interview. 

[Sempiternal]

He did do the honourable thing and resign, which I respect and is super rare in football. 

[Guest]

33 minutes ago, PCW1983 said:

Wasn’t it Liverpool, Bobby wanted to replace Shearer with Emile Mpenza….can’t remember the source. 

 

Bobby's autobiography I think.

[Conjo]

Liverpool were close to signing Shearer for £5m summer 2004 I think it was, when SBR signed Kluivert as he saw it was time to move on if we wanted to improve...........5 years after Gullit benched him against Sunderland  Hardly a good argument from Gullit.

[TRon]

I always thought Gullitt just had a totally different way of seeing football from the rest of us, have to remember he was part of a great Milan team which played fantastic football, and he was part of a pretty good Holland side as well. There was all the talk about sexy football at Chelsea, and when he tried to bring that here, we just didn't have those type of players. He didn't rate Shearer despite his fantastic record of goals, but he would probably have loved someone like Isak with his pace and movement. Shearer was more the old fashioned striker who relied more on power and finishing.

[sushimonster85]

34 minutes ago, Conjo said:

Liverpool were close to signing Shearer for £5m summer 2004 I think it was, when SBR signed Kluivert as he saw it was time to move on if we wanted to improve...........5 years after Gullit benched him against Sunderland  Hardly a good argument from Gullit.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love Alan Shearer, but there were times that season where we had Shearer, Kluivert & Bellamy where it seemed like Shearer may be the odd one out. Remember Kluivert and Bellamy playing pretty well together the few times they did. Seem to remember them doing really well away at Palace. Not saying Kluivert was definitely the one to replace Shearer, as he wasn't exactly young either, & definitely had long spells where he didn't fancy it, but it certainly made the point that maybe it was getting time for phasing Shearer into being more of a bench option. 

[The College Dropout]

Love Big Al. But he stayed on at least a season too long.

 

 

[Conjo]

25 minutes ago, sushimonster85 said:

 

Don't get me wrong, I love Alan Shearer, but there were times that season where we had Shearer, Kluivert & Bellamy where it seemed like Shearer may be the odd one out. Remember Kluivert and Bellamy playing pretty well together the few times they did. Seem to remember them doing really well away at Palace. Not saying Kluivert was definitely the one to replace Shearer, as he wasn't exactly young either, & definitely had long spells where he didn't fancy it, but it certainly made the point that maybe it was getting time for phasing Shearer into being more of a bench option. 

 

Nothing to misinterpret there. I remember at the time it was painfully obvious that Bellamy & Kluivert should be our starting strikers but Shearer got too many starts on account of being Shearer. In retrospect it was probably worth it for the record considering how things turned out later anyway but at the time it was to the detriment of our team and results.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Love Big Al. But he stayed on at least a season too long.

 

 

 

Tbh I'm pleased he did. We've had bugger all to cling on to since then (we still finished 7th that year) so seeing a club record broken by a legend was one of the few good things over the last 18 years.

[80]

Seems totally upside down to me. Maybe we'd have had more to cheer if we hadn't dedicated the club to that ambition for his last couple of years? It set us back when we could have been trying to move forwards from a much stronger position.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, 80 said:

Seems totally upside down to me. Maybe we'd have had more to cheer if we hadn't dedicated the club to that ambition for his last couple of years? It set us back when we could have been trying to move forwards from a much stronger position.

 

Set us back from what? Ashley was here a year later so nothing would have improved. We finished 4th, 3rd, 5th and 7th in 4 of his last 5 years. Once he got to 2005 which is what TCD was talking about, I'm pleased he hung around for the record.

 

 

Edited March 15, 2023 by Optimistic Nut

[80]

40 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

Set us back from what? Ashley was here a year later so nothing would have improved. We finished 4th, 3rd, 5th and 7th in 4 of his last 5 years. Once he got to 2005 which is what TCD was talking about, I'm pleased he clung around for the record.

Well, he said at least a year, to be fair to TCD. And I was talking 2004. Set us back from trying to progress as a club and keep a vibrant strikeforce while we were still a dynamic force in English and European football. Rather than turning into a one player cult that lost its one player to age and became increasingly financially unattractive to it's owners so they ditched it when a dodgy barrow boy with cash came along?

 

I suspect Ashley worked out we were easy marks for a reign like his based on things like us happily fading the club away for the sake of a goalscorer's personal record. Hence the idea of hiring Keegan for perpetually happy headlines with a view to screwing us while were in a daze. The Halls and Shepherds taught him we were dupes, basically.

 

If Shearer had gone in 2004, there might never have been a Souness and Owen, nevermind Ashley three years later, so I think that has to have been worth exploring. If I remember rightly, the talk was Liverpool were offering £7m at the time. It would have been pretty cool to have set them back instead.

 

 

Edited March 15, 2023 by 80

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I can’t remember it clearly, but was the Gullit sacking just about dropping Shearer? 
 

Surely if he’d dropped Shearer but continued to get great results… no worries. 

[80]

4 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

I can’t remember it clearly, but was the Gullit sacking just about dropping Shearer? 
 

Surely if he’d dropped Shearer but continued to get great results… no worries. 

No, things were pretty dire under him. He'd already gone out of his way humiliate Rob Lee and not give him a squad number, for example. We were second bottom of the league.

 

 

Edited March 15, 2023 by 80