In the mind of Shearer...

[LoveItIfWeBeatU]

^ That place is normally full of the My Brothers, girlfriends, dads, cousins friend who was in the RAF, his daughter met shearer and said he was a cunt.

 

Congratulating Julio Arca man, that would have been just after Shearer had smashed one in on the way to a 4-1 thumping in your own back yard then? 

Exactly. In a way it was very fitting that Shearer's last act of playing professional football involved sticking one in against those bastards at their own ground.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

The best times we ever had as a club were before Shearer arrived. The next best were under SBR who supposedly tried to flog him because of his pervasive influence. We ended up hiring Souness and flogging Bellamy instead.

 

He was getting in the way of progress towards the end of his career, but he still brought us some amazing memories and will forever be a legend.

 

[Guest KeithKettleborough]

A Geordie legend, national hero at times and generally great ambassador football wise for the Toon up til a year before he retired. Without his presence it is unlikely that we would have achieved so much during the Bobby era. Since then, at times a bit of an embarrassment in my view. From the rather struggling performances in his last season to the inept ones on Match of the Day, he has not done himself many favours apart from the obvious financial benefits.

 

His appearances on Match of The Day highlight to me why he would always struggle to be a decent manager. Dull with even the scripted humour proving a chore. How many times will he mention his receding hair?  It is not a joke any longer or ever was to be honest. Tonights "cool look" (agree he didn't quite fit in) didn't improve his standing and although the refusal to wear a Mackem top will go down well up here, I am sure others will view it as further proof that he is basically not that bright.

 

Good on the lad that he does a lot of charitable stuff but I hope that we never become that desperate or embedded in sentiment, to employ him as manager again. Sir Bobby knew we needed shot of him and it is a shame that Freddy stuck with Al instead of Sir Bobby. If he had we may not have gone through the disasters that transpired after that day. I thought it was time for Bobby to go but with hindsite and a little more information filtering down about that period, I wish he had stayed. Maybe not Shearers fault for the slide but it appears to me that it was that "conflict", that started the demise of the club.

[Superior Acuña]

.

Congratulating Julio Arca man, that would have been just after Shearer had smashed one in on the way to a 4-1 thumping in your own back yard then? 

 

I know, I don't get why they're happy about that.  Surely there was no more perfect end to Shearer's career than putting us 2-1 up by penalty, away at Sunderland, in front of the toon fans. It really couldn't have been better.

[merlin]

To be honest, the constant agonizing about characters like Shearer, SBR, KK etc., and whether each was right or wrong OR a bad influence, really sums up what is wrong with Newcastle United - namely, that it is NOT United either on or off the field and rarely has been since the Fairs Cup days(even before that there was aggro between sections of the board).

 

Although football is necessarily a game of opinions and always will be, there has been far too much dissent in the club for years and this, in my opinion, is why the club has failed to achieve what it should have done.

The situation is made far worse by the fact that the media have always been delighted to get easy stories about the club and the club has, in turn, made it easy for them by washing far too much dirty linen in public - this probably really started in earnest after Pop Robson's famous Press conference when he accused the club of a lack of professionalism and then the arrival of Malcolm Macdonald in a white RR after his signing almost a year later.

Joe Harvey ALMOST managed to create a good side capable of winning domestic trophies in 1973 but the loss of Tony Green and the unwillingness of the board to go that extra yard to sign players Harvey wanted(such as Andy Gray and Alan Hansen) stopped him from finishing the job...also, the players let the club down badly at Wembley in 1974 after all the hype preceding the Cup Final.

There were reputedly schisms in the dressing room between Supermac's acolytes and those of Bobby Moncur and whether these stories were true or not, the club started to go backwards and Harvey had to go in 1975. Lee came in and achieved a modicum of success by taking the club to the LCF in 1976, but left(for Everton) the following season after selling Macdonald but leading the club to a European challenging position.

 

We all know what happened after Dinnis took over with player-power - the club reached Europe then got relegated a year later....

 

Since then, a succession of managers have come and gone, many being unable to work with the Board, until the John Hall takeover - all the while, the club was slipping behind others, and we fans watched while clubs like Watford and Leicester won silverware.

 

Even after KK took over, there was controversy and problems off the field but he(and, to be fair) the board got the club into its best position for years...both on AND off the field, where a degree of unity among fans and officials prevailed.

 

To get to the point, the reason all this failed was, in my view, because we failed to win the League in 1996.

Had we done so, the signing of Shearer would not have been seen as such a surprise, or the reason for it being given as 'he decided to come home' ; this gave him special status in the eyes of many fans and even though his unfortunate injuries took the edge off his game, he was still seen as Mr NUFC by most people.

Had we won the league, his signing would have been simply that of a top player choosing to join what would have been the Best Club in England at that time.

His turning down Man U was great at the time for fans of NUFC but many felt that we 'owed' him for doing so. That view still prevails, and it is hard to argue against it since he lost many medals by joining us.

 

As to the SBR situation, he too was seen as a saviour because he joined us when the club was in danger of relegation and he sorted things out after a dire spell under Gullit ; people tend to forget that he turned us down after Sir John asked him to come in 1997 after KK left when he could have had access to a much better situation.

 

The fact that people are STILL arguing about the relative merits of the two men is just ridiculous - for what its worth, if SBR had come to me and said he wanted to sell Shearer for 5m at the time he supposedly did, I would have agreed had I been Chairman - PROVIDED he could convince me that he had a proper replacement lined up...that is the way all TOP clubs deal with their aging stars, and Liverpool did that, esp under Shankly, which is why they stayed at the top so long until Souness wrecked it.

No doubt Shepherd would have taken a different line.......

 

However, SBR was definitely at the end of the road as a Prem manager in 2003 - he should have joined the Board that summer and helped to recruit a successor - maybe even Mourinho.

 

UNTIL there is unity of purpose among both fans and club, and PROFESSIONALISM on and off the field, the club will always struggle to punch its weight - no matter WHO is in charge.

Shearer was a great CF when he joined us, the best in Europe but his injuries never allowed him to make the contribution he should have done ; we had to do without him for months in his first season and then thereafter. He is still human and should have quit when he was past it - as should SBR and both WOULD have had to do so if the club was being run properly.

[MW]

Good post that

[Cronky]

There certainly needs to be unity between players, manager and owner for a club to succeed. In the later stages of Sir Bob's time here that unity was fractured and for me the crucial point was when Robson proposed to accept Liverpool's offer for Shearer and Shepherd over ruled him. The reason given was that the fans would not accept it, but I actually think Shepherd was one of those fans and was as starry eyed about the Geordie legend as anyone else.

 

As a professional, it's no surprise that Sir Bob noticed the early signs of Shearer's decline that bit earlier than others, but the main point is that he was responsible for that kind of footballing judgment and Shepherd's job was to look after the financial side. He shouldn't have been over-ruled. Contrast that when Sir John backed Keegan's decision to sell Andy Cole, despite his misgivings.

 

We come back to this not just because it was the turning point, but because there are lessons to be learned. Putting particular people on pedastals can cloud the judgement, and our club has a tendency to go down that route.

[Hughesy]

I can't now remember when Robson wanted to sell Shearer, but bearing in mind Shearer scored 22 league goals in 37 league games in 2003/04, I would suggest that any reports of his demise at this point were somewhat wrong.

 

Bearing in mind, we had no-one to replace within the club (no... Kluivert should not have been playing instead of Shearer...), it would have been madness to have sold Shearer then.

[merlin]

I can't now remember when Robson wanted to sell Shearer, but bearing in mind Shearer scored 22 league goals in 37 league games in 2003/04, I would suggest that any reports of his demise at this point were somewhat wrong.

 

Bearing in mind, we had no-one to replace within the club (no... Kluivert should not have been playing instead of Shearer...), it would have been madness to have sold Shearer then.

 

As I said, I would have agreed provided SBR had a genuinely decent replacement lined up - Kluivert would NOT have counted as that replacement.

[M4]

At the time I understood the argument that Shearer was maybe in the way during his last 18 months, it certainly had some weight.

 

But with the hindsight of the last couple of seasons with what players like Owen, Martins, Viduka contributed I feel Shearer was still just as good an option if not even better.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

At the time I understood the argument that Shearer was maybe in the way during his last 18 months, it certainly had some weight.

 

But with the hindsight of the last couple of seasons with what players like Owen, Martins, Viduka contributed I feel Shearer was still just as good an option if not even better.

 

Yes, but four wrongs don't make a right!

[Cronky]

I can't now remember when Robson wanted to sell Shearer, but bearing in mind Shearer scored 22 league goals in 37 league games in 2003/04, I would suggest that any reports of his demise at this point were somewhat wrong.

 

Bearing in mind, we had no-one to replace within the club (no... Kluivert should not have been playing instead of Shearer...), it would have been madness to have sold Shearer then.

 

As I said, I would have agreed provided SBR had a genuinely decent replacement lined up - Kluivert would NOT have counted as that replacement.

 

Whatever your opinion on the footballing side of things, it was Robson's call to make. When a Chairman over-rules his manager on a football matter because of what the fans might think, the club is clearly not being run in the right way. That was the start of the slippery slope.

 

From Shepherd's point of view, I think he was right in anticipating that there would be a backlash from most fans, but it's part of his job to back his manager when he comes under fire. We've had plenty of talk over the last 2 years about 'fan power' and the supposed desirability of getting some representation in the running of the club. Trouble is, the general collective opinion of the fans is sometimes dead wrong, and the position of the professionals who are going to be held responsible for results on the pitch has to be respected.

[Guest malandro]

The best times we ever had as a club were before Shearer arrived. The next best were under SBR who supposedly tried to flog him because of his pervasive influence. We ended up hiring Souness and flogging Bellamy instead.

 

He was getting in the way of progress towards the end of his career, but he still brought us some amazing memories and will forever be a legend.

 

How does that work then?

[Guest Phil K]

Alan, can you tell us a joke? Yeah, your questions.

 

 

Usual pompous Guardian prick.

No more, no less.

[Tooj]

SBR wanted to replace Shearer with Emile Mpenza.....

[merlin]

I can't now remember when Robson wanted to sell Shearer, but bearing in mind Shearer scored 22 league goals in 37 league games in 2003/04, I would suggest that any reports of his demise at this point were somewhat wrong.

 

Bearing in mind, we had no-one to replace within the club (no... Kluivert should not have been playing instead of Shearer...), it would have been madness to have sold Shearer then.

 

As I said, I would have agreed provided SBR had a genuinely decent replacement lined up - Kluivert would NOT have counted as that replacement.

 

Whatever your opinion on the footballing side of things, it was Robson's call to make. When a Chairman over-rules his manager on a football matter because of what the fans might think, the club is clearly not being run in the right way. That was the start of the slippery slope.

 

From Shepherd's point of view, I think he was right in anticipating that there would be a backlash from most fans, but it's part of his job to back his manager when he comes under fire. We've had plenty of talk over the last 2 years about 'fan power' and the supposed desirability of getting some representation in the running of the club. Trouble is, the general collective opinion of the fans is sometimes dead wrong, and the position of the professionals who are going to be held responsible for results on the pitch has to be respected.

 

Agree with this, but replacing Shearer with a player who was seen as second rate or risky would not be an

acceptable scenario ; had SBR come along with Eto or a combination of players who would do the job, then fine.