Denis Cassidy Book **Contains Shepherd**

[Thespence]

Gawd, I swear Keegan fans are the touchiest bunch in the world. If it even looks like someone might be thinking of venturing the mildest criticism of their idol, they're out in force, picketing threads and shouting self-righteously through tinny megaphones.

 

It's very hard to resist winding them up, but there's no sport in it really. Too easy.

 

Almost predictable isn't it?

 

I agree Ozzie & Cronky are.

[James]

The book ends with an open letter to Mike Ashley.

 

What does that say ?

 

I don't know. My post was a sumarry of what was in the Chronicle and the Journal.

[Guest]

 

About 8.

 

It was exactly 8 and it was less than the previous 2 seasons when we finished higher.  8 defeats is the best we've had in the Premiership and it equalled the two seasons we finished 2nd, it wasn't all doom and gloom.

 

We also only won 2 away, which we equalled in our relegation season, and got more points 2 seasons later with Souness/Roeder in charge, so stats can be used to back either argument, but nobody can tell me we weren't on the decline already during that season.

[madras]

thats the difference between looking at bare results and performances, we went massivly backwards that season and my hopes werent high for the following season. not for the first time i'll compare it sunderlands two 7th place finishes. many of their fans could see the difference and what was needed. fortunatly for us murray didn't.

 

Give over man, would you moan if we won the league with 80 points because it would be better if we had 85 points?  The season is relative and relative to every other team in the Premiership, we were the 5th best (ouch).

its not points its performances as we all know you can get away with poor performances so long before it catches up on you (like seemed to be happening to us,re the start of robsons final spell and sunderlands), would you say in general the on field performnaces were headed backwards that season ?

[Mick]

 

We also only won 2 away, which we equalled in our relegation season, and got more points 2 seasons later with Souness/Roeder in charge, so stats can be used to back either argument, but nobody can tell me we weren't on the decline already during that season.

 

You may see a decline, I saw an adjustment to the way we were playing which didn't quite work.  Likke I said earlier, everything is relative and we finished 5th and had something to work with.

[madras]

 

We also only won 2 away, which we equalled in our relegation season, and got more points 2 seasons later with Souness/Roeder in charge, so stats can be used to back either argument, but nobody can tell me we weren't on the decline already during that season.

 

You may see a decline, I saw an adjustment to the way we were playing which didn't quite work.  Likke I said earlier, everything is relative and we finished 5th and had something to work with.

i didnt see it that way, i saw it as a very similar decline to that, i'll say it again, of sunderland not so long before.

[Mick]

its not points its performances as we all know you can get away with poor performances so long before it catches up on you (like seemed to be happening to us,re the start of robsons final spell and sunderlands), would you say in general the on field performnaces were headed backwards that season ?

 

We weren't as fluent going forwards but we were more solid at the back.  We were let down by a poor start, just like we were when we finished 3rd and 4th.  I have no reason why we seemed to be slow starters but that let us down badly, the season we finished 5th wasn't helped by our end of season either when we didn't pick up enough points.  Our last 7 games brought us 7 points and that might have been due to our UEFA Cup run catching up with us.

[Mick]

i didnt see it that way, i saw it as a very similar decline to that, i'll say it again, of sunderland not so long before.

 

Sunderland weren't playing in the UEFA, I don't see anything similar in our situation to that of the mackems.

[madras]

i didnt see it that way, i saw it as a very similar decline to that, i'll say it again, of sunderland not so long before.

 

Sunderland weren't playing in the UEFA, I don't see anythiing similar in our situation to that of the mackems.

the obvious downward trend of the performances.

[madras]

also it was my last season of going to away games regularly. the ammount of games we went ahead in but didn't win was unreal (more than anyone else in the league iirc) and many times away from home after leading we were clinging on for a point near the end. the way we started the following season came as no surprise to many.

[Mick]

also it was my last season of going to away games regularly. the ammount of games we went ahead in but didn't win was unreal (more than anyone else in the league iirc) and many times away from home after leading we were clinging on for a point near the end. the way we started the following season came as no surprise to many.

 

We needed something extra to keep on top of games and we seemed unable to make the most of it when we were leading.  I would guess that our most regular scoreline was 1-1.

[Cronky]

Gawd, I swear Keegan fans are the touchiest bunch in the world. If it even looks like someone might be thinking of venturing the mildest criticism of their idol, they're out in force, picketing threads and shouting self-righteously through tinny megaphones.

 

It's very hard to resist winding them up, but there's no sport in it really. Too easy.

 

Almost predictable isn't it?

 

I agree Ozzie & Cronky are.

 

There have been some interesting responses here. Gimp asked a 'genuine question' about how Keegan's critics compare him to Robson's situation. I gave an entirely factual response - no opinion offered at all - and I seem to be causing some annoyance.

 

The fact is that when the basic details of Keegan's behaviour are presented, it doesn't look good.

[cp40]

Gawd, I swear Keegan fans are the touchiest bunch in the world. If it even looks like someone might be thinking of venturing the mildest criticism of their idol, they're out in force, picketing threads and shouting self-righteously through tinny megaphones.

 

It's very hard to resist winding them up, but there's no sport in it really. Too easy.

 

 

FUCK OFF

 

:angry:

[quayside]

Gawd, I swear Keegan fans are the touchiest bunch in the world. If it even looks like someone might be thinking of venturing the mildest criticism of their idol, they're out in force, picketing threads and shouting self-righteously through tinny megaphones.

 

It's very hard to resist winding them up, but there's no sport in it really. Too easy.

 

Almost predictable isn't it?

 

I agree Ozzie & Cronky are.

 

There have been some interesting responses here. Gimp asked a 'genuine question' about how Keegan's critics compare him to Robson's situation. I gave an entirely factual response - no opinion offered at all - and I seem to be causing some annoyance.

 

The fact is that when the basic details of Keegan's behaviour are presented, it doesn't look good.

 

Well I think Keegan's appointment was Ashley's biggest mistake, which he compounded by trying to put him under Dennis Wise etc etc.....

 

BUT I suspect Keegan probably had a bit more than a dubious Latin American loan signing to contend with. I suspect Keegan's lawyers hung a good chunk of his case on the Nacho Gonzalez loan because the evidence of "intervention" was easy to prove and probably undeniable. Their job was to win and they went with the area where they knew they could make their case. However I think there was probably a lot more that happened in that transfer window and I would bet that Milner's transfer and the use of the funds was the most significant factor behind Keegan's walkout.       

[NG32]

Gawd, I swear Keegan fans are the touchiest bunch in the world. If it even looks like someone might be thinking of venturing the mildest criticism of their idol, they're out in force, picketing threads and shouting self-righteously through tinny megaphones.

 

It's very hard to resist winding them up, but there's no sport in it really. Too easy.

 

I can feel your anger....

 

http://www.creativescreenwriting.com/csdaily/csdart/images/2004-08-August/Star%20Wars%20-%20Return%20of%20the%20Jedi%20-%20You%20don%27t%20know%20the%20power%20(300w).jpg

 

Keegan quit something something

 

Keegan let us down something something

 

Keegan blew a 12 point lead something something

 

Keegan is a serial quietter something something

 

If only his fans could follow suit.

 

[Guest BlacknWhiteArmy]

Gawd, I swear Keegan fans are the touchiest bunch in the world. If it even looks like someone might be thinking of venturing the mildest criticism of their idol, they're out in force, picketing threads and shouting self-righteously through tinny megaphones.

 

It's very hard to resist winding them up, but there's no sport in it really. Too easy.

 

 

f*** OFF

 

:angry:

 

You're not making a very good case for yourself are ya?

[cp40]

[Ronaldo]

Robson states in his book that he never had an ounce of trouble from Lee Bowyer, sounds like an absolute load of fabricated nonsense to me.

 

But it's accepted knowledge that he did have some troubles with Dyer and Bellamy which means it's not all fabricated nonsense, or perhaps not nonsense at all, maybe it just never made it into Robson's book at the time because he'd forgotten about it, forgiven it, was too much of a gentleman etc.

 

He states twice that Bowyer kept his nose clean and didn't give him a moment of trouble.

[M4]

 

About 8.

 

It was exactly 8 and it was less than the previous 2 seasons when we finished higher.  8 defeats is the best we've had in the Premiership and it equalled the two seasons we finished 2nd, it wasn't all doom and gloom.

 

We also only won 2 away, which we equalled in our relegation season, and got more points 2 seasons later with Souness/Roeder in charge, so stats can be used to back either argument, but nobody can tell me we weren't on the decline already during that season.

 

2003/04 always sticks in my mind as one of the most frustrating seasons, even more so than ones that have followed. Obviously we'd kill for 5th in the League and UEFA cup semis now, but there was something about how we played that had just died from the previous year.

[timnufc22]

Gawd, I swear Keegan fans are the touchiest bunch in the world. If it even looks like someone might be thinking of venturing the mildest criticism of their idol, they're out in force, picketing threads and shouting self-righteously through tinny megaphones.

 

It's very hard to resist winding them up, but there's no sport in it really. Too easy.

 

Almost predictable isn't it?

 

I agree Ozzie & Cronky are.

 

There have been some interesting responses here. Gimp asked a 'genuine question' about how Keegan's critics compare him to Robson's situation. I gave an entirely factual response - no opinion offered at all - and I seem to be causing some annoyance.

 

The fact is that when the basic details of Keegan's behaviour are presented, it doesn't look good.

 

Another fact is that Wise rang up Keegan and said "I've got a very good player for you". Then Wise later said to Keegan he'd actually never seen him play... which was after he told Keegan to look at Gonzalez on Youtube when Keegan didnt like the look of Gonzalez credentials. What sort of treatment is that?  Its not just a simple disagreement over a loan signing, which looks nice and innocent... but the DOF lying to the manager, showing a total lack of resprect and breaking any trust.

 

Another fact, is that had Keegan stayed on the basis of Llambias' letter sent to him - "It will continue to be the position that no player will be bought for the first team without your approval, save of course for commercial deals which remain within the sole discrection of the Board." - then they could have brought in any player without his agreement and have it classed as a commercial signing. And Keegan wouldnt have been able to complain or leave afterwards referencing board interference as he'd have agreed to Llambias' terms in that letter - terms which wernt agreed on when he joined.

 

Other witnesses at the tribunal claimed Dennis Wise was not prepared to accepted that Keegan had the final say. Total mess man.

 

And can I ask where these young south american players are? That deal was really 100% legit wasnt it?

 

The treatment was totally shabby, and more than just a simple disagreement.  No-one claims Keegan is perfect, but  I dont understand why a Newcastle fan would think this treatment didnt matter, and say 'it dosent look good on Keegan' when reading what happened. The mistake imo wasnt appointing him, the mistake was to treat him like the way they did and push him into a corner afterwards!

[Guest malandro]

Gawd, I swear Keegan fans are the touchiest bunch in the world. If it even looks like someone might be thinking of venturing the mildest criticism of their idol, they're out in force, picketing threads and shouting self-righteously through tinny megaphones.

 

It's very hard to resist winding them up, but there's no sport in it really. Too easy.

 

Almost predictable isn't it?

 

I agree Ozzie & Cronky are.

 

There have been some interesting responses here. Gimp asked a 'genuine question' about how Keegan's critics compare him to Robson's situation. I gave an entirely factual response - no opinion offered at all - and I seem to be causing some annoyance.

 

The fact is that when the basic details of Keegan's behaviour are presented, it doesn't look good.

 

Another fact is that Wise rang up Keegan and said "I've got a very good player for you". Then Wise later said to Keegan he'd actually never seen him play... which was after he told Keegan to look at Gonzalez on Youtube when Keegan didnt like the look of Gonzalez credentials. What sort of treatment is that?  Its not just a simple disagreement over a loan signing, which looks nice and innocent... but the DOF lying to the manager, showing a total lack of resprect and breaking any trust.

 

Another fact, is that had Keegan stayed on the basis of Llambias' letter sent to him - "It will continue to be the position that no player will be bought for the first team without your approval, save of course for commercial deals which remain within the sole discrection of the Board." - then they could have brought in any player without his agreement and have it classed as a commercial signing. And Keegan wouldnt have been able to complain or leave afterwards referencing board interference as he'd have agreed to Llambias' terms in that letter - terms which wernt agreed on when he joined.

 

Other witnesses at the tribunal claimed Dennis Wise was not prepared to accepted that Keegan had the final say. Total mess man.

 

And can I ask where these young south american players are? That deal was really 100% legit wasnt it?

 

The treatment was totally shabby, and more than just a simple disagreement.  No-one claims Keegan is perfect, but  I dont understand why a Newcastle fan would think this treatment didnt matter, and say 'it dosent look good on Keegan' when reading what happened. The mistake imo wasnt appointing him, the mistake was to treat him like the way they did and push him into a corner afterwards!

It took a long time for the truth to out (and there may yet be more to come) but when it did it clearly showed KK had been badly treated. The problem is by the time the tribunal arrived at a verdict a lot of supporters had committed themselves to blaming Keegan and can’t admit they got it wrong.

[M4]

It took a long time for the truth to out (and there may yet be more to come) but when it did it clearly showed KK had been badly treated. The problem is by the time the tribunal arrived at a verdict a lot of supporters had committed themselves to blaming Keegan and can’t admit they got it wrong.

 

 

bullsheeeeet

[timnufc22]

Theres no doubt Robson was making mistakes that season, selling Solano, the handling of Jenas and the handling of Viana some of them imo. But at the same time, the amount of negativity towards the whole team in general was far too much imo. The hostile atmosphere at SJP towards our own players through-out that season was way over the top, and the Wolves game was such an over-reaction without any prespective. I dont think Shepherd & co would have been so eager to get rid of Robson had the support for him stayed more, even with some dissatisfaction at the same time, whihc like I said, was warranted too. But you'd really thought we'd got relegated or something, I think expectation went far too high... disapointment yes, but it was total implosion. Its obvious they didnt have any confidence in him going into the 04 season, the way Sheperd undermined him with his public statements was disgraceful. He should have had his final season and left with a golden handshake imo.

[Guest malandro]

Good post, which will probably be ignored because the role of the support in SBR’s sacking isn’t something anyone who wants to admit to.

[Cronky]

Gawd, I swear Keegan fans are the touchiest bunch in the world. If it even looks like someone might be thinking of venturing the mildest criticism of their idol, they're out in force, picketing threads and shouting self-righteously through tinny megaphones.

 

It's very hard to resist winding them up, but there's no sport in it really. Too easy.

 

Almost predictable isn't it?

 

I agree Ozzie & Cronky are.

 

There have been some interesting responses here. Gimp asked a 'genuine question' about how Keegan's critics compare him to Robson's situation. I gave an entirely factual response - no opinion offered at all - and I seem to be causing some annoyance.

 

The fact is that when the basic details of Keegan's behaviour are presented, it doesn't look good.

 

Another fact is that Wise rang up Keegan and said "I've got a very good player for you". Then Wise later said to Keegan he'd actually never seen him play... which was after he told Keegan to look at Gonzalez on Youtube when Keegan didnt like the look of Gonzalez credentials. What sort of treatment is that?  Its not just a simple disagreement over a loan signing, which looks nice and innocent... but the DOF lying to the manager, showing a total lack of resprect and breaking any trust.

 

Another fact, is that had Keegan stayed on the basis of Llambias' letter sent to him - "It will continue to be the position that no player will be bought for the first team without your approval, save of course for commercial deals which remain within the sole discrection of the Board." - then they could have brought in any player without his agreement and have it classed as a commercial signing. And Keegan wouldnt have been able to complain or leave afterwards referencing board interference as he'd have agreed to Llambias' terms in that letter - terms which wernt agreed on when he joined.

 

Other witnesses at the tribunal claimed Dennis Wise was not prepared to accepted that Keegan had the final say. Total mess man.

 

And can I ask where these young south american players are? That deal was really 100% legit wasnt it?

 

The treatment was totally shabby, and more than just a simple disagreement.  No-one claims Keegan is perfect, but  I dont understand why a Newcastle fan would think this treatment didnt matter, and say 'it dosent look good on Keegan' when reading what happened. The mistake imo wasnt appointing him, the mistake was to treat him like the way they did and push him into a corner afterwards!

It took a long time for the truth to out (and there may yet be more to come) but when it did it clearly showed KK had been badly treated. The problem is by the time the tribunal arrived at a verdict a lot of supporters had committed themselves to blaming Keegan and can’t admit they got it wrong.

 

BUT I suspect Keegan probably had a bit more than a dubious Latin American loan signing to contend with. I suspect Keegan's lawyers hung a good chunk of his case on the Nacho Gonzalez loan because the evidence of "intervention" was easy to prove and probably undeniable. Their job was to win and they went with the area where they knew they could make their case. However I think there was probably a lot more that happened in that transfer window and I would bet that Milner's transfer and the use of the funds was the most significant factor behind Keegan's walkout.       

 

I'll try and be brief. The tribunal found that it was not a part of Keegan's contract that he had to accept Wise as the final decision-maker on transfers, and as such he was entitled to the £2 million specified in his contract. Gonzalez had been imposed on him, he was found right in law and there's no argument on that particular point.

 

What was outside the tribunal's brief - although they did mention it in passing - was the general problems in the working relationships between Keegan and the Ashley set-up that had existed for some time beforehand. There had been rumours about it early on, and it had become obvious after Keegan's outburst after the Chelsea game and the subsequent meeting in London. Keegan did not like working to a DOF, and he did not like working in the context of a limited transfer budget. He was unable to change those issues, and that, I believe is the fundamental background to his walkout.

 

Supporters of Keegan's actions often seem to speculate that there is more evidence of the Board's wrong-doing over transfers which for some reason was never cited at the tribunal by Keegan's lawyers and has never come to light since. That strikes me as a tacit admission that the Gonzalez affair, in itself, doesn't amount to a great deal. Well, on that I can agree. Only I don't think the hidden tensions were due to other players having been imposed on him. I just think Keegan didn't like working under the constraints, financial and procedural, that he was under, and was looking for a way out.

 

Preferably with far more money than he was entitled to, of course.