We always back our managers at Newcastle....

[James]

Just shortened the link there XVentura.

 

That link is well fucking annoying, so thanks Davey.

 

What do you think about my question and HTL's questions? It would be interesting for you to enter this in-depth debate.

[Howaythelads]

Howaythelads, I dont think that some of your responses have been very appropriate, in fact, they have been quite childish.

 

Why cant you answer that lads question about the warehouse, you do seem to be conveniently ignoring it?

 

Inappropriate? Childish? That's rich, given what I'm replying to.

 

I'd say it sounds like you're one of those who takes the view something they don't agree with is "inappropriate". A common trait on this forum, it must be said.

 

What do you want me to say in response to the kids question that is totally unrelated to football? I couldn't give a toss about any warehouse, I couldn't give a toss about what Fred has said in a brothel. I don't care that Geordie women are dogs and whatever it is he said about Shearer. I couldn't give a toss about dividends as long as money is made available to the manager to strengthen the team, which is what this Board has consistently done and which may not happen under another Board. You can believe the opposite if you like.

 

That's my answer to the question.

 

Perhaps you and your chum can now answer some of mine? Like why do you think it's guaranteed another Board will appoint the right manager, will provide as much funding for players, etc etc. They're all there in the thread but have been *childishly* ignored so far.

 

How can you not care about a chairman giving our own money to his other family business when we are paying for it to be spent on the team?

 

In response to your question - those that have taken over at other clubs haven't done badly have they? Fact is, only good businessmen can afford to take control of a Premiership club, and that can only be a good thing for the football club. Therefore, any replacement coming in is bound to be better.

 

We aren't paying for money to later be spent on the team, we're paying to watch the team that is put out on a match day, whatever that team may be. The Board does not HAVE to spend huge sums of money on players.

 

I've nothing to say in response to your second paragraph, it's one of the most naive things I've ever read, tbh.

[Dave]

Just shortened the link there XVentura.

 

That link is well fucking annoying, so thanks Davey.

 

What do you think about my question and HTL's questions? It would be interesting for you to enter this in-depth debate.

 

I've made my opinions known in the past, and am fully aware of HTL's stance. We disagree, and it'll just end up with more arguing.

 

Therefore I don't wish to participate, thanks.

[Howaythelads]

Even more tripe highlighted for you in bold. As I said, there has never been any suggestion that Fred funds the club from his own pocket. None at all.  You're clearly not in a position to be aware of that fact, christ knows where you're getting this load of shite from.

 

Maybe this load of shite came from Shepherd himself?

 

"I can only do my best here with the tools I've got, which in my opinion are more than enough to get this football club into Europe every season and something we now expect.

 

Yes, there are always going to be setbacks. But if there is somebody out there who can do better than me and who would be willing to invest millions into the club, then fine.

 

Every penny I have had from this club I have reinvested back into the club. I have never sold a single share since I came to the club and the money I have had has been reinvested in the way of buying shares.

 

When people say that I have taken money out of the club, all I have done is to put the money back in by buying shares. Nobody can accuse me of taking money out of this football club and not reinvesting it."

 

Source:  Dead long link

 

 

Err, aye?

 

Aye aye  bluewink.gif

 

HTL in the familiar position of being owned.

 

You're obviously too intelligent for me, mate. I haven't a clue what you're babbling about.

 

As usual, I'll abuse you and offer nothing to the debate bluebigrazz.gif

 

An internet tough guy, you appear in the thread posting personal abuse. Well done.

 

Your contribution is as always, a joy and informative to read.

[Taylor Swift]

Even more tripe highlighted for you in bold. As I said, there has never been any suggestion that Fred funds the club from his own pocket. None at all.  You're clearly not in a position to be aware of that fact, christ knows where you're getting this load of shite from.

 

Maybe this load of shite came from Shepherd himself?

 

"I can only do my best here with the tools I've got, which in my opinion are more than enough to get this football club into Europe every season and something we now expect.

 

Yes, there are always going to be setbacks. But if there is somebody out there who can do better than me and who would be willing to invest millions into the club, then fine.

 

Every penny I have had from this club I have reinvested back into the club. I have never sold a single share since I came to the club and the money I have had has been reinvested in the way of buying shares.

 

When people say that I have taken money out of the club, all I have done is to put the money back in by buying shares. Nobody can accuse me of taking money out of this football club and not reinvesting it."

 

Source:  Dead long link

 

 

Err, aye?

 

Aye aye  bluewink.gif

 

HTL in the familiar position of being owned.

 

You're obviously too intelligent for me, mate. I haven't a clue what you're babbling about.

 

As usual, I'll abuse you and offer nothing to the debate bluebigrazz.gif

 

An internet tough guy, you appear in the thread posting personal abuse. Well done.

 

Your contribution is as always, a joy and informative to read.

 

Thanks. My pleasure mate.

[Taylor Swift]

Howaythelads, I dont think that some of your responses have been very appropriate, in fact, they have been quite childish.

 

Why cant you answer that lads question about the warehouse, you do seem to be conveniently ignoring it?

 

Inappropriate? Childish? That's rich, given what I'm replying to.

 

I'd say it sounds like you're one of those who takes the view something they don't agree with is "inappropriate". A common trait on this forum, it must be said.

 

What do you want me to say in response to the kids question that is totally unrelated to football? I couldn't give a toss about any warehouse, I couldn't give a toss about what Fred has said in a brothel. I don't care that Geordie women are dogs and whatever it is he said about Shearer. I couldn't give a toss about dividends as long as money is made available to the manager to strengthen the team, which is what this Board has consistently done and which may not happen under another Board. You can believe the opposite if you like.

 

That's my answer to the question.

 

Perhaps you and your chum can now answer some of mine? Like why do you think it's guaranteed another Board will appoint the right manager, will provide as much funding for players, etc etc. They're all there in the thread but have been *childishly* ignored so far.

 

How can you not care about a chairman giving our own money to his other family business when we are paying for it to be spent on the team?

 

In response to your question - those that have taken over at other clubs haven't done badly have they? Fact is, only good businessmen can afford to take control of a Premiership club, and that can only be a good thing for the football club. Therefore, any replacement coming in is bound to be better.

 

Going to have disagree vehemently with the last part of your paragraph. Any replacement that comes in is NOT bound to be better. If they know nothing about football (like Shepherd), then they'd be no better than him and probably worse because at least Shepherd tried to please the fans (seen by some of his reactionary moves) while the new bloke wouldn't have a clue what to do. And as of a year ago, many people (on this board as well) were saying that Shepherd was a good businessman and at least runs the financial side of the club well and that's why some of them were willing to stick it out with him in the hope that we get lucky with a manager. How times have changed eh?

[Howaythelads]

Even more tripe highlighted for you in bold. As I said, there has never been any suggestion that Fred funds the club from his own pocket. None at all.  You're clearly not in a position to be aware of that fact, christ knows where you're getting this load of shite from.

 

Maybe this load of shite came from Shepherd himself?

 

"I can only do my best here with the tools I've got, which in my opinion are more than enough to get this football club into Europe every season and something we now expect.

 

Yes, there are always going to be setbacks. But if there is somebody out there who can do better than me and who would be willing to invest millions into the club, then fine.

 

Every penny I have had from this club I have reinvested back into the club. I have never sold a single share since I came to the club and the money I have had has been reinvested in the way of buying shares.

 

When people say that I have taken money out of the club, all I have done is to put the money back in by buying shares. Nobody can accuse me of taking money out of this football club and not reinvesting it."

 

Source:  Dead long link

 

 

Err, aye?

 

Aye aye  bluewink.gif

 

HTL in the familiar position of being owned.

 

You're obviously too intelligent for me, mate. I haven't a clue what you're babbling about.

 

As usual, I'll abuse you and offer nothing to the debate bluebigrazz.gif

 

An internet tough guy, you appear in the thread posting personal abuse. Well done.

 

Your contribution is as always, a joy and informative to read.

 

Thanks. My pleasure mate.

 

Don't mention it.  Striikes me you must be grateful for the internet, like. Allows you to say stuff that you would otherwise never dream of.

[macbeth]

 

 

You can argue that the timing of changing managers has been flawed, but you'd be wrong. It's football and it IS different. I really don't think you understand it, hence your attempted point about changing managers. Other people use the same stick with which to beat the Board, highlighting the departure of Souness yet they never complain about Gullit leaving. Why is that, do you think?

 

I tried to avoid judging the managers.

 

The whole recruitment process, of the individual to be manager, your key appointment, has been flawed. Regardless of who has been appointed.

 

Glad you finally acknowledge the manager is the key.

 

Thanks for producinig those figures of how much money has been made available to the managers over the years. Great stuff.

 

the appointment of the manager is the chairman's key decision, above all others. He should manage it. If he has to lose a manager eh shoudl do it at the correct time, if he has to appoint a new one he should draw up his job spec, approach all those who fit his criteria, and then appoint the best fit.

 

There is no evidence that the current chairman has the skills to manage the process. He has demonstrably got it wrong too many times. The timing of the Robson dismissal was wrong. It was either too late, or too early depending on points of view, which ever it was not correct. I am not sure what criteria was used to pick Roeder. I see nothign on his CV pre-February 2006 that qualifies him for the job. Gullit was 'lost' at the wrong time, as was Dalglish. All of this points to a chairman not in control of the situation he is paid to be in control of.

 

The amount released to managers is shown at http://www.nufc-finances.org.uk/transfers2.htm

 

 

[macbeth]

And as of a year ago, many people (on this board as well) were saying that Shepherd was a good businessman and at least runs the financial side of the club well and that's why some of them were willing to stick it out with him in the hope that we get lucky with a manager. How times have changed eh?

 

I'd like to apologise for this happening. Many people have contacted me to say that before reading the excellent

www.nufc-finance.org.uk site they too thought Shepherd was a good businessman. Suddenly they saw that us having crowds of 10,000 more than say Liverpool made no difference, as the money from those 10,000 peopel attending went straight out of the club and never benefited the team at all.

[NE5]

 

 

You can argue that the timing of changing managers has been flawed, but you'd be wrong. It's football and it IS different. I really don't think you understand it, hence your attempted point about changing managers. Other people use the same stick with which to beat the Board, highlighting the departure of Souness yet they never complain about Gullit leaving. Why is that, do you think?

 

I tried to avoid judging the managers.

 

The whole recruitment process, of the individual to be manager, your key appointment, has been flawed. Regardless of who has been appointed.

 

Glad you finally acknowledge the manager is the key.

 

Thanks for producinig those figures of how much money has been made available to the managers over the years. Great stuff.

 

the appointment of the manager is the chairman's key decision, above all others. He should manage it. If he has to lose a manager eh shoudl do it at the correct time, if he has to appoint a new one he should draw up his job spec, approach all those who fit his criteria, and then appoint the best fit.

 

as easy as winning the lottery. Do you have a plan to find this weeks numbers 

 

There is no evidence that the current chairman has the skills to manage the process. He has demonstrably got it wrong too many times. The timing of the Robson dismissal was wrong. It was either too late, or too early depending on points of view, which ever it was not correct. I am not sure what criteria was used to pick Roeder. I see nothign on his CV pre-February 2006 that qualifies him for the job. Gullit was 'lost' at the wrong time, as was Dalglish. All of this points to a chairman not in control of the situation he is paid to be in control of.

 

When do you think we should have sacked Gullit ? And I would be grateful if you can point us to the next Alex Ferguson, as clearly everyone else has this man except us 

 

 

[Guest Village Idiot]

And as of a year ago, many people (on this board as well) were saying that Shepherd was a good businessman and at least runs the financial side of the club well and that's why some of them were willing to stick it out with him in the hope that we get lucky with a manager. How times have changed eh?

 

I'd like to apologise for this happening. Many people have contacted me to say that before reading the excellent

www.nufc-finance.org.uk site they too thought Shepherd was a good businessman. Suddenly they saw that us having crowds of 10,000 more than say Liverpool made no difference, as the money from those 10,000 peopel attending went straight out of the club and never benefited the team at all.

 

Just perused that link. Things that surprised me.

 

1) Your income is quite higher than I thought, so ultimately you have a good base. Looks like you could have hit a bit of ceiling though. How much money is expected from that new Sky deal?

2) Wages are just plain ridiculous. Our wage budget is 80m quid, and Newcastle's 56. Not so much higher, yet with it we pay the likes of Ronaldinho, Eto'o, Deco, Puyol, Iniesta, Messi...  while with it you are paying Carr, Butt, Luque, Duff, Owen (deserves it, but done fuck all for the club so far, are you paying him or is there some insurance?).

 

Really what puzzles me the most is your wage budget.

[Guest Village Idiot]

Just read the bit about dividends :shock:

 

From a neutral point of view, hang the board from the highest bridge in Newcastle. The way they are sucking your club dry is unforgivable. Our last board was absolutely incompetent an almost bankrupt us, but at least they weren't doing it with such premeditation :shock:

 

Not sure that consortium that wants to take you over would behave in another way though, that's the problem of being a PLC!

[Mick]

Even more tripe highlighted for you in bold. As I said, there has never been any suggestion that Fred funds the club from his own pocket. None at all.  You're clearly not in a position to be aware of that fact, christ knows where you're getting this load of shite from.

 

Maybe this load of shite came from Shepherd himself?

 

"I can only do my best here with the tools I've got, which in my opinion are more than enough to get this football club into Europe every season and something we now expect.

 

Yes, there are always going to be setbacks. But if there is somebody out there who can do better than me and who would be willing to invest millions into the club, then fine.

 

Every penny I have had from this club I have reinvested back into the club. I have never sold a single share since I came to the club and the money I have had has been reinvested in the way of buying shares.

 

When people say that I have taken money out of the club, all I have done is to put the money back in by buying shares. Nobody can accuse me of taking money out of this football club and not reinvesting it."

 

Source:  Dead long link

 

I mentioned that statement from Shepherd a while ago and was called a liar, I was told that Shepherd hadn't denied taking money out of the club, thanks for finding it, another myth removed.

[NE5]

Even more tripe highlighted for you in bold. As I said, there has never been any suggestion that Fred funds the club from his own pocket. None at all.  You're clearly not in a position to be aware of that fact, christ knows where you're getting this load of shite from.

 

Maybe this load of shite came from Shepherd himself?

 

"I can only do my best here with the tools I've got, which in my opinion are more than enough to get this football club into Europe every season and something we now expect.

 

Yes, there are always going to be setbacks. But if there is somebody out there who can do better than me and who would be willing to invest millions into the club, then fine.

 

Every penny I have had from this club I have reinvested back into the club. I have never sold a single share since I came to the club and the money I have had has been reinvested in the way of buying shares.

 

When people say that I have taken money out of the club, all I have done is to put the money back in by buying shares. Nobody can accuse me of taking money out of this football club and not reinvesting it."

 

Source:  Dead long link

 

I mentioned that statement from Shepherd a while ago and was called a liar, I was told that Shepherd hadn't denied taking money out of the club, thanks for finding it, another myth removed.

 

the sad thing is, if we are taken over by a board with McKeag - like or Bob Murray type tendencies, you will probably be the only one that would be happy - [apart from macbeth as the club would only be spending about 2 or 3m quid a year on players and end up with a half full stadium again ] - because you think the current board are no better.

 

Do you still think that buying Owen and Woodgate is the same as selling Waddle, Beardsley and Gazza, and qualifying for europe 9 times in 12 years is the same as 4 times in over 30  ? Cracks me up this like 

 

 

[Dave]

I've trimmed the links to that icnewcastle site in your posts gents, hence the edit by me at the bottom. It breaks the page.

[Cronky]

The proper comparison to make isn't between the current situation and how things were pre-1992. It's between the current situation and where we ought to be if the club was run properly.

 

So where is our divine right to be, then?

 

Also, tell me why there is more chance of replacing the Board with a better one than a worse one? Tell me why another Board will automatically be better than the current one, why they will automatically make available as much or even more cash to the manager and will automatically appoint the right manager?

 

Thanks

 

Well, we've no divine right to be anywhere, and there's no automatic guarantees that another Board would perform better, but seeing I didn't say either of those things, I think your questions are wide of the mark.

 

I mean, if someone is doing their job badly, you don't have any guarantees that their replacement would automatically do better, but you might still be correct in reaching the judgement that the bloke should be fired. You have to reach some kind of decision.

 

Your reason for thinking that Shepherd should remain is that we're doing better than pre-1992, but in that era we weren't a big club whose turnover took them into the European top 20. We were a middle-sized club on the lines of West Ham or Sheffield Wednesday. Now we seem to be slipping back. Shepherd took over a very different club from the one that Sir John Hall took over in 1992.

 

I mean, if you think Shepherd is doing an okay job, then fine, but it seems to me that our club has become one man's personal fiefdom. There's no checks on his powers because the Halls stay in the background, the local press is cowardly, and he doesn't give proper respect for the judgement of his managers. He's now built up a reputation as a Dictator that will make it difficult to attract any top-class manager, and maybe even top class players are going to think twice.

[Mick]

Mick

 

Deep down you know the Board hasn't failed, you're just at the point where you can't bring yourself to admit it because you don't want to lose face.

 

The fact is, if the Board had failed to the extent of previous Boards you'd have jumped off the bandwagon by now and would be taking the piss out of those squandering their money supporting a shite club. Like you did in the 70's and 80's, clearly shown by your level of ignorance of the club during that period.

 

By the way, some of your comments earlier about McDermott and Beardsley should be archived forever. Fantastic level of ignorance, it's just a shame there aren't enough people on this forum to know it. You should try posting that and your other shite on Skunkers, I think the only support you'll get might be over Lee because there is a split due to the misplaced adoration of Macdonald despite the improved team performances and results following his sale. Let me know if you plan to post on Skunkers anyway, I'd make a point of logging in just to see the reaction from long standing supporters.

 

Same message to Macbeth, people may be disenchanted with Fred due to his errors, but try telling some long standing supporters that the current Board is no better than the Board of the 60's, 70 and 80's.........a type of Board we could easily return to if the current one moved out.

 

Shepherd has failed, he took over the club that was 2nd in the league and has taken us to where we are now, are you calling that success or even stagnation?

 

If he hasn't failed then give a link to a league table which doesn't show us currently lying 17th or one which doesn't show us making massive losses while our gates reduce for probably the first time since Sir John and Keegan took over other than when the ground was being redeveloped, if you can't then he's failed, FACT.

 

What comments about Beardsley and McDermott do you find funny?

 

Is it that Beardsley was well known enough for Man U to pay money up front to his club and agreed a fee of £500,000 to take him to Manchester United while nobody had heard of him?

 

Is it the bit where I said that the club didn't have to buy these players along with Roeder and Davie Mac if Keegan was a token "trophy signing" for the club?

 

As for jumping ship, I've never jumped ship in the 70's and 80's at all and went to more games back then than I do now because I didn't have a family who thought that they should have some of my time when I'm at home.  I remember going to Chelsea and seeing 6 goals put into our net, the away support (us) were singing "we want 5 after the 4th goal and we want 6 after the 5th.  I remember going to see Newcastle v Colchester in the FA Cup and it taking 7 or 8 hours to travel 100 miles because of the fog that developed during the game.  I remember going to Cardiff along with about 300 others and spending the full 90 minutes dodging bricks that were coming over the back of our end then getting bricked again while walking to the train station.  I remember travelling to Bristol City twice within a few weeks because the Rovers ground had burned down.

 

I remember watching Gazza make his full debut away to Southampton and also being at Wimbledon when the fans went mad because Vinny Jones had him by the balls, do you remember those games?

 

Going to places like Oldham, Carlisle, Shrewsbury, Cambridge, Exeter and Watford only to have the game called off because of the weather and some idiot in the pub claiming that we were lucky because we got the 3 points because the pools panel put the game down as an away win.

 

How many away games do you remember from these times?

 

I think Shepherd has no more ambition than the old boards, he's in it for the money.

 

You and your "mate"  can stick your head in the sand as much as you want when it comes to Shepherd, others can see him for what he is, a failure.

[Mick]

the sad thing is, if we are taken over by a board with McKeag - like or Bob Murray type tendencies, you will probably be the only one that would be happy - [apart from macbeth as the club would only be spending about 2 or 3m quid a year on players and end up with a half full stadium again ] - because you think the current board are no better.

 

Do you still think that buying Owen and Woodgate is the same as selling Waddle, Beardsley and Gazza, and qualifying for europe 9 times in 12 years is the same as 4 times in over 30  ? Cracks me up this like 

 

 

 

Post a link to where I've ever made the claim highlighted in bold or admit to lying, I'll take no link as meaning you accept you've admitted to it.

 

 

[NE5]

Mick

 

Deep down you know the Board hasn't failed, you're just at the point where you can't bring yourself to admit it because you don't want to lose face.

 

The fact is, if the Board had failed to the extent of previous Boards you'd have jumped off the bandwagon by now and would be taking the piss out of those squandering their money supporting a shite club. Like you did in the 70's and 80's, clearly shown by your level of ignorance of the club during that period.

 

By the way, some of your comments earlier about McDermott and Beardsley should be archived forever. Fantastic level of ignorance, it's just a shame there aren't enough people on this forum to know it. You should try posting that and your other shite on Skunkers, I think the only support you'll get might be over Lee because there is a split due to the misplaced adoration of Macdonald despite the improved team performances and results following his sale. Let me know if you plan to post on Skunkers anyway, I'd make a point of logging in just to see the reaction from long standing supporters.

 

Same message to Macbeth, people may be disenchanted with Fred due to his errors, but try telling some long standing supporters that the current Board is no better than the Board of the 60's, 70 and 80's.........a type of Board we could easily return to if the current one moved out.

 

Shepherd has failed, he took over the club that was 2nd in the league and has taken us to where we are now, are you calling that success or even stagnation?

 

If he hasn't failed then give a link to a league table which doesn't show us currently lying 17th or one which doesn't show us making massive losses while our gates reduce for probably the first time since Sir John and Keegan took over other than when the ground was being redeveloped, if you can't then he's failed, FACT.

 

What comments about Beardsley and McDermott do you find funny?

 

Is it that Beardsley was well known enough for Man U to pay money up front to his club and agreed a fee of £500,000 to take him to Manchester United while nobody had heard of him?

 

as with your thread that you deleted, when you failed to try to show the club in the 1980's was a club who bought big players, like nowadays, you continue to make up these figures.

 

http://www.uit.no/mancity/players/old/beardsley.html

 

Peter Beardsley was an unknown player, at Manu and when he left, if he had not been, then someone else would have snapped him up before Carlisle and Newcastle, especially at 150,000 quid. This is the figure you claimed was "splashing the cash", along with buying back McDermott, another player whose career was almost over.

 

Keep it up lad, your getting funnier.

 

 

[NE5]

the sad thing is, if we are taken over by a board with McKeag - like or Bob Murray type tendencies, you will probably be the only one that would be happy - [apart from macbeth as the club would only be spending about 2 or 3m quid a year on players and end up with a half full stadium again ] - because you think the current board are no better.

 

Do you still think that buying Owen and Woodgate is the same as selling Waddle, Beardsley and Gazza, and qualifying for europe 9 times in 12 years is the same as 4 times in over 30  ? Cracks me up this like 

 

 

 

Post a link to where I've ever made the claim highlighted in bold or admit to lying, I'll take no link as meaning you accept you've admitted to it.

 

 

how many times have you said the board that have ran the club since 1992 are the same as the ones who ran it for the previous 30 years. Hilarious. Have we all dreamt the regular european nights, the signing of England players and Champions League run 

 

[Howaythelads]

Howaythelads, I dont think that some of your responses have been very appropriate, in fact, they have been quite childish.

 

Why cant you answer that lads question about the warehouse, you do seem to be conveniently ignoring it?

 

Inappropriate? Childish? That's rich, given what I'm replying to.

 

I'd say it sounds like you're one of those who takes the view something they don't agree with is "inappropriate". A common trait on this forum, it must be said.

 

What do you want me to say in response to the kids question that is totally unrelated to football? I couldn't give a toss about any warehouse, I couldn't give a toss about what Fred has said in a brothel. I don't care that Geordie women are dogs and whatever it is he said about Shearer. I couldn't give a toss about dividends as long as money is made available to the manager to strengthen the team, which is what this Board has consistently done and which may not happen under another Board. You can believe the opposite if you like.

 

That's my answer to the question.

 

Perhaps you and your chum can now answer some of mine? Like why do you think it's guaranteed another Board will appoint the right manager, will provide as much funding for players, etc etc. They're all there in the thread but have been *childishly* ignored so far.

 

How can you not care about a chairman giving our own money to his other family business when we are paying for it to be spent on the team?

 

In response to your question - those that have taken over at other clubs haven't done badly have they? Fact is, only good businessmen can afford to take control of a Premiership club, and that can only be a good thing for the football club. Therefore, any replacement coming in is bound to be better.

 

Going to have disagree vehemently with the last part of your paragraph. Any replacement that comes in is NOT bound to be better. If they know nothing about football (like Shepherd), then they'd be no better than him and probably worse because at least Shepherd tried to please the fans (seen by some of his reactionary moves) while the new bloke wouldn't have a clue what to do. And as of a year ago, many people (on this board as well) were saying that Shepherd was a good businessman and at least runs the financial side of the club well and that's why some of them were willing to stick it out with him in the hope that we get lucky with a manager. How times have changed eh?

 

A surprisingly good post.  clapping.gif

[Howaythelads]

The proper comparison to make isn't between the current situation and how things were pre-1992. It's between the current situation and where we ought to be if the club was run properly.

 

So where is our divine right to be, then?

 

Also, tell me why there is more chance of replacing the Board with a better one than a worse one? Tell me why another Board will automatically be better than the current one, why they will automatically make available as much or even more cash to the manager and will automatically appoint the right manager?

 

Thanks

 

Well, we've no divine right to be anywhere, and there's no automatic guarantees that another Board would perform better, but seeing I didn't say either of those things, I think your questions are wide of the mark.

 

I mean, if someone is doing their job badly, you don't have any guarantees that their replacement would automatically do better, but you might still be correct in reaching the judgement that the bloke should be fired. You have to reach some kind of decision.

 

Your reason for thinking that Shepherd should remain is that we're doing better than pre-1992, but in that era we weren't a big club whose turnover took them into the European top 20. We were a middle-sized club on the lines of West Ham or Sheffield Wednesday. Now we seem to be slipping back. Shepherd took over a very different club from the one that Sir John Hall took over in 1992.

 

I mean, if you think Shepherd is doing an okay job, then fine, but it seems to me that our club has become one man's personal fiefdom. There's no checks on his powers because the Halls stay in the background, the local press is cowardly, and he doesn't give proper respect for the judgement of his managers. He's now built up a reputation as a Dictator that will make it difficult to attract any top-class manager, and maybe even top class players are going to think twice.

 

Sigh

 

"Where we ought to be if the club is run properly" ........

 

Note the second bit I put in bold, which is something true only in your head, as the muppets like to say.

[Howaythelads]

Mick

 

Deep down you know the Board hasn't failed, you're just at the point where you can't bring yourself to admit it because you don't want to lose face.

 

The fact is, if the Board had failed to the extent of previous Boards you'd have jumped off the bandwagon by now and would be taking the piss out of those squandering their money supporting a shite club. Like you did in the 70's and 80's, clearly shown by your level of ignorance of the club during that period.

 

By the way, some of your comments earlier about McDermott and Beardsley should be archived forever. Fantastic level of ignorance, it's just a shame there aren't enough people on this forum to know it. You should try posting that and your other shite on Skunkers, I think the only support you'll get might be over Lee because there is a split due to the misplaced adoration of Macdonald despite the improved team performances and results following his sale. Let me know if you plan to post on Skunkers anyway, I'd make a point of logging in just to see the reaction from long standing supporters.

 

Same message to Macbeth, people may be disenchanted with Fred due to his errors, but try telling some long standing supporters that the current Board is no better than the Board of the 60's, 70 and 80's.........a type of Board we could easily return to if the current one moved out.

 

Shepherd has failed, he took over the club that was 2nd in the league and has taken us to where we are now, are you calling that success or even stagnation?

 

If he hasn't failed then give a link to a league table which doesn't show us currently lying 17th or one which doesn't show us making massive losses while our gates reduce for probably the first time since Sir John and Keegan took over other than when the ground was being redeveloped, if you can't then he's failed, FACT.

 

What comments about Beardsley and McDermott do you find funny?

 

Is it that Beardsley was well known enough for Man U to pay money up front to his club and agreed a fee of £500,000 to take him to Manchester United while nobody had heard of him?

 

Is it the bit where I said that the club didn't have to buy these players along with Roeder and Davie Mac if Keegan was a token "trophy signing" for the club?

 

As for jumping ship, I've never jumped ship in the 70's and 80's at all and went to more games back then than I do now because I didn't have a family who thought that they should have some of my time when I'm at home.  I remember going to Chelsea and seeing 6 goals put into our net, the away support (us) were singing "we want 5 after the 4th goal and we want 6 after the 5th.  I remember going to see Newcastle v Colchester in the FA Cup and it taking 7 or 8 hours to travel 100 miles because of the fog that developed during the game.  I remember going to Cardiff along with about 300 others and spending the full 90 minutes dodging bricks that were coming over the back of our end then getting bricked again while walking to the train station.  I remember travelling to Bristol City twice within a few weeks because the Rovers ground had burned down.

 

I remember watching Gazza make his full debut away to Southampton and also being at Wimbledon when the fans went mad because Vinny Jones had him by the balls, do you remember those games?

 

Going to places like Oldham, Carlisle, Shrewsbury, Cambridge, Exeter and Watford only to have the game called off because of the weather and some idiot in the pub claiming that we were lucky because we got the 3 points because the pools panel put the game down as an away win.

 

How many away games do you remember from these times?

 

I think Shepherd has no more ambition than the old boards, he's in it for the money.

 

You and your "mate"  can stick your head in the sand as much as you want when it comes to Shepherd, others can see him for what he is, a failure.

 

Please confirm for me that you "thought" the Board was a total failure during the seasons we finished 4th, 3rd and 5th, and would have liked them removed at that time for being shite.

 

As for the rest of your diatribe, care to explain why you find it necessary to write a potted history of your so-called attendance habits? Looks more than a little like insecurity from where I'm sitting and I don't understand it. You clearly have nowt to worry about, being a supafan and all that. Shame that you slip up so many times, like believng Beardsley was well known when we signed him when he was almost totally unknown.

 

How come you haven't mentioned those other ambitious signings of top international players, such as Kenny Sansom and Mick Channon, who as England internationals obviously compare favourably with Owen, for example. :roll:

[Cronky]

The proper comparison to make isn't between the current situation and how things were pre-1992. It's between the current situation and where we ought to be if the club was run properly.

 

So where is our divine right to be, then?

 

Also, tell me why there is more chance of replacing the Board with a better one than a worse one? Tell me why another Board will automatically be better than the current one, why they will automatically make available as much or even more cash to the manager and will automatically appoint the right manager?

 

Thanks

 

Well, we've no divine right to be anywhere, and there's no automatic guarantees that another Board would perform better, but seeing I didn't say either of those things, I think your questions are wide of the mark.

 

I mean, if someone is doing their job badly, you don't have any guarantees that their replacement would automatically do better, but you might still be correct in reaching the judgement that the bloke should be fired. You have to reach some kind of decision.

 

Your reason for thinking that Shepherd should remain is that we're doing better than pre-1992, but in that era we weren't a big club whose turnover took them into the European top 20. We were a middle-sized club on the lines of West Ham or Sheffield Wednesday. Now we seem to be slipping back. Shepherd took over a very different club from the one that Sir John Hall took over in 1992.

 

I mean, if you think Shepherd is doing an okay job, then fine, but it seems to me that our club has become one man's personal fiefdom. There's no checks on his powers because the Halls stay in the background, the local press is cowardly, and he doesn't give proper respect for the judgement of his managers. He's now built up a reputation as a Dictator that will make it difficult to attract any top-class manager, and maybe even top class players are going to think twice.

 

Sigh

 

"Where we ought to be if the club is run properly" ........

 

Note the second bit I put in bold, which is something true only in your head, as the muppets like to say.

 

Well let me put it another way. If you don't think another Board could do better, why is that?

 

If you do think it's possible that another Board could do better, why are you so reluctant to consider a change?

 

 

[NE5]

Mick

 

Deep down you know the Board hasn't failed, you're just at the point where you can't bring yourself to admit it because you don't want to lose face.

 

The fact is, if the Board had failed to the extent of previous Boards you'd have jumped off the bandwagon by now and would be taking the piss out of those squandering their money supporting a shite club. Like you did in the 70's and 80's, clearly shown by your level of ignorance of the club during that period.

 

By the way, some of your comments earlier about McDermott and Beardsley should be archived forever. Fantastic level of ignorance, it's just a shame there aren't enough people on this forum to know it. You should try posting that and your other shite on Skunkers, I think the only support you'll get might be over Lee because there is a split due to the misplaced adoration of Macdonald despite the improved team performances and results following his sale. Let me know if you plan to post on Skunkers anyway, I'd make a point of logging in just to see the reaction from long standing supporters.

 

Same message to Macbeth, people may be disenchanted with Fred due to his errors, but try telling some long standing supporters that the current Board is no better than the Board of the 60's, 70 and 80's.........a type of Board we could easily return to if the current one moved out.

 

Shepherd has failed, he took over the club that was 2nd in the league and has taken us to where we are now, are you calling that success or even stagnation?

 

If he hasn't failed then give a link to a league table which doesn't show us currently lying 17th or one which doesn't show us making massive losses while our gates reduce for probably the first time since Sir John and Keegan took over other than when the ground was being redeveloped, if you can't then he's failed, FACT.

 

What comments about Beardsley and McDermott do you find funny?

 

Is it that Beardsley was well known enough for Man U to pay money up front to his club and agreed a fee of £500,000 to take him to Manchester United while nobody had heard of him?

 

Is it the bit where I said that the club didn't have to buy these players along with Roeder and Davie Mac if Keegan was a token "trophy signing" for the club?

 

As for jumping ship, I've never jumped ship in the 70's and 80's at all and went to more games back then than I do now because I didn't have a family who thought that they should have some of my time when I'm at home.  I remember going to Chelsea and seeing 6 goals put into our net, the away support (us) were singing "we want 5 after the 4th goal and we want 6 after the 5th.  I remember going to see Newcastle v Colchester in the FA Cup and it taking 7 or 8 hours to travel 100 miles because of the fog that developed during the game.  I remember going to Cardiff along with about 300 others and spending the full 90 minutes dodging bricks that were coming over the back of our end then getting bricked again while walking to the train station.  I remember travelling to Bristol City twice within a few weeks because the Rovers ground had burned down.

 

I remember watching Gazza make his full debut away to Southampton and also being at Wimbledon when the fans went mad because Vinny Jones had him by the balls, do you remember those games?

 

Going to places like Oldham, Carlisle, Shrewsbury, Cambridge, Exeter and Watford only to have the game called off because of the weather and some idiot in the pub claiming that we were lucky because we got the 3 points because the pools panel put the game down as an away win.

 

How many away games do you remember from these times?

 

I think Shepherd has no more ambition than the old boards, he's in it for the money.

 

You and your "mate"  can stick your head in the sand as much as you want when it comes to Shepherd, others can see him for what he is, a failure.

 

Please confirm for me that you "thought" the Board was a total failure during the seasons we finished 4th, 3rd and 5th, and would have liked them removed at that time for being shite.

 

As for the rest of your diatribe, care to explain why you find it necessary to write a potted history of your so-called attendance habits? Looks more than a little like insecurity from where I'm sitting and I don't understand it. You clearly have nowt to worry about, being a supafan and all that. Shame that you slip up so many times, like believng Beardsley was well known when we signed him when he was almost totally unknown.

 

How come you haven't mentioned those other ambitious signings of top international players, such as Kenny Sansom and Mick Channon, who as England internationals obviously compare favourably with Owen, for example. :roll:

 

Kenny Sanson and Mick Channon were 2 other players whose best days were behind them. Of course thickmick will try to tell people - as usual - that signing them is the same as signing Owen and Woodgate .......... not to mention selling Waddle, Beardsley and Gazza. In fact he STILL hasn't told us why they wanted to leave the club - unlike Alan Shearer  - despite his insistence that the board pre-1992 is "no worse than" the board post - 1992 

 

Brilliant. You couldn't make it up if you tried