We always back our managers at Newcastle....

[Mick]

97-98 P 13

98-99 P 13

99-00 P 11

00-01 P 11

01-02 P 4

02-03 P 3

03-04 P 5

04-05 P 14

05-06 P 7

 

 

Shepherd became chairman durign 97-98 season. Four lower half finishes, four upper. This season will have him either averaging either top or bottom.

 

Excellent set of stats though, does that make you as boring as me  :winking:    You'll have to get used to the fact that some people will just not believing them though, and adding your own personal comment is very dangerous  :roll:

 

Was the time you mention not his return from disgrace?

[Mick]

or 96-97  :confused:

 

He arrived in December 97, opened his mouth in a brothel and resigned durning March 98 and legged it for a few months then returned in December 1998.

 

 

http://www.nufcmismanagement.info/shepherd-facts.html

[Howaythelads]

Mick thinks the current Board is no better than Boards of the past. Well here are the facts just in case anybody is interested.

 

Removed spin

 

... but just avoided relegation to division 3 on the last day of the season with that 20th placed finish and with a new manager installed.

Nobody complains about the timing of sacking Ardiles.

---

So KK and the core of the current Board had arrived, the top man at that time being SJH, who is undoubtedly a better

Chairman than Fred, but whose ambition for success has been continued, blighted by poor performance by managers

with top track records, and then by the terrible appointment of Souness, who was backed to the tune of £50m and turned a

5th placed team into a 14th placed team.

Season Div  Position

92-93 1 1 Sir John

93-94 P 3 Sir John

94-95 P 6 Sir John

95-96 P 2 Sir John

96-97 P 2  Shepherd became chairman part way through this season

97-98 P 13 Shepherd

98-99 P 13 Shepherd

99-00 P 11 Shepherd

00-01 P 11 Shepherd

01-02 P 4 Shepherd

02-03 P 3 Shepherd

03-04 P 5 Shepherd

04-05 P 14 Shepherd

05-06 P 7 Shepherd

06-07      P            18 Shepherd (current standing)

 

 

 

I've said Shepherd is no better than the chairman of the past, fact.

 

 

If you want to make a case for Shepherd then go through and add who was the chairman at the time to we can compare like for like, we can then look to see who has taken us further backwards while in office.

 

The others will not have the financial clout that Freddy was handed on a plate but we'll put that to one side as nobody can say how much they actually did have for sure.

 

We do know that the game has never had as much money so it can be taken for granted that Freddy isn't at a disadvantage on that score.

 

Spin?

 

Idiot.

[NE5]

 

 

I have read Beardsleys book. You say that he was "well known", I say on the basis that he was sold by manu for less than they bought him, and a small fee at that with very little interest from other clubs, and that he went to Canada, that he wasn't well known.

 

As you seem to be glossing over the fact that when he did sign, he made his name, then pissed off, why do you think he did that, and then come back to Newcastle again ? Why do you think he did that ?

 

Fairly straightforward and obvious point, but carry on misleading people with untrue rubbish as usual.

 

There is an interesting post by kiwi, I suggest you read it. It may bring you up to date and refresh your memory, seeing as you don't believer others that supported the club pre-1992.

 

 

 

If you've read the book then from what you've said on here I get the impression that you only looked at the pictures, you clearly have as many problems reading books as you do reading posts on here.

 

You go on about Man U losing money on Beardsley, they didn't lose a penny as far as I'm aware, and it wasn't mentioned in the book.  The money was a returnable deposit and I'm sure they got it all back.

 

You've quoted me ad saying that Beardsley was "well known," that's just you cherry picking again, I said he was well known enough for Man U to be interested in him, not the unknown that he was made out to be earlier in this thread.

 

If he was unknown then Man U would not have gone after him in the first place  , try thinking for a change.

 

I've read the "interesting post by kiwi" and I am truly indebted that he's pointed out that macbeth's a T*** (my words not his) for not highlighting that our catering is so good, bad macbeth.  The next time I sit in a freezing cold stand watching crap, I'll think back to the time I found out that our catering (something Freddy knows a lot about) was held with such high regard.  I think somebody should come up with a match day song so that we can tell everybody how well our catering side of the business is going.

 

 

so what you are saying is that manure buy nothing other than well known players  --- another gem.

 

And let them go for less than they paid, and you didn;t reply why he went to Canada, and why no one other than us were interested in buying him ..... if you know anything about the link, you will know that the only reason we had heard of him was because of a tip from Bob Moncur.

 

But keep making things up....fantastically funny ...   

 

Why did he piss off to Liverpool ? In fact why didn't he sign for them in the first place, if he was so well known and Liverpool being less than an hour from Manchester.........  :lol:

 

Where did I say Man U only buy well known players?  Another lie developed between the lugs of NE5. bluebiggrin.gif

 

I've highlighted it to make it easier to remember what you said yourself.

 

Man U didn't let Beardsley go for less than they paid for him, again the penny doesn't drop even when you claim to have read the book.

 

As for us getting a tip from Moncur, that's not entirely true.  We had planned to give him a trial the week after he originally went to Carlisle and John Gibson used to play with himself over Beardsley.  Newcastle knew about Beardsley before he played for Carlisle, not just during or after.

 

I didn't reply about why he went to Canada because you didn't ask a question, you may have thought about asking one but you didn't ask and I don't read minds which is a bonus when it's you.  You've got the memory of a goldfish; I suggest that you read your posts again in future before demanding answers to questions that you haven't even asked, I'll not bother asking for a link to the question as you don't do links.

 

but if he was so well known, why didn't he go to a top club, like Liverpool at the time ? Why not try answering or engaging your brain ? I'm sure everyone else on here can work out the answer to that .....

 

Keep making things up.

 

 

 

bluesleep.gif  bluesleep.gif  bluesleep.gif  bluesleep.gif

 

I'll let those who can read decide, this has become really boring, even by your standards.

 

Aren’t you fed-up of having "debates" with this moron, yet?

 

Mate, do I what I did, ignore the fucker because he is a serious waste of time.

 

que NE5's "I have been to over 900 games" blah blah blah's.... :roll:

 

people who know nothing about the club are a waste of time Dinho lad. Like you.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

or 96-97  :confused:

 

He arrived in December 97, opened his mouth in a brothel and resigned durning March 98 and legged it for a few months then returned in December 1998.

 

 

http://www.nufcmismanagement.info/shepherd-facts.html

 

You're worse than a reformed smoker. Y

 

You support the club during a couple of cup runs in the 70's, deserting the club during every other season. Then you jump on the bandwagon at the "promise of trophies" you imagined would appear when KK took over. and because it hasn't happened you moan like spoilt kid.

 

Get over yourself, ffs.

[NE5]

Mick thinks the current Board is no better than Boards of the past. Well here are the facts just in case anybody is interested.

 

Removed spin

 

... but just avoided relegation to division 3 on the last day of the season with that 20th placed finish and with a new manager installed.

Nobody complains about the timing of sacking Ardiles.

---

So KK and the core of the current Board had arrived, the top man at that time being SJH, who is undoubtedly a better

Chairman than Fred, but whose ambition for success has been continued, blighted by poor performance by managers

with top track records, and then by the terrible appointment of Souness, who was backed to the tune of £50m and turned a

5th placed team into a 14th placed team.

Season Div  Position

92-93 1 1 Sir John

93-94 P 3 Sir John

94-95 P 6 Sir John

95-96 P 2 Sir John

96-97 P 2  Shepherd became chairman part way through this season

97-98 P 13 Shepherd

98-99 P 13 Shepherd

99-00 P 11 Shepherd

00-01 P 11 Shepherd

01-02 P 4 Shepherd

02-03 P 3 Shepherd

03-04 P 5 Shepherd

04-05 P 14 Shepherd

05-06 P 7 Shepherd

06-07       P             18 Shepherd (current standing)

 

 

 

I've said Shepherd is no better than the chairman of the past, fact.

 

 

If you want to make a case for Shepherd then go through and add who was the chairman at the time to we can compare like for like, we can then look to see who has taken us further backwards while in office.

 

The others will not have the financial clout that Freddy was handed on a plate but we'll put that to one side as nobody can say how much they actually did have for sure.

 

We do know that the game has never had as much money so it can be taken for granted that Freddy isn't at a disadvantage on that score.

 

Pathetic attempt to dodge factual information that simply can't be argued with.

 

You still also haven't told us why Beardsley chose to come to Newcastle and not a top club, like Liverpool, in 1983, as he was so well known. Why didn't Liverpool want him then in 1983 and not 3 years later ?

 

And why was he only sold to us for 150,000, less than we paid for Malcolm MacDonald and about the same as we paid for Tony Green 13 years previously ?

 

 

[macbeth]

I think the reason Beardsley left was because Hall and Shepherd weren't on the board.

 

I think the reason Beardsley came was because he wanted to play with Keegan, and learn.

 

I think Liverpool in te 80s bought who ever they wanted. They were multiple European Champions and bought who ever they wanted, like Chlsea, but with soem history and some style. I can't think of any rumoured move to Liverpool at that time ever falling through.

 

I'm also pretty sure that what happened in the 1970s and 80s has as much relevance to how well, or badly, the current board is running the club, as the 1940s and 50s had to me when I started going in the late 60s, early 70s. I didn't compare, I was only interested in the present and the future not what seemed like very old people told me about from years ago. In the 70s I could see how bad things were, I was too young to be able to try and do anything about it. The older generation just accepted the rubbish the board shoved at them. It is good to see that this generation are, generally, at least questioning what goes on. Some don't dare open their eyes though

[NE5]

I think the reason Beardsley left was because Hall and Shepherd weren't on the board.

 

meaning ?

 

I think the reason Beardsley came was because he wanted to play with Keegan, and learn.

 

that is indeed possible, but it doesn't explain the small fee nor the fact that nobody else of note were in the running to buy him. I can assure you that I was in the South of England at the time and nobody had heard of him. In fact, when he and Waddle were in the team together, Waddle was capped first by England at full level and the under 21's [or 23's] and everyone I knew outside Newcastle said they thought that Waddle was the best player, even when I told them that Beardsley was and would prove it in time.

 

I think Liverpool in te 80s bought who ever they wanted. They were multiple European Champions and bought who ever they wanted, like Chlsea, but with soem history and some style. I can't think of any rumoured move to Liverpool at that time ever falling through.

 

Gazza ? [another Newcastle player wanting to leave ........ ]. Why do you think those 3 players left the club ?

 

I'm also pretty sure that what happened in the 1970s and 80s has as much relevance to how well, or badly, the current board is running the club, as the 1940s and 50s had to me when I started going in the late 60s, early 70s. I didn't compare, I was only interested in the present and the future not what seemed like very old people told me about from years ago. In the 70s I could see how bad things were, I was too young to be able to try and do anything about it. The older generation just accepted the rubbish the board shoved at them. It is good to see that this generation are, generally, at least questioning what goes on. Some don't dare open their eyes though

 

The older generation did indeed seem to accept that we were a small time club, with potential big support. This continued right through the 1970's and 1980's, despite having opportunities to build a bigger club, which HTL highlights - again - and Mick ignores - again.

 

Those expectations, or questions, that you speak of, have only been raised since 1992.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

I think the reason Beardsley left was because Hall and Shepherd weren't on the board.

 

I think the reason Beardsley came was because he wanted to play with Keegan, and learn.

 

I think Liverpool in te 80s bought who ever they wanted. They were multiple European Champions and bought who ever they wanted, like Chlsea, but with soem history and some style. I can't think of any rumoured move to Liverpool at that time ever falling through.

 

I'm also pretty sure that what happened in the 1970s and 80s has as much relevance to how well, or badly, the current board is running the club, as the 1940s and 50s had to me when I started going in the late 60s, early 70s. I didn't compare, I was only interested in the present and the future not what seemed like very old people told me about from years ago. In the 70s I could see how bad things were, I was too young to be able to try and do anything about it. The older generation just accepted the rubbish the board shoved at them. It is good to see that this generation are, generally, at least questioning what goes on. Some don't dare open their eyes though

 

I don't believe you're as stupid as your monkey, perhaps I'm wrong. You tell me.

 

There is no relevance per se, except that it highlights for anyone with a brain that because there is no guarantee a new Board will be better than the current one the club could end up with a shite one just like those of the past. It is naive in the extreme to not believe that either outcome is possible. That is the only reason for bringing it up. I hadn't thought I'd have to spell that out as it's so obvious.

[Guest BooBoo]

Same old N-O. Mick talking sense, the brothers dim boring everyone into a coma.

[macbeth]

I have an optimistic view on life. We'll always do well 'next week' or 'next season'. his a failing of mine.

 

Others have a pesimistic view.

 

In 1991 I thought things may get better under Hall, proven businessman, a natural leader. It was difficult to imagine that it could actually get any worse. It may not have happened, but I was hopeful. Luckily it did improve dramatically.

 

In 2006, there isa similar feeling. For whatever reason the team is fighting a relegation battle, the thought of challenging for a place in the Intertoto seems miles away, survival is the key.

 

If the board deserves praise for the high finishes of 3 or 4 years ago, they MUST deserve equal criticsim for where we are now. It would be unfair to do only one or the other. If the team were sitting where Portsmoth or Reading or Bolton are then those complaining would be easy targets. We are not. Clubs with gates up to 30,000 fewer than ours are completley out-performing us. yf it was one team it could be viewed as a freak. But somehow despite huge access to more resources we under-perform. Three 'smaller' teams have made that key managerial decision better than we have.

 

The pessimistic view is that the replacement of Hall & Shepherd would weaken the board, weaken our ability to attract the top manager, and weaken that manager's ability to compete. The three named sides, and the likes of Everton, Man City, Fulham, Blackburn, Wigan seem to show that there are others out there who can do it. We shoudl be able to compete with these sides, we don't currently seem able to do so

[Howaythelads]

I have an optimistic view on life. We'll always do well 'next week' or 'next season'. his a failing of mine.

 

Others have a pesimistic view.

 

In 1991 I thought things may get better under Hall, proven businessman, a natural leader. It was difficult to imagine that it could actually get any worse. It may not have happened, but I was hopeful. Luckily it did improve dramatically.

 

In 2006, there isa similar feeling. For whatever reason the team is fighting a relegation battle, the thought of challenging for a place in the Intertoto seems miles away, survival is the key.

 

If the board deserves praise for the high finishes of 3 or 4 years ago, they MUST deserve equal criticsim for where we are now. It would be unfair to do only one or the other. If the team were sitting where Portsmoth or Reading or Bolton are then those complaining would be easy targets. We are not. Clubs with gates up to 30,000 fewer than ours are completley out-performing us. yf it was one team it could be viewed as a freak. But somehow despite huge access to more resources we under-perform. Three 'smaller' teams have made that key managerial decision better than we have.

 

The pessimistic view is that the replacement of Hall & Shepherd would weaken the board, weaken our ability to attract the top manager, and weaken that manager's ability to compete. The three named sides, and the likes of Everton, Man City, Fulham, Blackburn, Wigan seem to show that there are others out there who can do it. We shoudl be able to compete with these sides, we don't currently seem able to do so

 

Never been accused of pessimism before, so there's a first.

 

Good of you to dodge my last reply to you, it's becoming a habit, just like you dodged the last question I asked you a couple of days ago. This was how much money has been given to successive managers during the same period you moan about dividends. Wouldn't mind a comment on the post just a few up from this one, plus the question I've just restated here.

 

Thanks

[macbeth]

 

 

Never been accused of pessimism before, so there's a first.

 

Good of you to dodge my last reply to you, it's becoming a habit, just like you dodged the last question I asked you a couple of days ago. This was how much money has been given to successive managers during the same period you moan about dividends. Wouldn't mind a comment on the post just a few up from this one, plus the question I've just restated here.

 

Thanks

 

Would that be this question ?

 

 

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

 

 

 

The link contains the line .... 

The total net amount spent on transfer fees since 1998 is £86m or roughly an average of just under £10m per season.. 

 

The link also has a year by year breakdown in the form of a graph .....

http://www.nufc-finances.org.uk/transf6.gif

 

 

Sorry if it wasn't clear for you, hopefully this answers you question.

 

As you don't seem to have actually been to my site, I'll include the dividend graph too ...

 

http://www.nufc-finances.org.uk/divide10.gif

 

[macbeth]

Never been accused of pessimism before, so there's a first.

 

Good of you to dodge my last reply to you, it's becoming a habit, just like you dodged the last question I asked you a couple of days ago. This was how much money has been given to successive managers during the same period you moan about dividends. Wouldn't mind a comment on the post just a few up from this one, plus the question I've just restated here.

 

Thanks

 

Not sure which is the last reply to me.

 

if it the one at the end of the stats .....

 

Macbeth will probably like most of this, because there was no speculative spending going on in an effort to improve things on the pitch. No effort to challenge the teams at the top. Probably a great balance sheet though, selling our best players time after time and stashing the cash. 'Our' cash.

 

then it didn't seem to be a question more a statement of 'fact' on what you thought my opinion was. It was one of those put-an-opinion-in-someone-elses-name-and-criticise-them-for-it type comments that usually comes from NE5, rather than from you.

 

If it was some other question then I apologise for not answering point me to it. If it was the one I've mentioned here then make it into a question and I'll see what  I can do for you.

 

 

 

[Howaythelads]

Macbeth

 

Keep your sarcasm and stick it up your arse.

 

I realise it's a forum, so you see a chance to act the twát by coming across in a way you'd never do in a personal discussion. I shouldn't be surprised, but for some reason in your case I am. I didn't have you down as an idiotic kid.

 

We don't have to agree about this and I don't think we ever will.  I see football as different to other business's and you see it as the same as any other business. You also do have a huge chip on your shoulder about dividends and I don't. Despite what you may claim I think it's obvious you envy anyone better off than yourself. That's very sad for you.

 

BTW You're right, I've never been to your website nor do I intend to go to it. You post enough misrepresentation on this forum without me readiing it elsewhere. You should post your stuff on Skunkers rather than this forum, which is visited largely by juveniles with no knowledge of what a shite Board really is. Not their fault they're young, but they have been consumed by the raised expectations and are spitting the dummy out because those expectations haven't been met. As I said earlier, older people don't like Fred much either, but people with even half a brain understand changing the Board doesn't automatically = a better Board. In your case, as you appear to measure the quality of someone by the size of company they run (rather than their performance at the FA for example) I guess it's understandable you'd think a new set of people would be better. In football it isn't that simple and you won't understand that either.

 

This is my last post to you. I don't care if you respond or not but if you do it will be the last word. I have no intention of replying to anything else you post.

 

No respect.

[Guest thompers]

what's a twát? a french twat?

[Mick]

 

Spin?

 

Idiot.

 

You don't need to put your name after your question.

 

Yes, spin.

 

We had more than one chairman during that time so highlighting what quite a few have done isn't relevant when trying to compare like with like.  I've said in another thread that I wouldn't use our trophy haul as a way at having a go at Shepherd because it wouldn't be fair on him as it was achieved by more than one chairman.

[Mick]

or 96-97  :confused:

 

He arrived in December 97, opened his mouth in a brothel and resigned durning March 98 and legged it for a few months then returned in December 1998.

 

 

http://www.nufcmismanagement.info/shepherd-facts.html

 

You're worse than a reformed smoker. Y

 

You support the club during a couple of cup runs in the 70's, deserting the club during every other season. Then you jump on the bandwagon at the "promise of trophies" you imagined would appear when KK took over. and because it hasn't happened you moan like spoilt kid.

 

Get over yourself, ffs.

 

    You sound more like each other with every day that passes by. bluebiggrin.gif

[Mick]

I think the reason Beardsley left was because Hall and Shepherd weren't on the board.

 

I think the reason Beardsley came was because he wanted to play with Keegan, and learn.

 

I think Liverpool in te 80s bought who ever they wanted. They were multiple European Champions and bought who ever they wanted, like Chlsea, but with soem history and some style. I can't think of any rumoured move to Liverpool at that time ever falling through.

 

I'm also pretty sure that what happened in the 1970s and 80s has as much relevance to how well, or badly, the current board is running the club, as the 1940s and 50s had to me when I started going in the late 60s, early 70s. I didn't compare, I was only interested in the present and the future not what seemed like very old people told me about from years ago. In the 70s I could see how bad things were, I was too young to be able to try and do anything about it. The older generation just accepted the rubbish the board shoved at them. It is good to see that this generation are, generally, at least questioning what goes on. Some don't dare open their eyes though

 

I don't believe you're as stupid as your monkey, perhaps I'm wrong. You tell me.

 

There is no relevance per se, except that it highlights for anyone with a brain that because there is no guarantee a new Board will be better than the current one the club could end up with a shite one just like those of the past. It is naive in the extreme to not believe that either outcome is possible. That is the only reason for bringing it up. I hadn't thought I'd have to spell that out as it's so obvious.

 

A bite because the secret is no longer a secret and everybody knows why the two of you sound so alike. bluebiggrin.gif

[Howaythelads]

Mick

 

As I've said before, I couldn't give a toss what you think or what you believe, the opinion of people such as yourself is worthless to people who have supported the club through thick and thin.

 

If I wasn't a genuine supporter of Newcastle United I would find myself hoping you get what you wish for, but that would mean real supporters potentially suffering as the club goes through decades of a lack of ambition. Others who wish for the same as you don't come into the same category, they weren't around at the time of shit Boards, so they know no better through no fault of their own. They don't lie by claiming they were there.

 

Your posting of events taken from websites and books is absolutely hilarious in your quest to come across as a real supporter.

 

That's my last post to you as well. Not much point in continuing but as I'll be on the forum I'll continue to laugh at the shite and lies you post.

[macbeth]

Macbeth

 

Keep your sarcasm and stick it up your arse.

 

I realise it's a forum, so you see a chance to act the twát by coming across in a way you'd never do in a personal discussion. Sadly I am that twat all the time. Both of my friends tell me to grow upI shouldn't be surprised, but for some reason in your case I am. I didn't have you down as an idiotic kid.

 

We don't have to agree about this and I don't think we ever will.  I see football as different to other business's and you see it as the same as any other business. You also do have a huge chip on your shoulder about dividends and I don't. See you did it again. Why make up your view of my view and then criticise me for them ?? Despite what you may claim I think it's obvious you envy anyone better off than yourself. That's very sad for you.

 

BTW You're right, I've never been to your website nor do I intend to go to it. You post enough misrepresentation on this forum without me readiing it elsewhere. All my misrepresentation comes from the club accounts, surely you aren't accusing the board of misrepresenting the finances !! You should post your stuff on Skunkers rather than this forum, which is visited largely by juveniles with no knowledge of what a shite Board really is. Not sure I've ever been there, who toldf you about it ? Not their fault they're young, but they have been consumed by the raised expectations and are spitting the dummy out because those expectations haven't been met. As I said earlier, older people don't like Fred much either, but people with even half a brain understand changing the Board doesn't automatically = a better Board. In your case, as you appear to measure the quality of someone by the size of company they run (rather than their performance at the FA for example) NE5 is the only one who ever raises Crozier, have you got yout username mixed up this week ? Crozier appointed Sven, Sheperd appinted Souness, a hard call on the incomeptence stakes there I guess it's understandable you'd think a new set of people would be better. In football it isn't that simple and you won't understand that either.

 

Lets try it, the way you would do it ....  And what you seem to think is that Shepherd and Hall are the only people out there fit to run NUFC, despite them giving away £35m to shareholders in 9 years. So regardless of there being stacks of businessmen, and stacks of football people you cannot see that there would be any possibility of doing better than H&S. Shepherd's football credentials are purely with us. Hall's has no business skills to merit mention, and his football knowledge that you see as being special is related to running an office in Gibraltar. You seem to think if we started from scratch and went out to find two people to run the club then we would come up with H&S. You should have complete confidence in a new owner then. A new owner would want the best for the club. A new owner would want the very best board in place. If the new owners have that level of business sense then they too will come up with the answer that H&S are the best people to run the business.

A new owner, buying the club for say £100m (a guess) would surely be delighted to let H&S continue as they have done and pay out £35m to them over the next 9 years as well. A decision I'm sure you would applaud, as you so strongly back the club's policy giving money away to shareholders ? Particularly as you insist it wouldn't make any difference to the amount of money given to the manager

 

 

This is my last post to you. I don't care if you respond or not but if you do it will be the last word. I have no intention of replying to anything else you post.

 

Nah, come on, don't admit defeat so easily. I promise not to use club accounts any more. Honest

 

No respect.

[Mick]

Mick

 

As I've said before, I couldn't give a toss what you think or what you believe, the opinion of people such as yourself is worthless to people who have supported the club through thick and thin.

 

If I wasn't a genuine supporter of Newcastle United I would find myself hoping you get what you wish for, but that would mean real supporters potentially suffering as the club goes through decades of a lack of ambition. Others who wish for the same as you don't come into the same category, they weren't around at the time of shit Boards, so they know no better through no fault of their own. They don't they lie by claiming they were there. Your posting of events taken from websites and books is absolutely hilarious as you struggle to come across as a real supporter.

 

That's my last post to you as well. Not much point in continuing but as I'll be on the forum I'll continue to laugh at the shite and lies you post.

 

Another last post to me. bluebiggrin.gif

 

What I wish for the club is for us to do better than we currently are and to stop seeing the name of the club dragged through the mud because of our chairman.  If that's not what you want then you're not a genuine supporter, simple as.

 

I don't think Shepherd is capable of taking this club in any direction other than backwards; he's a serial at it.

 

The bloke has taken the piss out of the fans while becoming very wealthy at our expense.

 

He wasn't skint when he became involved with the club but he's a damned site richer because of his involvement.  He's made dodgy deals, the warehouse being an obvious one; he's done this for his own and families benefit, not for the benefit of the club.

 

If you want to keep somebody with that sort of record then you're mad and not a genuine supporter.

 

Posting events from websites and books is a way of getting a point across, did you remember all of those league positions or did you get them from somewhere?  If you didn't remember then you're just another hypocrite, like your brother who had a go at HTT for reading books then started quoting from one in another thread, pathetic.

 

You keep calling people liars when it suits you then you post rubbish a few times and say it was a typo', even when you posted the same thing on more than one occassion, again, pathetic.

[NE5]

Mick

 

As I've said before, I couldn't give a toss what you think or what you believe, the opinion of people such as yourself is worthless to people who have supported the club through thick and thin.

 

If I wasn't a genuine supporter of Newcastle United I would find myself hoping you get what you wish for, but that would mean real supporters potentially suffering as the club goes through decades of a lack of ambition. Others who wish for the same as you don't come into the same category, they weren't around at the time of shit Boards, so they know no better through no fault of their own. They don't they lie by claiming they were there. Your posting of events taken from websites and books is absolutely hilarious as you struggle to come across as a real supporter.

 

That's my last post to you as well. Not much point in continuing but as I'll be on the forum I'll continue to laugh at the shite and lies you post.

 

Another last post to me. bluebiggrin.gif

 

What I wish for the club is for us to do better than we currently are and to stop seeing the name of the club dragged through the mud because of our chairman.  If that's not what you want then you're not a genuine supporter, simple as.

 

I don't think Shepherd is capable of taking this club in any direction other than backwards; he's a serial at it.

 

The bloke has taken the piss out of the fans while becoming very wealthy at our expense.

 

try telling supporters of numerous big clubs that we have overtaken since 1992 that bringing England players and regular european football is taking the piss 

 

Taking the piss = selling the club short for 30 years and selling any good player you happen to find to someone with more ambition than you. Supporters who witnessed these times will tell you about that, as you weren't really there, as is proven by your reluctance to answer factual information regarding transfer fees, and league positions over these years. You weren't there, you're a liar. You came back to the club because you hoped there would be trophies and now that there isn't you are pissed off about it. If one thing good comes about the clubs current blip, it is that they will get rid of bandwagon jumper fans and hopefully will be replaced by some of those who used to go to games when we were really shit and were squeezed out during our rise up the leagues.

 

I fail to see what a warehouse has got to do with the fortunes of the football club and footballers on a football field.

 

He wasn't skint when he became involved with the club but he's a damned site richer because of his involvement.  He's made dodgy deals, the warehouse being an obvious one; he's done this for his own and families benefit, not for the benefit of the club.

 

If you want to keep somebody with that sort of record then you're mad and not a genuine supporter.

 

Posting events from websites and books is a way of getting a point across, did you remember all of those league positions or did you get them from somewhere?  If you didn't remember then you're just another hypocrite, like your brother who had a go at HTT for reading books then started quoting from one in another thread, pathetic.

 

I don't need to look at books, you do, because you're a liar.

 

You keep calling people liars when it suits you then you post rubbish a few times and say it was a typo', even when you posted the same thing on more than one occassion, again, pathetic.

 

the league positions, and transfer fees of Beardsley etc, are fact. As is my statement that when we signed him, hardly anyone had heard of him.

 

Incidentally, do you always think people who think, or know, different to you are related, or know each other or something ? How dumb are you 

 

 

[macbeth]

I fail to see what a warehouse has got to do with the fortunes of the football club and footballers on a football field.

 

 

 

The advantage we should have over 'smaller' clubs just doesn't seem to help us. Maybe you should start to ask where the money goes ?

 

As you would so eloquently put it  "How dumb are you  "

 

 

 

[Syrette]