magorific Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Funny how many people seemingly just buy the party line without question. Yes, it is...isn't it. Oh sorry, I guess you must have meant the Ashley party line, rather than the Keegan one. Yes, the Keegan party line - and the independent Premier League panel party line. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I didn't specify tbh, but at least Keegan was backed by a fully independent tribunal who roundly criticised the club's behaviour. There was further evidence of how they operate from Shearer and what we saw with Hughton. There are plenty of reasons to at least question the party line and yet some seem content to just ignore all that and treat what the club claim (including via the media) verbatim. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning_Linguist Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Sounds like he only sold Milner on the premiss that he already had a replacement lined up. I'm sure that replacement wasn't supposed to be Nacho Gonzalez mind. We bought Colo, Gutierrez, Bassong and Xisco that season as well if I'm not mistaken. We did spend money but it was put in the wrong hands with Dennis Wise. That relationship was the big downfall IMO. ARGUABLY 3 out of those 4 signings have not turned out TOO bad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M4 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Yes, the Keegan party line - and the independent Premier League panel party line. I guess it's a good thing that some can find such solace in KK being 'right', whilst the club then had to endure Ashley, Kinnear and relegation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 It's not Keegan's fault Ashley was completely fucking clueless that season in particular. Say what you like about the timing of his exit but ultimately Keegan was just an employee of the club, he can do what he likes and owes Newcastle United nothing. It's the same with Carroll, I'm not sure why anyone who leaves is becomes a cunt almost by default. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 *us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maze Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I'm gonna agree with KK on this. Ashley has proven again and again that he's unwilling to back up his managers with a decent transfer budget. Thus, Ashley needs to prove he is willing to spend in the summer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I don't really blame Keegan for much, Ashley shouldn't have hired him. It's obvious that a man and a manager like KK wouldn't fit in with the Ashley regime. Keegan just stumbled into the monumental crossfire of shit that was NUFC at the time. I still would prefer him to keep quiet now though. I have a greater loyalty to NUFC as a club than I do to any player or manager, so it still annoys me when people criticise them in public. Overall I think he's exaggerating for effect in saying Pardew won't see a penny of it... he must know that it's likely we'll spend a bit of money. Guess he might mean that Pardew won't have the final say on how it's spent, which I guess is probably true. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Keegan is similar to Martin o'Neill in that they aren't interested in bank balances they just want the quality players to keep rolling through the door. Once you start talking about reducing wage bills and balancing the books they are off. Unfortunately unless you have russian/arab billionaire owners those conditions don't exist elsewhere these days. How many Russian & Arab billionaires have O'Neill & KK worked for? I am thinking 1 in total. They both demanded big budgets from big clubs which they got - and then walked away from when they were asked to cut back to balance the books. There is no criticism here, just stating the facts. Please don't tell me you believe the bullshit about Keegan walking away because he wasn't given the 200 million he demanded so he could sign Beckham, Henry and Lampard. I was thinking more of the time he walked away under Shepherd and Hall. After the club became a public company Keegan was unhappy that there were going to be financial restrictions and called it a day. Considering how well he'd been backed for two or three years before that it wasn't unreasonable to be asked to work within a budget but Keegan didn't want to know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
olliemort Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I love KK but I wish he would keep it shut for a while Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Agree Ian, same as I posted yesterday. He never actually says we definitely won't spend it as a club, think he was more chuckling at Pardew's implication about doing what he wants with it. Based on his experiences here, he obviously feels that is unlikely. Again, I hope he's wrong for the club's sake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M4 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Say what you like about the timing of his exit but ultimately Keegan was just an employee of the club, he can do what he likes and owes Newcastle United nothing. I don't think it was unrealistic to expect more from him. It also isn't accurate to portray this as any other club/manager situation. Especially when Keegan himself was the first one to always go on about how special the circumstances were. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Say what you like about the timing of his exit but ultimately Keegan was just an employee of the club, he can do what he likes and owes Newcastle United nothing. I don't think it was unrealistic to expect more from him. It also isn't accurate to portray this as any other club/manager situation. Especially when Keegan himself was the first one to always go on about how special the circumstances were. True, Keegan was supposed be a unique case, so was Andy Carroll. We're finding out there are really very few special cases in football. Saying that, I have sympathy for KK as I've also been in a job where I was prevented from doing my job properly and forced out. Its the most frustrating thing in the world. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I bet your job didn't involve still having charge of a quality set of staff on millions of pounds a year in front of 50,000 customers who love you no matter what you do...let's not go down that path though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 As Keegan critics like to point out, he was out of a job quite some time before he came back. He probably couldn't believe his luck. But if he couldn't make it work then he was entitled to resign. As it happens some impartial people judged he was entitled to more than that and awarded compensation based on his treatment. Honestly can't see how the tribunal outcome can be dismissed. It's all-important. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Funny how many people seemingly just buy the party line without question. that's a much wider problem than just football Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 As Keegan critics like to point out, he was out of a job quite some time before he came back. He probably couldn't believe his luck. But if he couldn't make it work then he was entitled to resign. As it happens some impartial people judged he was entitled to more than that and awarded compensation based on his treatment. Honestly can't see how the tribunal outcome can be dismissed. It's all-important. Exactly. How people can see fit to call him a cunt is beyond me. You may disagree with his decision to walk away, even in the face of proof that he was more than justified in doing so. You're more than welcome to. But to call the man who provided most of us with the greatest era of football we've ever seen a cunt? Nah, not for me, like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpal78 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Why does discussion of Keegan always has to be binary, if you think Keegan is wrong, you must therefore be supporting Ashley? There is also no need to drag up issues on why of how he walked away/was constructively dismissed. The issue is his recent comment on Pardew not seeing any of the 35M based purely on how things went during his time. People are entitled to think that he is wrong and that he is over dramatizing the issue when he actually knows nothing about Mike's plan in the summer without being dragged into another Ashley vs Keegan debate. People who think in binaries should grow up, it's not black or white, it's logically consistent to criticize KK for his recent comments without defending Mike on his dealings with KK. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Geordie Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 The Keegan haters out in force again, I see. *Shakes head* Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest magpie99 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I dont particularly want to buy into another argument about the rights or wrongs of Keegan again. The only thing I will say is that he is ancient history now and if anyone on here can actually believe we were in a financial position to supplement his demands for players, they need to take a good hard look at the club accounts. As some people have mentioned on here, he should not have come back. Ashley listened to the fans on that one and I think if he got a more savvy manager at the time, we wouldnt have been relgated. All the turmoil at the club that year, whether we would be sold or not, didnt help but the so called superstars purchased by the club on high salaries (Viduka, Owen, Geremi, Martins, Duff) didnt perform and they should be held accountable more than anyone. On the subject of player finds, the poster who referred to Bassong needs to read my original post. How many players had Keegan discovered and brought through the ranks? The answer is NONE. That in itself shows that he is a manager who can only survive by spending money rather than nurturing young talent. Finally, if Keegan is so good, why isnt he still working in football management? Could it be that most clubs would not risk the prospect of another petulant, spit the dummy out, walkout? I would imagine so. Keegan was great in his first management stint with us but after the England job, he became a dinosaur. Tere was even a player revolt about his training methods which finally resulted in him leaving. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 'his demands for players' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punk77 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Good post Magipe99! Regarding MON, I was actually glad that Pardew took over instead him. I did some reading when the rumor about us taking on MON appeared. Here goes: MON was supported 100% by his Lerner financially for multiple seasons. He spent astonishing £120 million over 4 seasons on players. The problem was of course that he only bought rubbish: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1301712/Buy-buy-Martin-How-ONeill-spent-120million-years-Aston-Villa.html Then the reality hit MON, Milner had to be sold for two reasons: The deal was pretty good (on paper Ireland is a better player than Milner) and two Milner wanted a move. And for not receiving Lerner's backing in that single instance, he quit. Totally forgetting that Lerner has backed him 100% in every s*** transfer move he's made. According to this article, http://bleacherreport.com/articles/375262-randy-lerners-money-talks-at-aston-villa , MON sanctioned his below par players some generous salaries (notice in particular the writing in bold): " However, you don’t have to look too far to identify the main reason for the dramatically higher loss, as the operating expenses jumped by nearly 50% (£34.3m) from £70.8m to £105.1m. The primary driver for this growth was staff costs, which grew by a massive £20.2m from £50.4m to £70.6m in a single year. This was after the 2008 accounts reported that the wage bill had more than doubled to £50m." A good example of this policy is the salary of a very ordinary footballer, John Carew: he netted above £60 000 a week in Villa. So the result of MON's era was that he left ha club in a significantly worse situation economically (read the bleacher report), only to achieve some marginally better results than O Leary. On top of that they played utterly boring football. MON never rotated, and as a consequence he ignored talent and general player development (Curtis Davies, Delph for example), which made the club even more dependent on immediate external buys if the results didn't come. It's no coincidence that it was only after MON left, talents like Albringhton and Clark appeared. And the best part of all, the man himself wants to generously paid too for installing such a havoc. The conclusion is that any club that takes on MON must be willing to give him a tons of money. In return it gets, mediocre players on extremely good wages , s*** football, no talents and huge debt. Just to repeat myself, a update from today regarding the consequences of the reign of MON: http://www.teamtalk.com/news/2483/6787295/Villa-suffer-huge-losses I cannot believe that a chunk of our fans wanted him as our replacement for CH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Huge chunk? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punk77 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Huge chunk? A chunk then I remember discussing MON when CH was fired. And most were happy to take him. Although that doesn't necessarily represent this forum Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Wally_McFool Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 As some people have mentioned on here, he should not have come back. Ashley listened to the fans on that one and I think if he got a more savvy manager at the time, we wouldnt have been relgated. Am getting fucking sick of people spouting shite about Keegan. Ashley listened to the fans on that one my fucking arse, afer sacking Big Fat Sam, Ashley thought that he'd landed Redknapp as boss after being led to believe that Redknapp wanted the job by his cockney chums. Keegan was appointed out of the blue after Redknapp turned the job down so stick that in yer pipe and smoke it. (Hi, Dave.... I'm back! ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now