Sunderland

[Elliottman]

Mackem I know is already grumbling about them being given Marriner this Saturday.

 

Lining their excuses up already.

 

What's he done to them recently? Anything of note?

 

ploughed money into them and backed each manager....the b******.

 

He really shouldn't be reffing them then.

 

f*** you

 

 

[Unbelievable]

To be fair, Short is getting it in the neck on RTG recently.

 

They spent 153 million on transfers in the past five years, or nearly 50 mill net, putting them 8th in the nett spend table. His decision making is there to be questioned, but they cannot complain they haven't been royally backed by their owner.

We were heavily backed financially by Shepherd and the board over many years, during and after SBR era. Throwing money at the problem alone, clearly is not the way to go, especially for clubs spending well above their means.

 

And we challenged for top honours and got into the Champions League. Whilst mindlessly throwing money at a problem will not solve it, neither will stopping to spend money. As I said, the can have no complaints about the way Short has backed them, and every managerial appointment they have done has been greeted with a nod of approval, even their DoF/Udinese model was. Their problem is they are just a nothing club with a culture of failure deeply ingrained in them, and long may it continue. The day Short has had enough is the day the will slump down the leagues never to be heard of again.

[Dokko]

To be fair, Short is getting it in the neck on RTG recently.

 

They spent 153 million on transfers in the past five years, or nearly 50 mill net, putting them 8th in the nett spend table. His decision making is there to be questioned, but they cannot complain they haven't been royally backed by their owner.

We were heavily backed financially by Shepherd and the board over many years, during and after SBR era. Throwing money at the problem alone, clearly is not the way to go, especially for clubs spending well above their means.

 

By the bank you mean.

[GeordieDazzler]

What's the record for most own goals in a season? 

[Dokko]

What's the record for most own goals in a season?

8 Leicester

[WarrenBartonCentrePartin]

Mackem I know is already grumbling about them being given Marriner this Saturday.

 

Lining their excuses up already.

 

What's he done to them recently? Anything of note?

 

Most recently had them down to 9 at Hull.

 

They all reckon he nearly always sends one of their players off.

[Andymc1]

Mackem I know is already grumbling about them being given Marriner this Saturday.

 

Lining their excuses up already.

 

What's he done to them recently? Anything of note?

 

Most recently had them down to 9 at Hull.

 

They all reckon he nearly always sends one of their players off.

 

Ah right, aye. Good then - keep up the good work Andre.

[jdckelly]

To be fair, Short is getting it in the neck on RTG recently.

 

They spent 153 million on transfers in the past five years, or nearly 50 mill net, putting them 8th in the nett spend table. His decision making is there to be questioned, but they cannot complain they haven't been royally backed by their owner.

We were heavily backed financially by Shepherd and the board over many years, during and after SBR era. Throwing money at the problem alone, clearly is not the way to go, especially for clubs spending well above their means.

 

And we challenged for top honours and got into the Champions League. Whilst mindlessly throwing money at a problem will not solve it, neither will stopping to spend money. As I said, the can have no complaints about the way Short has backed them, and every managerial appointment they have done has been greeted with a nod of approval, even their DoF/Udinese model was. Their problem is they are just a nothing club with a culture of failure deeply ingrained in them, and long may it continue. The day Short has had enough is the day the will slump down the leagues never to be heard of again.

backing alone isn't in any way to judge someone its decision making and shorts decision making has been mighty rubbish

[Unbelievable]

To be fair, Short is getting it in the neck on RTG recently.

 

They spent 153 million on transfers in the past five years, or nearly 50 mill net, putting them 8th in the nett spend table. His decision making is there to be questioned, but they cannot complain they haven't been royally backed by their owner.

We were heavily backed financially by Shepherd and the board over many years, during and after SBR era. Throwing money at the problem alone, clearly is not the way to go, especially for clubs spending well above their means.

 

And we challenged for top honours and got into the Champions League. Whilst mindlessly throwing money at a problem will not solve it, neither will stopping to spend money. As I said, the can have no complaints about the way Short has backed them, and every managerial appointment they have done has been greeted with a nod of approval, even their DoF/Udinese model was. Their problem is they are just a nothing club with a culture of failure deeply ingrained in them, and long may it continue. The day Short has had enough is the day the will slump down the leagues never to be heard of again.

backing alone isn't in any way to judge someone its decision making and shorts decision making has been mighty rubbish

 

If you think that I wonder how you rate Fat Mike's..?

[Klaus]

To be fair, Short is getting it in the neck on RTG recently.

 

They spent 153 million on transfers in the past five years, or nearly 50 mill net, putting them 8th in the nett spend table. His decision making is there to be questioned, but they cannot complain they haven't been royally backed by their owner.

We were heavily backed financially by Shepherd and the board over many years, during and after SBR era. Throwing money at the problem alone, clearly is not the way to go, especially for clubs spending well above their means.

 

And we challenged for top honours and got into the Champions League. Whilst mindlessly throwing money at a problem will not solve it, neither will stopping to spend money. As I said, the can have no complaints about the way Short has backed them, and every managerial appointment they have done has been greeted with a nod of approval, even their DoF/Udinese model was. Their problem is they are just a nothing club with a culture of failure deeply ingrained in them, and long may it continue. The day Short has had enough is the day the will slump down the leagues never to be heard of again.

backing alone isn't in any way to judge someone its decision making and shorts decision making has been mighty rubbish

That was the point i was trying to make, we spent s*** loads/got in to s*** loads of debt, backing managers like Souness who the board/shepherd appointed. I am not saying the Mike Ashley approach is correct either btw  .

[Unbelievable]

I understand what you were trying to see, but I'm not saying Short is a good owner/chairman just because he backs his managers. On the flipside, I don't understand why owners are criticised for backing their manager whilst putting their own money in. It's what they are supposed to do. Beyond that, they need good football people to advise them on who to appoint as manager, which players to invest in, et cetera. I don't think Ellis Short comes up with managerial appointments like O'Neill or Di Canio himself, or believes Jozy Altidore would make a good Premiership striker, he will be advised on these matters and writes the checks. By now he might want to consider finding some other people to advise him mind you, because they are costing him a fortune..

[jdckelly]

To be fair, Short is getting it in the neck on RTG recently.

 

They spent 153 million on transfers in the past five years, or nearly 50 mill net, putting them 8th in the nett spend table. His decision making is there to be questioned, but they cannot complain they haven't been royally backed by their owner.

We were heavily backed financially by Shepherd and the board over many years, during and after SBR era. Throwing money at the problem alone, clearly is not the way to go, especially for clubs spending well above their means.

 

And we challenged for top honours and got into the Champions League. Whilst mindlessly throwing money at a problem will not solve it, neither will stopping to spend money. As I said, the can have no complaints about the way Short has backed them, and every managerial appointment they have done has been greeted with a nod of approval, even their DoF/Udinese model was. Their problem is they are just a nothing club with a culture of failure deeply ingrained in them, and long may it continue. The day Short has had enough is the day the will slump down the leagues never to be heard of again.

backing alone isn't in any way to judge someone its decision making and shorts decision making has been mighty rubbish

 

If you think that I wonder how you rate Fat Mike's..?

all over the place. Some ideas and theorys I can get and understand but they're followed up with awful execution. Others are just plain bad ideas. Examples, having a director of football to focus on the transfer negotiation and strategy and also be a backer of the manager with an experienced football man giving advise to the suits and ashley-good idea thinking Denis Wise or JFK is that man-horrible execution.

Having the club financially stable and be able to support itself without large amounts of cash injected to cover losses-good idea, doing so soley by focusing on keeping costs down instead of trying to grow commercial income (the one area of income that is solely the boards responsibility) -horrible execution.

[TRC]

Poyet starting to sound more like Di Canio with every day that passes:

 

But Poyet said: “I am not criticising the players, we say we here. We made bad decisions. I am the first one, so I am not criticising the players, I am saying we as a group, the staff, the players, every single one of us in the club are making errors.

 

“I say I'm hammering it in to them. We keep hammering, hammering, hammering, if you tell me three times one thing and then I get it, the next time I will say stop it, don’t tell me any more, I got it but we haven’t yet because something happened.

 

“It is not individuals not getting the message, it is the group. If it was one player it would be easy for me, because you drop him. It is the group that need to get it, the players altogether because they have to learn if one person makes a mistake their team-mates need to react.”

 

Poyet described how he was “hurt” by the result and suggested Sunderland “would miss a penalty” if they got one such is the situation they are facing at the moment.

 

And he was visibly surprised by just how poorly Sunderland played. He said: “On that performance we would not get enough points to stay up. On a normal day Spurs – and they had come here with more confidence – we would have lost 5-1.

 

“Then it would be even worse. It does not change my opinion of the team because we lost 2-1 because I am realistic. They had chances and they didn’t go in. The defensive marking was the same.”

 

Sunderland's last six home games have all come against teams challenging for a top four place, but they are due for a more generous – albeit vital - run of fixtures and Poyet is well aware of just how precarious the situation facing Sunderland is.

 

He said: “If you don’t share the urgency, you are not realistic. We are playing West Ham, Cardiff, Norwich, when are we going to win three in a row? Now. It has to be now. The idea was to double the points before January, so we have lost another opportunity and somehow we had a normal performance in the first half and very poor in the second half. There is nothing to hide.

 

“I looked at my first two home games and looked at Newcastle and Man City and thought `all the best’ and we won both. It was incredible. Then I was really looking forward to playing Hull and Stoke, and we didn’t play, how does it work? I don’t know.

 

“But now, I think there is a line. Does the season start here? If it doesn’t start today we have got a massive problem. A start means win? Because everybody wins somehow, we don’t. I am the first one responsible, it is up to me now. It is up to the players as well, and they know that.”

 

Poyet believes Sunderland have four “absolutely massive” Premier League games before the January transfer window opens on New Year's Day. He is keen to see immediate improvements, knowing he has plans to strengthen after the turn of the year.

 

He said: “I am working on that for sure, that doesn’t change my mind. We always thought there were positions we needed to address and there are plenty of things going on behind the scenes. That doesn’t change. I hope things will help. How big? I don’t know because I don’t know yet.”

 

Hope they get a really dodgy penalty at West Ham, then sky it.

[Tiresias]

The problem for Sunderland is, where are they going to get the 30 odd points for safety from? 23 games left, they could win twice and draw the rest and get there but realistically they are going to have to get some momentum going to get a relegation saving run going and I can't see them having that in the tank. West Ham have enough quality there in the end to drag them out of the mire, Cardiff probably can get enough home wins together and West Brom you suspect will probably pick up again and be alright. They don't have enough quality in the tank to get a run going. They can't afford to lose any of their next home games, but if they're still there, maybe a point or two better off by half way point they'll be finished imo.

 

Having said that still kinda expect them to string 5 flukey wins in a row 

[Paully]

It looks like The Derby isn't on TV;

 

West Ham United v Swansea City

Saturday 1 February, 12.45pm (BT Sport)

West Bromwich Albion v Liverpool

Sunday 2 February, 1.30pm (Sky Sports)

Arsenal v Crystal Palace

Sunday 2 February, 4pm (Sky Sports)

Manchester City v Chelsea

Monday 3 February, 8pm (Sky Sports)

[Yorkie]

Surely not.

[Chicken Dancer]

Surely it'll still get moved to Sunday though?

[Guest The_Optimistic]

probably guessing it will be a nothing game as they will be relegated by then

[BottledDog]

To be fair, Short is getting it in the neck on RTG recently.

 

They spent 153 million on transfers in the past five years, or nearly 50 mill net, putting them 8th in the nett spend table. His decision making is there to be questioned, but they cannot complain they haven't been royally backed by their owner.

We were heavily backed financially by Shepherd and the board over many years, during and after SBR era. Throwing money at the problem alone, clearly is not the way to go, especially for clubs spending well above their means.

 

And we challenged for top honours and got into the Champions League. Whilst mindlessly throwing money at a problem will not solve it, neither will stopping to spend money. As I said, the can have no complaints about the way Short has backed them, and every managerial appointment they have done has been greeted with a nod of approval, even their DoF/Udinese model was. Their problem is they are just a nothing club with a culture of failure deeply ingrained in them, and long may it continue. The day Short has had enough is the day the will slump down the leagues never to be heard of again.

backing alone isn't in any way to judge someone its decision making and shorts decision making has been mighty rubbish

 

If you think that I wonder how you rate Fat Mike's..?

all over the place. Some ideas and theorys I can get and understand but they're followed up with awful execution. Others are just plain bad ideas. Examples, having a director of football to focus on the transfer negotiation and strategy and also be a backer of the manager with an experienced football man giving advise to the suits and ashley-good idea thinking Denis Wise or JFK is that man-horrible execution.

Having the club financially stable and be able to support itself without large amounts of cash injected to cover losses-good idea, doing so soley by focusing on keeping costs down instead of trying to grow commercial income (the one area of income that is solely the boards responsibility) -horrible execution.

 

Overall then, who do you reckon has been the better owner?

 

 

[Paully]

Surely it'll still get moved to Sunday though?

 

Unless they're planning on trialling the 11pm Saturday televised slot ahead of the England vs Italy World Cup game 

[nufc4eva]

To be fair, Short is getting it in the neck on RTG recently.

 

They spent 153 million on transfers in the past five years, or nearly 50 mill net, putting them 8th in the nett spend table. His decision making is there to be questioned, but they cannot complain they haven't been royally backed by their owner.

We were heavily backed financially by Shepherd and the board over many years, during and after SBR era. Throwing money at the problem alone, clearly is not the way to go, especially for clubs spending well above their means.

 

And we challenged for top honours and got into the Champions League. Whilst mindlessly throwing money at a problem will not solve it, neither will stopping to spend money. As I said, the can have no complaints about the way Short has backed them, and every managerial appointment they have done has been greeted with a nod of approval, even their DoF/Udinese model was. Their problem is they are just a nothing club with a culture of failure deeply ingrained in them, and long may it continue. The day Short has had enough is the day the will slump down the leagues never to be heard of again.

backing alone isn't in any way to judge someone its decision making and shorts decision making has been mighty rubbish

 

If you think that I wonder how you rate Fat Mike's..?

all over the place. Some ideas and theorys I can get and understand but they're followed up with awful execution. Others are just plain bad ideas. Examples, having a director of football to focus on the transfer negotiation and strategy and also be a backer of the manager with an experienced football man giving advise to the suits and ashley-good idea thinking Denis Wise or JFK is that man-horrible execution.

Having the club financially stable and be able to support itself without large amounts of cash injected to cover losses-good idea, doing so soley by focusing on keeping costs down instead of trying to grow commercial income (the one area of income that is solely the boards responsibility) -horrible execution.

 

Overall then, who do you reckon has been the better owner?

 

 

 

Them as he appears willing to bring players in tbf, he has backed all his managers to some degree, although maybe our consistency approach of keeping people in place may help long term

[madras]

 

They are such a pointless club.

 

And they know it too: http://www.readytogo.net/smb/threads/the-biggest-indictment-of-safc.846074/

some harsh home truths in there.

[Teasy]

To be fair, Short is getting it in the neck on RTG recently.

 

They spent 153 million on transfers in the past five years, or nearly 50 mill net, putting them 8th in the nett spend table. His decision making is there to be questioned, but they cannot complain they haven't been royally backed by their owner.

We were heavily backed financially by Shepherd and the board over many years, during and after SBR era. Throwing money at the problem alone, clearly is not the way to go, especially for clubs spending well above their means.

 

And we challenged for top honours and got into the Champions League. Whilst mindlessly throwing money at a problem will not solve it, neither will stopping to spend money. As I said, the can have no complaints about the way Short has backed them, and every managerial appointment they have done has been greeted with a nod of approval, even their DoF/Udinese model was. Their problem is they are just a nothing club with a culture of failure deeply ingrained in them, and long may it continue. The day Short has had enough is the day the will slump down the leagues never to be heard of again.

backing alone isn't in any way to judge someone its decision making and shorts decision making has been mighty rubbish

 

If you think that I wonder how you rate Fat Mike's..?

all over the place. Some ideas and theorys I can get and understand but they're followed up with awful execution. Others are just plain bad ideas. Examples, having a director of football to focus on the transfer negotiation and strategy and also be a backer of the manager with an experienced football man giving advise to the suits and ashley-good idea thinking Denis Wise or JFK is that man-horrible execution.

Having the club financially stable and be able to support itself without large amounts of cash injected to cover losses-good idea, doing so soley by focusing on keeping costs down instead of trying to grow commercial income (the one area of income that is solely the boards responsibility) -horrible execution.

 

Overall then, who do you reckon has been the better owner?

 

 

 

Well Short backs his manager, but their's far less of an advantage in backing the manager if you can't get any decisions right, including the appointment of the manager you're backing.  In fact it can be detrimental to the club in that case.  Ashley makes some amazingly bad decisions, but he makes some correct ones in there to which have paid off.  Short stumbles from one disaster to the next, shoveling money into the fire as he goes.  Also when it comes time for him the go I doubt he's going to forget the money he's put in.  For all Ashley's shitness I wouldn't want Short in his place.

[BlueStar]

£47 for Mags Away

Not sure exactly how true this is but seen this posted on twitter earlier

 

Also suggests making it a 'bubble' trip, which is ridiculous as we're not the ones who cause the bother at our games

 

im contacting the FSF tonight with regards to this, minimal violence and disorder from our fans for 3/4 seasons and impeccable behavior at away games so, yet they twat osses and smash up service stations yet we are the ones being forced into a fucking bubble trip, bubble trips are archaic and only further demonstrate Northumbria Polices inability to manage an allocation over 10 fans, worst force in the country by far

 

You fucking what?  Are we talking about the same flare throwing, bus bricking, pitch invading, coin chucking, keeper punching rabid apes?

[Wilson]

We ALL punch horses....it makes their actions null and void.