Mick Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Nah, that's bullshit. 12 months ago we had the same s**** we do now with very few measured or reasoned opinions. I get that many people don't like him but most of it boils down to petty reactionary stuff. Very few on here wanted him to begin with (I wasn't thrilled either) and from then on every negative, however minor, was evidence he was a fraud. Anything positive was someone else's doing. Anyone with who had the nerve to suggest we wait and see what he does was always shouted down. I don't mock people for their genuine concerns. I mock people for over the top, conspiracy theorist, reactionary bullshit. It's never just "we should be more positive against these teams" it's always "he's trying to destroy the club and laughing at us." It's never just "Kinnear was a bad appointment and we're paying the price for it now," it's always "Ashley appointed Kinnear to deliberately not sign anyone." It's ridiculous, batshit stuff and anyone who dares say so is one of them. That's why people like me only poke our heads in once in a while and prod you for kicks, because you've got fuckall interesting to say. You just want to agree with each other that the sky is falling. Do you even understand your own posts? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucaAltieri Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Has this guy not been sussed as a WUM, like? It was only t'other month he was on about re-signing Lovenkrands instead of Remy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm not buying that Kinnear was simply a bad appointment and we coincidentally didn't buy anyone for 2 whole transfer windows like. Sometimes you need to read between the lines a bit, not one person thought that was a good appointment but it's far too convenient that Kinnear served as the scapegoat for doing precisely what Ashley loves doing when not pressed otherwise by factors such as potential relegation, i.e. spending the square root of fuck-all. Seems far more fanciful to believe it was an innocent mistake that didn't work out, made by someone who wants the best for the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Has this guy not been sussed as a WUM, like? It was only t'other month he was on about re-signing Lovenkrands instead of Remy. Don't get me wrong, I find you mildly entertaining at times. Just don't know how you've managed to hook 4 or 5 posters the right side of stupid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 The argument of "he's a professional, therefore he knows best" only works in a world where all professionals in a particular field do things exactly the same. Football managers don't. 3-0 down at home to Man Utd a couple weeks back. Shola Ameobi preparing to come on the pitch to replace Gouffran with barely a few minutes to play. I know it's a minute detail, extremely small in the grand scheme of things, but to this day, this incredibly baffling decision fills me with fucking rage when I think about it. This seemingly irrelevant decision perfectly summarizes and epitomizes just how clueless and out of his depth P***ew is. Was Shola coming back from injury and needed a few minutes run out to test an ankle now that the game was lost? No. Did Shola have a knack for grabbing a goal in a super-sub type role? Maybe he could grab a consolation goal as some sort of "apology" to the fans for a shambolic home performance? No. Was Shola brought on to showcase his talents to future suitors - in the shop window - type thing? What could he showcase in about 4 minutes? Was Shola brought on because he was our only fit sub and had to replace a badly injured player who'd come off with an awful injury? No. There was absolutely no reason on earth why Shola fucking Ameobi (bless his heart) should have been used as a sub in that manner, at that timing, in said match and circumstance. Anyone who was unsure as to whether P***ew was anything but a fraudulent charlatan mascarading as a "football" manager, desecrating the great name of NUFC, insulting its fanbase, and ripping its heart out of any ambition and optimism, should be left without a shred of doubt as to what he really is based on this seemingly harmless innocent substitution. Fuck off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spudil Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Has this guy not been sussed as a WUM, like? It was only t'other month he was on about re-signing Lovenkrands instead of Remy. Don't get me wrong, I find you mildly entertaining at times. Just don't know how you've managed to hook 4 or 5 posters the right side of stupid. Oh shit has Luca really been trolling the fuck out of everyone here? it's seriously hard to tell at this stage. ffs man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm not buying that Kinnear was simply a bad appointment and we coincidentally didn't buy anyone for 2 whole transfer windows like. Sometimes you need to read between the lines a bit, not one person thought that was a good appointment but it's far too convenient that Kinnear served as the scapegoat for doing precisely what Ashley loves doing when not pressed otherwise by factors such as potential relegation, i.e. spending the square root of fuck-all. Seems far more fanciful to believe it was an innocent mistake that didn't work out, made by someone who wants the best for the club. :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucaAltieri Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm not buying that Kinnear was simply a bad appointment and we coincidentally didn't buy anyone for 2 whole transfer windows like. Sometimes you need to read between the lines a bit, not one person thought that was a good appointment but it's far too convenient that Kinnear served as the scapegoat for doing precisely what Ashley loves doing when not pressed otherwise by factors such as potential relegation, i.e. spending the square root of fuck-all. Seems far more fanciful to believe it was an innocent mistake that didn't work out, made by someone who wants the best for the club. We know that Ashley doesn't give a fuck about what the fans think. We know that Ashley doesn't like to spend money. Why would he hire someone just to use them as a scapegoat? Did he suddenly start to care what the fans think or did he suddenly decide he liked wasting money? I see little evidence of either in any other aspect of the club. If he was so keen to keep the fans onside, why would he hire Kinnear in the first place? Why wouldn't he hire someone we respected to be DoF then use them as a scapegoat? Wouldn't that be more plausible? It just doesn't add up. It's fucking bonkers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucaAltieri Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 It also implies that Ashley doesn't want us to succeed. The theory goes he just wants to use us as a vehicle to push Sports Direct. I'm sure he does like the free advertisng. But the better we do, the more exposure he gets. What marketing genius wants their brand associated with the football team that gets humped every week? Or at best achieves mid-table stability. Moreover, there are much cheaper ways to buy that advertising. He could have put the same fucking banners up all over SJP or any other ground for a fraction of what it cost to buy the club. It doesn't. Make. Sense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm not buying that Kinnear was simply a bad appointment and we coincidentally didn't buy anyone for 2 whole transfer windows like. Sometimes you need to read between the lines a bit, not one person thought that was a good appointment but it's far too convenient that Kinnear served as the scapegoat for doing precisely what Ashley loves doing when not pressed otherwise by factors such as potential relegation, i.e. spending the square root of fuck-all. Seems far more fanciful to believe it was an innocent mistake that didn't work out, made by someone who wants the best for the club. Conspiracy v Cock-up theory again. Ashley does have a history, in his business and with the club, of giving jobs to mates who he knows and trusts. I believe that the upper echelons of Sports Direct are full of people who have been with him since the very early days. I'd agree that Kinnear was a dingbat appointment. There's a political / pr element to a senior post at a football club and from the very start Kinnear showed that he didn't have the ability to handle that. It's also hard to imagine him handling delicate negotiations with other clubs, particularly from abroad. But would Ashley put the club at risk by deliberately appointing someone who he knew would screw up? I can't see that. Kinnear was an attempt by Ashley to get a handle on what was going on inside the club without actually having to spend the time getting directly involved himself. The fact that he's now formally joined the Board suggests that he knows that can't work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tachikoma Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm not buying that Kinnear was simply a bad appointment and we coincidentally didn't buy anyone for 2 whole transfer windows like. Sometimes you need to read between the lines a bit, not one person thought that was a good appointment but it's far too convenient that Kinnear served as the scapegoat for doing precisely what Ashley loves doing when not pressed otherwise by factors such as potential relegation, i.e. spending the square root of fuck-all. Seems far more fanciful to believe it was an innocent mistake that didn't work out, made by someone who wants the best for the club. We know that Ashley doesn't give a fuck about what the fans think. We know that Ashley doesn't like to spend money. Why would he hire someone just to use them as a scapegoat? Did he suddenly start to care what the fans think or did he suddenly decide he liked wasting money? I see little evidence of either in any other aspect of the club. If he was so keen to keep the fans onside, why would he hire Kinnear in the first place? Why wouldn't he hire someone we respected to be DoF then use them as a scapegoat? Wouldn't that be more plausible? It just doesn't add up. It's fucking bonkers. Then, what do you think Mike hired Kinnear for? I don't necessarily buy the line that he hired Kinnear to not spend money, I think he just likes the old bat. But if you think that appointment was made with the best interests of the club at the heart of it, then you have to be seriously delusional. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 He wants us to succeed but doesn't buy any players for two years, sells Cabaye in January sans replacement and drags a manager off the League 1 scrapheap to run the show. It's all becoming clear now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucaAltieri Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 He wants us to succeed but doesn't buy any players for two years, sells Cabaye in January sans replacement and drags a manager off the League 1 scrapheap to run the show. It's all becoming clear now. Maybe, the billionaire owner with no history working in football, and with multiple other business interests doesn't spend that much time worrying about the inner workings of the club and leaves that to the people he hires specifically for that purpose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucaAltieri Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm not buying that Kinnear was simply a bad appointment and we coincidentally didn't buy anyone for 2 whole transfer windows like. Sometimes you need to read between the lines a bit, not one person thought that was a good appointment but it's far too convenient that Kinnear served as the scapegoat for doing precisely what Ashley loves doing when not pressed otherwise by factors such as potential relegation, i.e. spending the square root of fuck-all. Seems far more fanciful to believe it was an innocent mistake that didn't work out, made by someone who wants the best for the club. We know that Ashley doesn't give a fuck about what the fans think. We know that Ashley doesn't like to spend money. Why would he hire someone just to use them as a scapegoat? Did he suddenly start to care what the fans think or did he suddenly decide he liked wasting money? I see little evidence of either in any other aspect of the club. If he was so keen to keep the fans onside, why would he hire Kinnear in the first place? Why wouldn't he hire someone we respected to be DoF then use them as a scapegoat? Wouldn't that be more plausible? It just doesn't add up. It's fucking bonkers. Then, what do you think Mike hired Kinnear for? I don't necessarily buy the line that he hired Kinnear to not spend money, I think he just likes the old bat. But if you think that appointment was made with the best interests of the club at the heart of it, then you have to be seriously delusional. See Cronky's post above. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 He wants us to succeed but doesn't buy any players for two years, sells Cabaye in January sans replacement and drags a manager off the League 1 scrapheap to run the show. It's all becoming clear now. Maybe, the billionaire owner with no history working in football, and with multiple other business interests doesn't spend that much time worrying about the inner workings of the club and leaves that to the people he hires specifically for that purpose. People like his mate Derek Llambias who resigned, so laughable was the situation? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 It's coming to something when the best argument that people have got is "He's shit, but it's because he's shit" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucaAltieri Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 He wants us to succeed but doesn't buy any players for two years, sells Cabaye in January sans replacement and drags a manager off the League 1 scrapheap to run the show. It's all becoming clear now. Maybe, the billionaire owner with no history working in football, and with multiple other business interests doesn't spend that much time worrying about the inner workings of the club and leaves that to the people he hires specifically for that purpose. Ah right, of course. It's the club employees that are choosing to sell our best players, choosing not to spend, choosing to hire a manager sacked by West Ham, Southampton and Charlton Athletic, who no other club would have touched with a bargepole. Mike's given them an open cheque book and told them to go after Laudrup and they keep letting him down, the bloody rascals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 It's coming to something when the best argument that people have got is "He's s***, but it's because he's s***" It is, that's all Pardew has on his side now, Muppets supporting a Muppet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm not buying that Kinnear was simply a bad appointment and we coincidentally didn't buy anyone for 2 whole transfer windows like. Sometimes you need to read between the lines a bit, not one person thought that was a good appointment but it's far too convenient that Kinnear served as the scapegoat for doing precisely what Ashley loves doing when not pressed otherwise by factors such as potential relegation, i.e. spending the square root of fuck-all. Seems far more fanciful to believe it was an innocent mistake that didn't work out, made by someone who wants the best for the club. We know that Ashley doesn't give a fuck about what the fans think. We know that Ashley doesn't like to spend money. Why would he hire someone just to use them as a scapegoat? Did he suddenly start to care what the fans think or did he suddenly decide he liked wasting money? I see little evidence of either in any other aspect of the club. If he was so keen to keep the fans onside, why would he hire Kinnear in the first place? Why wouldn't he hire someone we respected to be DoF then use them as a scapegoat? Wouldn't that be more plausible? It just doesn't add up. It's fucking bonkers. I'd dispute your first point, which would sort of negate much of the rest of your post tbh. Few questions for you, if Ashley doesn't care a jot what the fans think... - Why did he throw a massive paddy when fans were kicking off at him after the Keegan stuff, reacting by putting the club on the market in a huff? - Why did he do similar when the Chronicle objectively and innocuously reported a protest march in their paper, banning all TH publications from the ground? - Why are his staff consistently trying to dampen expectations in the media, if not to limit fan anger and fuel apathy? - Why are they consistently mis-leading the fans on issues such as transfer fees paid out, if not to avoid being berated by the fans for not spending what we bring in? - Why the cloak-and-dagger approach to explaining the Sports Direct advertising issue? If he's not bothered about the fans, why doesn't he just say it's his ground and they can fuck off? - Why is the club run in such a shady, secretive way, where every communication with the fans is watered down and again geared towards lowering expectations? They're just a few questions, there'd be more if I could be arsed to think of them. But the point I'm making is that although fan's feelings clearly aren't the be-all-and-end-all for Mike Ashley, he benefits from an easier ride, which is unfortunately all too often afforded to him due to the fractured nature of our support, general apathy/resignation in the stands (much of it resulting from years of the club saying/doing things that suggest we're not much cop as a football club, in contrast to previous years where we'd be allowed to dream and knew we'd try to compete) and also many of our fans falling for the quite obvious decoys being put in front of them, such as an excuse-machine manager and a DOF who people would point and laugh at and then later on blame when no players were brought in and our best one was sold. You even heard it at the time, fans all over the shop going "It's the Director Of Fuck-All's fault, he's not doing his job properly", so it clearly was believable to some. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm genuinely staggered that there are still people hanging onto anything positive whatsoever to do with that cluster of cunts like. After everything, after everything that has been predicted and has happened, there's still people finding solace in their delusions of insignificance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'd dispute your first point, which would sort of negate the rest of your post tbh. Few questions for you, if Ashley doesn't care a jot what the fans think... - Why did he throw a massive paddy when fans were kicking off at him after the Keegan stuff, reacting by putting the club on the market in a huff? - Why did he do the same when the Chronicle objectively and innocuously reported a protest march in their paper? - Why are his staff consistently trying to dampen expectations in the media, if not to limit fan anger and fuel apathy? - Why are they consistently mis-leading the fans on issues such as transfer fees paid out, if not to avoid being berated by the fans for not spending what we bring in? - Why the cloak-and-dagger approach to explaining the Sports Direct advertising issue? If he's not bothered about the fans, why doesn't he just say it's his ground and they can f*** off? - Why is the club run in such a shady, secretive way, where every communication with the fans is watered down and again geared towards lowering expectations? They're just a few questions, there'd be more if I could be arsed to think of them. But the point I'm making is that although fan's feelings clearly aren't the be-all-and-end-all for Mike Ashley, he benefits from an easier ride, which is unfortunately all too often afforded to him due to the fractured nature of our support, general apathy/resignation in the stands (much of it resulting from years of the club saying/doing things that suggest we're not much cop as a football club, in contrast to previous years where we'd be allowed to dream and knew we'd try to compete) and also many of our fans falling for the quite obvious decoys being put in front of them, such as an excuse-machine manager and a DOF who people would point and laugh at and then later on blame when no players were brought in and our best one was sold. You even heard it at the time, fans all over the shop going "It's the Director Of f***-All's fault, he's not doing his job properly", so it clearly was believable to some. You just had to mention the singing section, you didn't need all of those words. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucaAltieri Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 He wants us to succeed but doesn't buy any players for two years, sells Cabaye in January sans replacement and drags a manager off the League 1 scrapheap to run the show. It's all becoming clear now. Maybe, the billionaire owner with no history working in football, and with multiple other business interests doesn't spend that much time worrying about the inner workings of the club and leaves that to the people he hires specifically for that purpose. Ah right, of course. It's the club employees that are choosing to sell our best players, choosing not to spend, choosing to hire a manager sacked by West Ham, Southampton and Charlton Athletic. Mike's given them an open cheque book and told them to go after Laudrup and they keep letting him down, the bloody rascals. See, this is the kind of shit I'm talking about. I argue that he's not micromanaging the day to day operations. Your response is to suggest that there's no money available anyway. It's all smoke and mirrors. Part of the plan. There's a middle ground. Ashley wants bargains and fuck face Kinnear couldn't deliver them. We were bidding for players. We even had bids accepted and were negotiating personal terms. But no, that's just a smokescreen in the grand plot to make sure we never sign another player again. Logic would dictate Ashley gave them a budget and Kinnear couldn't make it work. He sold one of our most valuable assets (arguably cheaply) and couldn't get a replacement through the door in time. He got sacked. Looks pretty obvious to me. But unless there's something sinister you lot just aren't happy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 How many years do we need to see us spending significantly less than we bring in for it to click like? We consistently find ways to do it, so no wonder people are cynical. It appears to be the plan. Can't believe we're still having this conversation after 7 years of seeing it happen in front of our eyes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spudil Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 How many years do we need to see us spending significantly less than we bring in for it to click like? We consistently find ways to do it, so no wonder people are cynical. It appears to be the plan. Can't believe we're still having this conversation after 7 years of seeing it happen in front of our eyes. Next window is the crucial one IMO. We will see Mikes true intentions then, without that rascal Joe around to scupper things with his ineptitude. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts