Pre-season (2024/25)

[Tsunami]

Big Jo is in Brazil for his wedding, probs came off so he didn’t risk any pre nup injury.

[Tsunami]

Bruno is there as well.

[Wolfcastle]

Well that's the last bitching and moaning about the team/s for a good while out the way for some folk.

Our youth players didn't do well in the check-a-trade/papa-johns and nobody gave a stuff  and the club was generally a total mess for some of that time and made no financial gains through it

[TheBrownBottle]

Just seen the result by as a result of hopping onto this forum.  An Australian-based NUFC supporter, all I can offer is *shrug*.  Anyone daft enough to pay silly money for this nonsense had it coming.  I don’t have much time for the ‘what about the young’uns watching for the first time’ crack.  Plenty of local football to take them to - those kids should be supporting their local side first and foremost.   Don’t get me wrong, the club deserves any criticism it receives - these matches should never have been played.  

 

It will have zero impact on the expanding the club in the very, very limited local market.  No bugger knows it was being played.  Wouldn’t worry about it. 

[Pancrate1892]

At least we've enhanced our global brand 

[TheBrownBottle]

Also, why is this in the pre-season thread?  It isn’t pre-season.  It’s still the 23/24 season.  We’re just daft enough to have organised friendlies in Australia at the end of it. 

[Memphis]

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Simple as.

[Dr.Spaceman]

37 minutes ago, Armchair Pundit said:

 

If the whole point was to drum up support, raise our commercial side outside the UK, to build a more global brand to work on helping with FFP, then we need supporters wherever we can get them. This tour will have been a failure in those terms, it's not a good look at all.

 

Was it? I thought we just went because we were being paid a daft amount to do so.

[Dr.Spaceman]

19 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Also, why is this in the pre-season thread?  It isn’t pre-season.  It’s still the 23/24 season.  We’re just daft enough to have organised friendlies in Australia at the end of it. 

 

We didn't organise it, did we?

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

 

We didn't organise it, did we?

No, it was organised for us if we’re being specific, but regardless of who put the friendly on the club agreed to it and therefore we organised sending the squad out to play these matches. 

[Dr.Spaceman]

Oh well.

[Dr.Spaceman]

Honestly, some of you will get your knickers in a twist over absolutely anything 

[TheBrownBottle]

2 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

Honestly, some of you will get your knickers in a twist over absolutely anything 

My knickers remain untwisted  

[Dr.Spaceman]

2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

My knickers remain untwisted  

 

Oh yeah, that wasn't aimed at you

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Pancrate1892 said:

Didn't we win the league the season before? 

A couple of seasons before - 1926/27 - but it was still a strong side however the whole tour was full of incident and massive controversy.

[Guest]

For those interested open that 1929 tour I’ll put up the rest of the article which includes been attacked by Italians and coming close to sparking a diplomatic incident with Hungary!

 

This was how the game in Milan was reported

 

19/05/1929 - AMBROSIANA MILAN 0 NEWCASTLE 1

 

 

Sunderland Echo: Newcastle Players’ Lively Reception At Milan

 

Sunderland Echo reporter Argus had received a sensational account of Sunday's game in Milan from Tommy  Urwin and  Bob Thomson and the paper reports it in their own words (written in the hotel on the evening after the game).

 

We witnessed some of the most amazing scenes to-day. We were one up  in the first ten minutes, scored by Chalmers, our inside right. Then it began to get rough, but we were still in front at half-time.

 

After changing over things got worse on account of the referee being very weak. He allowed the worst fouls imaginable and this at last led to Tommy  Lang our outside left and their right back being sent off.

 

Things went from bad to worse. They were given a penalty, what for nobody knows!  Anyhow, the player deliberately missed the goal. After many more stoppages the game finished with the United still leading 1-0.

 

All the boys played well, and our opponents were quite a good side, but the crowd was full of excitement and bitter against us. Well when we had to leave the stadium fully 5,000 awaited us, and we had to be escorted by the Army and the police, for our bus windows were smashed by the missiles thrown.

 

Several players were hit. Burns, our goalkeeper, was cut about the face, and we were all lucky to escape. After being in the hotel a few minutes we were visited again by the mob, still strong, and flashing knives, and they are at this moment still outside giving us our "Sunday names".

 

We have had orders not to leave the hotel tonight, and I can assure you we won't leave until train-time tomorrow.

 

 

Other UK Newspaper Reports

 

An attack by a mob of at least 5.000 strong was made on the Newcastle United football team at Milan during their Continental tour, which is still in progress. Great enthusiasm was aroused in the city, and apparently the crowd hoped to see the local players win, but the English team proved the masters.

 

Only noisy demonstrations occurred during the match, but at the end of the game feeling developed to such a pitch that the crowd got out of hand. A mob at least 5,000 strong made a concerted attack on the Newcastle men as they left the ground and entered their motor-coaches.

 

Immediately the English team were the centre of a free fight, as the hostile crowd tried to swarm on to the vehicles. They were repulsed, however, by the police, who raced to the rescue.

 

The coaches were so damaged that they could not be moved, and had to be 

surrounded by police while repairs were made. All the time missiles were thrown, and the scene threatened to become still more dangerous. 

 

The police finally drew their revolvers and drove the crowd back. Guarded by the police, the Newcastle men were able to make their way to their hotel. The crowd followed (many brandishing knives) and tried to storm the building, but were held at bay by the police.

 

 

Milan newspaper Corriere della Sera 

 

The paper flatly contradicted the claims against the Italian crowds. It claimed that the English players lost their tempers when they perceived that the Italian team was tougher than they thought and they resorted to “brutal methods” in an attempt to “disable their adversaries”.

 

They also claimed that when a penalty was awarded, due to their “rough play”,  “the English players attacked the referee, kicking and bruising him”. As a protest the Milan team refused to take the kick.

 

Finally they say "we are astonished at the Newcastle United team's unchivalrous and unsportsmanlike behaviour, rendered worse by their attempt to throw the blame on the Italians".

 

 

Mr. F. G. Wall, secretary of the Football Association, responded to the Italian newspaper reports. "I have seen these statements. If there had been any improper behaviour by the English players in Italy it would have been the duty of the referee to bring such behaviour to the notice of the Italian F.A., who would then communicate with the English F.A. We have had nothing. I think it is sufficient for me to say that."

 

A journalist from the Berliner Tageblatt who attended the match in Milan supported United’s case. He stated that both the Italian team and the linesmen lost their heads and that the referee allowed them to hold, push and punch the Newcastle players. He also said that the referee blew for offside whenever Newcastle got into a dangerous position and made lots of other unfair decisions.

 

The Athletic News contained a letter from a couple of ex-patriots who were critical of the way Newcastle played stating that they "are very sorry indeed to have to confess that a display of football such as that, witnessed by Newcastle in the match in question does anything but further the British prestige of football on the Continent".

 

 

Hughie Gallacher's viewpoint in a 1932 Sunday Sun feature

 

Tommy Lang, our five feet six outside left, got into a slight tiff with the Milan right half.  Before he knew what was happening the big Italian rushed at him. Tommy shaped up, but the big fellow was no Carnera, He grabbed Tommy and tried to bite him. I could do nothing but laugh.

 

But my amusement soon ended when the referee, an Austrian, ordered Tommy to the pavilion. The crowd was furious. We had the winning goal and went off the field to the accompaniment of screams and threats of violence.

 

Going back to our hotel we had to run the gauntlet through a teeming crowd of enraged Italians. Worse than that, after we got aboard our coach the crowd smashed the windows and bombarded us with stones and any kind of missile available.

 

Jack Hill and another member of the party were hit. Even when we got to the hotel the crowd besieged the place. We left Milan that night under escort, glad to get a rest from the Fascisti idea of football enthusiasm.

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

Final one

 

30/05 - BUDAPEST: HUNGARIAN PROFESSIONAL XI 4 NEWCASTLE 1

 

Gallacher scored a penalty in the first half but he and Maitland were given their marching orders after the break as the play assumed a very rough character. 

 

Newcastle's display resulted in very strong adverse comment in the Hungarian Press. It was revealed that the Hungarian FA had  refused to pay the sum of £165 due to Newcastle United for the match. 

 

The money was to be sent to the English FA, who would be asked to exercise their discretion as to whether Newcastle United should receive it or whether it should be refunded to the Hungarian authorities.

 

It was also stated that they  were considering the advisability of refusing to arrange further tours from English clubs.

 

 

Vossische Zeitung - “No fight-No money! Hungarian Ultimatum to British Footballers" - The Prague correspondent reported that before the match against Slavia, the representative of the Hungarian Football Association told the manager of Newcastle United that he would not receive any money in Budapest unless they tried seriously to win the match. It further claimed that he obtained the insertion of a clause in the Budapest contract stating that Newcastle United would forfeit their fee for the Budapest match if they failed to equal the score of Hungary. 

 

The Magyar Hirlap claimed “the English players did not play” and that they “boxed, struck, and kicked the Hungarian players”.

 

Ujsag remarked that: “The Hungarian public will be represented by its enemies abroad as lacking in self-control and being too temperamental. Would the London public have taken it calmly if the foreign players had been guilty of brutal conduct?” It also claimed that the spectators remained calm and preserved their dignity.

 

Pesti Naplo suggested “Hill and Burns alone were above criticism”.

 

The Budapest Hirlap and  the Magyarsag expressed the opinion that “British professional football has spoilt itself in Budapest for years to come”.

 

 

Subsequent Events

 

05/06 - The FA revealed that they had received a £165 cheque from the Hungarian FA, but without any covering letter supporting the charges made. 

 “The money belongs to Newcastle United," said FA secretary Mr. Wall. “It is their guarantee, and we have no right to withhold it from them on the strength of vague foreign allegations of unfair play. Newcastle United strenuously deny the charges, and they have said quite openly that they are ready to meet any investigation we may hold, but we shall certainly not hold any such inquiry unless the Hungarian football authorities make definite charges in writing". 

 

11/06 - Frank Wall revealed that he had received a cable from the Hungarian FA stating that they had posted a report to him.  He also said he had seen the press reports and that he had met three United directors last Tuesday who were very concerned and were adamant that there was "not the slightest foundation for the allegations". Wall explained that until the report had been received, "nothing more can be said". 

 

15/06 - Mr Wall announced that the report had now been received and a copy had been sent to the club. The Hungarians were asking for an enquiry to be carried out.

 

19/06 - The FA invited Newcastle to make any comments/corrections before they decided what action to take. Wall said that in 34 years as an official at the FA he had “never come across such allegations against an English football team on the continent”. 

 

20/06 - The United Board met for three hours and secretary Watt stated that they have framed a lengthy reply for the FA which completely denied the charges. They also stated that, if a commission was to be held, they wanted the Hungarian Report and their official reply to be published in full.

 

29/06 - The FA informed the press that United's formal reply has been received by them and woul be communicated immediately to the Hungarian FA for their observations. Once these were received they would decide whether any further action was required.

 

15/10 - Directors Rutherford, Nevin, Oliver and Oates, secretary Watt and trainer McCombie travelled down to 42, Russell Square to attend the FA Commission meeting regarding their summer tour. They were joined by players Maitland, Hill and Gallacher and Huddersfield director Barlow (who had also been with the touring party). The Hungarian FA were represented by Dr. Nandon Fodor.

 

 After hearing evidence from both sides the commission adjourned and then issued a statement. "We are of the opinion from the indifferent displays given by Newcastle United during the tour that the Hungarian F.A. was justified in endeavouring to cancel the contract. The match, however, which was against Hungaria FC, having been played, the money retained - £165 - must be paid over to the Newcastle United club. We are further of the opinion that the referee's conduct of the game was not satisfactory. With regard to the reports as to Gallacher and Maitland being ordered off the field, on the evidence, we make no order.”

 

21/10 - The Hungarian FA were not altogether satisfied with some of the findings of the FA Commission and were planning to  to ask for a full investigation by the International FA; a step which was unprecedented in the annals of English football. Their grievances were against the team in general and two players in particular.

 

18/11 - It was reported that the Hungarian FA had stated that United would be banned from playing in their country until they had given entire satisfaction for an offending term alleged to have been used by a member of the United party during last summer’s visit.

 

 

 

Hughie Gallacher's viewpoint in 1932 Sunday Sun feature

 

The gossips have it that we went on to the field drunk. Others have it that we were so drunk the night before we were ill when we went on to the field.

 

As you know many clubs, even in sedate Scotland, on the occasion of a big match, allow a player the privilege of taking some slight stimulant before the match.

 

Well, we had no champagne, but it is true that before the Budapest match, myself, Alf. Maitland and Jack Hill, sipped and gargled our throats with some Cognac from a bottle that stood handy on the dressing-room table.

 

More to the point, as is the custom on the Continent, our dressing-room was not built as are dressing-rooms at home. Here players are hidden away from curious eyes. On the continent the players' room is usually built on a site which allows spectators to crowd round the window and watch the footballers undressing.

 

That is what happened at Budapest. People outside saw us sip the cognac, but sip and no more.

 

I got more than my usual rough passage and twice we were denied

legitimate penalties. By the interval the Austrians were leading 4-1.

 

Alf Maitland, like myself, was getting rather tired of "taking the boot." The outside-left, a genial chap, cheerfully ripped Alf's stocking with his boot and left an ugly wound on his leg.

 

Alf warned him. Three times, in fact, Maitland warned the winger, and each time the referee took no notice of the little incidents, and when, just after the Interval, the winger again left his boot mark on Maitland, our man lost his temper and rushed after him. Now the referee did move. He danced on to the field and in the best actor referee manner ordered Maitland to the pavilion.

 

Exactly four minutes from the moment Maitland was sent off, I picked up a nice pass down the middle and went back a yard or two to collect. An Austrian, from an awkward angle, intercepted, and my boot got him a rather severe jar on the ankle. He squealed and dropped on the ground. I stooped to pick him up. But my Austrian friend did not know anything about “turn the other cheek"; from where he lay he swung his strong leg and gave me a booter that more than made up for my kick.

 

While I was still hopping in fury and agony; the referee again left his anchor on the touch-line and came onto the field. Tapping me on the shoulder he pointed to the pavilion.

 

Before going there, still hoping that explanation would save me, I walked towards the injured man, Then the crowd went mad. They yelled and screamed. Talk about a Celtic - Rangers scene, by comparison no more than a P.S.A. debate.

 

A Newcastle director, Mr. George Rutherford, rushed on the field, and grabbing me by the arm, said "Get inside, quickly”. 

 

I believe he thought, as I thought, that the crowd would lynch me. When I walked down the passage-way to the dressing-rooms they spat on me. Even for me that was a new experience.

 

Next thing we heard was that the Austrians were refusing to pay Newcastle the usual fee and gate monies. We were told that the refusal was justified on the grounds that the Austrians accused us of being drunk.

 

At the time, the players accused, excused this charge by assuming that continental clubs do not favour the practice of players taking a stimulant and had therefore exaggerated the incident.

 

Certainly the Austrians magnified the true version. They also alleged that Newcastle had not played football worthy of their reputation.

 

I told the (FA) officials that, frankly, playing in England, Ireland, France and Scotland in representative and international matches I had never thought the sight of a brandy bottle unique in a pavilion. The moral rights and wrongs of the custom, I pointed out, did not concern me.

 

[TBG]

k

[80]

11 minutes ago, Toontimes said:

Final one

 

30/05 - BUDAPEST: HUNGARIAN PROFESSIONAL XI 4 NEWCASTLE 1

 

Gallacher scored a penalty in the first half but he and Maitland were given their marching orders after the break as the play assumed a very rough character. 

 

Newcastle's display resulted in very strong adverse comment in the Hungarian Press. It was revealed that the Hungarian FA had  refused to pay the sum of £165 due to Newcastle United for the match. 

 

The money was to be sent to the English FA, who would be asked to exercise their discretion as to whether Newcastle United should receive it or whether it should be refunded to the Hungarian authorities.

 

It was also stated that they  were considering the advisability of refusing to arrange further tours from English clubs.

 

 

Vossische Zeitung - “No fight-No money! Hungarian Ultimatum to British Footballers" - The Prague correspondent reported that before the match against Slavia, the representative of the Hungarian Football Association told the manager of Newcastle United that he would not receive any money in Budapest unless they tried seriously to win the match. It further claimed that he obtained the insertion of a clause in the Budapest contract stating that Newcastle United would forfeit their fee for the Budapest match if they failed to equal the score of Hungary. 

 

The Magyar Hirlap claimed “the English players did not play” and that they “boxed, struck, and kicked the Hungarian players”.

 

Ujsag remarked that: “The Hungarian public will be represented by its enemies abroad as lacking in self-control and being too temperamental. Would the London public have taken it calmly if the foreign players had been guilty of brutal conduct?” It also claimed that the spectators remained calm and preserved their dignity.

 

Pesti Naplo suggested “Hill and Burns alone were above criticism”.

 

The Budapest Hirlap and  the Magyarsag expressed the opinion that “British professional football has spoilt itself in Budapest for years to come”.

 

 

Subsequent Events

 

05/06 - The FA revealed that they had received a £165 cheque from the Hungarian FA, but without any covering letter supporting the charges made. 

 “The money belongs to Newcastle United," said FA secretary Mr. Wall. “It is their guarantee, and we have no right to withhold it from them on the strength of vague foreign allegations of unfair play. Newcastle United strenuously deny the charges, and they have said quite openly that they are ready to meet any investigation we may hold, but we shall certainly not hold any such inquiry unless the Hungarian football authorities make definite charges in writing". 

 

11/06 - Frank Wall revealed that he had received a cable from the Hungarian FA stating that they had posted a report to him.  He also said he had seen the press reports and that he had met three United directors last Tuesday who were very concerned and were adamant that there was "not the slightest foundation for the allegations". Wall explained that until the report had been received, "nothing more can be said". 

 

15/06 - Mr Wall announced that the report had now been received and a copy had been sent to the club. The Hungarians were asking for an enquiry to be carried out.

 

19/06 - The FA invited Newcastle to make any comments/corrections before they decided what action to take. Wall said that in 34 years as an official at the FA he had “never come across such allegations against an English football team on the continent”. 

 

20/06 - The United Board met for three hours and secretary Watt stated that they have framed a lengthy reply for the FA which completely denied the charges. They also stated that, if a commission was to be held, they wanted the Hungarian Report and their official reply to be published in full.

 

29/06 - The FA informed the press that United's formal reply has been received by them and woul be communicated immediately to the Hungarian FA for their observations. Once these were received they would decide whether any further action was required.

 

15/10 - Directors Rutherford, Nevin, Oliver and Oates, secretary Watt and trainer McCombie travelled down to 42, Russell Square to attend the FA Commission meeting regarding their summer tour. They were joined by players Maitland, Hill and Gallacher and Huddersfield director Barlow (who had also been with the touring party). The Hungarian FA were represented by Dr. Nandon Fodor.

 

 After hearing evidence from both sides the commission adjourned and then issued a statement. "We are of the opinion from the indifferent displays given by Newcastle United during the tour that the Hungarian F.A. was justified in endeavouring to cancel the contract. The match, however, which was against Hungaria FC, having been played, the money retained - £165 - must be paid over to the Newcastle United club. We are further of the opinion that the referee's conduct of the game was not satisfactory. With regard to the reports as to Gallacher and Maitland being ordered off the field, on the evidence, we make no order.”

 

21/10 - The Hungarian FA were not altogether satisfied with some of the findings of the FA Commission and were planning to  to ask for a full investigation by the International FA; a step which was unprecedented in the annals of English football. Their grievances were against the team in general and two players in particular.

 

18/11 - It was reported that the Hungarian FA had stated that United would be banned from playing in their country until they had given entire satisfaction for an offending term alleged to have been used by a member of the United party during last summer’s visit.

 

 

 

Hughie Gallacher's viewpoint in 1932 Sunday Sun feature

 

The gossips have it that we went on to the field drunk. Others have it that we were so drunk the night before we were ill when we went on to the field.

 

As you know many clubs, even in sedate Scotland, on the occasion of a big match, allow a player the privilege of taking some slight stimulant before the match.

 

Well, we had no champagne, but it is true that before the Budapest match, myself, Alf. Maitland and Jack Hill, sipped and gargled our throats with some Cognac from a bottle that stood handy on the dressing-room table.

 

More to the point, as is the custom on the Continent, our dressing-room was not built as are dressing-rooms at home. Here players are hidden away from curious eyes. On the continent the players' room is usually built on a site which allows spectators to crowd round the window and watch the footballers undressing.

 

That is what happened at Budapest. People outside saw us sip the cognac, but sip and no more.

 

I got more than my usual rough passage and twice we were denied

legitimate penalties. By the interval the Austrians were leading 4-1.

 

Alf Maitland, like myself, was getting rather tired of "taking the boot." The outside-left, a genial chap, cheerfully ripped Alf's stocking with his boot and left an ugly wound on his leg.

 

Alf warned him. Three times, in fact, Maitland warned the winger, and each time the referee took no notice of the little incidents, and when, just after the Interval, the winger again left his boot mark on Maitland, our man lost his temper and rushed after him. Now the referee did move. He danced on to the field and in the best actor referee manner ordered Maitland to the pavilion.

 

Exactly four minutes from the moment Maitland was sent off, I picked up a nice pass down the middle and went back a yard or two to collect. An Austrian, from an awkward angle, intercepted, and my boot got him a rather severe jar on the ankle. He squealed and dropped on the ground. I stooped to pick him up. But my Austrian friend did not know anything about “turn the other cheek"; from where he lay he swung his strong leg and gave me a booter that more than made up for my kick.

 

While I was still hopping in fury and agony; the referee again left his anchor on the touch-line and came onto the field. Tapping me on the shoulder he pointed to the pavilion.

 

Before going there, still hoping that explanation would save me, I walked towards the injured man, Then the crowd went mad. They yelled and screamed. Talk about a Celtic - Rangers scene, by comparison no more than a P.S.A. debate.

 

A Newcastle director, Mr. George Rutherford, rushed on the field, and grabbing me by the arm, said "Get inside, quickly”. 

 

I believe he thought, as I thought, that the crowd would lynch me. When I walked down the passage-way to the dressing-rooms they spat on me. Even for me that was a new experience.

 

Next thing we heard was that the Austrians were refusing to pay Newcastle the usual fee and gate monies. We were told that the refusal was justified on the grounds that the Austrians accused us of being drunk.

 

At the time, the players accused, excused this charge by assuming that continental clubs do not favour the practice of players taking a stimulant and had therefore exaggerated the incident.

 

Certainly the Austrians magnified the true version. They also alleged that Newcastle had not played football worthy of their reputation.

 

I told the (FA) officials that, frankly, playing in England, Ireland, France and Scotland in representative and international matches I had never thought the sight of a brandy bottle unique in a pavilion. The moral rights and wrongs of the custom, I pointed out, did not concern me.

 

These are cool, thanks.

[Disco]

What a LOL.

[wormy]

2 hours ago, James said:

Even if the youth team was good the fans would have come for Newcastle United.

 

we had enough in the squad to play 7 seniors in each match.

 

This is what confuses me. I assume there were enough players that weren't heading straight home or off to international duty that could've been rested Wednesday and played today? Maybe we'd have lost both games if we did but it may have looked a bit more balanced overall.

 

Ah well. It looked silly when it was announced and we looked silly today. What's done is done. Welcome to FFP I guess. 

 

[GeordieDazzler]

[Guest]

Forgot this one - expect similar in the Aussie press

 

22/05/29 - VIENNA ATHLETIC SPORTING CLUBS XI 2 NEWCASTLE 0

 

The President of the Vienna FA (Herr Alexander Neumann) and the manager of the Rapid club (Herr Dionys Schoenecker) criticised United's "conservative, old-fashioned, machine-like safety first and unimaginative methods". They went on to say that "the British are perfect gentlemen, but they play as if their primary reason was to earn a day's wage instead of putting their heart into the game". They also suggest that the United players “did not enter the field as fresh as they might have done”. 

 

Vienna newspaper "Sportagblatt" called upon the Austrian FA to prohibit visits from English clubs in the future as "teachers who have nothing to teach, fighters who don't fight, and players who have no ambition to play are unwelcome visitors here." They also criticised United's outdated tactics and pondered: "poor Newcastle, what has become of you!  The scientists without science". They also lambasted the team's approach suggesting that “they think they are on a pleasure cruise”.

 

[DubblyDubblyDubbly]

[Holloway]

The critical thing here is the timing of the q and q session with smarmy Darren, U bet it was in betweenies