Jump to content

General NUFC stuff


LoveItIfWeBeatU

Recommended Posts

Just now, NSG said:

Club website has been tarted up

 

www.newcastleunited.com

The club website has needed it for a while in fairness, it's looked dated for some time, and the menu design was horrible.

 

This, doesn't look right to me though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Pilko said:

Just me who thinks it looks far worse than it did before? :lol:

nah not worse, the old one was shocking

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was gonna say that it's one of those shite on desktop but probably good on mobile sites, but I've just checked on mobile and all of the banners look really blown up

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, El Prontonise said:

Footer is an abomination.

 

I swear I was doing that shit on bebo sites ffs :lol:

 

It's clean and long overdue like.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks like ChatGPT wrote something to the prompt: “write something about Newcastle Uniteds kits as though written by a local”

 

IMG_8067.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not bothered anymore that we got relegated in 09, but I really wish we scored to escape at Villa Park cos I think the celebrations would've been absolutely mental. Such an intense day, about as intense as I've felt at a match.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a decent article in the times this morning about City´s case against preferred party sponsers, and also Villa thinking about sueing them also. I thought Samuel´s final take on how to solve it was quite decent:

There could be a compromise in arbitration this week. Win some, lose some. Yet it remains strange that everyone thinks the alternative to protectionism is a free-for-all. It’s not. It’s a spending cap. Not linked to income, not anchored to the worst club in the league. One figure for all. And no loans. If the number is £400million on wages and transfer fees, then 20 clubs can spend it, but the owner can’t loan it. If the club only generate £100million, a further £300million can be added, but only as a gift. An owner can’t ask for it back if he leaves. Straightforward. Easily regulated.

You’ve either generated the money, or you’ve been given the money, but when you’ve spent that money, if you choose to spend the money, you’re done. And if Guardiola is your manager you’ll quite possibly win the league; and if he isn’t, you probably won’t. But, either way, the sky won’t fall in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, buzza said:

There was a decent article in the times this morning about City´s case against preferred party sponsers, and also Villa thinking about sueing them also. I thought Samuel´s final take on how to solve it was quite decent:

There could be a compromise in arbitration this week. Win some, lose some. Yet it remains strange that everyone thinks the alternative to protectionism is a free-for-all. It’s not. It’s a spending cap. Not linked to income, not anchored to the worst club in the league. One figure for all. And no loans. If the number is £400million on wages and transfer fees, then 20 clubs can spend it, but the owner can’t loan it. If the club only generate £100million, a further £300million can be added, but only as a gift. An owner can’t ask for it back if he leaves. Straightforward. Easily regulated.

You’ve either generated the money, or you’ve been given the money, but when you’ve spent that money, if you choose to spend the money, you’re done. And if Guardiola is your manager you’ll quite possibly win the league; and if he isn’t, you probably won’t. But, either way, the sky won’t fall in.

I'd like to see how Guardiola gets on on a level playing field.

 

 

Edited by madras

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, madras said:

I'd like to see how Guardiola gets on on a level playing field.

Would be fascinating to see how all successful managers of big budget clubs do with less resources. We occasionally get to see the opposite, and I guess Rafa might be an example of big to low budget, but an equal transfer budget would in time separate the men from the boys. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, buzza said:

There was a decent article in the times this morning about City´s case against preferred party sponsers, and also Villa thinking about sueing them also. I thought Samuel´s final take on how to solve it was quite decent:

There could be a compromise in arbitration this week. Win some, lose some. Yet it remains strange that everyone thinks the alternative to protectionism is a free-for-all. It’s not. It’s a spending cap. Not linked to income, not anchored to the worst club in the league. One figure for all. And no loans. If the number is £400million on wages and transfer fees, then 20 clubs can spend it, but the owner can’t loan it. If the club only generate £100million, a further £300million can be added, but only as a gift. An owner can’t ask for it back if he leaves. Straightforward. Easily regulated.

You’ve either generated the money, or you’ve been given the money, but when you’ve spent that money, if you choose to spend the money, you’re done. And if Guardiola is your manager you’ll quite possibly win the league; and if he isn’t, you probably won’t. But, either way, the sky won’t fall in.

Don’t expect a comprise, any change would require a vote and given this has gone as far as arbitration it appears the PL hand will have to be forced. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will just be our luck if we get drawn against Arsenal, Aston Villa, Bournemouth, Brentford, Brighton

Chelsea, Crystal Palace, Everton, Fulham Ipswich Town, Leicester City, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United,Nottingham Forest, Southampton,Tottenham, West Ham, Wolverhampton

 

 

Edited by TBG

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...