Newcastle United 0-2 Manchester United (26/02/2023)

[geordiesteve710]

1 minute ago, Froggy said:

 

The chant says "how we'll kill him I don't know, cut him up from head to toe." It's absolutely shite craic. I proper cringe when I hear it.

Well I wasn't aware of that bit. Aye, probably a bit much that like.

[jack j]

13 minutes ago, geordiesteve710 said:

Well I wasn't aware of that bit. Aye, probably a bit much that like.

Nee different to us singing about having a party when Ashley dies

Man u fans were in plenty of our fans faces on Wembley way singing the shearer song looking for a reaction. In their eyes they've took the piss and we done fuck all.

Theyve got a far rowdier element that we do. As discussed on the other thread that probably translates into them having a better atmosphere as well

[Hovagod]

3 minutes ago, jack j said:

Nee different to us singing about having a party when Ashley dies

Man u fans were in plenty of our fans faces on Wembley way singing the shearer song looking for a reaction. In their eyes they've took the piss and we done fuck all.

Theyve got a far rowdier element that we do. As discussed on the other thread that probably translates into them having a better atmosphere as well

Oh no. They took the piss and we did fuck all.

[Froggy]

38 minutes ago, 1964 said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but is it the running of the club that is the issue with the glazers?   They seem to have invested money in the squad.  3 of your players were the same price as our entire squad at the weekend.  I'm not close enough to know so happy to be corrected

 

To put it simply, yes.

 

We were arguably the biggest club in the world when the Glazers took over. We can and will always be able to spend big because of the huge revenue at the club. A lot of opposition fans see the spend and think that this is all that is required to be satisfied with your owners. It's just not the case.

 

In a nutshell, they:

• Bought the club with a leveraged buyout, saddling the club with almost £550m in loan debt, of which only £35m has been repaid 18 years later.
• Through debt repayments, dividends and "management charges" they've taken over £1.5b out of the club. Spurs new stadium cost £1b as a guide.
• They hire yes men and money men into footballing roles. We only hired a director of football last year.  There was never any concern for success, unless it was financial.
• While a fortune was spent on players, it was glorified accountants in charge of the deals. Overpaying in both fees and wages.
• Managers were never backed like people thought they were. The board blocked Mourinho signing Perisic and Alderweireld for example for £40m each but signed Maguire for £80m. Van Gaal has been very critical of the owners since leaving. Ole was a yes man and just happy to be here. Don't get me start of the Ralf debacle.
• The facilities haven't changed since they took over. Nor has the stadium which most fans agree is essentially falling apart.

There was a graph released last season or the season before showing investment from owners into their clubs. I think Chelsea were top with £500m. Newcastle were second bottom with -£20m and we were rock bottom with -£89m.

 

Look at what Sheikh Mansour has done with Man City's facilities. Did PIF not immediately make plans to upgrade your training ground? Ronaldo was quoted as saying absolutely nothing changed at the club from when he first arrived down to the same gym machines. I believe him.

 

Essentially we want the clubs money to be spent on the club, not on interest for loans used to buy the club while said buyers line their pockets with dividends every season. We've been allowed to fall massively behind our biggest rivals because the clubs hierachy is rotten.

 

A new approach seems to have been taken over the last year or two. Hiring a director of football. Hiring the manager everybody wanted who would build for the future. Signing the players he wanted and allowing him freedom. We'll see how it goes. It certainly looks like they're not going to sell now we're looking good again.

 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2023 by Froggy

[1964]

Great response 

[geordiesteve710]

45 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

To put it simply, yes.

 

We were arguably the biggest club in the world when the Glazers took over. We can and will always be able to spend big because of the huge revenue at the club. A lot of opposition fans see the spend and think that this is all that is required to be satisfied with your owners. It's just not the case.

 

In a nutshell, they:

• Bought the club with a leveraged buyout, saddling the club with almost £550m in loan debt, of which only £35m has been repaid 18 years later.
• Through debt repayments, dividends and "management charges" they've taken over £1.5b out of the club. Spurs new stadium cost £1b as a guide.
• They hire yes men and money men into footballing roles. We only hired a director of football last year.  There was never any concern for success, unless it was financial.
• While a fortune was spent on players, it was glorified accountants in charge of the deals. Overpaying in both fees and wages.
• Managers were never backed like people thought they were. The board blocked Mourinho signing Perisic and Alderweireld for example for £40m each but signed Maguire for £80m. Van Gaal has been very critical of the owners since leaving. Ole was a yes man and just happy to be here. Don't get me start of the Ralf debacle.
• The facilities haven't changed since they took over. Nor has the stadium which most fans agree is essentially falling apart.

There was a graph released last season or the season before showing investment from owners into their clubs. I think Chelsea were top with £500m. Newcastle were second bottom with -£20m and we were rock bottom with -£89m.

 

Look at what Sheikh Mansour has done with Man City's facilities. Did PIF not immediately make plans to upgrade your training ground? Ronaldo was quoted as saying absolutely nothing changed at the club from when he first arrived down to the same gym machines. I believe him.

 

Essentially we want the clubs money to be spent on the club, not on interest for loans used to buy the club while said buyers line their pockets with dividends every season. We've been allowed to fall massively behind our biggest rivals because the clubs hierachy is rotten.

 

A new approach seems to have been taken over the last year or two. Hiring a director of football. Hiring the manager everybody wanted who would build for the future. Signing the players he wanted and allowing him freedom. We'll see how it goes. It certainly looks like they're not going to sell now we're looking good again.

 

 

 

 

The way I've always looked at it from the outside is they've gone in and they've just taken and further enriched themselves without putting anything back in or adding any value (as a Thatcherite would put it) to the club.

 

I understand why fans would look at that and see their club being used and abused and also, with the emotional pull our clubs have on us it's going to get the fan base angry. And if anyone should understand, it's us.

[Froggy]

9 minutes ago, geordiesteve710 said:

The way I've always looked at it from the outside is they've gone in and they've just taken and further enriched themselves without putting anything back in or adding any value (as a Thatcherite would put it) to the club.

 

I understand why fans would look at that and see their club being used and abused and also, with the emotional pull our clubs have on us it's going to get the fan base angry. And if anyone should understand, it's us.

 

Aye they're fuckers like.  No doubt about it. Unfortunately if you look at it from a business perspective what they've done is incredibly shrewd.

 

The Athletic did an article recently enough which estimated they had added £450m to their personal fortune through the club so far, and that's excluding the actual value of the club when they sell. They'll be looking at £6-7b profit when it's all said and done. 

 

 

[Kid Icarus]

There's probably an argument to be made that they still could have made an obscene profit by taking money out of the club while also making the club massively successful. If the money that has been spent had been spent wisely, with the right people in the right places, and they even modestly invested in infrastructure, they still could have made like 1.48 billion instead of 1.5. 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2023 by Kid Icarus

[The Prophet]

A lot of our fans look at it through the lens of money spent. You'd think they'd have learnt from the likes of Bury fans that just because your club is operated really poorly, it doesn't mean that others can't be too, even if it is too a lesser extent.

 

The Glazers might have spent more money than Mike Ashley, but they've saddled the club with debt, trousered profits and for the most part, overseen the implementation of a disastrous transfer policy. 

[Froggy]

2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

There's probably an argument to be made that they still could have made an obscene profit by taking money out of the club while also making the club massively successful. If the money that has been spent had been spent wisely, with the right people in the right places, and they even modestly invested in infrastructure, they still could have made like 1.48 billion instead of 1.5. 

 

100%. I don't think fans would even mind them taking dividends every season. It's the refinancing and debt/interest payments that cause all the trouble and the complete lack of awareness to allow football people to make the footballing decisions. I think the club has paid an average of £60m a year in interest since they took over, and that peaked at £95m one season. Truly obscene figures IMO.

 

[CM1961]

5 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Aye they're fuckers like.  No doubt about it. Unfortunately if you look at it from a business perspective what they've done is incredibly shrewd.

 

The Athletic did an article recently enough which estimated they had added £450m to their personal fortune through the club so far, and that's excluding the actual value of the club when they sell. They'll be looking at £6-7b profit when it's all said and done. 

 

 

 

Woodward did you no favours when he said ... “Playing performance doesn’t really have a meaningful impact on what we can do on the commercial side of the business”.

 

In some ways, you've got the same problem as we did with Ashley.  The Glazier's may pretend that they want to sell (as Ashley did), but as they are making themselves rich taking so much money out of the club, why would they ?  Man utd are simply seen as a business in their eyes where success on the pitch is a secondary concern. You could be stuck with them for a long time with no obvious way of forcing them out ... as we were with Ashley.

 

Mind you, you've still had the biggest transfer spend in Europe over the last 10 years (£1.3 billion).  And you have the 3rd most expensive squad.  And you have 5 of the 10 most expensive transfers in Premier League history.  There's no doubt money had played a huge part in your club.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

15 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

There's probably an argument to be made that they still could have made an obscene profit by taking money out of the club while also making the club massively successful. If the money that has been spent had been spent wisely, with the right people in the right places, and they even modestly invested in infrastructure, they still could have made like 1.48 billion instead of 1.5. 

Same with Mike Ashley, but they’re just not the kind of people who give a shit about that. 

[Froggy]

2 minutes ago, CM1961 said:

Mind you, you've still had the biggest transfer spend in Europe over the last 10 years (£1.3 billion).  And you have the 3rd most expensive squad.  And you have 5 of the 10 most expensive transfers in Premier League history.  There's no doubt money had played a huge part in your club.

 

It's a huge part for sure, but also a huge part of the problem. Who thought it was a good idea to sign Harry Maguire for £80m?  I love Jadon Sancho, but who on earth decided to give the kid £350k a week. Baffling decisions.

 

Even Antony. He wanted to come and was available for £40m and we doddled about on that as well and ended up paying £80m.  Then we chased De Jong all summer when he was adamant he didn't want to come and we ended up paying a huge fee for Casemiro. That one has worked out OK but it's still poor transfer management. It has at least taken a step in the right direction though with players like Martinez, Malacia and Eriksen.

 

[Kid Icarus]

This is exactly it, the bottom line is that football fans largely only care about what happens on the pitch, the other stuff that gets brought up is only ever a byproduct of that. With the likes of Glazer and Ashley, their own greed gets in the way of potentially bigger profits. 

 

Case in point, the perception among Newcastle fans of Mike Ashley vs PIF

[Rafalove]

As if people are actually offended by those shearer chants  it’s a football match not a dinner party. We sing much worse when we play Liverpool.

[Yorkie]

1 hour ago, Froggy said:

A new approach seems to have been taken over the last year or two. Hiring a director of football. Hiring the manager everybody wanted who would build for the future. Signing the players he wanted and allowing him freedom. We'll see how it goes. It certainly looks like they're not going to sell now we're looking good again.

 

When Rafa was here and things were looking as encouraging as they had in years, there was a debate along the lines of "can we put up with Ashley if Rafa's just allowed to get on with it?" 

 

Then summer 18/19 happened and it became clear that we were never going to kick on, and only the prospect of Amanda Staveley (or Peter Kenyon ) waiting in the wings hinted at any possible future under Rafa/kept the apathy at bay. 

 

Are ManU fans in the process of being completely and utterly duped as well, or is there a realistic prospect of being able to 'let it go' re the owners cos Ten Hag et al are doing such a good job?

[Kid Icarus]

1 minute ago, Yorkie said:

 

When Rafa was here and things were looking as encouraging as they had in years, there was a debate along the lines of "can we put up with Ashley if Rafa's just allowed to get on with it?" 

 

Then summer 18/19 happened and it became clear that we were never going to kick on, and only the prospect of Amanda Staveley (or Peter Kenyon ) waiting in the wings hinted at any possible future under Rafa/kept the apathy at bay. 

 

Are ManU fans in the process of being completely and utterly duped as well, or is there a realistic prospect of being able to 'let it go' re the owners cos Ten Hag et al are doing such a good job?

"What Rafa wants, Rafa gets" lasted like 3 months IIRC

[HaydnNUFC]

2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

"What Rafa wants, Rafa gets" lasted like 3 months IIRC

 

Was the summer of the Championship season and Ashley then reverted to type in the January. IIRC Wullie called it.

[Yorkie]

3 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

6 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

When Rafa was here and things were looking as encouraging as they had in years, there was a debate along the lines of "can we put up with Ashley if Rafa's just allowed to get on with it?" 

 

Then summer 18/19 happened and it became clear that we were never going to kick on, and only the prospect of Amanda Staveley (or Peter Kenyon ) waiting in the wings hinted at any possible future under Rafa/kept the apathy at bay. 

 

Are ManU fans in the process of being completely and utterly duped as well, or is there a realistic prospect of being able to 'let it go' re the owners cos Ten Hag et al are doing such a good job?

"What Rafa wants, Rafa gets" lasted like 3 months IIRC

 

Yeah that only applied to the summer transfer window ahead of the Championship season.

 

There was definitely some chat on here in the latter half of 17/18 about us potentially being able to crack on and progress - before we knew what would happen that summer (I.e. Ki, Muto and a bit of luck with Schar and Rondon). I was one of the naive idiots, for one. 

[Kid Icarus]

Wouldn't mind having a read back at that if you know where it is. IIRC (I hope) I never fell for it either like. 

[KetsbaiaIsBald]

deleted.

 

 

Edited March 1, 2023 by KetsbaiaIsBald
can't be arsed.

[Wullie]

14 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Wouldn't mind having a read back at that if you know where it is. IIRC (I hope) I never fell for it either like. 

 

This is earlier than the timeframe Yorkie mentions (I think I'd mainly lost interest by then) but it's probably what Haydn is thinking of. Can't actually see what the poll results were because it was different forum software.

 

[Kid Icarus]

4 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

This is earlier than the timeframe Yorkie mentions (I think I'd mainly lost interest by then) but it's probably what Haydn is thinking of. Can't actually see what the poll results were because it was different forum software.

 

 

 

  

On 14/05/2016 at 18:02, Guest firetotheworks said:

A, without a shadow of a doubt. You can have Rafa or similar as well as a future with a new owner, but even having Rafa under Ashley we're always just one decision away from destruction.

 

Thank fuck for that

[Yorkie]

That was it, cheers, Wullie. 

[Thomson Mouse]

2 hours ago, Froggy said:

 

Oh believe me I am not saying we don't have a huge amount of absolute twats in our fanbase.  I just don't think the Shearer song should be lumped in with people trying to incite a row.

 

I actually got into a row with a couple of fans of ours the other day because I say the "Joel Glazer is gonna die" chant is pathetic.  

 

In 47 years I don’t think I’ve ever met a manure fan who wasn’t a cunt about football.

 

Even my old boss who has a season ticket at OT for decades and is now retired put “great day out at Wembley and Newcastle played their part”.

 

Cunts, all you.