The Board etc. etc.

[NE5]

 

if you aren't happy, stop going. Or support the mackems, or one of the 86 clubs below us, if you think they have a better board ....that don't make the money we do.

 

:roll:

 

Sorry, like, but you haven't got a clue.

 

 

 

How many times have we had 86 clubs under us while Shepherd has been chairman?

 

how many times did we have 86 clubs under us before Shepherd was chairman, in the previous 3-4 decades, starting from when we last won a domestic trophy ?

 

You aren't finally going to address your title "are Newcastle a selling club", and give us your conclusion at last, are you ?

 

 

[NE5]

 

sorry, but you're too stupid to see it. Think about how many clubs fill their grounds and give their managers so much cash. Quite why you equate the team not quite winning a trophy down to the chairman, when choosing players, selecting them and preparing them is the managers job, is beyond me, as is why you think we have a divine right to one or two trophies. Before this board came in, we were like the mackems, and inferior to many clubs we have overtaken and consolidated. It's like jumping from about 15th-20th position, in front of a half full ground, looking at an apathetic fanbase not bothered about the club anymore, to 5th. If you can't see this, I am not going to explain it again.

 

Also, go away and think about who you think will do better, and is prepared to do better.

 

 

Thanks for the laugh.

 

As I said, if you are so unhappy, boycott the club, persuade 30,000 others to do the same for a few years, get near to the state that they found us in, like the mackems, oxford, Cardiff, Preston etc etc  and you might get rid of them.

For who ? Fook knows, but I'm sure they will be better than Fred, and be more ambitious, matching Chelsea's and manure's spending power, but I'm sure you and your ilk would still whinge on.

 

 

 

You've got a cheek to claim somebody is too stupid to see something, you've been told before and I'll tell you again.  Crowds at most grounds at that time were down, remember trying to tell me that we had one of the best gates each week when somebody else pointed it out?

 

Most, if not all crowds are up now so does that mean all of these clubs are better run now compared to then?  Or, is it possible that interest in the game has grown throughout football in this country?

 

As for spending, yes Shepherd has spent, but he's appointed the wrong managers and backed the wrong ones when they were in the job.   He gave Sir Bobby Robson on average less that £6 million per year yet backed Souness with almost £31 million of new money.  He backs managers more when they are failing than he does when they are doing well, the man is a fool and spends in panic.

 

How many chairman pre-1992 bought quality players at all at any time to tap the fanbase and put the club in europe ?

 

How many times did we qualify for europe in the 3 decades before the current board took over ?

 

Why do you slag off people who put the club into europe, finishing in good league position, yet hold a torch for people who finish us only a few points above relegation, or being relegated, or selling our best players, and cause such a lack of interest the ground is only half full ?

 

Why did clubs such as West Ham, West Brom - to name 2 smaller clubs than us - have higher transfer records than we did, did they exist in a different economic climate to what we did 

 

Why did McKeag announce that our new Milburn Stand when complete "would be just like the stand at Watford" ? Do you think the limit of his ambition was to be like Watford  or do you still insist the current board is no better than the old board ?

 

How many trophy winning managers did we appoint in the 3 - 4 decades pre-1992 ?

 

Oh - and why did Gordon Lee leave Newcastle for Everton ?

 

Why did he buy England players at Everton and not at Newcastle ?

 

Please explain, if you understand, seeing as you say you do  because you were there .... so you say .........

 

[NE5]

 

if you aren't happy, stop going. Or support the mackems, or one of the 86 clubs below us, if you think they have a better board ....that don't make the money we do.

 

:roll:

 

Sorry, like, but you haven't got a clue.

 

 

 

This post may as all admit that I'm right as it has no reasonable response.

 

They make money because they cash in on the sheep, of which you're clearly one of the flock. They then, unlike other clubs with resources this big, waste it by giving it to an incapable manager, because they are too fucking stupid to appoint a good one in the first place.

 

How can you be right, you weren't there, you weren't even alive in the 1960's and 70's, and a bairn in the 1980's [or correct me if this is not true], how can you speak from experience, how can you know what those eras are like, shame but I think you are one of the [blind] sheep...and reading the wrong books obviously  must be the ones written by Mick and endorsed by Grassroots .... 

 

brilliant. You couldn't make this up ... thompers the expert on Newcastle United in an era before he was born .... priceless ..

 

[Mick]

 

 

how many times did we have 86 clubs under us before Shepherd was chairman, in the previous 3-4 decades, starting from when we last won a domestic trophy ?

 

You aren't finally going to address your title "are Newcastle a selling club", and give us your conclusion at last, are you ?

 

 

 

How many times in the previous 3-4 decades isn't relevant, what's relevant is that the previous chairman moved the club from the lower reaches of the 2nd division to 2nd top of the premiership, Shepherd has taken the club backwards, fact.

 

I can't give an answer to your 2nd question as I can't find all of the transfer fees in and out.

 

Why don't you go and find them and then I'll have more chance of answering it?

[Mick]

 

if you aren't happy, stop going. Or support the mackems, or one of the 86 clubs below us, if you think they have a better board ....that don't make the money we do.

 

:roll:

 

Sorry, like, but you haven't got a clue.

 

 

 

This post may as all admit that I'm right as it has no reasonable response.

 

They make money because they cash in on the sheep, of which you're clearly one of the flock. They then, unlike other clubs with resources this big, waste it by giving it to an incapable manager, because they are too fucking stupid to appoint a good one in the first place.

 

How can you be right, you weren't there, you weren't even alive in the 1960's and 70's, and a bairn in the 1980's [or correct me if this is not true], how can you speak from experience, how can you know what those eras are like, shame but I think you are one of the [blind] sheep...and reading the wrong books obviously  must be the ones written by Mick and endorsed by Grassroots .... 

 

brilliant. You couldn't make this up ... thompers the expert on Newcastle United in an era before he was born .... priceless ..

 

 

   

 

NE5 = the only person to have never read a book and has no idea of what happened before he was born.

[NE5]

 

 

how many times did we have 86 clubs under us before Shepherd was chairman, in the previous 3-4 decades, starting from when we last won a domestic trophy ?

 

You aren't finally going to address your title "are Newcastle a selling club", and give us your conclusion at last, are you ?

 

 

 

How many times in the previous 3-4 decades isn't relevant, what's relevant is that the previous chairman moved the club from the lower reaches of the 2nd division to 2nd top of the premiership, Shepherd has taken the club backwards, fact.

 

I can't give an answer to your 2nd question as I can't find all of the transfer fees in and out.

 

Why don't you go and find them and then I'll have more chance of answering it?

 

you started the thread, you prove the club are still a selling club like they used to be, Shepherd is the first manager to preside over 3 consecutive top 5 finishes in over 50 years. Fact. And we have been the 5th top team in the last decade, on merit. Fact.

 

Answer the questions, and the ones I posted in the next thread. I have posted the league positions before, from 1964 until 1992. What is your opinion on those ? Why did we not build on winning the Fairs Cup, why did we not build on winning promotion in 1984 with 3 England players coming through the club, and why did we not build on finishing 5th under Gordon Lee, and why did he move to Everton ?

 

You started researching the transfer fees, but stopped because you knew that myself, HTL and stevie were ripping up your figures for arsepaper, because it was impossible to prove what you were attempting to prove.  Fact. And a fan who really did live through that era wouldn't have even thought about attempting to show such figures, knowing it was impossible.

 

Answer the questions, and finish what you started.

 

http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=tbn:WJQ-Ni9AdoA8YM:http://members.tripod.com/anti_flag64/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/chickenshit.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

[NE5]

 

if you aren't happy, stop going. Or support the mackems, or one of the 86 clubs below us, if you think they have a better board ....that don't make the money we do.

 

:roll:

 

Sorry, like, but you haven't got a clue.

 

 

 

This post may as all admit that I'm right as it has no reasonable response.

 

They make money because they cash in on the sheep, of which you're clearly one of the flock. They then, unlike other clubs with resources this big, waste it by giving it to an incapable manager, because they are too fucking stupid to appoint a good one in the first place.

 

How can you be right, you weren't there, you weren't even alive in the 1960's and 70's, and a bairn in the 1980's [or correct me if this is not true], how can you speak from experience, how can you know what those eras are like, shame but I think you are one of the [blind] sheep...and reading the wrong books obviously  must be the ones written by Mick and endorsed by Grassroots .... 

 

brilliant. You couldn't make this up ... thompers the expert on Newcastle United in an era before he was born .... priceless ..

 

 

   

 

NE5 = the only person to have never read a book and has no idea of what happened before he was born.

 

finish what you started.

 

Show me the book you are reading. I don't need one.

 

 

[Mick]

 

How many chairman pre-1992 bought quality players at all at any time to tap the fanbase and put the club in europe ?

 

Shepherd wasn't chairman in 1992, Sir John Hall was.

 

Shepherd backed Sir Bobby Robson with less than £6 million per year while he was manager then sacked him after we made a £10 million profit on buys v sales.  In 2004 we spent £9 million and brought in £19.4 million, in 2005 we sacked the manager.  Maybe we would have been better off as a club if the money had been re-invested by Sir Bobby rather than giving it to Souness.

 

How many times did we qualify for europe in the 3 decades before the current board took over ?

 

Current board or chairman?  You seem to confuse the two.

 

Why do you slag off people who put the club into europe, finishing in good league position, yet hold a torch for people who finish us only a few points above relegation, or being relegated, or selling our best players, and cause such a lack of interest the ground is only half full ?

 

I've never said that I hold a torch for people who finish just above relegation.  What I've said is that I enjoyed some of the football played at that time, I think I might have seen a post from you that said you enjoyed it at the time but changed your mind later, I could be wrong about that.

 

Why did clubs such as West Ham, West Brom - to name 2 smaller clubs than us - have higher transfer records than we did, did they exist in a different economic climate to what we did 

 

I can't remember the other clubs transfer records, did WBA have anything to do with the sale of Brian Robson to Man U?

 

Why did McKeag announce that our new Milburn Stand when complete "would be just like the stand at Watford" ? Do you think the limit of his ambition was to be like Watford  or do you still insist the current board is no better than the old board ?

 

Freddy Shepherd labelled Shearer as Mary Poppins, do you think his ambition was to see a female play up front for Newcastle?

 

How many trophy winning managers did we appoint in the 3 - 4 decades pre-1992 ?

 

Newcastle have appointed 2 managers who has brought a trophy to the club pre-1992, how many have we appointed since 1998?

 

Oh - and why did Gordon Lee leave Newcastle for Everton ?

 

I've answered that one before, if you can't read then tough.

 

Why did he buy England players at Everton and not at Newcastle ?

 

No idea.

 

Please explain, if you understand, seeing as you say you do  because you were there .... so you say .........

 

I've asked you questions in posts above, why not try answering with an answer instead of a question?

 

[Mick]

 

you started the thread, you prove the club are still a selling club like they used to be, Shepherd is the first manager to preside over 3 consecutive top 5 finishes in over 50 years. Fact. And we have been the 5th top team in the last decade, on merit. Fact.

 

Wrong as usual, I don't think the club are a selling club and didn't need to go looking to know that.  I was interested to know if we had spent more in the past then we had brought in, I expected to find that we were a selling club, so far I can't say that we were.

 

Yes, at times we sold players for profit but we've done that under Shepherd.  We've had one year under him when we spent £810,000 more than we brought in and that's on a turnover of almost £100 million, we've also had another year when we spent £10 million less than we brought in, does that make us a selling club?

 

Did selling Les Ferdinand make us a selling club?

 

Would we now turn down a british record bid for any player on our books?

 

You have a go at previous boards for doing that, my guess is that we'd sell any of our current squad under the same circumstances.

 

I know Shepherd stuck his nose in where it wasn't needed but I didn't know that he was the manager, even if he did sell players behind the managers back at times.

 

Answer the questions, and the ones I posted in the next thread. I have posted the league positions before, from 1964 until 1992. What is your opinion on those ? Why did we not build on winning the Fairs Cup, why did we not build on winning promotion in 1984 with 3 England players coming through the club, and why did we not build on finishing 5th under Gordon Lee, and why did he move to Everton ?

 

I think our league position were crap back then and haven't said anything else, I also think most of our league position have been crap since Shepherd took control of the club.  As for why we didn't build on the Fairs Cup win, it could be a lack of money, I can't really say for sure, the same as you can't, at least I'm willing to try and find out, unlike you who would rather close your eyes and just say "lack of ambition" which it could have been.

 

You seem to not understand that those days are different to where we are now, you don't seem to understand that most of our game was in a mess at that time, unlike today, at least that's the case for the bigger clubs.

 

You started researching the transfer fees, but stopped because you knew that myself, HTL and stevie were ripping up your figures for arsepaper, because it was impossible to prove what you were attempting to prove.  Fact. And a fan who really did live through that era wouldn't have even thought about attempting to show such figures, knowing it was impossible.

 

No, you should go back and see that you were ripping the figures that somebody else mentioned, you either can't read or you're lying.

 

Answer the questions, and finish what you started.

 

I've just said that I can't find some transfer fees, I've also gave the figures that I could find and we spent more than we brought in through selling.

 

http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=tbn:WJQ-Ni9AdoA8YM:http://members.tripod.com/anti_flag64/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/chickenshit.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

[Mick]

 

finish what you started.

 

Show me the book you are reading. I don't need one.

 

 

 

You do read books, I'm sure you admitted that in either this thread or another one.  It would seem that it's OK for you to read but it's a put-down when others do it, you're a hypocrite.

[Howaythelads]

 

 

how many times did we have 86 clubs under us before Shepherd was chairman, in the previous 3-4 decades, starting from when we last won a domestic trophy ?

 

You aren't finally going to address your title "are Newcastle a selling club", and give us your conclusion at last, are you ?

 

 

 

How many times in the previous 3-4 decades isn't relevant, what's relevant is that the previous chairman moved the club from the lower reaches of the 2nd division to 2nd top of the premiership, Shepherd has taken the club backwards, fact.

 

I can't give an answer to your 2nd question as I can't find all of the transfer fees in and out.

 

Why don't you go and find them and then I'll have more chance of answering it?

 

You don't need to find all of the in/out transfer fees to show whether or not the club is a selling club. You need to look at the timings of the departures of some players and who was brought in to replace them. You don't have to come up with a definitive list of every player bought and sold for years.  :roll:

[Guest thompers]

 

if you aren't happy, stop going. Or support the mackems, or one of the 86 clubs below us, if you think they have a better board ....that don't make the money we do.

 

:roll:

 

Sorry, like, but you haven't got a clue.

 

 

 

This post may as all admit that I'm right as it has no reasonable response.

 

They make money because they cash in on the sheep, of which you're clearly one of the flock. They then, unlike other clubs with resources this big, waste it by giving it to an incapable manager, because they are too fucking stupid to appoint a good one in the first place.

 

How can you be right, you weren't there, you weren't even alive in the 1960's and 70's, and a bairn in the 1980's [or correct me if this is not true], how can you speak from experience, how can you know what those eras are like, shame but I think you are one of the [blind] sheep...and reading the wrong books obviously  must be the ones written by Mick and endorsed by Grassroots .... 

 

brilliant. You couldn't make this up ... thompers the expert on Newcastle United in an era before he was born .... priceless ..

 

 

What the fuck have the 60s and 70s got to do with now? The resources available are different, the club is different, because of Sir John Hall. Fred inheritted a club different to that of the 60s and 70s... SO HOW THE FUCK IS THE 60S AND 70S REMOTELY RELEVENT?

[Guest thompers]

Oh and for the pathetic petty age remarks, I'd like to confirm that I wasn't on Titanic but still know that the fucker sank.

[Howaythelads]

 

if you aren't happy, stop going. Or support the mackems, or one of the 86 clubs below us, if you think they have a better board ....that don't make the money we do.

 

:roll:

 

Sorry, like, but you haven't got a clue.

 

 

 

This post may as all admit that I'm right as it has no reasonable response.

 

They make money because they cash in on the sheep, of which you're clearly one of the flock. They then, unlike other clubs with resources this big, waste it by giving it to an incapable manager, because they are too fucking stupid to appoint a good one in the first place.

 

How can you be right, you weren't there, you weren't even alive in the 1960's and 70's, and a bairn in the 1980's [or correct me if this is not true], how can you speak from experience, how can you know what those eras are like, shame but I think you are one of the [blind] sheep...and reading the wrong books obviously  must be the ones written by Mick and endorsed by Grassroots .... 

 

brilliant. You couldn't make this up ... thompers the expert on Newcastle United in an era before he was born .... priceless ..

 

 

What the **** have the 60s and 70s got to do with now? The resources available are different, the club is different, because of Sir John Hall. Fred inheritted a club different to that of the 60s and 70s... SO HOW THE **** IS THE 60S AND 70S REMOTELY RELEVENT?

 

It was a level playing field for ALL clubs, thompers. The club always had massive potential just waiting to be tapped but it wasn't tapped until SJH arrived and this has been carried on by the present Board. Unfortunately the present Board have been as unlucky with the appointment of Souness as SJH was lucky with the appointment of Keegan. And that appointment was luck, it could have easily gone pear shaped.

 

Are you suggesting that the 60's and 70's were different only for Newcastle, that we were shit for decades because other clubs had the same resources they have now...........?

[Guest thompers]

So appointing Souness, who the VAST majority KNEW would be shit, was unlucky? Fuck me, heard it all now.

[Guest thompers]

Are you suggesting that the 60's and 70's were different only for Newcastle, that we were shit for decades because other clubs had the same resources they have now...........?

 

I'm not suggesting anything about the 60s and 70s because they have fuck all to do with today and the board's incompetence!

 

[Howaythelads]

Never do answer questions, do you mate.........

[Howaythelads]

So appointing Souness, who the VAST majority KNEW would be shit, was unlucky? Fuck me, heard it all now.

 

You obviously weren't reading this forum when Souness was appointed, were you?? 

[Guest thompers]

So appointing Souness, who the VAST majority KNEW would be shit, was unlucky? Fuck me, heard it all now.

 

You obviously weren't reading this forum when Souness was appointed, were you?? 

 

I was, most thought he was a poor appointment. Many backed him and gave him a chance whilst knowing he'd be shit.

[Syrette]

Oh and for the pathetic petty age remarks, I'd like to confirm that I wasn't on Titanic but still know that the fucker sank.

 

[Howaythelads]

So appointing Souness, who the VAST majority KNEW would be shit, was unlucky? Fuck me, heard it all now.

 

You obviously weren't reading this forum when Souness was appointed, were you?? 

 

I was, most thought he was a poor appointment. Many backed him and gave him a chance whilst knowing he'd be shit.

 

Wrong. Many people thought he was the man to sort out the supposed trouble makers in the club, to rid the club of the cancers. It took a long, long time for many people to accept he was shite. Your memory is playing tricks on you but those who were against him either from the very start or within a month or two don't forget the abuse thrown around for suggesting he should be sacked.

 

Anyway, with the exception of Souness the present Board has appointed successive managers based on excellent CV's. You can tell me now how you would set about selecting a manager.

 

Thanks.

[Parky]

Football is a very fickle business and the buying and selling of players is often a lottery regardless of reputation. You can only put stops and checks in place to make the business as successful as it possibly can. Although with the high amount of generated income footabll is almost guranteed now, this is a very fertile time to grow the business and descisions made now will be very important for the club in the coming years.

[Howaythelads]

Oh and for the pathetic petty age remarks, I'd like to confirm that I wasn't on Titanic but still know that the fucker sank.

 

 

You pinched the DVD as well then.....

[Cajun]

Most people werent happy with the employement of Souness but looked to what positives he might have which isnt the same thing and decided to give him time as abusing from the off wouldnt have made a difference anyway.

 

It was a poor appointment, rumours when rife that he was gonna get the boot from Blackburn as he was dragging them down and they probably couldnt believe their luck when we came knocking because first they wouldnt have to fork out compensation but even better they were actually going to get some instead!

[Howaythelads]

Most people werent happy with the employement of Souness but looked to what positives he might have which isnt the same thing and decided to give him time as abusing from the off wouldnt have made a difference anyway.

 

It was a poor appointment, rumours when rife that he was gonna get the boot from Blackburn as he was dragging them down and they probably couldnt believe their luck when we came knocking because first they wouldnt have to fork out compensation but even better they were actually going to get some instead!

 

Aye, ok.