The Board etc. etc.

[Guest The Fox]

Of course as I mentioned earlier, although its true to say that the Hall/Shepherd era is far and away better than what went before, its also true that under Keegan we were above Liverpool and Arsenal  not trying to catch them and since then we have in fact gone backwards in that respect.

[Howaythelads]

Of course as I mentioned earlier, although its true to say that the Hall/Shepherd era is far and away better than what went before, its also true that under Keegan we were above Liverpool and Arsenal  not trying to catch them and since then we have in fact gone backwards in that respect.

 

Souness.

[NE5]

Of course as I mentioned earlier, although its true to say that the Hall/Shepherd era is far and away better than what went before, its also true that under Keegan we were above Liverpool and Arsenal  not trying to catch them and since then we have in fact gone backwards in that respect.

 

It is true that no manager since Keegan has matched him, very true.

 

However under Bobby Robson we also finished above Liverpool.

 

Before Keegan was manager, we didn't finish above them at all since the 1950's. In fact, we on no occasion were anywhere near them. The overwhelming conclusion is obvious, we as a club are now setting our sights higher, appointing better managers and supporting them more.

 

But I am waiting for Grass to produce these facts he said would prove otherwise, and Mick to make excuses for Peter Beardsley waving to the Kop before his transfer saying we forced him out of the club against his will or something , and not that this action was the sign of a local, Geordie born player and an England international with his best years ahead of him, waving hello to his future fans months before he left.

 

 

[midds]

How the fuck can you lot get all worked up over ancient history? Arguing like kids in the schoolyard over things that may or may not have happened decades ago. "I started going in 1968", "World Cup grants of 1966" & signing internationals in the 70's for fuck's sake...Have you lot got nothing better to do? Your 'debates' rumble on for weeks.

 

I love this club as much as any of you and my opinion is as valid as anyone else's but life's too short to fall out over things that happened sooooooooooooooo long ago. Would it really be so hard to accept each others point of view and agree to disagree?? Everyone is entitled to their opinion but it's clear that neither side will be able to convince the other to agree with them. Life's too short gentlemen.  :roll: :roll:

 

the point, is to point out to those who whinge on about wanting to be like Liverpool, we have been striving to match Liverpool since 1958, and it is to show that since the Halls and Shepherd took over the club we are massively nearer to challenging them than we have been since before they took over the club. And also to point out the mistaken view to many people have that we won trophies galore, always played in europe, always bought top quality footballers and always filled the stadium before the Halls and Shepherd took over the club. It is also to point out that many, many clubs in the past have fallen from heights of actually being championship winners, European Cup winners, through chaning boards or simply just getting things wrong, so being careful and wishing the replacement of a board who have presided such a big improvement, may not necessarily be the golden egg that you hope for.

 

Understand ?

 

Thought not.

 

There are plenty of Luque threads if you want to read something easier and less boring ........ or should I say, not testing your knowledge of the club too much.

 

Meanwhile, I see that Grass has not posted these stats he was going to post yet, nor have he and Mick responded to the facts/questions I have posted, which I am assured happens on a mature board.

 

 

 

Now you see, there you go again. I perfectly understand what your point is. Why the need to question the intelligence of another poster?? :roll:

 

It's not the content of your posts that I've got a problem with. In fact I agree with quite a bit of what you say. I can also understand the counter arguments. My main problem is with the fact that you just can't seem to accept that someone could possibly disagree with you.  Just because you think something is true doesn't automatically mean it is so. You can't stop people from having an opinion and obviously different people will interpret things differently.

 

As Wullie has said, at least this topic has been contained to one thread. We should all be grateful for small mercies. Nice to know I'm not the only one fed up of this too. 

[Howaythelads]

How the **** can you lot get all worked up over ancient history? Arguing like kids in the schoolyard over things that may or may not have happened decades ago. "I started going in 1968", "World Cup grants of 1966" & signing internationals in the 70's for ****'s sake...Have you lot got nothing better to do? Your 'debates' rumble on for weeks.

 

I love this club as much as any of you and my opinion is as valid as anyone else's but life's too short to fall out over things that happened sooooooooooooooo long ago. Would it really be so hard to accept each others point of view and agree to disagree?? Everyone is entitled to their opinion but it's clear that neither side will be able to convince the other to agree with them. Life's too short gentlemen.  :roll: :roll:

 

the point, is to point out to those who whinge on about wanting to be like Liverpool, we have been striving to match Liverpool since 1958, and it is to show that since the Halls and Shepherd took over the club we are massively nearer to challenging them than we have been since before they took over the club. And also to point out the mistaken view to many people have that we won trophies galore, always played in europe, always bought top quality footballers and always filled the stadium before the Halls and Shepherd took over the club. It is also to point out that many, many clubs in the past have fallen from heights of actually being championship winners, European Cup winners, through chaning boards or simply just getting things wrong, so being careful and wishing the replacement of a board who have presided such a big improvement, may not necessarily be the golden egg that you hope for.

 

Understand ?

 

Thought not.

 

There are plenty of Luque threads if you want to read something easier and less boring ........ or should I say, not testing your knowledge of the club too much.

 

Meanwhile, I see that Grass has not posted these stats he was going to post yet, nor have he and Mick responded to the facts/questions I have posted, which I am assured happens on a mature board.

 

 

 

Now you see, there you go again. I perfectly understand what your point is. Why the need to question the intelligence of another poster?? :roll:

 

It's not the content of your posts that I've got a problem with. In fact I agree with quite a bit of what you say. I can also understand the counter arguments. My main problem is with the fact that you just can't seem to accept that someone could possibly disagree with you.  Just because you think something is true doesn't automatically mean it is so. You can't stop people from having an opinion and obviously different people will interpret things differently.

 

As Wullie has said, at least this topic has been contained to one thread. We should all be grateful for small mercies. Nice to know I'm not the only one fed up of this too. 

 

I'm fed with it as well. Fed up of repeating the fact that not a small number of quality players left the club while firing a shot that the club was unambitious and unprofessional.  That's not an opinion, mate. It's a solid fact.

 

The problem on this forum is caused not by people who don't accept others are entitled to an opinion, that's bollocks because everyone is entitled to that. We don't all agree on the quality of players for example, but that's generally subjective. Me saying Luque is shit is no more a fact than someone saying he's a good player.

 

No, the problem is that a number of people refuse to face facts for whatever reason.

[Guest BooBoo]

Christ, this shit's dull.

 

Not interested in the history of the club you claim to support. I expect you'd be one of the 20,000.

 

Shurrup man you boring auld fart.

 

Of course i'm interested in the history of NUFC. What i'm not so interested in is 14 pages of petty argueing and bickering between individuals who are too stubborn to realise that opinions exist other than their own.

 

 

 

 

[midds]

How the **** can you lot get all worked up over ancient history? Arguing like kids in the schoolyard over things that may or may not have happened decades ago. "I started going in 1968", "World Cup grants of 1966" & signing internationals in the 70's for ****'s sake...Have you lot got nothing better to do? Your 'debates' rumble on for weeks.

 

I love this club as much as any of you and my opinion is as valid as anyone else's but life's too short to fall out over things that happened sooooooooooooooo long ago. Would it really be so hard to accept each others point of view and agree to disagree?? Everyone is entitled to their opinion but it's clear that neither side will be able to convince the other to agree with them. Life's too short gentlemen.  :roll: :roll:

 

the point, is to point out to those who whinge on about wanting to be like Liverpool, we have been striving to match Liverpool since 1958, and it is to show that since the Halls and Shepherd took over the club we are massively nearer to challenging them than we have been since before they took over the club. And also to point out the mistaken view to many people have that we won trophies galore, always played in europe, always bought top quality footballers and always filled the stadium before the Halls and Shepherd took over the club. It is also to point out that many, many clubs in the past have fallen from heights of actually being championship winners, European Cup winners, through chaning boards or simply just getting things wrong, so being careful and wishing the replacement of a board who have presided such a big improvement, may not necessarily be the golden egg that you hope for.

 

Understand ?

 

Thought not.

 

There are plenty of Luque threads if you want to read something easier and less boring ........ or should I say, not testing your knowledge of the club too much.

 

Meanwhile, I see that Grass has not posted these stats he was going to post yet, nor have he and Mick responded to the facts/questions I have posted, which I am assured happens on a mature board.

 

 

 

Now you see, there you go again. I perfectly understand what your point is. Why the need to question the intelligence of another poster?? :roll:

 

It's not the content of your posts that I've got a problem with. In fact I agree with quite a bit of what you say. I can also understand the counter arguments. My main problem is with the fact that you just can't seem to accept that someone could possibly disagree with you.  Just because you think something is true doesn't automatically mean it is so. You can't stop people from having an opinion and obviously different people will interpret things differently.

 

As Wullie has said, at least this topic has been contained to one thread. We should all be grateful for small mercies. Nice to know I'm not the only one fed up of this too. 

 

I'm fed with it as well. Fed up of repeating the fact that not a small number of quality players left the club while firing a shot that the club was unambitious and unprofessional.  That's not an opinion, mate. It's a solid fact.

 

The problem on this forum is caused not by people who don't accept others are entitled to an opinion, that's bollocks because everyone is entitled to that. We don't all agree on the quality of players for example, but that's generally subjective. Me saying Luque is shit is no more a fact than someone saying he's a good player.

 

No, the problem is that a number of people refuse to face facts for whatever reason.

 

I'm not your mate.  :|

[Howaythelads]

How the **** can you lot get all worked up over ancient history? Arguing like kids in the schoolyard over things that may or may not have happened decades ago. "I started going in 1968", "World Cup grants of 1966" & signing internationals in the 70's for ****'s sake...Have you lot got nothing better to do? Your 'debates' rumble on for weeks.

 

I love this club as much as any of you and my opinion is as valid as anyone else's but life's too short to fall out over things that happened sooooooooooooooo long ago. Would it really be so hard to accept each others point of view and agree to disagree?? Everyone is entitled to their opinion but it's clear that neither side will be able to convince the other to agree with them. Life's too short gentlemen.  :roll: :roll:

 

the point, is to point out to those who whinge on about wanting to be like Liverpool, we have been striving to match Liverpool since 1958, and it is to show that since the Halls and Shepherd took over the club we are massively nearer to challenging them than we have been since before they took over the club. And also to point out the mistaken view to many people have that we won trophies galore, always played in europe, always bought top quality footballers and always filled the stadium before the Halls and Shepherd took over the club. It is also to point out that many, many clubs in the past have fallen from heights of actually being championship winners, European Cup winners, through chaning boards or simply just getting things wrong, so being careful and wishing the replacement of a board who have presided such a big improvement, may not necessarily be the golden egg that you hope for.

 

Understand ?

 

Thought not.

 

There are plenty of Luque threads if you want to read something easier and less boring ........ or should I say, not testing your knowledge of the club too much.

 

Meanwhile, I see that Grass has not posted these stats he was going to post yet, nor have he and Mick responded to the facts/questions I have posted, which I am assured happens on a mature board.

 

 

 

Now you see, there you go again. I perfectly understand what your point is. Why the need to question the intelligence of another poster?? :roll:

 

It's not the content of your posts that I've got a problem with. In fact I agree with quite a bit of what you say. I can also understand the counter arguments. My main problem is with the fact that you just can't seem to accept that someone could possibly disagree with you.  Just because you think something is true doesn't automatically mean it is so. You can't stop people from having an opinion and obviously different people will interpret things differently.

 

As Wullie has said, at least this topic has been contained to one thread. We should all be grateful for small mercies. Nice to know I'm not the only one fed up of this too. 

 

I'm fed with it as well. Fed up of repeating the fact that not a small number of quality players left the club while firing a shot that the club was unambitious and unprofessional.  That's not an opinion, mate. It's a solid fact.

 

The problem on this forum is caused not by people who don't accept others are entitled to an opinion, that's bollocks because everyone is entitled to that. We don't all agree on the quality of players for example, but that's generally subjective. Me saying Luque is shit is no more a fact than someone saying he's a good player.

 

No, the problem is that a number of people refuse to face facts for whatever reason.

 

I'm not your mate.  :|

 

Constructive reply there, mate.

[Syrette]

Is he not your son?

[midds]

Just another FACT. 

[Howaythelads]

Is he not your son?

 

You should be banned for such a suggestion.  :winking:

[NE5]

How the fuck can you lot get all worked up over ancient history? Arguing like kids in the schoolyard over things that may or may not have happened decades ago. "I started going in 1968", "World Cup grants of 1966" & signing internationals in the 70's for fuck's sake...Have you lot got nothing better to do? Your 'debates' rumble on for weeks.

 

I love this club as much as any of you and my opinion is as valid as anyone else's but life's too short to fall out over things that happened sooooooooooooooo long ago. Would it really be so hard to accept each others point of view and agree to disagree?? Everyone is entitled to their opinion but it's clear that neither side will be able to convince the other to agree with them. Life's too short gentlemen.  :roll: :roll:

 

the point, is to point out to those who whinge on about wanting to be like Liverpool, we have been striving to match Liverpool since 1958, and it is to show that since the Halls and Shepherd took over the club we are massively nearer to challenging them than we have been since before they took over the club. And also to point out the mistaken view to many people have that we won trophies galore, always played in europe, always bought top quality footballers and always filled the stadium before the Halls and Shepherd took over the club. It is also to point out that many, many clubs in the past have fallen from heights of actually being championship winners, European Cup winners, through chaning boards or simply just getting things wrong, so being careful and wishing the replacement of a board who have presided such a big improvement, may not necessarily be the golden egg that you hope for.

 

Understand ?

 

Thought not.

 

There are plenty of Luque threads if you want to read something easier and less boring ........ or should I say, not testing your knowledge of the club too much.

 

Meanwhile, I see that Grass has not posted these stats he was going to post yet, nor have he and Mick responded to the facts/questions I have posted, which I am assured happens on a mature board.

 

 

Now you see, there you go again. I perfectly understand what your point is. Why the need to question the intelligence of another poster?? :roll:

 

It's not the content of your posts that I've got a problem with. In fact I agree with quite a bit of what you say. I can also understand the counter arguments. My main problem is with the fact that you just can't seem to accept that someone could possibly disagree with you.  Just because you think something is true doesn't automatically mean it is so. You can't stop people from having an opinion and obviously different people will interpret things differently.

 

As Wullie has said, at least this topic has been contained to one thread. We should all be grateful for small mercies. Nice to know I'm not the only one fed up of this too. 

 

You don't understand, it isn't a case of someone disagreeing with me, I am posting facts . Unless someone posts that we did differently during the 1960's, 70's and 80's - and the facts posted about other clubs who we have overtaken ... you can't disagree.

 

If I think Luque is shit, that is an opinion, others think he is not, thats an opinion. So I disagree, this is totally different to putting across the clubs history.

 

I'm not questioning your intelligence or anyone else's, just that you - or whoever - are simply not prepared to accept facts.

 

As has been stated, the Luque posts bore me stupid, as do others. No one forces you to read them. As I supported the club during the 60's, 70's and 80's I would like to see posts about this period but unfortunately there are only a small amount of people who are up on it because they were also there. Some people might be interested in the clubs history, some may not. Each to their own.

 

However,  I consider the slating of the current board when it arises to be current and topical, and think a comparison with their predecessors and the fortunes of boards of other clubs to be part of the overall picture, taking into account the realism of knife edge competitive top level football, when judging their merits.

 

To that degree, if someone posts opinions , is it not right that they should back them up with facts where possible ? And not ignore alternative facts if provided ? Which is what tends to happen, as has happened here with Micks comments about the building of the East Stand, the World Cup grants in 1966, and comments by him and others about the selling of our major players, support to managers, ambition of the club, and subsequent poor and often disastrous league positions during three decades prior to 1992.

 

 

[NE5]

Christ, this shit's dull.

 

Not interested in the history of the club you claim to support. I expect you'd be one of the 20,000.

 

Shurrup man you boring auld fart.

 

Of course i'm interested in the history of NUFC. What i'm not so interested in is 14 pages of petty argueing and bickering between individuals who are too stubborn to realise that opinions exist other than their own.

 

 

See my previous post a minute ago. They are not opinions that have been posted, they are historical facts, if you are interested in the clubs history, you should be aware you can't change history - the only people arguing are those who think they know different to history.

 

 

 

 

[Syrette]

Everything NE5 posts is fact.

 

I'll reiterate that.

 

 

 

 

FACT.

 

Don't mess  bluewink.gif

[Wullie]

The bigger the font, the more factual it is.

 

FACT

[NE5]

Everything NE5 posts is fact.

 

I'll reiterate that.

 

FACT.

 

Don't mess  bluewink.gif

 

true. Shame you don't have anything to add though .....

 

 

[Guest elbee909]

Being around to experience the relative-crapness of past boards of NUFC shouldn't stop one from being dissatisfied with whatever one considers to be holding the current lot back.

 

the point, is to point out to those who whinge on about wanting to be like Liverpool, we have been striving to match Liverpool since 1958, and it is to show that since the Halls and Shepherd took over the club we are massively nearer to challenging them than we have been since before they took over the club.

<snip>

 

However - Liverpool have improved since the 90s.  Newcastle, surely, have not.  Is that fair to say?  Compare the trophy hauls at least (not that Newcastle have a divine right to win things in that period, but hell, neither did Liverpool and they managed to turn themselves around).

 

So yeah, it's fine to keep playing the "I only quote facts" card but don't dare claim not to manipulate them to suit your argument, because that's absolutely what you do.  And I don't begrudge you that, but at least be aware you do it.  Melding the 90s Sir John Hall chairmanship with the current lot's chairmanship is a subtle but tangible manipulation of facts to suit your general gist of things.

 

Some of the things that you claim as facts *are* subjective conclusions drawn from isolated events, if they were indisputable no-one would bother disputing them, but as they are disputed then there must be a bit more to them than just facts, surely.

[Guest Knightrider]

Not so quick to reply to this one are you Grassroots ? Let me know when you will post these "facts" that you said you would, won't you.

 

All in good time Leazes bro, cheel winstan. Keep an eye out for the post.

[Howaythelads]

Christ, this shit's dull.

 

Not interested in the history of the club you claim to support. I expect you'd be one of the 20,000.

 

Shurrup man you boring auld fart.

 

Of course i'm interested in the history of NUFC. What i'm not so interested in is 14 pages of petty argueing and bickering between individuals who are too stubborn to realise that opinions exist other than their own.

 

 

 

 

 

Must be on about grassroots, Mick and some others. Unless you're claiming it is just an opinion of mine that players such as McDermott, Kennedy, Beardsley, Waddle and Gazza all left the club because the Board didn't have the same level of ambition to succeed as those individuals did? Are you really saying you have an interest in the history of the club and that this information is just an opinion?

 

[macbeth]

Unless you're claiming it is just an opinion of mine that players such as McDermott, Kennedy, Beardsley, Waddle and Gazza all left the club because the Board didn't have the same level of ambition to succeed as those individuals did? Are you really saying you have an interest in the history of the club and that this information is just an opinion?

 

 

Now you're doing it too, I thought it was only NE5 !!

 

A fact is something like "Newcastle won the FA Cup in 1932". An opinion would be something like (as NE5 puts it ) "Luque is crap".

 

It is easy to see which is which.

 

Now stating that those players left the club because "all left the club because the Board didn't have the same level of ambition to succeed as those individuals did" is not a fact, it is an opinion. It is a subjective view taken from reading what others have said. It may well be an opinion repeated hundreds and thousands of times which may well make it look like a fact, but it really is just an opinion.

 

I do believe most of those players did leave because they saw more chances of winning things elsewhere, but it is only an opinion I have on the matter, it is not a fact. If I met them all and asked them all personally why they left and heard them say it was so, then I'd have an even stronger belief in my opinion.

 

 

[Mick]

 

Must be on about grassroots, Mick and some others. Unless you're claiming it is just an opinion of mine that players such as McDermott, Kennedy, Beardsley, Waddle and Gazza all left the club because the Board didn't have the same level of ambition to succeed as those individuals did? Are you really saying you have an interest in the history of the club and that this information is just an opinion?

 

 

Three of those went to the Chelsea of the day, Liverpool, the team that basically turned up to win things.

 

Do you think many of our players would tell Chelsea to take a hike if they came calling?  My guess is that most of them would be off like a shot.  I know Duff and Parker left Chelsea but they left a club to go to Chelsea in the first place.

 

It's amazing how during those shit times we actually had players that the equivalent of Chelsea came calling at all.

 

How many of our current players could hold down a position regularly for Chelsea?

[midds]

You don't understand,Yes I do it isn't a case of someone disagreeing with me, I am posting facts . Unless someone posts that we did differently during the 1960's, 70's and 80's - and the facts posted about other clubs who we have overtaken ... you can't disagree. I never have

 

If I think Luque is shit, that is an opinion, others think he is not, thats an opinion. Of course it is So I disagree, this is totally different to putting across the clubs history. What has Luque got to do with things that happens 50 years ago??

 

I'm not questioning your intelligence Yes you were or anyone else's, just that you - or whoever - are simply not prepared to accept facts. Of course I can??

 

As has been stated, the Luque posts bore me stupid, as do others. Me included No one forces you to read them. As I supported the club during the 60's, 70's and 80's I would like to see posts about this period but unfortunately there are only a small amount of people who are up on it because they were also there. Or just perhaps they don't see the relevance of how the club was run back then as compared to 2006??Some people might be interested in the clubs history, I am some may not. Each to their own.

 

However,  I consider the slating of the current board I never have when it arises to be current and topical, and think a comparison with their predecessors and the fortunes of boards of other clubs to be part of the overall picture, taking into account the realism of knife edge competitive top level football, when judging their merits.

 

To that degree, if someone posts opinions , is it not right that they should back them up with facts where possible ? Not necessarily And not ignore alternative facts if provided ? Which is what tends to happen, as has happened here with Micks comments about the building of the East Stand, the World Cup grants in 1966, and comments by him and others about the selling of our major players, support to managers, ambition of the club, and subsequent poor and often disastrous league positions during three decades prior to 1992. As far as I can ascertain the only people interested are yourself and HTL...

 

 

 

To be perfectly fair - you've either missed my point or ignored it.

 

Were you part of the board of directors during the 60's, 70's and 80's?? If, as I suspect, you weren't - how do you know so much about the reasons why they came to the decisions they eventually did? Did you read about them in the newspaper? Do you believe everything you read in the newspapers of today? How could you possibly be in a position to know the dynamics of the board and the situations they found themselves in?

 

Were you privvy to the innermost feelings of the players of the time or did you believe every word they said to the local rags?

 

The only fact I know is that you may have stood on the terraces at the time but you knew fuck all about the workings of the club. Neither did I. You are merely stating your precious opinion as your interpretation of what you were told and passing it off as 'fact'. I'm pretty sure you're spot on about some of the things you pontificate to us mere mortals about, but the majority is just your opinion.

 

As i've already stated, I agree with a lot of what you actually post but the tone of your posts sickens me to be perfectly honest. You're an extremley patronising and old chap aren't you? Am I glad I don't sit in front of you at matches... :roll:

 

Rant over. 

 

[Howaythelads]

You don't understand,Yes I do it isn't a case of someone disagreeing with me, I am posting facts . Unless someone posts that we did differently during the 1960's, 70's and 80's - and the facts posted about other clubs who we have overtaken ... you can't disagree. I never have

 

If I think Luque is shit, that is an opinion, others think he is not, thats an opinion. Of course it is So I disagree, this is totally different to putting across the clubs history. What has Luque got to do with things that happens 50 years ago??

 

I'm not questioning your intelligence Yes you were or anyone else's, just that you - or whoever - are simply not prepared to accept facts. Of course I can??

 

As has been stated, the Luque posts bore me stupid, as do others. Me included No one forces you to read them. As I supported the club during the 60's, 70's and 80's I would like to see posts about this period but unfortunately there are only a small amount of people who are up on it because they were also there. Or just perhaps they don't see the relevance of how the club was run back then as compared to 2006??Some people might be interested in the clubs history, I am some may not. Each to their own.

 

However,  I consider the slating of the current board I never have when it arises to be current and topical, and think a comparison with their predecessors and the fortunes of boards of other clubs to be part of the overall picture, taking into account the realism of knife edge competitive top level football, when judging their merits.

 

To that degree, if someone posts opinions , is it not right that they should back them up with facts where possible ? Not necessarily And not ignore alternative facts if provided ? Which is what tends to happen, as has happened here with Micks comments about the building of the East Stand, the World Cup grants in 1966, and comments by him and others about the selling of our major players, support to managers, ambition of the club, and subsequent poor and often disastrous league positions during three decades prior to 1992. As far as I can ascertain the only people interested are yourself and HTL...

 

 

 

To be perfectly fair - you've either missed my point or ignored it.

 

Were you part of the board of directors during the 60's, 70's and 80's?? If, as I suspect, you weren't - how do you know so much about the reasons why they came to the decisions they eventually did? Did you read about them in the newspaper? Do you believe everything you read in the newspapers of today? How could you possibly be in a position to know the dynamics of the board and the situations they found themselves in?

 

Were you privvy to the innermost feelings of the players of the time or did you believe every word they said to the local rags?

 

The only fact I know is that you may have stood on the terraces at the time but you knew **** all about the workings of the club. Neither did I. You are merely stating your precious opinion as your interpretation of what you were told and passing it off as 'fact'. I'm pretty sure you're spot on about some of the things you pontificate to us mere mortals about, but the majority is just your opinion.

 

As i've already stated, I agree with a lot of what you actually post but the tone of your posts sickens me to be perfectly honest. You're an extremley patronising and old chap aren't you? Am I glad I don't sit in front of you at matches... :roll:

 

Rant over. 

 

 

In that case I suggest you and your barmy mates all shut up about the current Board. Since I doubt any of you are on the current Board you obviously don't have the first idea of why they take the decisions they do and you and your mates have no idea of whether they are doing a good job or not.

 

I suppose you'll tell me, "that's different".

[Guest Gemmill]

I'd love to know what the people arguing in this thread would consider a successful outcome to the thread.  Or will it just go on forever with the same people repeating the same posts again and again and again?  Lads, you might as well give up.  You've stopped arguing points now and just keep coming back to tell people how stupid they are.  Can you not see how stupid that is?

[Howaythelads]

Unless you're claiming it is just an opinion of mine that players such as McDermott, Kennedy, Beardsley, Waddle and Gazza all left the club because the Board didn't have the same level of ambition to succeed as those individuals did? Are you really saying you have an interest in the history of the club and that this information is just an opinion?

 

 

Now you're doing it too, I thought it was only NE5 !!

 

A fact is something like "Newcastle won the FA Cup in 1932". An opinion would be something like (as NE5 puts it ) "Luque is crap".

 

It is easy to see which is which.

 

Now stating that those players left the club because "all left the club because the Board didn't have the same level of ambition to succeed as those individuals did" is not a fact, it is an opinion. It is a subjective view taken from reading what others have said. It may well be an opinion repeated hundreds and thousands of times which may well make it look like a fact, but it really is just an opinion.

 

I do believe most of those players did leave because they saw more chances of winning things elsewhere, but it is only an opinion I have on the matter, it is not a fact. If I met them all and asked them all personally why they left and heard them say it was so, then I'd have an even stronger belief in my opinion.

 

 

 

When we see a double figure number of players leaving the club during the tenure of a certain Board, all reported as slagging the club off for a lack of ambition, I take that as pretty solid information. I know why you don't, however.

 

You obviously believe in coincidence and also in fairies. There were too many similar reports in the media, made by too many different players over that particular time period for it not to be fact. Your tactic of deflection is pretty weak, trying to turn the discussion away from the point to one of discussing the difference between a fact and an opinion is a bit of a refuge, mate.

 

As I've just said to the biscuit man, in conclusion, if people want to discuss only things that are proven to be from the inside of the club then the forum may as well close down. We can discuss nothing. 

 

Not that any of us have any way of knowing if somebody here is or was involved in some capacity with the club. Macca was though. Perhaps he might shed some light on the thoughts of people such as Irving Nattrass, who left for the nappy rippers to 'win the league'. 

 

I suppose the straight question for you is do you think today's Board is performing better than all Board's of the club before 1992 going back to at least the end of the War? Here's where you'll immediately start thinking about finances. Well here's a tip. Look at the league tables, because the league performance is the overall measure. Look at the players who departed and those who arrived and where they arrived from, because that shows you the quality that wanted to leave and the level of ambition we had for improving the team with the players we brought in. Look at the attendances, because that shows you how the people of Newcastle viewed the ambitions of the club to succeed.