The Board etc. etc.

[NE5]

Nit picking.

 

I wasn't trying to nit pick, I was trying to find out if you thought that the transfer fee was less than £250k.  You've already confirmed what I thought about Goddard which is good.

 

I've also found this about Simpson http://www.talkofthetyne.net/93201.html

 

1990/91 N.Simpson 1/4 0

Neil came from Aberdeen (£500,000) having been 'kicked out' of Scotland because of "that tackle" on a Rangers player. Durrant had his leg smashed and Neil headed south after death threats. Only made one start. Looked good when he was on the field, but was a bit like Marcelino.

 

Honestly I don't care what that says, I know fine well he was £100,000.  Sure Aitken was £500,000 that's where the site editors getting mixed up.

 

you are absolutely right mate. Neil Simpson cost 100,000. Also Goddard was 415,000 [although West Ham paid 800k when they bought him] and David Mills cost West Brom 500k when they signed him from the smoggies. We got him for a lot less than that, or even free, as he was past his best which was our usual way of operating in those days, which you seem to know but don't expect those who weren't there to believe you.

 

At that time, West Ham and West Brom were 2 of many "smaller" clubs who had transfer records bigger that ours was. Still, I'm sure some people will still point to NUFC and insist we were a "big club", like now  :lol:

 

 

[Guest thenorthumbrian]

Nit picking.

 

I wasn't trying to nit pick, I was trying to find out if you thought that the transfer fee was less than £250k.  You've already confirmed what I thought about Goddard which is good.

 

I've also found this about Simpson http://www.talkofthetyne.net/93201.html

 

1990/91 N.Simpson 1/4 0

Neil came from Aberdeen (£500,000) having been 'kicked out' of Scotland because of "that tackle" on a Rangers player. Durrant had his leg smashed and Neil headed south after death threats. Only made one start. Looked good when he was on the field, but was a bit like Marcelino.

 

Honestly I don't care what that says, I know fine well he was £100,000.  Sure Aitken was £500,000 that's where the site editors getting mixed up.

 

I would be very surprised if he'd cost the £500k mentioned, I've seen somewhere that Simpson had to pay £400k in damages to Durrant.

Aberdeen fans are scum, to the tune of "who's that team they call United", they still sing, Who's that lying at Pittodrie who's that lying on the floor, it looks like Iain Durrant to me, cos Simmie's gone and fucked his knee, and he won't be playing for Rangers anymore.  They sing that to this day, he was defo £100,000 though.

 

I heard about the Simpson/Durrant thing leading to the hatred between Aberdeen and Rangers.I have a couple of mates one who supports Rangers and the other who supports Aberdeen (neither of who are "scum" by the way), but I had no idea that Simpson played for Newcastle.   

[Mick]

 

I heard about the Simpson/Durrant thing leading to the hatred between Aberdeen and Rangers.I have a couple of mates one who supports Rangers and the other who supports Aberdeen (neither of who are "scum" by the way), but I had no idea that Simpson played for Newcastle.   

 

Simpson only played once, Bristol City away I think, it was his only game for us, he'd been a substitute a few times before that but I can't remember him even coming off the bench, I don't think he ever played at St James.

 

The only time he might have played was against West Ham of the same season, 1990 -91.

[NE5]

so how's the research going Mick ?

 

 

[Mick]

so how's the research going Mick ?

 

 

 

I'm still stuck looking for most of the transfer fee's mentioned, it looks as if we spent more than we brought in but not by a great deal, it could be close.  I'm looking for a tie in with the gates we were getting and an initial impression is that we couldn't afford to keep Beardsley and Gazza because our gates were so low even with them playing in the team.

 

I'm now looking at our gates from the same period to see if spending and selling is tied in, it looks like our downfall was employing Gordon Lee and selling Malcolm Macdonald.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

Macdonald went to Arsenal and we played them at home our gate was 44,677 which is a huge rise and not in keeping with our gates at that time, no other crowd figure went up anywhere near as much as that.

 

Gates against the teams that normally lifted the crowd figures at Newcastle were reduced when Macdonald left, Boro at home had 7,000 less without Macdonald, the Man U gate was down in the region of 6,000 after selling Macdonald, Liverpool was down almost 7,000.

 

Arsenal was the only gate that went up by any great deal, we also played the mackems that season but not the season before, we had 49,664 against the mackems which was a lot higher than any gate we had the season before, when we didn't play the mackems.

 

The season after the big increase against Arsenal we played them again but this time Macdonald didn't play because of injury, the crowd was down to 23,679.

 

All in all, we should stop employing managers from Blackburn, they are not good for the health of the club.

[Howaythelads]

If you're correct then those patronising twáts from London who make claims such as, " Geordies just want a number 9 to worship, they aren't bothered about having a good team ", will look to be correct then. Here's the other side of the coin.......

 

We brought in Gordon Lee, who sold Macdonald and improved the team enough to go from 3 seasons of 15th placed finishes to a 5th place finish and European football. We turned to shit when Lee asked the Board for some money to sign Souness and Mills ( I think ) from the nappy rippers but was refused. That was when the rot set in. Decent players, Souness and Mills. Might have helped move us up from 5th. Gordon Lee had ambition and he knew a good footballer when he saw one, which was why he moved to Everton.

[Mick]

If you're correct then those patronising twáts from London who make claims such as, " Geordies just want a number 9 to worship, they aren't bothered about having a good team ", will look to be correct then. Here's the other side of the coin.......

 

We brought in Gordon Lee, who sold Macdonald and improved the team enough to go from 3 seasons of 15th placed finishes to a 5th place finish and European football. We turned to shit when Lee asked the Board for some money to sign Souness and Mills ( I think ) from the nappy rippers but was refused. That was when the rot set in. Decent players, Souness and Mills. Might have helped move us up from 5th. Gordon Lee had ambition and he knew a good footballer when he saw one, which was why he moved to Everton.

 

Like it or not but most of the fans were not impressed with the football that Lee served up, I know I wasn't.

 

As for Gordon Lee knowing a good player when he saw one, what did you think of Graham Oates?  Was Gordon Lee right to let Frank Clark go for nothing only to see Clark lift the second division, first division and European Cup with Forrest in three seasons?

 

I can't remember his asking for Souness and Mills, I'm not saying that he didn't, Souness would have done a good job for us, I'm not sure that Mills would have been a good signing.

 

Lee was a horrible person and only got the job because our first coice turned us down, pity.

[NE5]

so how's the research going Mick ?

 

 

 

I'm still stuck looking for most of the transfer fee's mentioned, it looks as if we spent more than we brought in but not by a great deal, it could be close.  I'm looking for a tie in with the gates we were getting and an initial impression is that we couldn't afford to keep Beardsley and Gazza because our gates were so low even with them playing in the team.

 

I'm now looking at our gates from the same period to see if spending and selling is tied in, it looks like our downfall was employing Gordon Lee and selling Malcolm Macdonald.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

Macdonald went to Arsenal and we played them at home our gate was 44,677 which is a huge rise and not in keeping with our gates at that time, no other crowd figure went up anywhere near as much as that.

 

Gates against the teams that normally lifted the crowd figures at Newcastle were reduced when Macdonald left, Boro at home had 7,000 less without Macdonald, the Man U gate was down in the region of 6,000 after selling Macdonald, Liverpool was down almost 7,000.

 

Arsenal was the only gate that went up by any great deal, we also played the mackems that season but not the season before, we had 49,664 against the mackems which was a lot higher than any gate we had the season before, when we didn't play the mackems.

 

The season after the big increase against Arsenal we played them again but this time Macdonald didn't play because of injury, the crowd was down to 23,679.

 

All in all, we should stop employing managers from Blackburn, they are not good for the health of the club.

 

do you always enjoy and support mediocrity more than people who give you top 5 teams ?

 

BTW, the bold bits are hilarious.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

as for THIS, what, by the same criteria, is your comment on us getting 52k crowds since the capacity was increased, and only half that for years prior to 1992 ? Don't let straightforward logic applied by your own criteria get in the way of an opininon with no basis mind 

 

 

[NE5]

If you're correct then those patronising twáts from London who make claims such as, " Geordies just want a number 9 to worship, they aren't bothered about having a good team ", will look to be correct then. Here's the other side of the coin.......

 

We brought in Gordon Lee, who sold Macdonald and improved the team enough to go from 3 seasons of 15th placed finishes to a 5th place finish and European football. We turned to shit when Lee asked the Board for some money to sign Souness and Mills ( I think ) from the nappy rippers but was refused. That was when the rot set in. Decent players, Souness and Mills. Might have helped move us up from 5th. Gordon Lee had ambition and he knew a good footballer when he saw one, which was why he moved to Everton.

 

Like it or not but most of the fans were not impressed with the football that Lee served up, I know I wasn't.

 

As for Gordon Lee knowing a good player when he saw one, what did you think of Graham Oates?  Was Gordon Lee right to let Frank Clark go for nothing only to see Clark lift the second division, first division and European Cup with Forrest in three seasons?

 

I can't remember his asking for Souness and Mills, I'm not saying that he didn't, Souness would have done a good job for us, I'm not sure that Mills would have been a good signing.

 

Lee was a horrible person and only got the job because our first coice turned us down, pity.

 

you're doing a sterling job with that research Mick, Gordon Lee didn't decide to move Frank Clark on, he was gone before he arrived.

 

You DID say you supported the club during this time .........

[Mick]

so how's the research going Mick ?

 

 

 

I'm still stuck looking for most of the transfer fee's mentioned, it looks as if we spent more than we brought in but not by a great deal, it could be close.  I'm looking for a tie in with the gates we were getting and an initial impression is that we couldn't afford to keep Beardsley and Gazza because our gates were so low even with them playing in the team.

 

I'm now looking at our gates from the same period to see if spending and selling is tied in, it looks like our downfall was employing Gordon Lee and selling Malcolm Macdonald.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

Macdonald went to Arsenal and we played them at home our gate was 44,677 which is a huge rise and not in keeping with our gates at that time, no other crowd figure went up anywhere near as much as that.

 

Gates against the teams that normally lifted the crowd figures at Newcastle were reduced when Macdonald left, Boro at home had 7,000 less without Macdonald, the Man U gate was down in the region of 6,000 after selling Macdonald, Liverpool was down almost 7,000.

 

Arsenal was the only gate that went up by any great deal, we also played the mackems that season but not the season before, we had 49,664 against the mackems which was a lot higher than any gate we had the season before, when we didn't play the mackems.

 

The season after the big increase against Arsenal we played them again but this time Macdonald didn't play because of injury, the crowd was down to 23,679.

 

All in all, we should stop employing managers from Blackburn, they are not good for the health of the club.

 

do you always enjoy and support mediocrity more than people who give you top 5 teams ?

 

BTW, the bold bits are hilarious.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

as for THIS, what, by the same criteria, is your comment on us getting 52k crowds since the capacity was increased, and only half that for years prior to 1992 ? Don't let straightforward logic applied by your own criteria get in the way of an opininon with no basis mind 

 

 

 

Most football clubs, but not all, were suffering from reducing crowds before Sky took over, ours were no different.  Our problems date back to appointing Gordon Lee if attendances are a measure of satisfaction amongst the fans.

 

Straightforward logic is something you don't seem to understand, if crowds are a measure of success then Lee was a failure, that's your logic, it's what you've just used. 

[Mick]

If you're correct then those patronising twáts from London who make claims such as, " Geordies just want a number 9 to worship, they aren't bothered about having a good team ", will look to be correct then. Here's the other side of the coin.......

 

We brought in Gordon Lee, who sold Macdonald and improved the team enough to go from 3 seasons of 15th placed finishes to a 5th place finish and European football. We turned to shit when Lee asked the Board for some money to sign Souness and Mills ( I think ) from the nappy rippers but was refused. That was when the rot set in. Decent players, Souness and Mills. Might have helped move us up from 5th. Gordon Lee had ambition and he knew a good footballer when he saw one, which was why he moved to Everton.

 

Like it or not but most of the fans were not impressed with the football that Lee served up, I know I wasn't.

 

As for Gordon Lee knowing a good player when he saw one, what did you think of Graham Oates?  Was Gordon Lee right to let Frank Clark go for nothing only to see Clark lift the second division, first division and European Cup with Forrest in three seasons?

 

I can't remember his asking for Souness and Mills, I'm not saying that he didn't, Souness would have done a good job for us, I'm not sure that Mills would have been a good signing.

 

Lee was a horrible person and only got the job because our first coice turned us down, pity.

 

you're doing a sterling job with that research Mick, Gordon Lee didn't decide to move Frank Clark on, he was gone before he arrived.

 

You DID say you supported the club during this time .........

 

Gordon Lee was appointed Newcastle manager in June,  Clark left in July and was the first player to go once Lee arrived, that's my memory of it unless you have proof to change my mind, go for it.

[Howaythelads]

Mick

 

I believe the average attendances were roughly the same during the time Gordon Lee was manager when compared to the previous 4 or 5 seasons at least. This is going by memory, it certainly didn't seem like the crowds were any smaller.

 

BTW A lot of people were happy that we had a team good enough to finish 5th, they weren't pissed off at all, although there were the mindless bunch who DO only want a number 9 to worship and who babbled on like idiots because he'd sold their idol.

[NE5]

so how's the research going Mick ?

 

 

 

I'm still stuck looking for most of the transfer fee's mentioned, it looks as if we spent more than we brought in but not by a great deal, it could be close.  I'm looking for a tie in with the gates we were getting and an initial impression is that we couldn't afford to keep Beardsley and Gazza because our gates were so low even with them playing in the team.

 

I'm now looking at our gates from the same period to see if spending and selling is tied in, it looks like our downfall was employing Gordon Lee and selling Malcolm Macdonald.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

Macdonald went to Arsenal and we played them at home our gate was 44,677 which is a huge rise and not in keeping with our gates at that time, no other crowd figure went up anywhere near as much as that.

 

Gates against the teams that normally lifted the crowd figures at Newcastle were reduced when Macdonald left, Boro at home had 7,000 less without Macdonald, the Man U gate was down in the region of 6,000 after selling Macdonald, Liverpool was down almost 7,000.

 

Arsenal was the only gate that went up by any great deal, we also played the mackems that season but not the season before, we had 49,664 against the mackems which was a lot higher than any gate we had the season before, when we didn't play the mackems.

 

The season after the big increase against Arsenal we played them again but this time Macdonald didn't play because of injury, the crowd was down to 23,679.

 

All in all, we should stop employing managers from Blackburn, they are not good for the health of the club.

 

do you always enjoy and support mediocrity more than people who give you top 5 teams ?

 

BTW, the bold bits are hilarious.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

as for THIS, what, by the same criteria, is your comment on us getting 52k crowds since the capacity was increased, and only half that for years prior to 1992 ? Don't let straightforward logic applied by your own criteria get in the way of an opininon with no basis mind 

 

 

 

Most football clubs, but not all, were suffering from reducing crowds before Sky took over, ours were no different.  Our problems date back to appointing Gordon Lee if attendances are a measure of satisfaction amongst the fans.

 

Straightforward logic is something you don't seem to understand, if crowds are a measure of success then Lee was a failure, that's your logic, it's what you've just used. 

 

You keep using sky as an excuse for our failures pre-1992 ? Yet you never answer, when I ask you, how all those other clubs were successful before sky when we were not ?

 

My criteria for assessing success is based on the same thing as always, namely results . For instance, Gordon Lee's team was on the way to finishing 5th in the league, after 3 consecutive 15th placings, when he left to join a more ambitious club. Yet you don't like him and apparently prefer the 3 consecutive 15th placings.

 

Newcastle United has also been the 5th top club over the last decade, and you dont' like that either, also preferring a period when we were mediocre at best, or refusing to give credit for the turnaround at the club saying it is no different to when we were in the bottom half of the league, selling our best players, and subsequently relegated. Correct or not ?

 

Odd.

 

I think Gordon Lee was ahead of his time, selling MacDonald blinded some people to what he was saying and doing, but they were coming round when he left.

 

Frank Clark was not a registered player with Newcastle United when Gordon Lee arrived, he had been given a free transfer at the end of the season. By all means, continue with your, eerr, research.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

Another thing, Mick.

 

You mention Graham Oates. Well all I can say is that Gordon Lee took the club from a solid and mediocre position of 15th, we hadn't slumped and then recovered, we were just mediocre and had been for quite a while. He signed players that he was able to sign for Newcastle and took us to 5th. So he did a bloody sound job with the resources and backing that was available to him.

 

Significantly, when he went to Everton he signed mainly international players. I wonder why.......?

[Mick]

Mick

 

I believe the average attendances were roughly the same during the time Gordon Lee was manager when compared to the previous 4 or 5 seasons at least. This is going by memory, it certainly didn't seem like the crowds were any smaller.

 

BTW A lot of people were happy that we had a team good enough to finish 5th, they weren't pissed off at all, although there were the mindless bunch who DO only want a number 9 to worship and who babbled on like idiots because he'd sold their idol.

 

The average attendances were roughtly the same under Gordon Lee, they were 1,000 down during his first season and were roughtly the same during the second season unless you remove the figure for the mackem game which brought a high crowd anyway and would have boosted the earlier figures if they had been in the same division, take away the Arsenal game when the crowd was massively up on what we would get against Arsenal and was only higher because of the bloke wearing the number 9 shirt for Arsenal and it was down another 1,000 which is 2,000 less than before Lee came.  To be fair the gates had been falling since 1969/1970.

 

I like the way you try to put those down who stopped going as mindless, maybe they thought we were the mindless ones for still going, I kept going but didn't enjoy the football as much, I like to enjoy the style of play as much as the result.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

so how's the research going Mick ?

 

 

 

I'm still stuck looking for most of the transfer fee's mentioned, it looks as if we spent more than we brought in but not by a great deal, it could be close.  I'm looking for a tie in with the gates we were getting and an initial impression is that we couldn't afford to keep Beardsley and Gazza because our gates were so low even with them playing in the team.

 

I'm now looking at our gates from the same period to see if spending and selling is tied in, it looks like our downfall was employing Gordon Lee and selling Malcolm Macdonald.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

Macdonald went to Arsenal and we played them at home our gate was 44,677 which is a huge rise and not in keeping with our gates at that time, no other crowd figure went up anywhere near as much as that.

 

Gates against the teams that normally lifted the crowd figures at Newcastle were reduced when Macdonald left, Boro at home had 7,000 less without Macdonald, the Man U gate was down in the region of 6,000 after selling Macdonald, Liverpool was down almost 7,000.

 

Arsenal was the only gate that went up by any great deal, we also played the mackems that season but not the season before, we had 49,664 against the mackems which was a lot higher than any gate we had the season before, when we didn't play the mackems.

 

The season after the big increase against Arsenal we played them again but this time Macdonald didn't play because of injury, the crowd was down to 23,679.

 

All in all, we should stop employing managers from Blackburn, they are not good for the health of the club.

 

do you always enjoy and support mediocrity more than people who give you top 5 teams ?

 

BTW, the bold bits are hilarious.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

as for THIS, what, by the same criteria, is your comment on us getting 52k crowds since the capacity was increased, and only half that for years prior to 1992 ? Don't let straightforward logic applied by your own criteria get in the way of an opininon with no basis mind 

 

 

 

Most football clubs, but not all, were suffering from reducing crowds before Sky took over, ours were no different.  Our problems date back to appointing Gordon Lee if attendances are a measure of satisfaction amongst the fans.

 

Straightforward logic is something you don't seem to understand, if crowds are a measure of success then Lee was a failure, that's your logic, it's what you've just used. 

 

Average attendances...

 

31842 70/71 12th (Harvey)

32397 71/72 11th (Harvey)

26308 72/73  8th (Harvey)

32791 73/74 15th (Harvey)

33690 74/75 15th (Harvey)

34269 75/76 15th (Lee took over from Joe Harvey )

33934 76/77  5th (Lee until Jan, then Dinnis)

25037 77/78  21st (Dinnis, relegation then McGarry)

20926 78/79 (2nd Division)

23711 79/80 (2nd Division)

 

The attendances were roughly similar until yet again the supporters were kicked in the teeth by the Board failing to back Gordon Lee. The attendances dropped during the relegation season under Dinnis/McGarry, and then further after the relegation itself.

 

The problem wasn't the arrival of Gordon Lee, it was the manner of his departure that brought about the feeling that once again we were being let down. Gordon Lee wanted to strengthen the side when he knew we were pushing for Europe in 1977, but he wasn't allowed to by the Board. The price was his resignation, relegation and stagnation.

 

[Mick]

 

You keep using sky as an excuse for our failures pre-1992 ? Yet you never answer, when I ask you, how all those other clubs were successful before sky when we were not ?

 

My criteria for assessing success is based on the same thing as always, namely results . For instance, Gordon Lee's team was on the way to finishing 5th in the league, after 3 consecutive 15th placings, when he left to join a more ambitious club. Yet you don't like him and apparently prefer the 3 consecutive 15th placings.

 

Newcastle United has also been the 5th top club over the last decade, and you dont' like that either, also preferring a period when we were mediocre at best, or refusing to give credit for the turnaround at the club saying it is no different to when we were in the bottom half of the league, selling our best players, and subsequently relegated. Correct or not ?

 

Odd.

 

I think Gordon Lee was ahead of his time, selling MacDonald blinded some people to what he was saying and doing, but they were coming round when he left.

 

Frank Clark was not a registered player with Newcastle United when Gordon Lee arrived, he had been given a free transfer at the end of the season. By all means, continue with your, eerr, research.

 

 

 

I said most clubs gates were going down before Sky, prove they were not or accept it.

 

Gordon Lee only had 1 full season and we finished 15th, yes we were 5th when he left but anything could have happened if he'd stayed including finishing higher, he didn't so we don't know what might have happened.

 

What happened to this manager who was ahead of his time after leaving Newcastle?  I'm guessing that he went on to great things and achieved great success producing many trophies along the way, how did he get on?

[Howaythelads]

Mick

 

I believe the average attendances were roughly the same during the time Gordon Lee was manager when compared to the previous 4 or 5 seasons at least. This is going by memory, it certainly didn't seem like the crowds were any smaller.

 

BTW A lot of people were happy that we had a team good enough to finish 5th, they weren't pissed off at all, although there were the mindless bunch who DO only want a number 9 to worship and who babbled on like idiots because he'd sold their idol.

 

The average attendances were roughtly the same under Gordon Lee, they were 1,000 down during his first season and were roughtly the same during the second season unless you remove the figure for the mackem game which brought a high crowd anyway and would have boosted the earlier figures if they had been in the same division, take away the Arsenal game when the crowd was massively up on what we would get against Arsenal and was only higher because of the bloke wearing the number 9 shirt for Arsenal and it was down another 1,000 which is 2,000 less than before Lee came.  To be fair the gates had been falling since 1969/1970.

 

I like the way you try to put those down who stopped going as mindless, maybe they thought we were the mindless ones for still going, I kept going but didn't enjoy the football as much, I like to enjoy the style of play as much as the result.

 

 

 

2 things.

 

Why are you trying to manipulate a season long average attendance figure by removing some matches? I could just as easily go through the fixtures and remove some low ones, but I hadn't even thought of it until you started on about removing some high ones. You either want to go for an average figure or you don't. Which is it to be? Perhaps some of the clubs that were promoted and relegated that season meant that we played some 'small' clubs and our attendances were lower for that reason. Perhaps it's the other way around? Not sure why you want to go on like this, why not just stick with the average and be done with it? Oh I know, it doesn't quite suit what you're trying to portray, does it Mick?

 

I'm not trying to put anyone down for not going. I wasn't even aware I'd said some people had stopped going, could have sworn I said attendances were roughly the same. How does that translate to me saying people stopped going?

 

[Mick]

so how's the research going Mick ?

 

 

 

I'm still stuck looking for most of the transfer fee's mentioned, it looks as if we spent more than we brought in but not by a great deal, it could be close.  I'm looking for a tie in with the gates we were getting and an initial impression is that we couldn't afford to keep Beardsley and Gazza because our gates were so low even with them playing in the team.

 

I'm now looking at our gates from the same period to see if spending and selling is tied in, it looks like our downfall was employing Gordon Lee and selling Malcolm Macdonald.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

Macdonald went to Arsenal and we played them at home our gate was 44,677 which is a huge rise and not in keeping with our gates at that time, no other crowd figure went up anywhere near as much as that.

 

Gates against the teams that normally lifted the crowd figures at Newcastle were reduced when Macdonald left, Boro at home had 7,000 less without Macdonald, the Man U gate was down in the region of 6,000 after selling Macdonald, Liverpool was down almost 7,000.

 

Arsenal was the only gate that went up by any great deal, we also played the mackems that season but not the season before, we had 49,664 against the mackems which was a lot higher than any gate we had the season before, when we didn't play the mackems.

 

The season after the big increase against Arsenal we played them again but this time Macdonald didn't play because of injury, the crowd was down to 23,679.

 

All in all, we should stop employing managers from Blackburn, they are not good for the health of the club.

 

do you always enjoy and support mediocrity more than people who give you top 5 teams ?

 

BTW, the bold bits are hilarious.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

as for THIS, what, by the same criteria, is your comment on us getting 52k crowds since the capacity was increased, and only half that for years prior to 1992 ? Don't let straightforward logic applied by your own criteria get in the way of an opininon with no basis mind 

 

 

 

Most football clubs, but not all, were suffering from reducing crowds before Sky took over, ours were no different.  Our problems date back to appointing Gordon Lee if attendances are a measure of satisfaction amongst the fans.

 

Straightforward logic is something you don't seem to understand, if crowds are a measure of success then Lee was a failure, that's your logic, it's what you've just used. 

 

Average attendances...

 

31842 70/71 12th (Harvey)

32397 71/72 11th (Harvey)

26308 72/73   8th (Harvey)

32791 73/74 15th (Harvey)

33690 74/75 15th (Harvey)

34269 75/76 15th (Lee took over from Joe Harvey )

33934 76/77   5th (Lee until Jan, then Dinnis)

25037 77/78  21st (Dinnis, relegation then McGarry)

20926 78/79 (2nd Division)

23711 79/80 (2nd Division)

 

The attendances were roughly similar until yet again the supporters were kicked in the teeth by the Board failing to back Gordon Lee. The attendances dropped during the relegation season under Dinnis/McGarry, and then further after the relegation itself.

 

The problem wasn't the arrival of Gordon Lee, it was the manner of his departure that brought about the feeling that once again we were being let down. Gordon Lee wanted to strengthen the side when he knew we were pushing for Europe in 1977, but he wasn't allowed to by the Board. The price was his resignation, relegation and stagnation.

 

 

They aren't league attendances, I went off league attendances as we always got higher figures for the cup.

[NE5]

 

You keep using sky as an excuse for our failures pre-1992 ? Yet you never answer, when I ask you, how all those other clubs were successful before sky when we were not ?

 

My criteria for assessing success is based on the same thing as always, namely results . For instance, Gordon Lee's team was on the way to finishing 5th in the league, after 3 consecutive 15th placings, when he left to join a more ambitious club. Yet you don't like him and apparently prefer the 3 consecutive 15th placings.

 

Newcastle United has also been the 5th top club over the last decade, and you dont' like that either, also preferring a period when we were mediocre at best, or refusing to give credit for the turnaround at the club saying it is no different to when we were in the bottom half of the league, selling our best players, and subsequently relegated. Correct or not ?

 

Odd.

 

I think Gordon Lee was ahead of his time, selling MacDonald blinded some people to what he was saying and doing, but they were coming round when he left.

 

Frank Clark was not a registered player with Newcastle United when Gordon Lee arrived, he had been given a free transfer at the end of the season. By all means, continue with your, eerr, research.

 

 

 

I said most clubs gates were going down before Sky, prove they were not or accept it.

 

Gordon Lee only had 1 full season and we finished 15th, yes we were 5th when he left but anything could have happened if he'd stayed including finishing higher, he didn't so we don't know what might have happened.

 

What happened to this manager who was ahead of his time after leaving Newcastle?  I'm guessing that he went on to great things and achieved great success producing many trophies along the way, how did he get on?

 

Before sky, nobody had sky yet many more clubs than nowadays made more use than us of the same resources that we all had. I can prove that, the proof is in the league positions since the 1960's, which I am quite prepared to put up again if you've suffered another bout of memory loss.

 

Eer....the manager who went to Everton finished in the top 4 3 times, bought England internationals, and set up a youth system that produced Southall, Ratcliffe, Sheedy, Stevens, Stephen, Sharpe and Mountfield. Who all went on to take their team to 2 league titles, the FA Cup and Cup winners Cup. Can you match factual answers like this ..... like why didn't he stay at Newcastle ?

 

While we were relegated, and produced the golden era of years in the 2nd division, and your favourite postion of a bottom half place in the top league for a while until 1992 and the Halls and Shepherd ruined it by transforming us into a club who buys quality players and qualify regularly for europe.

 

Why don't you comment on my last post, where I said you preferred the eras of mediocrity to finishing 5th .... or are you going to duck it again

 

 

 

[Howaythelads]

so how's the research going Mick ?

 

 

 

I'm still stuck looking for most of the transfer fee's mentioned, it looks as if we spent more than we brought in but not by a great deal, it could be close.  I'm looking for a tie in with the gates we were getting and an initial impression is that we couldn't afford to keep Beardsley and Gazza because our gates were so low even with them playing in the team.

 

I'm now looking at our gates from the same period to see if spending and selling is tied in, it looks like our downfall was employing Gordon Lee and selling Malcolm Macdonald.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

Macdonald went to Arsenal and we played them at home our gate was 44,677 which is a huge rise and not in keeping with our gates at that time, no other crowd figure went up anywhere near as much as that.

 

Gates against the teams that normally lifted the crowd figures at Newcastle were reduced when Macdonald left, Boro at home had 7,000 less without Macdonald, the Man U gate was down in the region of 6,000 after selling Macdonald, Liverpool was down almost 7,000.

 

Arsenal was the only gate that went up by any great deal, we also played the mackems that season but not the season before, we had 49,664 against the mackems which was a lot higher than any gate we had the season before, when we didn't play the mackems.

 

The season after the big increase against Arsenal we played them again but this time Macdonald didn't play because of injury, the crowd was down to 23,679.

 

All in all, we should stop employing managers from Blackburn, they are not good for the health of the club.

 

do you always enjoy and support mediocrity more than people who give you top 5 teams ?

 

BTW, the bold bits are hilarious.

 

For instance, our crowd against Arsenal was 21,895 two seasons before selling Macdonald and 34,698 the season before.

 

as for THIS, what, by the same criteria, is your comment on us getting 52k crowds since the capacity was increased, and only half that for years prior to 1992 ? Don't let straightforward logic applied by your own criteria get in the way of an opininon with no basis mind 

 

 

 

Most football clubs, but not all, were suffering from reducing crowds before Sky took over, ours were no different.  Our problems date back to appointing Gordon Lee if attendances are a measure of satisfaction amongst the fans.

 

Straightforward logic is something you don't seem to understand, if crowds are a measure of success then Lee was a failure, that's your logic, it's what you've just used. 

 

Average attendances...

 

31842 70/71 12th (Harvey)

32397 71/72 11th (Harvey)

26308 72/73  8th (Harvey)

32791 73/74 15th (Harvey)

33690 74/75 15th (Harvey)

34269 75/76 15th (Lee took over from Joe Harvey )

33934 76/77  5th (Lee until Jan, then Dinnis)

25037 77/78  21st (Dinnis, relegation then McGarry)

20926 78/79 (2nd Division)

23711 79/80 (2nd Division)

 

The attendances were roughly similar until yet again the supporters were kicked in the teeth by the Board failing to back Gordon Lee. The attendances dropped during the relegation season under Dinnis/McGarry, and then further after the relegation itself.

 

The problem wasn't the arrival of Gordon Lee, it was the manner of his departure that brought about the feeling that once again we were being let down. Gordon Lee wanted to strengthen the side when he knew we were pushing for Europe in 1977, but he wasn't allowed to by the Board. The price was his resignation, relegation and stagnation.

 

 

They aren't league attendances, I went off league attendances as we always got higher figures for the cup.

 

bluebiggrin.gif

 

Why? Think about it.

[Mick]

Mick

 

I believe the average attendances were roughly the same during the time Gordon Lee was manager when compared to the previous 4 or 5 seasons at least. This is going by memory, it certainly didn't seem like the crowds were any smaller.

 

BTW A lot of people were happy that we had a team good enough to finish 5th, they weren't pissed off at all, although there were the mindless bunch who DO only want a number 9 to worship and who babbled on like idiots because he'd sold their idol.

 

The average attendances were roughtly the same under Gordon Lee, they were 1,000 down during his first season and were roughtly the same during the second season unless you remove the figure for the mackem game which brought a high crowd anyway and would have boosted the earlier figures if they had been in the same division, take away the Arsenal game when the crowd was massively up on what we would get against Arsenal and was only higher because of the bloke wearing the number 9 shirt for Arsenal and it was down another 1,000 which is 2,000 less than before Lee came.  To be fair the gates had been falling since 1969/1970.

 

I like the way you try to put those down who stopped going as mindless, maybe they thought we were the mindless ones for still going, I kept going but didn't enjoy the football as much, I like to enjoy the style of play as much as the result.

 

 

 

2 things.

 

Why are you trying to manipulate a season long average attendance figure by removing some matches? I could just as easily go through the fixtures and remove some low ones, but I hadn't even thought of it until you started on about removing some high ones. You either want to go for an average figure or you don't. Which is it to be? Perhaps some of the clubs that were promoted and relegated that season meant that we played some 'small' clubs and our attendances were lower for that reason. Perhaps it's the other way around? Not sure why you want to go on like this, why not just stick with the average and be done with it? Oh I know, it doesn't quite suit what you're trying to portray, does it Mick?

 

I'm not trying to put anyone down for not going. I wasn't even aware I'd said some people had stopped going, could have sworn I said attendances were roughly the same. How does that translate to me saying people stopped going?

 

 

A game against Sunderland was a one off for that season and it brought in 49,664, it was a one off and the highest gate since we played Leeds in 1973, it was a blip and distorted the average figure, our average would have been higher for those years if we'd played them.  I work with figures all of the time and it's normal to take something like that out when looking for a true trend, the same goes for the Arsenal game, Macdonald playing in the game put extra on the gate, are you saying that he didn't?

 

Sorry, I'd misread your mindless comment, you're right, it didn't translate into them not going that was a mistake.

 

[Howaythelads]

Mick

 

I believe the average attendances were roughly the same during the time Gordon Lee was manager when compared to the previous 4 or 5 seasons at least. This is going by memory, it certainly didn't seem like the crowds were any smaller.

 

BTW A lot of people were happy that we had a team good enough to finish 5th, they weren't pissed off at all, although there were the mindless bunch who DO only want a number 9 to worship and who babbled on like idiots because he'd sold their idol.

 

The average attendances were roughtly the same under Gordon Lee, they were 1,000 down during his first season and were roughtly the same during the second season unless you remove the figure for the mackem game which brought a high crowd anyway and would have boosted the earlier figures if they had been in the same division, take away the Arsenal game when the crowd was massively up on what we would get against Arsenal and was only higher because of the bloke wearing the number 9 shirt for Arsenal and it was down another 1,000 which is 2,000 less than before Lee came.  To be fair the gates had been falling since 1969/1970.

 

I like the way you try to put those down who stopped going as mindless, maybe they thought we were the mindless ones for still going, I kept going but didn't enjoy the football as much, I like to enjoy the style of play as much as the result.

 

 

 

2 things.

 

Why are you trying to manipulate a season long average attendance figure by removing some matches? I could just as easily go through the fixtures and remove some low ones, but I hadn't even thought of it until you started on about removing some high ones. You either want to go for an average figure or you don't. Which is it to be? Perhaps some of the clubs that were promoted and relegated that season meant that we played some 'small' clubs and our attendances were lower for that reason. Perhaps it's the other way around? Not sure why you want to go on like this, why not just stick with the average and be done with it? Oh I know, it doesn't quite suit what you're trying to portray, does it Mick?

 

I'm not trying to put anyone down for not going. I wasn't even aware I'd said some people had stopped going, could have sworn I said attendances were roughly the same. How does that translate to me saying people stopped going?

 

 

A game against Sunderland was a one off for that season and it brought in 49,664, it was a one off and the highest gate since we played Leeds in 1973, it was a blip and distorted the average figure, our average would have been higher for those years if we'd played them.  I work with figures all of the time and it's normal to take something like that out when looking for a true trend, the same goes for the Arsenal game, Macdonald playing in the game put extra on the gate, are you saying that he didn't?

 

Sorry, I'd misread your mindless comment, you're right, it didn't translate into them not going that was a mistake.

 

 

My comment wasn't mindless, Mick.

 

I'm interested in your thoughts on what Gordon Lee did after he left Newcastle, Mick.

[Stevie]

Whoever said Newcastle's gates weren't big enough to keep Waddle, Gazza and Peter    Honest mate that's the most pathetic thing I've ever come across in my entire life.  In 1984 we were the third best supported club in the country, in 1985 we were fourth, then we sold Waddle.  Some people leave themselves wide open with poorly thought out posts.

[NE5]

Mick

 

I believe the average attendances were roughly the same during the time Gordon Lee was manager when compared to the previous 4 or 5 seasons at least. This is going by memory, it certainly didn't seem like the crowds were any smaller.

 

BTW A lot of people were happy that we had a team good enough to finish 5th, they weren't pissed off at all, although there were the mindless bunch who DO only want a number 9 to worship and who babbled on like idiots because he'd sold their idol.

 

The average attendances were roughtly the same under Gordon Lee, they were 1,000 down during his first season and were roughtly the same during the second season unless you remove the figure for the mackem game which brought a high crowd anyway and would have boosted the earlier figures if they had been in the same division, take away the Arsenal game when the crowd was massively up on what we would get against Arsenal and was only higher because of the bloke wearing the number 9 shirt for Arsenal and it was down another 1,000 which is 2,000 less than before Lee came.  To be fair the gates had been falling since 1969/1970.

 

I like the way you try to put those down who stopped going as mindless, maybe they thought we were the mindless ones for still going, I kept going but didn't enjoy the football as much, I like to enjoy the style of play as much as the result.

 

 

 

2 things.

 

Why are you trying to manipulate a season long average attendance figure by removing some matches? I could just as easily go through the fixtures and remove some low ones, but I hadn't even thought of it until you started on about removing some high ones. You either want to go for an average figure or you don't. Which is it to be? Perhaps some of the clubs that were promoted and relegated that season meant that we played some 'small' clubs and our attendances were lower for that reason. Perhaps it's the other way around? Not sure why you want to go on like this, why not just stick with the average and be done with it? Oh I know, it doesn't quite suit what you're trying to portray, does it Mick?

 

I'm not trying to put anyone down for not going. I wasn't even aware I'd said some people had stopped going, could have sworn I said attendances were roughly the same. How does that translate to me saying people stopped going?

 

 

A game against Sunderland was a one off for that season and it brought in 49,664, it was a one off and the highest gate since we played Leeds in 1973, it was a blip and distorted the average figure, our average would have been higher for those years if we'd played them.  I work with figures all of the time and it's normal to take something like that out when looking for a true trend, the same goes for the Arsenal game, Macdonald playing in the game put extra on the gate, are you saying that he didn't?

 

Sorry, I'd misread your mindless comment, you're right, it didn't translate into them not going that was a mistake.

 

 

My comment wasn't mindless, Mick.

 

I'm interested in your thoughts on what Gordon Lee did after he left Newcastle, Mick.

 

Indeed, and why he left Newcastle Mick.

 

And a comment as to why you attempted to mislead people wouldn't go amiss.

 

I would like to say that it is highly amusing that you say you work with figures but don't understand the relevance of league positions ......