Baggio Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 Here we go again! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Svenno Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 I have a feeling this has been discussed before Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delima Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 I have a feeling this has been discussed before You have opened the Pandora Box. You just need to remember, we are the 5th best team over the past decade. It doesn't matter how we average in terms of league position. As long as we are the 5th best team in premierleague. Shepherd is the saviour of Newcastle United. He is a saint, an untouchable saint that is! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 Just wait 'til Hinge & Bracket get wind of this... http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=tbn:Ih5GRbK91qcDQM:www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/guide/images/1600/hingeandbracket_1.jpg HTL & NE5 clear their throats.... :winking: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Svenno Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 You just need to remember, we are the 5th best team over the past decade. Fair enough. But I still think the board wages and dividends seem way to high.. We're not exactly what I would call a stable high-performing team! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 Your daft attempts at avoiding to reply to the facts I post, with nothing but denials and counter denials does you no credit mate. The thing is, if you could post facts to disprove me, you would do it, but can't. Every time I post something you twist it. It is what you do. Your 'facts' are just oft-repeated opinions. I only have to give you one sourse of facts. Go and look at the club's version of their financial situation at http://www.nufc.premiumtv.co.uk/staticFiles/16/40/0,,10278~16406,00.pdf So not my version, not one you think I have an agenda with , but theirs, with Shepherd's signature on the bottom. Thanks for your time. A pleasure, as ever they are football related facts. We are not going to end up like Leeds United, however before the Halls and Shepherd we were in a worse situation than they were under Ridsdale. Fact. You obviously have no idea of the potential of the club, or the position of the club pre-1992. But living in Dunfermline and not being a Geordie, I'm not surprised. Thanks for your time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delima Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 Fair enough. But I still think the board wages and dividends seem way to high.. We're not exactly what I would call a stable high-performing team! Fair enough!? My buttock! Despite the huge financial supports we pour into the club years after years, we average an 8th league position. Embarassing! But I will stop here because I can smell the tsunami of wrath by .... .... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 You just need to remember, we are the 5th best team over the past decade. Fair enough. But I still think the board wages and dividends seem way to high.. We're not exactly what I would call a stable high-performing team! so 5th best in the country over a period of a decade isn't a stable high performing team ? What is your knowledge and experience of the club Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 Fair enough. But I still think the board wages and dividends seem way to high.. We're not exactly what I would call a stable high-performing team! Fair enough!? My buttock! Despite the huge financial supports we pour into the club years after years, we average an 8th league position. Embarassing! But I will stop here because I can smell the tsunami of wrath by .... .... name me the 7 teams that have qualified for europe more than us in the last decade ........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delima Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 Fair enough. But I still think the board wages and dividends seem way to high.. We're not exactly what I would call a stable high-performing team! Fair enough!? My buttock! Despite the huge financial supports we pour into the club years after years, we average an 8th league position. Embarassing! But I will stop here because I can smell the tsunami of wrath by .... .... name me the 7 teams that have qualified for europe more than us in the last decade ........ Juventus, AC Milan, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Manchester United, Arsenal Ah, Celtics and Rangers too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 2 minutes! Jesus fucking christ! Get on with it boys...Enlighten us. :roll: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Svenno Posted July 11, 2006 Share Posted July 11, 2006 You just need to remember, we are the 5th best team over the past decade. Fair enough. But I still think the board wages and dividends seem way to high.. We're not exactly what I would call a stable high-performing team! so 5th best in the country over a period of a decade isn't a stable high performing team ? What is your knowledge and experience of the club My knowledge and experience is pretty good IMO. You can call it stable if you want to, but variatons from second to fourteenth, CL and Inter-Toto doesn't say stable in my head. Arsenal, Man U and Liverpool are stable. Teams who variate from sixth to tenth are stable. Our variatons are to large to say stable. And the average is heavily pulled by our glory mid-to-late-ninetys and SBR best years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest elbee909 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 I'm glad I don't live in a world where my subjective interpretation of everything that happens = facts. Would make me out to be a bit of plank if that were the case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 I'm glad I don't live in a world where my subjective interpretation of everything that happens = facts. Would make me out to be a bit of plank if that were the case. Well, its a fact that under Shepherd/this board we have finished in the top 5 for 3 consecutive seasons for the first time in over 50 years. Correct or not ? If you think this a "subjective interpretation of everything that happens" then you must be a plank. Likewise the FACT that in the last decade we have appeared in europe more than we did between the whole period from the late 1950's until 1992. Likewise during the years between 1964 and 1992 the highest positions we finished in the top league were 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th [once each], spent 11 years in the old 2nd division and the remainder of that time in the bottom half of the top league. Therefore it is reasonable to say that the current board we have had since 1992 has run the club better than all of their predecessor since the mid 1950's. Correct or not ? And I think if you DON'T agree with this, or think it is a "subjective interpretation of everything that happens" then you must indeed, be a right plank. Of course I am waiting to hear differently from macbeth, or grass from his books. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest elbee909 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Well, its a fact that under Shepherd/this board we have finished in the top 5 for 3 consecutive seasons for the first time in over 50 years. Correct or not ? If you think this a "subjective interpretation of everything that happens" then you must be a plank. Likewise the FACT that in the last decade we have appeared in europe more than we did between the whole of the late 1950's and 1992. Likewise during the years between 1964 and 1992 the highest positions we finished in the top league were 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th [once each], spent 11 years in the old 2nd division and the remainder of that time in the bottom half of the top league. Therefore it is reasonable to say that the current board we have had since 1992 has run the club better than all of their predecessor since the mid 1950's. Correct or not ? And I think if you DON'T agree with this, or think it is a "subjective interpretation of everything that happens" then you must indeed, be a right plank. Of course I am waiting to hear differently from macbeth, or grass from his books. I apologise if you took offence at any wood-based rhetorical comparisons I may or may not have made. You lambast others for making conclusions and drawing relationships between events and situations in a way that you do yourself; your subjectivity comes across in that. Let me first just say yes, to any hard and fast facts that you may have pointed out to the group. Your facts are correct. They're pretty bloody contrived, but not going to argue with them. But if I were going to I might say: "Appeared more in Europe? Ok, well, are there ANY other external reasons that might be the case? Perhaps UEFA putting bias on money-spinning group stages has something to do with that. Intertoto appearances also included, no doubt." The club sure has had a lot more money in the last decade than it ever did recently. What's the ratio of money gone through the books to success? Any better than it was before? I just want to know what service it does anyone, including Newcastle Utd, by congratulating the board rather than doing a constructive job of criticising them. When a set of people are in a monopoly position, which the board absolutely IS, where there aren't many that hold them to account, surely it makes sense to question rather than say 'well done chaps, carry on'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Well, its a fact that under Shepherd/this board we have finished in the top 5 for 3 consecutive seasons for the first time in over 50 years. Correct or not ? If you think this a "subjective interpretation of everything that happens" then you must be a plank. Likewise the FACT that in the last decade we have appeared in europe more than we did between the whole of the late 1950's and 1992. Likewise during the years between 1964 and 1992 the highest positions we finished in the top league were 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th [once each], spent 11 years in the old 2nd division and the remainder of that time in the bottom half of the top league. Therefore it is reasonable to say that the current board we have had since 1992 has run the club better than all of their predecessor since the mid 1950's. Correct or not ? And I think if you DON'T agree with this, or think it is a "subjective interpretation of everything that happens" then you must indeed, be a right plank. Of course I am waiting to hear differently from macbeth, or grass from his books. I apologise if you took offence at any wood-based rhetorical comparisons I may or may not have made. You lambast others for making conclusions and drawing relationships between events and situations in a way that you do yourself; your subjectivity comes across in that. Let me first just say yes, to any hard and fast facts that you may have pointed out to the group. Your facts are correct. They're pretty bloody contrived, but not going to argue with them. But if I were going to I might say: "Appeared more in Europe? Ok, well, are there ANY other external reasons that might be the case? Perhaps UEFA putting bias on money-spinning group stages has something to do with that. Intertoto appearances also included, no doubt." The club sure has had a lot more money in the last decade than it ever did recently. What's the ratio of money gone through the books to success? Any better than it was before? I just want to know what service it does anyone, including Newcastle Utd, by congratulating the board rather than doing a constructive job of criticising them. When a set of people are in a monopoly position, which the board absolutely IS, where there aren't many that hold them to account, surely it makes sense to question rather than say 'well done chaps, carry on'. No apology needed mate, I didn't take the use of "you" as you thought, and apologies to yourself if you took mine the same way, as it wasn't intended that way either. No, we have appeared in the UEFA Cup/CWC/Champions League more since 1992 than we did between the late 1950's and 1992 in the Fairs Cup/UEFA Cup/CWC and European Cup. We competed in the Fairs Cup in 1969, 1970, 1971 and 1976. We have competed in the UEFA/CWC/CL in 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2002, 2003, 2004. The league positions I quoted are off the top of my head but I am pretty sure they are right, I could check but there's no need unless someone thinks I'm making it up or something. The money the club has made is no more and no less than proportional to the same opportunities all the other clubs have also had including ourselves. If Man City, Villa, Leeds, Everton made more money than us [to mention a few] and been more successful in the past, why are we making more and doing better than them now ? The same opportunity was always there for every club in any era. Simple fact is they had better run, more ambitious clubs than we did, now the reverse is true. How else could this be so? We don't sell our best players anymore for financial reasons, we sign top players instead, and the ground isn't half full any more, (for bean counters like macbeth this approach generates more money and capitalises the clubs potentail instead) and we consider not finishing in a good position failure, whereas before 1992 we considered simply staying in the top flight success. I am not intentionally "congratulating" them, just pointing how much bigger and better we are since they came in. No club does we what we have done in their time with a crap/rubbish/shit board [insert whatever term you feel is applicable that you've said]. I have no idea how well we might do in future, and I have no idea how capable they are, but they have got us this far and at the moment there is no-one better on the horizon who has came along and shown themselves able and prepared to do better. Which will be extremely difficult as only 4 clubs have done better than us over their time, so until such a time comes along they remain the best people. I find it hugely, massively ironic, and very sad, that so many people slag off the board yet pages and pages of threads are posted on this website theoretically spending millions of millions of pounds of a value and amount that only clubs with good directors generate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 I'm glad I don't live in a world where my subjective interpretation of everything that happens = facts. Would make me out to be a bit of plank if that were the case. Well, its a fact that under Shepherd/this board we have finished in the top 5 for 3 consecutive seasons for the first time in over 50 years. Correct or not ? If you think this a "subjective interpretation of everything that happens" then you must be a plank. The fact is correct, but again, youre only selecting the facts that suit your bias. For example, its also a fact that when Shephard took over, we had the 2nd best team in the country with the best attack and a side that had the potential to dominate for many years to come - and thanks to the previous management as well as the increase in TV and prize money, another fact is that Shephard has had far greater resources to work with than any of Newcastle's previous boards/chairmen. On top of all this, its also a fact that since Shephard has taken over, weve finished outside the top 10 more times than we have finished inside it. Within this fact which covers many seasons, you choose to select the most suitable set of seasons that suited your bias. Quite simply, thats the way it is, and theres about as much point arguing that youre not selectively choosing facts that suit your views as there is to arguing that youre not breathing air whilst at the same time doing just that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 I'm glad I don't live in a world where my subjective interpretation of everything that happens = facts. Would make me out to be a bit of plank if that were the case. Well, its a fact that under Shepherd/this board we have finished in the top 5 for 3 consecutive seasons for the first time in over 50 years. Correct or not ? If you think this a "subjective interpretation of everything that happens" then you must be a plank. The fact is correct, but again, youre only selecting the facts that suit your bias. For example, its also a fact that when Shephard took over, we had the 2nd best team in the country with the best attack and a side that had the potential to dominate for many years to come - and thanks to the previous management as well as the increase in TV and prize money, another fact is that Shephard has had far greater resources to work with than any of Newcastle's previous boards/chairmen. On top of all this, its also a fact that since Shephard has taken over, weve finished outside the top 10 more times than we have finished inside it. Within this fact which covers many seasons, you choose to select the most suitable set of seasons that suited your bias. Quite simply, thats the way it is, and theres about as much point arguing that youre not selectively choosing facts that suit your views as there is to arguing that youre not breathing air whilst at the same time doing just that. I'm not being selective about anything. We may have finished outside the top 10 a few times but have also finished in the top 5 for 3 consecutive seasons for the first time in over 50 years. Also - "the years we finished outside the top 10" you refer to are also the next highest positions we have finished in for 50 years after the 3 Keegan/SJH ones. Believe it or not, our lowest position of 14th under Souness is higher than we finished for 3 consecutive seasons in the 70's which was classed as a "golden era" with MacDonald and Hibbit in the team, and our longest run in the top league since the 1950's was from 1965 until 1978, most of that time spent in the bottom half of the league, so we have now beaten that too. To put it more easily, between 1964 and 1992 we finished "outside the top 10" 23 times in 28 years, with 11 of those in the old 2nd division. So who's being selective. These are all the facts for you. Which bear out - completely - that although SJH got to 2nd, the current board have been our 2nd most successful board in league and european qualification terms for over 50 years, over a longer period than SJH and if you are realistic you have to accept that no team has a right to stay 2nd in the league forever. Only a complete utter plank would think that. And only a compete utter plank would not say that the people who have run the club since 1992 are massively more competent than their predecessors when faced with such facts as these. I don't consider myself biased. I only want success for the club, real success, however we don't have a right to it, other clubs also think exactly the same as we do and are also doing their best to win 2 trophies, or 3 if you count the League Cup. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bobjonson Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 It's totally unbelievable that people whinge on and on about Sheperd the board etc etc, fair enough he was an idiot for appointing souness, and he has made a load of crap decisions in the past, but today is a prime example, players of the calibre of duff would laugh out loud if they were linked with newcastle before sheperd and hall took over. Is it the case that some people are not happy unless they have something to complain about? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 It's totally unbelievable that people whinge on and on about Sheperd the board etc etc, fair enough he was an idiot for appointing souness, and he has made a load of crap decisions in the past, but today is a prime example, players of the calibre of duff would laugh out loud if they were linked with newcastle before sheperd and hall took over. Is it the case that some people are not happy unless they have something to complain about? In my opinion the most important signing in my time as a Newcastle supporter was the England captain Kevin Keegan, that happened long before Hall and Shepherd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 STOP ARGUING WITH NE5 JUST LEAVE HIM BE AND STOP GOING ROUND IN CIRCLES THANKS bluebigrazz.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 It's totally unbelievable that people whinge on and on about Sheperd the board etc etc, fair enough he was an idiot for appointing souness, and he has made a load of crap decisions in the past, but today is a prime example, players of the calibre of duff would laugh out loud if they were linked with newcastle before sheperd and hall took over. Is it the case that some people are not happy unless they have something to complain about? In my opinion the most important signing in my time as a Newcastle supporter was the England captain Kevin Keegan, that happened long before Hall and Shepherd. Shame Gazza, Beardsley, Waddle and subsequent relegation didn't agree with you. Not to mention knocking on the door of the old 3rd division later again. Canny opportunity eh, what happened to moving forward from that platform ? Remind yourself where we were when he signed Mick, assuming you really were there. What do you think of today, still harking for the old pre-Shepherd and Hall days ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bobjonson Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 It's totally unbelievable that people whinge on and on about Sheperd the board etc etc, fair enough he was an idiot for appointing souness, and he has made a load of crap decisions in the past, but today is a prime example, players of the calibre of duff would laugh out loud if they were linked with newcastle before sheperd and hall took over. Is it the case that some people are not happy unless they have something to complain about? In my opinion the most important signing in my time as a Newcastle supporter was the England captain Kevin Keegan, that happened long before Hall and Shepherd. and where did I say duff is the most important signing?? KK was an amazing signing, but was only ever coming to end his career, it was an amazing time to watch the team then, but wasnt built on. Oh and he was an EX england captain when we signed him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 STOP ARGUING WITH NE5 JUST LEAVE HIM BE AND STOP GOING ROUND IN CIRCLES THANKS bluebigrazz.gif you would do yourself more favours if you listened to us [ie me, bob, HTL, Micktoon and one or two others] than those you obviously do Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 It's totally unbelievable that people whinge on and on about Sheperd the board etc etc, fair enough he was an idiot for appointing souness, and he has made a load of crap decisions in the past, but today is a prime example, players of the calibre of duff would laugh out loud if they were linked with newcastle before sheperd and hall took over. Is it the case that some people are not happy unless they have something to complain about? In my opinion the most important signing in my time as a Newcastle supporter was the England captain Kevin Keegan, that happened long before Hall and Shepherd. and where did I say duff is the most important signing?? KK was an amazing signing, but was only ever coming to end his career, it was an amazing time to watch the team then, but wasnt built on. Oh and he was an EX england captain when we signed him I mentioned before to Mick that Keegan never played for England again after signing for Newcastle Bob, but he doesn't believe me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now