Looks like we really have no money

[BottledDog]

Bravo

 

 

of course, getting another board who lack ambition like the old one, is impossible and simply will not happen to us

 

No board with ambition would employ Souness and Roeder.

 

You'll now come out with Liverpool employing Souness so I'll just remind you that Liverpool employed Souness after he'd been a success at Rangers, we employed him after he'd been a failure at Liverpool and beyond.

 

Quite, and if we are talking players (Francis Lee/Darren Bent etc), you could pull such examples for any board including the current one strangely enough.

 

For instance when Robson wanted Miguel, the board held back and then chose to provide Carr instead. Was that an example of ambition?

 

[NE5]

Bravo

 

 

of course, getting another board who lack ambition like the old one, is impossible and simply will not happen to us

 

No board with ambition would employ Souness and Roeder.

 

You'll now come out with Liverpool employing Souness so I'll just remind you that Liverpool employed Souness after he'd been a success at Rangers, we employed him after he'd been a failure at Liverpool and beyond.

 

I will. I will also point out that Souness had been successful at Blackburn, having won the League Cup after promotion back to the premiership.

 

Is employing Roy Evans ambitious ? Is employing Joe Fagan ambitious ? Is employing a managerial double act ambitious ?

 

Is employing Bruce Rioch ambitious ? Was employing George Graham ambitious [at the time he had only managed Millwall] ?

 

Is employing Kenny Dalglish ambitious  Is employing Bobby Robson ambitious ? Is employing Ruud Gullit ambitious ?

 

As usual, you don't look at the whole picture, you only pick out what suits you.

 

There is a case for employing Roeder that you have to understand and give them a bit of slack. The clubs needs stability and someone with a feel for what is best for the club and not their own ego. The last thing we needed was another big name more concerned with themselves. And a foreigner, whatever their track record, may well have not understood the club as we have not been the trophy winners like Liverpool etc have been in the last few decades.

 

 

[NE5]

Bravo

 

 

of course, getting another board who lack ambition like the old one, is impossible and simply will not happen to us

 

No board with ambition would employ Souness and Roeder.

 

You'll now come out with Liverpool employing Souness so I'll just remind you that Liverpool employed Souness after he'd been a success at Rangers, we employed him after he'd been a failure at Liverpool and beyond.

 

Quite, and if we are talking players (Francis Lee/Darren Bent etc), you could pull such examples for any board including the current one strangely enough.

 

For instance when Robson wanted Miguel, the board held back and then chose to provide Carr instead. Was that an example of ambition?

 

 

If you really think this board haven't shown they have had ambition, then you must have been living on Mars.

 

Quite simply, if they say they didn't have the money to buy Miguel then that will be fact, unless of course you are one of those who slate them for spending money then also slate them for not spending money.

 

What did you think of spending 6m on Marcelino, 4m on Goma, 4m on Domi and 4.5m on Pistone ?

 

 

[Mick]

 

I will. I will also point out that Souness had been successful at Blackburn, having won the League Cup after promotion back to the premiership.

 

Is employing Roy Evans ambitious ? Is employing Joe Fagan ambitious ? Is employing a managerial double act ambitious ?

 

Is employing Bruce Rioch ambitious ? Was employing George Graham ambitious [at the time he had only managed Millwall] ?

 

Is employing Kenny Dalglish ambitious  Is employing Bobby Robson ambitious ? Is employing Ruud Gullit ambitious ?

 

As usual, you don't look at the whole picture, you only pick out what suits you.

 

There is a case for employing Roeder that you have to understand and give them a bit of slack. The clubs needs stability and someone with a feel for what is best for the club and not their own ego. The last thing we needed was another big name more concerned with themselves. And a foreigner, whatever their track record, may well have not understood the club as we have not been the trophy winners like Liverpool etc have been in the last few decades.

 

 

 

Talk about clutching at straws.

 

You're now defending the appointment of Souness, another sign of desperation from the Shepherd apologist.  The record of Souness has been done a million times, you've done it yourself so I'll not spend any more time on that one.

 

In fact everything you've mentioned has been done a million times.

[Mick]

 

If you really think this board haven't shown they have had ambition, then you must have been living on Mars.

 

Quite simply, if they say they didn't have the money to buy Miguel then that will be fact, unless of course you are one of those who slate them for spending money then also slate them for not spending money.

 

What did you think of spending 6m on Marcelino, 4m on Goma, 4m on Domi and 4.5m on Pistone ?

 

 

 

Ok, Shearer really is Mary Poppins, we're mugs for buying the clubs shirts and your lass is a dog.

[Dinho lad]

 

If you really think this board haven't shown they have had ambition, then you must have been living on Mars.

 

Quite simply, if they say they didn't have the money to buy Miguel then that will be fact, unless of course you are one of those who slate them for spending money then also slate them for not spending money.

 

What did you think of spending 6m on Marcelino, 4m on Goma, 4m on Domi and 4.5m on Pistone ?

 

 

 

Ok, Shearer really is Mary Poppins, we're mugs for buying the clubs shirts and your lass is a dog.

 

[Guest Knightrider]

I would have thought it obvious that we have no money, the desperate attempt to peddle Milner on the eve of the last window should have been the eye opener. We are skint. That's what happens when you appoint a shite manager and try to justify that decision by handing him the most money any manager has ever had at the club. Or offer double what Liverpool had offered on an injury prone striker who didn't want to join the club in the first-place. You honestly couldn't make it up. The very thing FS and Co can never be accused of, spending and looking after the finances, has undone them big style and all the good work they did on that front has been undone in the space of a mad crazy summer.

[NE5]

 

I will. I will also point out that Souness had been successful at Blackburn, having won the League Cup after promotion back to the premiership.

 

Is employing Roy Evans ambitious ? Is employing Joe Fagan ambitious ? Is employing a managerial double act ambitious ?

 

Is employing Bruce Rioch ambitious ? Was employing George Graham ambitious [at the time he had only managed Millwall] ?

 

Is employing Kenny Dalglish ambitious  Is employing Bobby Robson ambitious ? Is employing Ruud Gullit ambitious ?

 

As usual, you don't look at the whole picture, you only pick out what suits you.

 

There is a case for employing Roeder that you have to understand and give them a bit of slack. The clubs needs stability and someone with a feel for what is best for the club and not their own ego. The last thing we needed was another big name more concerned with themselves. And a foreigner, whatever their track record, may well have not understood the club as we have not been the trophy winners like Liverpool etc have been in the last few decades.

 

 

 

Talk about clutching at straws.

 

You're now defending the appointment of Souness, another sign of desperation from the Shepherd apologist.  The record of Souness has been done a million times, you've done it yourself so I'll not spend any more time on that one.

 

In fact everything you've mentioned has been done a million times.

 

I'm not defending anything. Least of all the appointment of Souness. The one thing you have got right is when you agreed with me that he should never have got the time and money he did.

 

I just think that you are a whinger who will moan at whatever they do when it doesn't suit you, with the same unrealistic outlook that all bandwagon jumpers have.

 

What is your opinions on all the managers I mentioned, that you conveniently forget to mention ? You cannot say that I am an apologist for / and defending anyone when you continue to fail to respond to posts in full.

 

 

[NE5]

 

If you really think this board haven't shown they have had ambition, then you must have been living on Mars.

 

Quite simply, if they say they didn't have the money to buy Miguel then that will be fact, unless of course you are one of those who slate them for spending money then also slate them for not spending money.

 

What did you think of spending 6m on Marcelino, 4m on Goma, 4m on Domi and 4.5m on Pistone ?

 

 

 

Ok, Shearer really is Mary Poppins, we're mugs for buying the clubs shirts and your lass is a dog.

 

Once again, why not reply to the whole post in context. What do you think of buying those players, or is it unambitious 

[BottledDog]

Bravo

 

 

of course, getting another board who lack ambition like the old one, is impossible and simply will not happen to us

 

No board with ambition would employ Souness and Roeder.

 

You'll now come out with Liverpool employing Souness so I'll just remind you that Liverpool employed Souness after he'd been a success at Rangers, we employed him after he'd been a failure at Liverpool and beyond.

 

Quite, and if we are talking players (Francis Lee/Darren Bent etc), you could pull such examples for any board including the current one strangely enough.

 

For instance when Robson wanted Miguel, the board held back and then chose to provide Carr instead. Was that an example of ambition?

 

 

If you really think this board haven't shown they have had ambition, then you must have been living on Mars.

 

Quite simply, if they say they didn't have the money to buy Miguel then that will be fact, unless of course you are one of those who slate them for spending money then also slate them for not spending money.

 

What did you think of spending 6m on Marcelino, 4m on Goma, 4m on Domi and 4.5m on Pistone ?

 

 

 

 

They had more than enough money to buy him when Robson asked for him. The board stalled and when his price rocketed, bought Carr.

 

Marcelino, Goma, Domi and Pistone? Poor to middling buys, but as you argue yourself, you have to back the manager you appoint, right?

[Mick]

 

I will. I will also point out that Souness had been successful at Blackburn, having won the League Cup after promotion back to the premiership.

 

Is employing Roy Evans ambitious ? Is employing Joe Fagan ambitious ? Is employing a managerial double act ambitious ?

 

Is employing Bruce Rioch ambitious ? Was employing George Graham ambitious [at the time he had only managed Millwall] ?

 

Is employing Kenny Dalglish ambitious  Is employing Bobby Robson ambitious ? Is employing Ruud Gullit ambitious ?

 

As usual, you don't look at the whole picture, you only pick out what suits you.

 

There is a case for employing Roeder that you have to understand and give them a bit of slack. The clubs needs stability and someone with a feel for what is best for the club and not their own ego. The last thing we needed was another big name more concerned with themselves. And a foreigner, whatever their track record, may well have not understood the club as we have not been the trophy winners like Liverpool etc have been in the last few decades.

 

 

 

Talk about clutching at straws.

 

You're now defending the appointment of Souness, another sign of desperation from the Shepherd apologist.  The record of Souness has been done a million times, you've done it yourself so I'll not spend any more time on that one.

 

In fact everything you've mentioned has been done a million times.

 

I'm not defending anything. Least of all the appointment of Souness. The one thing you have got right is when you agreed with me that he should never have got the time and money he did.

 

I just think that you are a whinger who will moan at whatever they do when it doesn't suit you, with the same unrealistic outlook that all bandwagon jumpers have.

 

What is your opinions on all the managers I mentioned, that you conveniently forget to mention ? You cannot say that I am an apologist for / and defending anyone when you continue to fail to respond to posts in full.

 

 

 

See the bit in bold where you didn't defend the appointment of Souness.

 

I've responded to every point you make, ask your brother to find the posts where he mentioned Liverpool and Arsenal failing when they appointed the managers you've mentioned although he didn't mention Joe Fagan or question George Graham, at least I don't remember that happening.  I'm not wasting my time looking for the posts just so that I can prove I've actually covered what you demand.

 

I've posted my thoughts on Dalglish and Gullit, go and find them if you're interested.

[Mick]

 

If you really think this board haven't shown they have had ambition, then you must have been living on Mars.

 

Quite simply, if they say they didn't have the money to buy Miguel then that will be fact, unless of course you are one of those who slate them for spending money then also slate them for not spending money.

 

What did you think of spending 6m on Marcelino, 4m on Goma, 4m on Domi and 4.5m on Pistone ?

 

 

 

Ok, Shearer really is Mary Poppins, we're mugs for buying the clubs shirts and your lass is a dog.

 

Once again, why not reply to the whole post in context. What do you think of buying those players, or is it unambitious 

 

Quite simply, if the board say they are ambitious then that will be fact.

[Guest BooBoo]

The more i read his guff, the more i'm concerned that NE5 has a severe learning abnormality. Poor guy.

[Howaythelads]

The more i read his guff, the more i'm concerned that NE5 has a severe learning abnormality. Poor guy.

 

Why not stick to football?  There's really no need for you to stick your oar in with an insult, but you do tend to do this a lot, contributing nowt to the discussion. As you've moved the thread off topic with an insult I'll say that the more off topic interjections you post to insult other members the more I'm sure you're really a soft shite acting tough from behind the safety of your computer.

[Dinho lad]

The more i read his guff, the more i'm concerned that NE5 has a severe learning abnormality. Poor guy.

 

Why not stick to football?  There's really no need for you to stick your oar in with an insult, but you do tend to do this a lot, contributing nowt to the discussion. As you've moved the thread off topic with an insult I'll say that the more off topic interjections you post to insult other members the more I'm sure you're really a soft shite acting tough from behind the safety of your computer.

 

tbfh.....

 

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/3280/26891056eq3.jpg

[OzzieMandias]

The more i read his guff, the more i'm concerned that NE5 has a severe learning abnormality. Poor guy.

 

Why not stick to football?  There's really no need for you to stick your oar in with an insult, but you do tend to do this a lot, contributing nowt to the discussion. As you've moved the thread off topic with an insult I'll say that the more off topic interjections you post to insult other members the more I'm sure you're really a soft shite acting tough from behind the safety of your computer.

 

Aye, Leazes Parrot would never do that. 

[Cajun]

Awaits the cries of "but he started it!"

[Guest Johan]

The dynamic duo is back I see. Would like to ask NE5 the same questions I asked HTL.

 

Above all I would like to know, are you truly still happy with the board? And if so, why? I would also like it if you did not answer with "It is better than the one we had in the 80´s"

 

Listen mate, at the end of the day, you know very little about this club. People like me and HTL attempt to wise you up but you don't listen or want to listen. I don't mean to sound patronising, but you give me very little choice.

 

Newcastle United does not have a divine right to be one of the top clubs in the country. There are numerous other clubs who were above us for decades - that should not have been. That could just as easily happen again if we really did have a shite board. Look down the road at Sunderland if you don't believe me. That is, if you know where Sunderland is or know anything about them and their potential too. Take these comments on board if you like, or don't if you don't want to, but if you wish to remain largely ignorant of the reality of our situation and the progress we have made under this board, that is your choice.

 

 

 

I guess I should thank you and HTL for your "education" then  As some of the posters here have said, no I dont think we have some kind of divine right to be in the top four or anything. However I think that there right now is a lot of potential in the club and its brand. We happened to have some success at exactly the right time when football really exploded and in a way I think we are still living on some of that which Keegan and the board at that time built up. 

 

Maybe this is where the biggest difference in opinions between me and the two of you lie. I really think that Newcastle as a brand and club have the potential to be some kind of a dark horse in the premiership year after year and maybe you dont?

 

Maybe we also differ in the way we look at the club, I see it more as a business that should operate as such. If the man in charge fail, he gets replaced. Even if we dont change owners we could hire someone to run the club, like Kenyon at Chelsea.

 

If i where to sum this up into a question for you to answer it would be something like. Dont you think that the success we have had motivates raising the goals of the club and the expectations of the fans? Or does prior success excuse mistakes and bad times that comes after?

 

PS. yes I know what Sunderland is and where it is located. Though my father raised me to never motivate my failures by saying stuff like " that guy did even worse"

 

the alternative, and difference in outlook, is quite simple

 

I support the football club, from the heart. And have a realistic view of football as such.

 

You support the "brand", and if you wish to support a "brand", you should have chosen a more successful "brand" if the 5th best in the country over the span of a decade isn't enough for you.

 

And, in football terms, it is far from "failure", as 87 other clubs will tell you, especially when they all watch us playing - again - in the UEFA Cup soon.

 

Whether you like it or not, the current board, since taking over the club in 1992, HAVE raised the expectations of the club and supporters during their time in charge. This is what myself, HTL and one or two others are trying to put across. So you are back to square 1. Accept it or not.

 

 

 

 

What makes you say that I support the "brand"? Sure, I use the word and I feel that you use that as a way to dodge some of my points and questions. I dont really like the way football works these days but it is the world we live in and you have to deal with it best you can.

 

As for you last point, yeah sure. That is exactly what I said. They have been successful, there is no question about that. That doesnt mean that they will continue to be that. Football like everything else is in constant change and no matter what you think of it you have to change as well or get left behind. With other clubs changing owners and getting new cash in through investment will we be able to keep being the fifth club in England?

 

As for accepting or not, this is an internet forum. Its about debating things and for me personally also a chance to learn how to better type and read english and learn about other things. Its not like I think that what I post here will change anything with regards to the clubs ownership structure.

 

[Guest Johan]

The more i read his guff, the more i'm concerned that NE5 has a severe learning abnormality. Poor guy.

 

Why not stick to football?  There's really no need for you to stick your oar in with an insult, but you do tend to do this a lot, contributing nowt to the discussion. As you've moved the thread off topic with an insult I'll say that the more off topic interjections you post to insult other members the more I'm sure you're really a soft shite acting tough from behind the safety of your computer.

 

Ehm, its not like you never insult people either.. Like your " " response to my post yesterday and other things that I feel just has the aim of trying to make people feel stupid for not agreeing with you or NE5. Though that of course does not motivate his post.

[Howaythelads]

The more i read his guff, the more i'm concerned that NE5 has a severe learning abnormality. Poor guy.

 

Why not stick to football?  There's really no need for you to stick your oar in with an insult, but you do tend to do this a lot, contributing nowt to the discussion. As you've moved the thread off topic with an insult I'll say that the more off topic interjections you post to insult other members the more I'm sure you're really a soft shite acting tough from behind the safety of your computer.

 

Ehm, its not like you never insult people either.. Like your " " response to my post yesterday and other things that I feel just has the aim of trying to make people feel stupid for not agreeing with you or NE5. Though that of course does not motivate his post.

 

[NE5]

Bravo

 

 

of course, getting another board who lack ambition like the old one, is impossible and simply will not happen to us

 

No board with ambition would employ Souness and Roeder.

 

You'll now come out with Liverpool employing Souness so I'll just remind you that Liverpool employed Souness after he'd been a success at Rangers, we employed him after he'd been a failure at Liverpool and beyond.

 

Quite, and if we are talking players (Francis Lee/Darren Bent etc), you could pull such examples for any board including the current one strangely enough.

 

For instance when Robson wanted Miguel, the board held back and then chose to provide Carr instead. Was that an example of ambition?

 

 

If you really think this board haven't shown they have had ambition, then you must have been living on Mars.

 

Quite simply, if they say they didn't have the money to buy Miguel then that will be fact, unless of course you are one of those who slate them for spending money then also slate them for not spending money.

 

What did you think of spending 6m on Marcelino, 4m on Goma, 4m on Domi and 4.5m on Pistone ?

 

 

 

 

They had more than enough money to buy him when Robson asked for him. The board stalled and when his price rocketed, bought Carr.

 

Marcelino, Goma, Domi and Pistone? Poor to middling buys, but as you argue yourself, you have to back the manager you appoint, right?

 

so whats your stance on this ? Should the club spend big money on defenders or not ? Tell us what you think, then don't go back on your response when you feel like slating the club whatever they do. I had a feeling you would be thick enough not to grasp the point.

 

 

 

 

[nufcjmc]

sort of merging two threads here but if this babel thing is true and we have tabled a 4.5/5 million bid and we do this knowing its enough and not one of these "we offered them a good price and they said no". Does that mean we go back to the suggestion of this 10 million fund or do we think this is all bull and there is no money in the pot or have we made a bid but its a swap/loan deal between the two clubs no money chaging hands and the media and putting a figure on it as they dont know all the facts.

 

 

its got my head sore could have been the 8/9 pints but im sure its over thinking

[NE5]

 

I will. I will also point out that Souness had been successful at Blackburn, having won the League Cup after promotion back to the premiership.

 

Is employing Roy Evans ambitious ? Is employing Joe Fagan ambitious ? Is employing a managerial double act ambitious ?

 

Is employing Bruce Rioch ambitious ? Was employing George Graham ambitious [at the time he had only managed Millwall] ?

 

Is employing Kenny Dalglish ambitious  Is employing Bobby Robson ambitious ? Is employing Ruud Gullit ambitious ?

 

As usual, you don't look at the whole picture, you only pick out what suits you.

 

There is a case for employing Roeder that you have to understand and give them a bit of slack. The clubs needs stability and someone with a feel for what is best for the club and not their own ego. The last thing we needed was another big name more concerned with themselves. And a foreigner, whatever their track record, may well have not understood the club as we have not been the trophy winners like Liverpool etc have been in the last few decades.

 

 

 

Talk about clutching at straws.

 

You're now defending the appointment of Souness, another sign of desperation from the Shepherd apologist.  The record of Souness has been done a million times, you've done it yourself so I'll not spend any more time on that one.

 

In fact everything you've mentioned has been done a million times.

 

I'm not defending anything. Least of all the appointment of Souness. The one thing you have got right is when you agreed with me that he should never have got the time and money he did.

 

I just think that you are a whinger who will moan at whatever they do when it doesn't suit you, with the same unrealistic outlook that all bandwagon jumpers have.

 

What is your opinions on all the managers I mentioned, that you conveniently forget to mention ? You cannot say that I am an apologist for / and defending anyone when you continue to fail to respond to posts in full.

 

 

 

See the bit in bold where you didn't defend the appointment of Souness.

 

I've responded to every point you make, ask your brother to find the posts where he mentioned Liverpool and Arsenal failing when they appointed the managers you've mentioned although he didn't mention Joe Fagan or question George Graham, at least I don't remember that happening.  I'm not wasting my time looking for the posts just so that I can prove I've actually covered what you demand.

 

I've posted my thoughts on Dalglish and Gullit, go and find them if you're interested.

 

You deleted and didn't make any comment whatsoever on the part of my post where I mentioned those managers.

 

Are you mad, or is it just that can't you read ?

 

And, where is your sister macbeth these days .........  are you still his monkey.

 

If you are so unhappy, why don't you stop going to games, [like you did when we really had shit directors] or is it that the club gives you something to support, unlike the board who sold our best players for decades, and ran the club when they spent years in the old 2nd division, that you think is "just the same as the current board" who have qualfified for europe more often in 10 years than the board you defend did in over 30 .

 

 

Outstandingly stupid, and you couldn't make it up. Only a KK bandwagon jumper would come out with such utter rubbish.

 

 

[NE5]

The more i read his guff, the more i'm concerned that NE5 has a severe learning abnormality. Poor guy.

 

its a shame you appear to be out of your depth here. I don't think I've ever seen you make any post whatsoever that raises any points to debate in the slightest.

 

 

[NE5]

The dynamic duo is back I see. Would like to ask NE5 the same questions I asked HTL.

 

Above all I would like to know, are you truly still happy with the board? And if so, why? I would also like it if you did not answer with "It is better than the one we had in the 80´s"

 

Listen mate, at the end of the day, you know very little about this club. People like me and HTL attempt to wise you up but you don't listen or want to listen. I don't mean to sound patronising, but you give me very little choice.

 

Newcastle United does not have a divine right to be one of the top clubs in the country. There are numerous other clubs who were above us for decades - that should not have been. That could just as easily happen again if we really did have a shite board. Look down the road at Sunderland if you don't believe me. That is, if you know where Sunderland is or know anything about them and their potential too. Take these comments on board if you like, or don't if you don't want to, but if you wish to remain largely ignorant of the reality of our situation and the progress we have made under this board, that is your choice.

 

 

 

I guess I should thank you and HTL for your "education" then  As some of the posters here have said, no I dont think we have some kind of divine right to be in the top four or anything. However I think that there right now is a lot of potential in the club and its brand. We happened to have some success at exactly the right time when football really exploded and in a way I think we are still living on some of that which Keegan and the board at that time built up. 

 

Maybe this is where the biggest difference in opinions between me and the two of you lie. I really think that Newcastle as a brand and club have the potential to be some kind of a dark horse in the premiership year after year and maybe you dont?

 

Maybe we also differ in the way we look at the club, I see it more as a business that should operate as such. If the man in charge fail, he gets replaced. Even if we dont change owners we could hire someone to run the club, like Kenyon at Chelsea.

 

If i where to sum this up into a question for you to answer it would be something like. Dont you think that the success we have had motivates raising the goals of the club and the expectations of the fans? Or does prior success excuse mistakes and bad times that comes after?

 

PS. yes I know what Sunderland is and where it is located. Though my father raised me to never motivate my failures by saying stuff like " that guy did even worse"

 

the alternative, and difference in outlook, is quite simple

 

I support the football club, from the heart. And have a realistic view of football as such.

 

You support the "brand", and if you wish to support a "brand", you should have chosen a more successful "brand" if the 5th best in the country over the span of a decade isn't enough for you.

 

And, in football terms, it is far from "failure", as 87 other clubs will tell you, especially when they all watch us playing - again - in the UEFA Cup soon.

 

Whether you like it or not, the current board, since taking over the club in 1992, HAVE raised the expectations of the club and supporters during their time in charge. This is what myself, HTL and one or two others are trying to put across. So you are back to square 1. Accept it or not.

 

 

 

 

What makes you say that I support the "brand"? Sure, I use the word and I feel that you use that as a way to dodge some of my points and questions. I dont really like the way football works these days but it is the world we live in and you have to deal with it best you can.

 

As for you last point, yeah sure. That is exactly what I said. They have been successful, there is no question about that.  That doesnt mean that they will continue to be that. Football like everything else is in constant change and no matter what you think of it you have to change as well or get left behind. With other clubs changing owners and getting new cash in through investment will we be able to keep being the fifth club in England?

 

As for accepting or not, this is an internet forum. Its about debating things and for me personally also a chance to learn how to better type and read english and learn about other things. Its not like I think that what I post here will change anything with regards to the clubs ownership structure.

 

 

unfortunately, there is indeed no guarantee that they will continue to be more successful. Neither is there a guarantee that a replacement board will be as successful as the current board. This is what I am saying.

 

Well done.