Lynch mob preparing the noose for Freddie Shepherd?

[Guest Sniffer]

You know baggio, it's morons like you that stop people posting on boards. They usually just say fuck it, what's the point?

 

 

[Baggio]

We are paying the price for the likes of marcelhino, cort, bassedas, luque, viana, boumsong.............not a world class player like Owen.

 

spot on. And how many people on here were telling us how world class Luque and Boumsong were at the time .......

 

 

So you can use hindsight to judge moves for Luque, Boumsong etc but not for Michael Owen?

 

hindsight ? Who's using hindsight ? Whos talking about Owen ? Replacing a world class goalscorer with another world class goalscorer a bad thing ? I think not. On the other hand, if we had a shite board we could have replaced Shearer with someone like Jon Stead, like other clubs with shite boards do. I take it you would prefer that to these "trophy" players 

 

I would of preferred replacing him with a striker that actually wanted to come here, someone that we could afford and wouldn't have left the club millions in debt with no way of paying it back, a striker that hasn't had a history of being injured either.

 

hindsight ?

 

 

 

Which bit?

 

All of it. You should have told us he would be injured at the World Cup. I also agree with the view that quality is quality, and if a player performs then he largely isn't a waste of money, sometimes you have to pay the money to get the top player. The real waste of money is money spent on players who don't perform ie Luque and Boumsong combined cost the same as Owen. Which is the waste ?

 

 

 

Can you highlight the bit where I said he'll be injured in the World Cup?

 

You can't as I didn't say it, I said he had a history of injuries which is true, he also didn't really want to come here and only did so so he could keep his England place, again true.

 

Which is the waste? In hindsight, all 3 of them.

[NE5]

We are paying the price for the likes of marcelhino, cort, bassedas, luque, viana, boumsong.............not a world class player like Owen.

 

spot on. And how many people on here were telling us how world class Luque and Boumsong were at the time .......

 

 

So you can use hindsight to judge moves for Luque, Boumsong etc but not for Michael Owen?

 

hindsight ? Who's using hindsight ? Whos talking about Owen ? Replacing a world class goalscorer with another world class goalscorer a bad thing ? I think not. On the other hand, if we had a shite board we could have replaced Shearer with someone like Jon Stead, like other clubs with shite boards do. I take it you would prefer that to these "trophy" players 

 

I would of preferred replacing him with a striker that actually wanted to come here, someone that we could afford and wouldn't have left the club millions in debt with no way of paying it back, a striker that hasn't had a history of being injured either.

 

hindsight ?

 

 

 

Which bit?

 

All of it. You should have told us he would be injured at the World Cup. I also agree with the view that quality is quality, and if a player performs then he largely isn't a waste of money, sometimes you have to pay the money to get the top player. The real waste of money is money spent on players who don't perform ie Luque and Boumsong combined cost the same as Owen. Which is the waste ?

 

 

 

Can you highlight the bit where I said he'll be injured in the World Cup?

 

You can't as I didn't say it, I said he had a history of injuries which is true, he also didn't really want to come here and only did so so he could keep his England place, again true.

 

Which is the waste? In hindsight, all 3 of them.

 

you are missing the point. Nobody knew he would be injured at the World Cup. If he was playing now and scoring goals, nobody would be saying he was a waste of money, as he is a top level replacement for a top level player and its as simple as that.

 

 

[Baggio]

You know baggio, it's morons like you that stop people posting on boards. They usually just say fuck it, what's the point?

 

 

 

Well don't hang around for my benefit Sniffer.

 

Do you think the club is well run considering we're over £80 million in debt with no way of paying it back, have a shit squad and no money to sign new players?

 

The only thing we'll achieve under this lot is bankruptcy.

 

 

[Baggio]

We are paying the price for the likes of marcelhino, cort, bassedas, luque, viana, boumsong.............not a world class player like Owen.

 

spot on. And how many people on here were telling us how world class Luque and Boumsong were at the time .......

 

 

So you can use hindsight to judge moves for Luque, Boumsong etc but not for Michael Owen?

 

hindsight ? Who's using hindsight ? Whos talking about Owen ? Replacing a world class goalscorer with another world class goalscorer a bad thing ? I think not. On the other hand, if we had a shite board we could have replaced Shearer with someone like Jon Stead, like other clubs with shite boards do. I take it you would prefer that to these "trophy" players 

 

I would of preferred replacing him with a striker that actually wanted to come here, someone that we could afford and wouldn't have left the club millions in debt with no way of paying it back, a striker that hasn't had a history of being injured either.

 

hindsight ?

 

 

 

Which bit?

 

All of it. You should have told us he would be injured at the World Cup. I also agree with the view that quality is quality, and if a player performs then he largely isn't a waste of money, sometimes you have to pay the money to get the top player. The real waste of money is money spent on players who don't perform ie Luque and Boumsong combined cost the same as Owen. Which is the waste ?

 

 

 

Can you highlight the bit where I said he'll be injured in the World Cup?

 

You can't as I didn't say it, I said he had a history of injuries which is true, he also didn't really want to come here and only did so so he could keep his England place, again true.

 

Which is the waste? In hindsight, all 3 of them.

 

you are missing the point. Nobody knew he would be injured at the World Cup. If he was playing now and scoring goals, nobody would be saying he was a waste of money, as he is a top level replacement for a top level player and its as simple as that.

 

 

 

If Owen hadn't got injured in the World cup he'd be playing in red this season.

[NE5]

You know baggio, it's morons like you that stop people posting on boards. They usually just say fuck it, what's the point?

 

 

 

Well don't hang around for my benefit Sniffer.

 

Do you think the club is well run considering we're over £80 million in debt with no way of paying it back, have a shit squad and no money to sign new players?

 

The only thing we'll achieve under this lot is bankruptcy.

 

 

when we didn't have ambition for over 3 decades, we ended up a lot closer to bankruptcy than we will be under "this lot". Sniffer makes a good point too, again.

 

 

[NE5]

We are paying the price for the likes of marcelhino, cort, bassedas, luque, viana, boumsong.............not a world class player like Owen.

 

spot on. And how many people on here were telling us how world class Luque and Boumsong were at the time .......

 

 

So you can use hindsight to judge moves for Luque, Boumsong etc but not for Michael Owen?

 

hindsight ? Who's using hindsight ? Whos talking about Owen ? Replacing a world class goalscorer with another world class goalscorer a bad thing ? I think not. On the other hand, if we had a shite board we could have replaced Shearer with someone like Jon Stead, like other clubs with shite boards do. I take it you would prefer that to these "trophy" players 

 

I would of preferred replacing him with a striker that actually wanted to come here, someone that we could afford and wouldn't have left the club millions in debt with no way of paying it back, a striker that hasn't had a history of being injured either.

 

hindsight ?

 

 

 

Which bit?

 

All of it. You should have told us he would be injured at the World Cup. I also agree with the view that quality is quality, and if a player performs then he largely isn't a waste of money, sometimes you have to pay the money to get the top player. The real waste of money is money spent on players who don't perform ie Luque and Boumsong combined cost the same as Owen. Which is the waste ?

 

 

 

Can you highlight the bit where I said he'll be injured in the World Cup?

 

You can't as I didn't say it, I said he had a history of injuries which is true, he also didn't really want to come here and only did so so he could keep his England place, again true.

 

Which is the waste? In hindsight, all 3 of them.

 

you are missing the point. Nobody knew he would be injured at the World Cup. If he was playing now and scoring goals, nobody would be saying he was a waste of money, as he is a top level replacement for a top level player and its as simple as that.

 

 

 

If Owen hadn't got injured in the World cup he'd be playing in red this season.

 

is that a fact or are you making things up

 

 

[Mick]

 

you are missing the point. Nobody knew he would be injured at the World Cup. If he was playing now and scoring goals, nobody would be saying he was a waste of money, as he is a top level replacement for a top level player and its as simple as that.

 

 

 

You are missing the point, we signed a player for £17 million and he's hardly played for us, it doesn't matter how good he is when fit, if he's not playing then he's a waste of resources.

 

Owen has a history of injuries, the fact that it wasn't a repeat of his usual dodgy hamstrings makes no difference, dodgy hamstring or knee injury results in the same outcome.

 

Woodgate was the best defender I've ever seen play for us, we did well to sell him as he hardly played, the same goes for Owen.

[NE5]

 

you are missing the point. Nobody knew he would be injured at the World Cup. If he was playing now and scoring goals, nobody would be saying he was a waste of money, as he is a top level replacement for a top level player and its as simple as that.

 

 

 

You are missing the point, we signed a player for £17 million and he's hardly played for us, it doesn't matter how good he is when fit, if he's not playing then he's a waste of resources.

 

Owen has a history of injuries, the fact that it wasn't a repeat of his usual dodgy hamstrings makes no difference, dodgy hamstring or knee injury results in the same outcome.

 

Woodgate was the best defender I've ever seen play for us, we did well to sell him as he hardly played, the same goes for Owen.

 

As I said to Baggio, you should have told the club he was about to be injured at the World Cup.

 

 

[Baggio]

You know baggio, it's morons like you that stop people posting on boards. They usually just say fuck it, what's the point?

 

 

 

Well don't hang around for my benefit Sniffer.

 

Do you think the club is well run considering we're over £80 million in debt with no way of paying it back, have a shit squad and no money to sign new players?

 

The only thing we'll achieve under this lot is bankruptcy.

 

 

when we didn't have ambition for over 3 decades, we ended up a lot closer to bankruptcy than we will be under "this lot". Sniffer makes a good point too, again.

 

 

 

Were we ever £80 million in debt with no way of paying it back?

 

Perhaps you should direct him to your shower of shite forum were you all reminisce about how hard done by you were years ago.

[Baggio]

We are paying the price for the likes of marcelhino, cort, bassedas, luque, viana, boumsong.............not a world class player like Owen.

 

spot on. And how many people on here were telling us how world class Luque and Boumsong were at the time .......

 

 

So you can use hindsight to judge moves for Luque, Boumsong etc but not for Michael Owen?

 

hindsight ? Who's using hindsight ? Whos talking about Owen ? Replacing a world class goalscorer with another world class goalscorer a bad thing ? I think not. On the other hand, if we had a shite board we could have replaced Shearer with someone like Jon Stead, like other clubs with shite boards do. I take it you would prefer that to these "trophy" players 

 

I would of preferred replacing him with a striker that actually wanted to come here, someone that we could afford and wouldn't have left the club millions in debt with no way of paying it back, a striker that hasn't had a history of being injured either.

 

hindsight ?

 

 

 

Which bit?

 

All of it. You should have told us he would be injured at the World Cup. I also agree with the view that quality is quality, and if a player performs then he largely isn't a waste of money, sometimes you have to pay the money to get the top player. The real waste of money is money spent on players who don't perform ie Luque and Boumsong combined cost the same as Owen. Which is the waste ?

 

 

 

Can you highlight the bit where I said he'll be injured in the World Cup?

 

You can't as I didn't say it, I said he had a history of injuries which is true, he also didn't really want to come here and only did so so he could keep his England place, again true.

 

Which is the waste? In hindsight, all 3 of them.

 

you are missing the point. Nobody knew he would be injured at the World Cup. If he was playing now and scoring goals, nobody would be saying he was a waste of money, as he is a top level replacement for a top level player and its as simple as that.

 

 

 

If Owen hadn't got injured in the World cup he'd be playing in red this season.

 

is that a fact or are you making things up

 

 

 

It's an opinion based on the FACT he wanted to go to Liverpool in the first place.

[Guest Knightrider]

Now Owen, he was a mistake signing and a very ill judged one at that, on a number of points. Not only did we buy an injury prone striker who didn't want to join us at double the market value that wiped out funds for more pressing areas that needed strengthening first, then and now, we also didn't have the money to buy him in the first place and have risked our financial stability as a result.

[Mick]

 

As I said to Baggio, you should have told the club he was about to be injured at the World Cup.

 

 

 

I didn't say that I knew he would be injured at the World Cup, I said he had a history of hamstring problems, did you miss what I said or do you disagree that he's had hamstring problems since early in his career?

[Mick]

 

Were we ever £80 million in debt with no way of paying it back?

 

Perhaps you should direct him to your shower of shite forum were you all reminisce about how hard done by you were years ago.

 

The club was roughly £3 million is debt when Sir John took over, we were close to going out of business.  Sir John was on holiday and Douglas rang him to get him to stump up some cash, which he eventually did.

 

We are not as close to going out of business now but we are going in the right direction for that to happen.

[Baggio]

Now Owen, he was a mistake signing and a very ill judged one at that, on a number of points. Not only did we buy an injury prone striker who didn't want to join us at double the market value that wiped out funds for more pressing areas that needed strengthening first, then and now, we also didn't have the money to buy him in the first place and have risked our financial stability as a result.

 

Which is what I've been saying, unfortunately that opinion makes you a moron. :-[

[NE5]

You know baggio, it's morons like you that stop people posting on boards. They usually just say fuck it, what's the point?

 

 

 

Well don't hang around for my benefit Sniffer.

 

Do you think the club is well run considering we're over £80 million in debt with no way of paying it back, have a shit squad and no money to sign new players?

 

The only thing we'll achieve under this lot is bankruptcy.

 

 

when we didn't have ambition for over 3 decades, we ended up a lot closer to bankruptcy than we will be under "this lot". Sniffer makes a good point too, again.

 

 

 

Were we ever £80 million in debt with no way of paying it back?

 

Perhaps you should direct him to your shower of shite forum were you all reminisce about how hard done by you were years ago.

 

haha....its better for not being inhabited by you though .......  saves digging among the rubbish for the decent and informed posts .....

 

As we couldn't even raise 2.5m quid with a share issue in the early 90's, I would indeed say it was a debt that had no way of paying it back if the Halls had not stepped in.

 

 

[Guest Knightrider]

The intentions to sign a world-class striker can never be questioned and we were right to try and sign such a player, but only if we had the funds and that player wanted to be here and we didn't have more pressing needs to address first. Which we never so it was a mistake to sign him, a costly one as we are finding out. Shame because he's a great player or was and in an ideal world, you want your club to sign such players. He was a panic signing IMO, to appease fans. Like I said ill judged.

[NE5]

The intentions to sign a world-class striker can never be questioned and we were right to try and sign such a player, but only if we had the funds and that player wanted to be here and we didn't have more pressing needs to address first. Which we never so it was a mistake to sign him, a costly one as we are finding out. Shame because he's a great player or was and in an ideal world, you want your club to sign such players. He was a panic signing IMO, to appease fans. Like I said ill judged.

 

a long term replacement for Alan Shearer is ill judged ?

 

Who else would you say was capable of filling his boots ?

 

 

[Mick]

The intentions to sign a world-class striker can never be questioned and we were right to try and sign such a player, but only if we had the funds and that player wanted to be here and we didn't have more pressing needs to address first. Which we never so it was a mistake to sign him, a costly one as we are finding out. Shame because he's a great player or was and in an ideal world, you want your club to sign such players. He was a panic signing IMO, to appease fans. Like I said ill judged.

 

a long term replacement for Alan Shearer is ill judged ?

 

Who else would you say was capable of filling his boots ?

 

 

 

Owen has spent more time in the treatment room since he's been here than Dyer - FACT.

[Guest Knightrider]

The intentions to sign a world-class striker can never be questioned and we were right to try and sign such a player, but only if we had the funds and that player wanted to be here and we didn't have more pressing needs to address first. Which we never so it was a mistake to sign him, a costly one as we are finding out. Shame because he's a great player or was and in an ideal world, you want your club to sign such players. He was a panic signing IMO, to appease fans. Like I said ill judged.

 

a long term replacement for Alan Shearer is ill judged ?

 

Who else would you say was capable of filling his boots ?

 

 

 

Like I said, the intentions were spot on, and we did need a long-term replacement for Big Al as you say, but we could have gotten by for a year or so in the meantime and should never put the financial stability of the club at risk, regardless. Where Owen is concerned the cons far outweigh the pros. It should have went like this:

 

We need a Shearer replacement - tick

A player is a available - tick

 

Ah, but we don't have the money (cross) and that player doesn't really wanna join us (cross), plus he does have a history of injuries (cross)and the manager wants some defenders (cross).

 

Conclusion: Leave it until we have the money and the right player is available who actually wants to join the club. Bring in some stop-gaps in the meantime to ease Shearer's impending retirement like we did with Sibbers because of Owen's injury.

 

Instead we gambled and the risk didn't pay off.

 

A quick risk assessment of signing Owen would say no go even to an idiot, but we did the opposite and went for it, we are now paying the price and once again, we all saw it coming, except the board it seems.

[NE5]

The intentions to sign a world-class striker can never be questioned and we were right to try and sign such a player, but only if we had the funds and that player wanted to be here and we didn't have more pressing needs to address first. Which we never so it was a mistake to sign him, a costly one as we are finding out. Shame because he's a great player or was and in an ideal world, you want your club to sign such players. He was a panic signing IMO, to appease fans. Like I said ill judged.

 

a long term replacement for Alan Shearer is ill judged ?

 

Who else would you say was capable of filling his boots ?

 

 

 

Owen has spent more time in the treatment room since he's been here than Dyer - FACT.

 

Well, you should have told the club before we signed him that he was going to be out for a whole season.

 

 

[nufcjmc]

The intentions to sign a world-class striker can never be questioned and we were right to try and sign such a player, but only if we had the funds and that player wanted to be here and we didn't have more pressing needs to address first. Which we never so it was a mistake to sign him, a costly one as we are finding out. Shame because he's a great player or was and in an ideal world, you want your club to sign such players. He was a panic signing IMO, to appease fans. Like I said ill judged.

 

i agree that right now he has been an ineffective purchase, it was also the wrong choice to go off to the world cup having played was it about 30 mins? But we needed a striker when shearer left we needed someone to fill his boots as best we could. I remember at the time people were saying they have known for 2 seasons or so he was going to go why didnt they look into it then and keep track on their targets. This is where the board let us down, as I'm sure robson had an idea but sinse he left FFS descided that he would pick the new striker and cause he doesnt have any more brain cells that the garden variety pigeon he descided who else than wore lil michael owen sitting out on the subs bench at real madrid. I for one was delighted we had got him was proud of the chairman to go for him and delighted he seemed to be all smiles when he was welcomed at st jame's .

 

Fact we needed a high calibre replacement one that we werent going to be retiring straight after signing and I for one think he was the best at the time, we all knew the risks and i think its just bad luck that we have not seen the best of the outlay. I wish i was a fly on the wall that saw the logic in letting real double their money for a striker they have had for 5 mins and couldnt hold down a solid place in the side.

 

If and i mean if with a wait and see attached to it see him show some commitment and play to his best for us till at least his contract ends then i will be happy as i do think him bagging 15/20 goals a season would mean the difference from european places and midtable blandness.

[Guest Knightrider]

BTW having said all that, had Owen not been injured, and banged in lots of goals or won us a trophy, we wouldn't be having this debate. That's the thin line there. However, a simple risk assessment should have dictated a no answer to the possibility of signing Owen regardless of any "he could score us lots of goals, or win us a trophy" thoughts because those things aren't guaranteed and when making big decisions, you have to always go with the least risky, or the most sensible option. Spending money we didn't have on an injury prone player who didn't want to join when we needed more squad players, is not a sensible decision and sums the board up for me, they have no common sense and that's why we have these debates and why we keep getting things wrong. Sadly you can't suddenly develop common sense, you either have it or you don't.

[NE5]

The intentions to sign a world-class striker can never be questioned and we were right to try and sign such a player, but only if we had the funds and that player wanted to be here and we didn't have more pressing needs to address first. Which we never so it was a mistake to sign him, a costly one as we are finding out. Shame because he's a great player or was and in an ideal world, you want your club to sign such players. He was a panic signing IMO, to appease fans. Like I said ill judged.

 

a long term replacement for Alan Shearer is ill judged ?

 

Who else would you say was capable of filling his boots ?

 

 

 

Like I said, the intentions were spot on, and we did need a long-term replacement for Big Al as you say, but we could have gotten by for a year or so in the meantime and should never put the financial stability of the club at risk, regardless. Where Owen is concerned the cons far outweigh the pros. It should have went like this:

 

We need a Shearer replacement - tick

A player is a available - tick

 

Ah, but we don't have the money (cross) and that player doesn't really wanna join us (cross), plus he does have a history of injuries (cross)and the manager wants some defenders (cross).

 

Conclusion: Leave it until we have the money and the right player is available who actually wants to join the club. Bring in some stop-gaps in the meantime to ease Shearer's impending retirement like we did with Sibbers because of Owen's injury.

 

Instead we gambled and the risk didn't pay off.

 

A quick risk assessment of signing Owen would say no go even to an idiot, but we did the opposite and went for it, we are now paying the price and once again, we all saw it coming, except the board it seems.

 

I really don't have any problem with the signing of Owen mate. I realise we could maybe have got him for less, but equally we could have lost him for less possibly. I don't think buying such a player is panicking, I think buying Luque was panicking, and Boumsong was ill judged, by a bad manager. If we hadn't bought those 2 players, we would have been 17m quid better off. Ask yourself - if you could spend 16m on Owen to replace Shearer or 17m on Luque and Boumsong, what choice would you make ?

 

If we had not lost Craig Bellamy, and spent the 17m quid wasted on Luque and Boumsong well, we would be in an different position entirely today to what we actually are, even with Owen injured.

 

 

[Mick]

 

Well, you should have told the club before we signed him that he was going to be out for a whole season.

 

 

 

I shouldn't have to tell a £multi-million business how to vet a players injury record, it wouldn't say he would be out for a year but it would have told them that he would miss a lot of games, obviously they didn't do that.