Lynch mob preparing the noose for Freddie Shepherd?

[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.

 

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.

 

We didn't NEED a big money striker to replace Shearer, we wouldn't suddenly vanish from existence without a Shearer, remember when we signed Owen, we still had Shearer for one more year and there are many examples of £4-5m strikers scoring goals in the Premiership. The need or desire to sign a name to replace an outgoing name is another fault of the board, and again, one of the reasons why we are in this mess. Man Utd didn't go out and splash £16m on a replacement for Van Nistelrooy, in fact they didn't bring in a replacement. Liverpool never splashed big to replace Owen or even Fowler, Arsenal didn't spend huge to replace Ian Wright or to replace Bergkamp. They didn't need to and neither did we, certainly not when 1) we didn't have such funds to spend, 2) that player didn't want to even join us, 3) that player is injury prone and 4) we needed to address other positions.

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

Freddie need have no worries.

 

HTL and Leazes Parrot will save him from the mob.

 

Perhaps, but my prediction is NE5 for the Freddy saviour.

 

Different name, same Fat Freddy apologist.

 

Oh, good to know that.

 

Don't worry about the mackem, he'll disappear when we win a couple of games.

 

or when he dishes the dirt on the club to a London journo

 

 

 

Squawk!

 

as Micktoon said, you serve no purpose. Are you still backing your man Souness in his rebuilding job ?

 

 

 

Who's a naughty boy, then? Squawk!!

[nufcjmc]

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.

 

I think thats where i was heading in my thinking, I could have seen it go another way. Owen scores in every match mega play maker and follows on with an excellent pre season, who is to say that we would have been able to hold onto him. What if chelsea came in and offered our money back or 19/20 million (so they didnt have to go for shev stinko) and we agreed to sell on. Who would we have bought I would say that at that time we would have threw 16/17 at bent and we probably we would be in the same situation except I actually prefer a fit owen to a fit bent or is that another thread?

[Guest Knightrider]

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.

 

 

 

In an ideal world neither would I, if the circumstances were right to spend such vast sums on one player but you have to admit they were not right, the circumstances. I liken Owen's signing exactly to that of Boumsong -  a panic signing. I see no difference between signing Boumsong at an inflated price to replace one player than doing the exact same with Owen to replace Shearer. At least we had the money to spend on Boumsong because of the money we got for Woodgate, and he wanted to join us and never had an injury record. Owen, we didn't have the money, he didn't want to join us and he is injury prone.

 

If you were Chairman and you didn't have the money, the player didn't want to join, the player had a dodgy record of injuries, and there were other areas to strengthen first and foremost, would you sign him? Honestly? I can't think of one Chairman other than our own who would, Liverpool pulled out at 8m.

 

Even the way we went about it was madness, they offer 8m, the player says he would only join us on loan and doesn't want to join us full-time, so what do we do? We offer 17m. Madness and it is that wrecklessness that is costing us big time and why so many have zero faith in the board.

[Mick]

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.

 

 

 

In an ideal world neither would I, if the circumstances were right to spend such vast sums on one player but you have to admit they were not right, the circumstances. I liken Owen's signing exactly to that of Boumsong -  a panic signing. I see no difference between signing Boumsong at an inflated price to replace one player than doing the exact same with Owen to replace Shearer. At least we had the money to spend on Boumsong because of the money we got for Woodgate, and he wanted to join us and never had an injury record. Owen, we didn't have the money, he didn't want to join us and he is injury prone.

 

If you were Chairman and you didn't have the money, the player didn't want to join, the player had a dodgy record of injuries, and there were other areas to strengthen first and foremost, would you sign him? Honestly? I can't think of one Chairman other than our own who would, Liverpool pulled out at 8m.

 

Even the way we went about it was madness, they offer 8m, the player says he would only join us on loan and doesn't want to join us full-time, so what do we do? We offer 17m. Madness and it is that wrecklessness that is costing us big time and why so many have zero faith in the board.

 

Agreed, Shepherd giving Souness the money to spend on those players was almost as crazy as the decision to appoint him.

[Guest Knightrider]

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.

 

 

 

In an ideal world neither would I, if the circumstances were right to spend such vast sums on one player but you have to admit they were not right, the circumstances. I liken Owen's signing exactly to that of Boumsong -  a panic signing. I see no difference between signing Boumsong at an inflated price to replace one player than doing the exact same with Owen to replace Shearer. At least we had the money to spend on Boumsong because of the money we got for Woodgate, and he wanted to join us and never had an injury record. Owen, we didn't have the money, he didn't want to join us and he is injury prone.

 

If you were Chairman and you didn't have the money, the player didn't want to join, the player had a dodgy record of injuries, and there were other areas to strengthen first and foremost, would you sign him? Honestly? I can't think of one Chairman other than our own who would, Liverpool pulled out at 8m.

 

Even the way we went about it was madness, they offer 8m, the player says he would only join us on loan and doesn't want to join us full-time, so what do we do? We offer 17m. Madness and it is that wrecklessness that is costing us big time and why so many have zero faith in the board.

 

Agreed, Shepherd giving Souness the money to spend on those players was almost as crazy as the decision to appoint him.

 

It all leads back to that appointment so in my eyes, they just can't be excuses, you could argue in their favour about Owen or whatever, but the fact remains, had they not appointed Souness there would be no sale of Bellamy, no wasting of mega money and no debate. Every mistake made even if not directly their fault is a result of that one decision. They want sacked for even considering Souness, god it still boils my piss thinking about that day and how angry I was, forced to support Souness and look on the brightside even though you knew it was all gonna end in tears. Grrrr!

[Howaythelads]

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.

 

 

 

In an ideal world neither would I, if the circumstances were right to spend such vast sums on one player but you have to admit they were not right, the circumstances. I liken Owen's signing exactly to that of Boumsong -  a panic signing. I see no difference between signing Boumsong at an inflated price to replace one player than doing the exact same with Owen to replace Shearer. At least we had the money to spend on Boumsong because of the money we got for Woodgate, and he wanted to join us and never had an injury record. Owen, we didn't have the money, he didn't want to join us and he is injury prone.

 

If you were Chairman and you didn't have the money, the player didn't want to join, the player had a dodgy record of injuries, and there were other areas to strengthen first and foremost, would you sign him? Honestly? I can't think of one Chairman other than our own who would, Liverpool pulled out at 8m.

 

Even the way we went about it was madness, they offer 8m, the player says he would only join us on loan and doesn't want to join us full-time, so what do we do? We offer 17m. Madness and it is that wrecklessness that is costing us big time and why so many have zero faith in the board.

 

Agreed, Shepherd giving Souness the money to spend on those players was almost as crazy as the decision to appoint him.

 

It all leads back to that appointment so in my eyes, they just can't be excuses, you could argue in their favour about Owen or whatever, but the fact remains, had they not appointed Souness there would be no sale of Bellamy, no wasting of mega money and no debate. Every mistake made even if not directly their fault is a result of that one decision. They want sacked for even considering Souness, god it still boils my piss thinking about that day and how angry I was, forced to support Souness and look on the brightside even though you knew it was all gonna end in tears. Grrrr!

 

Finally.......

[Mick]

 

It all leads back to that appointment so in my eyes, they just can't be excuses, you could argue in their favour about Owen or whatever, but the fact remains, had they not appointed Souness there would be no sale of Bellamy, no wasting of mega money and no debate. Every mistake made even if not directly their fault is a result of that one decision. They want sacked for even considering Souness, god it still boils my piss thinking about that day and how angry I was, forced to support Souness and look on the brightside even though you knew it was all gonna end in tears. Grrrr!

 

Any self-respecting person wouldn't have been sacked, they would have resigned.

 

I've got a three hour drive tonight, if I knock somebody down and kill then and it's my fault I'll rightly do time for it, I would expect nothing else.  Even if I didn't go out of my way to do it, I'd still be held responsible for my actions.

 

I do a job which is very important to the company who employs me, if I screw up the way our Chairman did when appointing Souness, I'd resign before I was sacked, I would expect the sack, again quite rightly. 

 

We are all responsible for our actions, no matter if things happen that weren't intended.

 

My employer is in the top 3 in the world at what we do, if my actions took us to 14th I'd be sacked without a single complaint from me.

[Guest Knightrider]

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.

 

 

 

In an ideal world neither would I, if the circumstances were right to spend such vast sums on one player but you have to admit they were not right, the circumstances. I liken Owen's signing exactly to that of Boumsong -  a panic signing. I see no difference between signing Boumsong at an inflated price to replace one player than doing the exact same with Owen to replace Shearer. At least we had the money to spend on Boumsong because of the money we got for Woodgate, and he wanted to join us and never had an injury record. Owen, we didn't have the money, he didn't want to join us and he is injury prone.

 

If you were Chairman and you didn't have the money, the player didn't want to join, the player had a dodgy record of injuries, and there were other areas to strengthen first and foremost, would you sign him? Honestly? I can't think of one Chairman other than our own who would, Liverpool pulled out at 8m.

 

Even the way we went about it was madness, they offer 8m, the player says he would only join us on loan and doesn't want to join us full-time, so what do we do? We offer 17m. Madness and it is that wrecklessness that is costing us big time and why so many have zero faith in the board.

 

Agreed, Shepherd giving Souness the money to spend on those players was almost as crazy as the decision to appoint him.

 

It all leads back to that appointment so in my eyes, they just can't be excuses, you could argue in their favour about Owen or whatever, but the fact remains, had they not appointed Souness there would be no sale of Bellamy, no wasting of mega money and no debate. Every mistake made even if not directly their fault is a result of that one decision. They want sacked for even considering Souness, god it still boils my piss thinking about that day and how angry I was, forced to support Souness and look on the brightside even though you knew it was all gonna end in tears. Grrrr!

 

Finally.......

 

Therefore, every mistake and fault that followed and follows, is in part down to the board, so the buck stops with them for everything. Bellamy's sale, down to the board, wasting money on backing Souness, down to the board - this mess - all down to the board. Can they redeem themselves? Not IMO they can't so they must go. Trouble is, who comes in and will that someone be any better (that I've always agreed with you on), but me, I'm willing to take the gamble to find out because NUFC can't keep going on the way it has been, if we do we'll go bust or get relegated, which amounts to the same really in this day and age of "if you're not in the Premiership you don't exist" attitude. It all hinges on Shearer for them.