No Ashley transfer funds! Yet!

[Optimistic Nut]

 

You THINK ?

 

Please explain why Allardyce took the job if he didnt; think he would be allowed to do the job in the way he sees fit ?

 

Don't make up anything, whatever you do, when you reply.

 

If you reply.

 

 

 

I guess that Allardyce thought that he could come to the club and do a good job.

 

Also, I think he has a better chance now than he did when he first came.

 

Disagree there. I think under Shepherd, it'd have been accepted by him if he simply finished top 10 next season. With new owners, expectations will have changed, and if he doesn't achieve what the new men want him to, then he could be out.

[Baggio]

Go back to jail, go, or Old Kent Road, or somewhere, because you quite clearly don't have a clue.

 

[Mick]

 

Is that so ? Please explain why he is complaining about his transfer budget then ?

 

What rubbish you come out with. Why not answer the question, truthfully. He is feeling let down by the owners. And whats more, you know it.

 

 

 

I've answered the question and you've responded to it in the post that I'm now responding to.

 

I can understand that you're probably having problems seeing the screen, here's a cyber present as a sign of my condolences at your loss.

 

http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/6995/kleenexblj3.jpg

[Mick]

 

Disagree there. I think under Shepherd, it'd have been accepted by him if he simply finished top 10 next season. With new owners, expectations will have changed, and if he doesn't achieve what the new men want him to, then he could be out.

 

That's possible, we'll have to wait and see.

[NE5]

 

Is that so ? Please explain why he is complaining about his transfer budget then ?

 

What rubbish you come out with. Why not answer the question, truthfully. He is feeling let down by the owners. And whats more, you know it.

 

 

 

I've answered the question and you've responded to it in the post that I'm now responding to.

 

I can understand that you're probably having problems seeing the screen, here's a cyber present as a sign of my condolences at your loss.

 

http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/6995/kleenexblj3.jpg

 

I can understand that you are unable to comment - as usual - hence the stupidest reply ever, and thats saying something.

 

 

[Mick]

 

I can understand that you are unable to comment - as usual - hence the stupidest reply ever, and thats saying something.

 

 

 

[Syrette]

[madras]

NE5--Would you mind answering the question "would you rather fred were still here or would you rather take the risk with ashley ?"

 

i've read your previous answers and they don't seem to make sense,you see when i asked my wife to marry me i'd have been pissed off had she replied "well my answer depends on how you treet me in our first few years" when i voted at the general election there was no box marked "depends on what happens in the next couple of years."

 

it's a question for now,i wish we could do it your way,no-one would ever make a mistake.

 

 

I didn't hear Ashley say he was going to bankroll managers, did you ? Has he had any previous experience of owning football clubs so we can judge him ?

 

If you did, please show me a link.

 

I wouldn't have liked that hedge fund though, and quite a lot of chairman at other premiership and big city clubs around the country either.

 

 

can i take it you would have preferred fred had stayed and ashley never took over then ?

 

please don't answer anything about seeing what ashley does as what he does in the future has sod all bearing on feelings now.

 

I think you should find where I say that or anything like it.

 

Please explain why anyone should have a judgement on Ashley's intentions or ambitions, when he has not ran a football club before, nor told anyone what his intentions and ambitions are ?

 

I'm a bit surprised that you appear to be believing in fairies like numerous other people, I thought you were more pragmatic than that to be honest.

 

Nobody here has any idea at all what Ashleys intentions are, you are only saying he will spend his money because you want him to, we all want him to.

 

Unfortunately, you can't demand that or expect it. Its his money and its up to him. Please don't you - or anyone else - say that he should just because he's the new owner and you want him to, because he doesn't. Significantly, he is a businessman, he can make small profits without being hugely successful, whereas if he was a keen football supporter, or better still a Newcastle supporter, he would have more urge to succeed on the pitch. I said this once before and was slightly slaughtered for it. And has been said by someone else, the money he has bought the club with is irrelevant, because he can just sell the club on in due course if he wants to do so.

 

 

so you have no judgement on it,because you cannot see into the future you have no judgement on it.

i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ?

 

not believing in fairies mate,but taking a punt where i think it may do us good.

 

i'm giving up now as you won't answer a simple either/or question that everone else understands (as do you).

 

i wish we could all live in the world you wish to believe in,only making decisions when the outcomes are known and certain.

 

mackems.gif

 

when the Halls etc took over the club, the only way really was up.#

 

To remind you, as you clearly weren't there, otherwise there is no way in a million years you would even mention such a thing.....the club had sold ALL its best players for years, were staring at the old 3rd division, were playing in front of a half empty 30,000 ground that was nothing more than a s*** heap, had qualified for europe 4 times in over 30 years, had finished in the top 5 once during this period, on the brink of going bankrupt and out of existence, and appointed a journeyman manager like Jim Smith - the EIGHTH choice [for those who think we appoint only s*** managers that nobody else wants], followed by a complete tosser straight out of the clowns book of managers ie Ossie Ardiles, that the chairman Forbes laughingly thought would bring the good times back to the club, in the form of challenging for promotion to the 1st division and that was the limit of ambition as it always was under such complete tossers, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club.

 

I was almost believing you had half a brain lately, as you had been raising some objective and interesting points, but this completely ridiculous post puts you among the micks of this world.

 

Go back to jail, go, or Old Kent Road, or somewhere, because you quite clearly don't have a clue.

 

 

yes i was there,that season i missed about half a dozen games home and away,probably and perversely the most fun i've had following nufc.(the tales from a lot of those trips are legendary in our circle).

 

you've also put nothing in your post you haven't posted a hundred times before and i agree about the position we were in yet no-one mentioned going to the wall,until hall took over and if you remember he was always a bit overdramatic.

 

 

but anyway,the question was about now,and like all questions about now you have to make it not knowing what the future holds,so would you prefer fred was still in charge or take the risk with ashley ?

[NE5]

NE5--Would you mind answering the question "would you rather fred were still here or would you rather take the risk with ashley ?"

 

i've read your previous answers and they don't seem to make sense,you see when i asked my wife to marry me i'd have been pissed off had she replied "well my answer depends on how you treet me in our first few years" when i voted at the general election there was no box marked "depends on what happens in the next couple of years."

 

it's a question for now,i wish we could do it your way,no-one would ever make a mistake.

 

 

I didn't hear Ashley say he was going to bankroll managers, did you ? Has he had any previous experience of owning football clubs so we can judge him ?

 

If you did, please show me a link.

 

I wouldn't have liked that hedge fund though, and quite a lot of chairman at other premiership and big city clubs around the country either.

 

 

can i take it you would have preferred fred had stayed and ashley never took over then ?

 

please don't answer anything about seeing what ashley does as what he does in the future has sod all bearing on feelings now.

 

I think you should find where I say that or anything like it.

 

Please explain why anyone should have a judgement on Ashley's intentions or ambitions, when he has not ran a football club before, nor told anyone what his intentions and ambitions are ?

 

I'm a bit surprised that you appear to be believing in fairies like numerous other people, I thought you were more pragmatic than that to be honest.

 

Nobody here has any idea at all what Ashleys intentions are, you are only saying he will spend his money because you want him to, we all want him to.

 

Unfortunately, you can't demand that or expect it. Its his money and its up to him. Please don't you - or anyone else - say that he should just because he's the new owner and you want him to, because he doesn't. Significantly, he is a businessman, he can make small profits without being hugely successful, whereas if he was a keen football supporter, or better still a Newcastle supporter, he would have more urge to succeed on the pitch. I said this once before and was slightly slaughtered for it. And has been said by someone else, the money he has bought the club with is irrelevant, because he can just sell the club on in due course if he wants to do so.

 

 

so you have no judgement on it,because you cannot see into the future you have no judgement on it.

i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ?

 

not believing in fairies mate,but taking a punt where i think it may do us good.

 

i'm giving up now as you won't answer a simple either/or question that everone else understands (as do you).

 

i wish we could all live in the world you wish to believe in,only making decisions when the outcomes are known and certain.

 

mackems.gif

 

when the Halls etc took over the club, the only way really was up.#

 

To remind you, as you clearly weren't there, otherwise there is no way in a million years you would even mention such a thing.....the club had sold ALL its best players for years, were staring at the old 3rd division, were playing in front of a half empty 30,000 ground that was nothing more than a s*** heap, had qualified for europe 4 times in over 30 years, had finished in the top 5 once during this period, on the brink of going bankrupt and out of existence, and appointed a journeyman manager like Jim Smith - the EIGHTH choice [for those who think we appoint only s*** managers that nobody else wants], followed by a complete tosser straight out of the clowns book of managers ie Ossie Ardiles, that the chairman Forbes laughingly thought would bring the good times back to the club, in the form of challenging for promotion to the 1st division and that was the limit of ambition as it always was under such complete tossers, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club.

 

I was almost believing you had half a brain lately, as you had been raising some objective and interesting points, but this completely ridiculous post puts you among the micks of this world.

 

Go back to jail, go, or Old Kent Road, or somewhere, because you quite clearly don't have a clue.

 

 

yes i was there,that season i missed about half a dozen games home and away,probably and perversely the most fun i've had following nufc.(the tales from a lot of those trips are legendary in our circle).

 

you've also put nothing in your post you haven't posted a hundred times before and i agree about the position we were in yet no-one mentioned going to the wall,until hall took over and if you remember he was always a bit overdramatic.

 

 

but anyway,the question was about now,and like all questions about now you have to make it not knowing what the future holds,so would you prefer fred was still in charge or take the risk with ashley ?

 

I am pleased you accept that Ashley is a risk. That is my reply BTW. Maybe the vast majority of other people will have something to say about it, having assured everyone else that Shepherd was holding the club back single handed from world glory. What will they say if nothing happens, or we don't match the 3 consecutive top 5 finishes achieved under the old board, for the first time in 50 years ? Will this mean that the Halls and Shepherd weren't holding the club back after all ?

 

Just a thought.

 

EDIT: Ref your comments about Hall, you are correct, he and he alone said we were going to the wall. One thing for certain is that we were heading for the 3rd division, and total oblivion, and maybe the fans didn't deserve it but the people who ran the club for 30 years did and could hardly have expected anything else. As you do understand this why do you say " i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ? "

 

Everyone who supported the club knows the state the club was in at that time, its simply beyond discussion at all. I don't know anybody who I know supported the club who doesn't dispute it.

 

I think the outcome of the Halls and Shepherd was never in any doubt at all. We were always going to head back upwards.

 

 

[Dave]

"Look into my eyes. Look into my eyes. The eyes. The eyes. Not around the eyes. Don't look around my eyes. Look into my eyes... You're under."

[Mick]

"Look into my eyes. Look into my eyes. The eyes. The eyes. Not around the eyes. Don't look around my eyes. Look into my eyes... You're under."

 

   

 

I'm glad I didn't read that at work.

[Lotus]

NE5--Would you mind answering the question "would you rather fred were still here or would you rather take the risk with ashley ?"

 

i've read your previous answers and they don't seem to make sense,you see when i asked my wife to marry me i'd have been pissed off had she replied "well my answer depends on how you treet me in our first few years" when i voted at the general election there was no box marked "depends on what happens in the next couple of years."

 

it's a question for now,i wish we could do it your way,no-one would ever make a mistake.

 

 

I didn't hear Ashley say he was going to bankroll managers, did you ? Has he had any previous experience of owning football clubs so we can judge him ?

 

If you did, please show me a link.

 

I wouldn't have liked that hedge fund though, and quite a lot of chairman at other premiership and big city clubs around the country either.

 

 

can i take it you would have preferred fred had stayed and ashley never took over then ?

 

please don't answer anything about seeing what ashley does as what he does in the future has sod all bearing on feelings now.

 

I think you should find where I say that or anything like it.

 

Please explain why anyone should have a judgement on Ashley's intentions or ambitions, when he has not ran a football club before, nor told anyone what his intentions and ambitions are ?

 

I'm a bit surprised that you appear to be believing in fairies like numerous other people, I thought you were more pragmatic than that to be honest.

 

Nobody here has any idea at all what Ashleys intentions are, you are only saying he will spend his money because you want him to, we all want him to.

 

Unfortunately, you can't demand that or expect it. Its his money and its up to him. Please don't you - or anyone else - say that he should just because he's the new owner and you want him to, because he doesn't. Significantly, he is a businessman, he can make small profits without being hugely successful, whereas if he was a keen football supporter, or better still a Newcastle supporter, he would have more urge to succeed on the pitch. I said this once before and was slightly slaughtered for it. And has been said by someone else, the money he has bought the club with is irrelevant, because he can just sell the club on in due course if he wants to do so.

 

 

so you have no judgement on it,because you cannot see into the future you have no judgement on it.

i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ?

 

not believing in fairies mate,but taking a punt where i think it may do us good.

 

i'm giving up now as you won't answer a simple either/or question that everone else understands (as do you).

 

i wish we could all live in the world you wish to believe in,only making decisions when the outcomes are known and certain.

 

mackems.gif

 

when the Halls etc took over the club, the only way really was up.#

 

To remind you, as you clearly weren't there, otherwise there is no way in a million years you would even mention such a thing.....the club had sold ALL its best players for years, were staring at the old 3rd division, were playing in front of a half empty 30,000 ground that was nothing more than a s*** heap, had qualified for europe 4 times in over 30 years, had finished in the top 5 once during this period, on the brink of going bankrupt and out of existence, and appointed a journeyman manager like Jim Smith - the EIGHTH choice [for those who think we appoint only s*** managers that nobody else wants], followed by a complete tosser straight out of the clowns book of managers ie Ossie Ardiles, that the chairman Forbes laughingly thought would bring the good times back to the club, in the form of challenging for promotion to the 1st division and that was the limit of ambition as it always was under such complete tossers, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club.

 

I was almost believing you had half a brain lately, as you had been raising some objective and interesting points, but this completely ridiculous post puts you among the micks of this world.

 

Go back to jail, go, or Old Kent Road, or somewhere, because you quite clearly don't have a clue.

 

 

yes i was there,that season i missed about half a dozen games home and away,probably and perversely the most fun i've had following nufc.(the tales from a lot of those trips are legendary in our circle).

 

you've also put nothing in your post you haven't posted a hundred times before and i agree about the position we were in yet no-one mentioned going to the wall,until hall took over and if you remember he was always a bit overdramatic.

 

 

but anyway,the question was about now,and like all questions about now you have to make it not knowing what the future holds,so would you prefer fred was still in charge or take the risk with ashley ?

 

I am pleased you accept that Ashley is a risk. That is my reply BTW. Maybe the vast majority of other people will have something to say about it, having assured everyone else that Shepherd was holding the club back single handed from world glory. What will they say if nothing happens, or we don't match the 3 consecutive top 5 finishes achieved under the old board, for the first time in 50 years ? Will this mean that the Halls and Shepherd weren't holding the club back after all ?

 

Just a thought.

 

EDIT: Ref your comments about Hall, you are correct, he and he alone said we were going to the wall. One thing for certain is that we were heading for the 3rd division, and total oblivion, and maybe the fans didn't deserve it but the people who ran the club for 30 years did and could hardly have expected anything else. As you do understand this why do you say " i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ? "

 

Everyone who supported the club knows the state the club was in at that time, its simply beyond discussion at all. I don't know anybody who I know supported the club who doesn't dispute it.

 

I think the outcome of the Halls and Shepherd was never in any doubt at all. We were always going to head back upwards.

 

 

In all fairness, i don't see why you get involved in debates if you haven't got the b0ll0x to clearly state an opinion to a really easy question. You're behaving like a politician on Question Time.

I'm sure i remember you saying you thought we could have a revival under the previous Board, you said reckoned as they'd done it once they could do it again. I'm also pretty sure you said you fairly content it was Ashley that took over.

So, i reckon AT THE TIME you were happy with Ashley. You are allowed to change your mind you know, people do that in life all the time.

 

For me, right now i'd take a punt on Ashley.

However, i think Sam would've had an easier time of it under FS than MA this transfer window.

[NE5]

NE5--Would you mind answering the question "would you rather fred were still here or would you rather take the risk with ashley ?"

 

i've read your previous answers and they don't seem to make sense,you see when i asked my wife to marry me i'd have been pissed off had she replied "well my answer depends on how you treet me in our first few years" when i voted at the general election there was no box marked "depends on what happens in the next couple of years."

 

it's a question for now,i wish we could do it your way,no-one would ever make a mistake.

 

 

I didn't hear Ashley say he was going to bankroll managers, did you ? Has he had any previous experience of owning football clubs so we can judge him ?

 

If you did, please show me a link.

 

I wouldn't have liked that hedge fund though, and quite a lot of chairman at other premiership and big city clubs around the country either.

 

 

can i take it you would have preferred fred had stayed and ashley never took over then ?

 

please don't answer anything about seeing what ashley does as what he does in the future has sod all bearing on feelings now.

 

I think you should find where I say that or anything like it.

 

Please explain why anyone should have a judgement on Ashley's intentions or ambitions, when he has not ran a football club before, nor told anyone what his intentions and ambitions are ?

 

I'm a bit surprised that you appear to be believing in fairies like numerous other people, I thought you were more pragmatic than that to be honest.

 

Nobody here has any idea at all what Ashleys intentions are, you are only saying he will spend his money because you want him to, we all want him to.

 

Unfortunately, you can't demand that or expect it. Its his money and its up to him. Please don't you - or anyone else - say that he should just because he's the new owner and you want him to, because he doesn't. Significantly, he is a businessman, he can make small profits without being hugely successful, whereas if he was a keen football supporter, or better still a Newcastle supporter, he would have more urge to succeed on the pitch. I said this once before and was slightly slaughtered for it. And has been said by someone else, the money he has bought the club with is irrelevant, because he can just sell the club on in due course if he wants to do so.

 

 

so you have no judgement on it,because you cannot see into the future you have no judgement on it.

i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ?

 

not believing in fairies mate,but taking a punt where i think it may do us good.

 

i'm giving up now as you won't answer a simple either/or question that everone else understands (as do you).

 

i wish we could all live in the world you wish to believe in,only making decisions when the outcomes are known and certain.

 

mackems.gif

 

when the Halls etc took over the club, the only way really was up.#

 

To remind you, as you clearly weren't there, otherwise there is no way in a million years you would even mention such a thing.....the club had sold ALL its best players for years, were staring at the old 3rd division, were playing in front of a half empty 30,000 ground that was nothing more than a s*** heap, had qualified for europe 4 times in over 30 years, had finished in the top 5 once during this period, on the brink of going bankrupt and out of existence, and appointed a journeyman manager like Jim Smith - the EIGHTH choice [for those who think we appoint only s*** managers that nobody else wants], followed by a complete tosser straight out of the clowns book of managers ie Ossie Ardiles, that the chairman Forbes laughingly thought would bring the good times back to the club, in the form of challenging for promotion to the 1st division and that was the limit of ambition as it always was under such complete tossers, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club.

 

I was almost believing you had half a brain lately, as you had been raising some objective and interesting points, but this completely ridiculous post puts you among the micks of this world.

 

Go back to jail, go, or Old Kent Road, or somewhere, because you quite clearly don't have a clue.

 

 

yes i was there,that season i missed about half a dozen games home and away,probably and perversely the most fun i've had following nufc.(the tales from a lot of those trips are legendary in our circle).

 

you've also put nothing in your post you haven't posted a hundred times before and i agree about the position we were in yet no-one mentioned going to the wall,until hall took over and if you remember he was always a bit overdramatic.

 

 

but anyway,the question was about now,and like all questions about now you have to make it not knowing what the future holds,so would you prefer fred was still in charge or take the risk with ashley ?

 

I am pleased you accept that Ashley is a risk. That is my reply BTW. Maybe the vast majority of other people will have something to say about it, having assured everyone else that Shepherd was holding the club back single handed from world glory. What will they say if nothing happens, or we don't match the 3 consecutive top 5 finishes achieved under the old board, for the first time in 50 years ? Will this mean that the Halls and Shepherd weren't holding the club back after all ?

 

Just a thought.

 

EDIT: Ref your comments about Hall, you are correct, he and he alone said we were going to the wall. One thing for certain is that we were heading for the 3rd division, and total oblivion, and maybe the fans didn't deserve it but the people who ran the club for 30 years did and could hardly have expected anything else. As you do understand this why do you say " i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ? "

 

Everyone who supported the club knows the state the club was in at that time, its simply beyond discussion at all. I don't know anybody who I know supported the club who doesn't dispute it.

 

I think the outcome of the Halls and Shepherd was never in any doubt at all. We were always going to head back upwards.

 

 

In all fairness, i don't see why you get involved in debates if you haven't got the b0ll0x to clearly state an opinion to a really easy question. You're behaving like a politician on Question Time.

I'm sure i remember you saying you thought we could have a revival under the previous Board, you said reckoned as they'd done it once they could do it again. I'm also pretty sure you said you fairly content it was Ashley that took over.

So, i reckon AT THE TIME you were happy with Ashley. You are allowed to change your mind you know, people do that in life all the time.

 

For me, right now i'd take a punt on Ashley.

However, i think Sam would've had an easier time of it under FS than MA this transfer window.

 

the answer to the question is this:  We had a board that backed their managers. I am happy with this. Ashley won't be better if he doesn't match that. Face facts, if he doesn't, we aren;t going to be successful or even quality for the Champions League if he doesn't. Then and only then can we say this change of ownership is good for the club. I'm not going to waffle on and pretend I've answered, this is the best reply I can give, because its an impossible question. YOU maybe think it isn't, but that is because you - or others anyway - think we can do better than Hall and Shepherd with just about anybody. But I think you are wrong, badly wrong.

 

Only time will tell.

 

I can however say that I am happy to take a punt on Allardyce, because he has a track record, and I wanted him to succeed Bobby Robson 3 years ago. I think he would have been successful under the Halls and Shepherd, so obviously I think he will also be a success under Ashley, if he backs him.

 

 

 

[madras]

NE5--Would you mind answering the question "would you rather fred were still here or would you rather take the risk with ashley ?"

 

i've read your previous answers and they don't seem to make sense,you see when i asked my wife to marry me i'd have been pissed off had she replied "well my answer depends on how you treet me in our first few years" when i voted at the general election there was no box marked "depends on what happens in the next couple of years."

 

it's a question for now,i wish we could do it your way,no-one would ever make a mistake.

 

 

I didn't hear Ashley say he was going to bankroll managers, did you ? Has he had any previous experience of owning football clubs so we can judge him ?

 

If you did, please show me a link.

 

I wouldn't have liked that hedge fund though, and quite a lot of chairman at other premiership and big city clubs around the country either.

 

 

can i take it you would have preferred fred had stayed and ashley never took over then ?

 

please don't answer anything about seeing what ashley does as what he does in the future has sod all bearing on feelings now.

 

I think you should find where I say that or anything like it.

 

Please explain why anyone should have a judgement on Ashley's intentions or ambitions, when he has not ran a football club before, nor told anyone what his intentions and ambitions are ?

 

I'm a bit surprised that you appear to be believing in fairies like numerous other people, I thought you were more pragmatic than that to be honest.

 

Nobody here has any idea at all what Ashleys intentions are, you are only saying he will spend his money because you want him to, we all want him to.

 

Unfortunately, you can't demand that or expect it. Its his money and its up to him. Please don't you - or anyone else - say that he should just because he's the new owner and you want him to, because he doesn't. Significantly, he is a businessman, he can make small profits without being hugely successful, whereas if he was a keen football supporter, or better still a Newcastle supporter, he would have more urge to succeed on the pitch. I said this once before and was slightly slaughtered for it. And has been said by someone else, the money he has bought the club with is irrelevant, because he can just sell the club on in due course if he wants to do so.

 

 

so you have no judgement on it,because you cannot see into the future you have no judgement on it.

i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ?

 

not believing in fairies mate,but taking a punt where i think it may do us good.

 

i'm giving up now as you won't answer a simple either/or question that everone else understands (as do you).

 

i wish we could all live in the world you wish to believe in,only making decisions when the outcomes are known and certain.

 

mackems.gif

 

when the Halls etc took over the club, the only way really was up.#

 

To remind you, as you clearly weren't there, otherwise there is no way in a million years you would even mention such a thing.....the club had sold ALL its best players for years, were staring at the old 3rd division, were playing in front of a half empty 30,000 ground that was nothing more than a s*** heap, had qualified for europe 4 times in over 30 years, had finished in the top 5 once during this period, on the brink of going bankrupt and out of existence, and appointed a journeyman manager like Jim Smith - the EIGHTH choice [for those who think we appoint only s*** managers that nobody else wants], followed by a complete tosser straight out of the clowns book of managers ie Ossie Ardiles, that the chairman Forbes laughingly thought would bring the good times back to the club, in the form of challenging for promotion to the 1st division and that was the limit of ambition as it always was under such complete tossers, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club.

 

I was almost believing you had half a brain lately, as you had been raising some objective and interesting points, but this completely ridiculous post puts you among the micks of this world.

 

Go back to jail, go, or Old Kent Road, or somewhere, because you quite clearly don't have a clue.

 

 

yes i was there,that season i missed about half a dozen games home and away,probably and perversely the most fun i've had following nufc.(the tales from a lot of those trips are legendary in our circle).

 

you've also put nothing in your post you haven't posted a hundred times before and i agree about the position we were in yet no-one mentioned going to the wall,until hall took over and if you remember he was always a bit overdramatic.

 

 

but anyway,the question was about now,and like all questions about now you have to make it not knowing what the future holds,so would you prefer fred was still in charge or take the risk with ashley ?

 

I am pleased you accept that Ashley is a risk. That is my reply BTW. Maybe the vast majority of other people will have something to say about it, having assured everyone else that Shepherd was holding the club back single handed from world glory. What will they say if nothing happens, or we don't match the 3 consecutive top 5 finishes achieved under the old board, for the first time in 50 years ? Will this mean that the Halls and Shepherd weren't holding the club back after all ?

 

Just a thought.

 

EDIT: Ref your comments about Hall, you are correct, he and he alone said we were going to the wall. One thing for certain is that we were heading for the 3rd division, and total oblivion, and maybe the fans didn't deserve it but the people who ran the club for 30 years did and could hardly have expected anything else. As you do understand this why do you say " i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ? "

 

Everyone who supported the club knows the state the club was in at that time, its simply beyond discussion at all. I don't know anybody who I know supported the club who doesn't dispute it.

 

I think the outcome of the Halls and Shepherd was never in any doubt at all. We were always going to head back upwards.

 

 

i think i've stated that ashley is a risk each time i've posted the question,however all decisions carry risk,keeping fred would have been a risk (some may say a bigger risk!),what i don't understand is why you can't answer my simple question,everyone else could without needing to know exactly what will happen at the conclusion of each decision,everybody else weighs up the pros and cons in the here and now and projects it forward in their mind.thats how decisions are made,using todays information,accepting that it is difficuilt to make todays decision based on tomorrows info.

 

who would you prefer to be in charge of nufc right this very moment,fred ar ashley ?

 

is it only your vanity stopping you answering my simple question,the need to not be seen to turn your back on our previous chairman or the need to be seen to be right in the future so no matter how this turns out you can say "i was right" (naturally having technically backed both horses)

[NE5]

NE5--Would you mind answering the question "would you rather fred were still here or would you rather take the risk with ashley ?"

 

i've read your previous answers and they don't seem to make sense,you see when i asked my wife to marry me i'd have been pissed off had she replied "well my answer depends on how you treet me in our first few years" when i voted at the general election there was no box marked "depends on what happens in the next couple of years."

 

it's a question for now,i wish we could do it your way,no-one would ever make a mistake.

 

 

I didn't hear Ashley say he was going to bankroll managers, did you ? Has he had any previous experience of owning football clubs so we can judge him ?

 

If you did, please show me a link.

 

I wouldn't have liked that hedge fund though, and quite a lot of chairman at other premiership and big city clubs around the country either.

 

 

can i take it you would have preferred fred had stayed and ashley never took over then ?

 

please don't answer anything about seeing what ashley does as what he does in the future has sod all bearing on feelings now.

 

I think you should find where I say that or anything like it.

 

Please explain why anyone should have a judgement on Ashley's intentions or ambitions, when he has not ran a football club before, nor told anyone what his intentions and ambitions are ?

 

I'm a bit surprised that you appear to be believing in fairies like numerous other people, I thought you were more pragmatic than that to be honest.

 

Nobody here has any idea at all what Ashleys intentions are, you are only saying he will spend his money because you want him to, we all want him to.

 

Unfortunately, you can't demand that or expect it. Its his money and its up to him. Please don't you - or anyone else - say that he should just because he's the new owner and you want him to, because he doesn't. Significantly, he is a businessman, he can make small profits without being hugely successful, whereas if he was a keen football supporter, or better still a Newcastle supporter, he would have more urge to succeed on the pitch. I said this once before and was slightly slaughtered for it. And has been said by someone else, the money he has bought the club with is irrelevant, because he can just sell the club on in due course if he wants to do so.

 

 

so you have no judgement on it,because you cannot see into the future you have no judgement on it.

i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ?

 

not believing in fairies mate,but taking a punt where i think it may do us good.

 

i'm giving up now as you won't answer a simple either/or question that everone else understands (as do you).

 

i wish we could all live in the world you wish to believe in,only making decisions when the outcomes are known and certain.

 

mackems.gif

 

when the Halls etc took over the club, the only way really was up.#

 

To remind you, as you clearly weren't there, otherwise there is no way in a million years you would even mention such a thing.....the club had sold ALL its best players for years, were staring at the old 3rd division, were playing in front of a half empty 30,000 ground that was nothing more than a s*** heap, had qualified for europe 4 times in over 30 years, had finished in the top 5 once during this period, on the brink of going bankrupt and out of existence, and appointed a journeyman manager like Jim Smith - the EIGHTH choice [for those who think we appoint only s*** managers that nobody else wants], followed by a complete tosser straight out of the clowns book of managers ie Ossie Ardiles, that the chairman Forbes laughingly thought would bring the good times back to the club, in the form of challenging for promotion to the 1st division and that was the limit of ambition as it always was under such complete tossers, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club.

 

I was almost believing you had half a brain lately, as you had been raising some objective and interesting points, but this completely ridiculous post puts you among the micks of this world.

 

Go back to jail, go, or Old Kent Road, or somewhere, because you quite clearly don't have a clue.

 

 

yes i was there,that season i missed about half a dozen games home and away,probably and perversely the most fun i've had following nufc.(the tales from a lot of those trips are legendary in our circle).

 

you've also put nothing in your post you haven't posted a hundred times before and i agree about the position we were in yet no-one mentioned going to the wall,until hall took over and if you remember he was always a bit overdramatic.

 

 

but anyway,the question was about now,and like all questions about now you have to make it not knowing what the future holds,so would you prefer fred was still in charge or take the risk with ashley ?

 

I am pleased you accept that Ashley is a risk. That is my reply BTW. Maybe the vast majority of other people will have something to say about it, having assured everyone else that Shepherd was holding the club back single handed from world glory. What will they say if nothing happens, or we don't match the 3 consecutive top 5 finishes achieved under the old board, for the first time in 50 years ? Will this mean that the Halls and Shepherd weren't holding the club back after all ?

 

Just a thought.

 

EDIT: Ref your comments about Hall, you are correct, he and he alone said we were going to the wall. One thing for certain is that we were heading for the 3rd division, and total oblivion, and maybe the fans didn't deserve it but the people who ran the club for 30 years did and could hardly have expected anything else. As you do understand this why do you say " i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ? "

 

Everyone who supported the club knows the state the club was in at that time, its simply beyond discussion at all. I don't know anybody who I know supported the club who doesn't dispute it.

 

I think the outcome of the Halls and Shepherd was never in any doubt at all. We were always going to head back upwards.

 

 

i think i've stated that ashley is a risk each time i've posted the question,however all decisions carry risk,keeping fred would have been a risk (some may say a bigger risk!),what i don't understand is why you can't answer my simple question,everyone else could without needing to know exactly what will happen at the conclusion of each decision,everybody else weighs up the pros and cons in the here and now and projects it forward in their mind.thats how decisions are made,using todays information,accepting that it is difficuilt to make todays decision based on tomorrows info.

 

who would you prefer to be in charge of nufc right this very moment,fred ar ashley ?

 

is it only your vanity stopping you answering my simple question,the need to not be seen to turn your back on our previous chairman or the need to be seen to be right in the future so no matter how this turns out you can say "i was right" (naturally having technically backed both horses)

 

Fact is, if I say Ashley and he turns out not to back his managers as well as the Halls and Shepherd, then it makes my choice incorrect.

 

Without a track record, how do you know Ashley will be better ?

 

Do YOU think we will match and better the Champions League finishes under Bobby Robson with Shepherd as chairman ?

 

You have absolutely no grounds whatsoever for thinking that we will. You may be prepared to think that someone will be better than the last board - with no basis whatsoever - but I do not. This is why I have called the last board correctly and others haven't. They simply want rid of Fred because they are dragging personalities into their judgement. I will make mine on how I consider their view, knowledge of football, and ambition for their club, and if you don't mind.

 

If he backs his managers, he could be better. If he doesn't, he won't. You are asking the equivalent of judging whether someone will be a good manager without having been one before, or asking if someone will be a good footballer despite not knowing anything about him.

 

Asking if Ashley will be a good owner of a club is no different to asking if Alan Shearer will be a good manager, therefore would you be happy for him to take over from Allardyce ?

 

Its a silly question, nobody can answer, unless you have a personal greivance against one of the indivuduals concerned which prevents you from making a good judgement. The you will presume the new bloke will better, but that is only because you want him to be.

 

 

 

 

[madras]

NE5--Would you mind answering the question "would you rather fred were still here or would you rather take the risk with ashley ?"

 

i've read your previous answers and they don't seem to make sense,you see when i asked my wife to marry me i'd have been pissed off had she replied "well my answer depends on how you treet me in our first few years" when i voted at the general election there was no box marked "depends on what happens in the next couple of years."

 

it's a question for now,i wish we could do it your way,no-one would ever make a mistake.

 

 

I didn't hear Ashley say he was going to bankroll managers, did you ? Has he had any previous experience of owning football clubs so we can judge him ?

 

If you did, please show me a link.

 

I wouldn't have liked that hedge fund though, and quite a lot of chairman at other premiership and big city clubs around the country either.

 

 

can i take it you would have preferred fred had stayed and ashley never took over then ?

 

please don't answer anything about seeing what ashley does as what he does in the future has sod all bearing on feelings now.

 

I think you should find where I say that or anything like it.

 

Please explain why anyone should have a judgement on Ashley's intentions or ambitions, when he has not ran a football club before, nor told anyone what his intentions and ambitions are ?

 

I'm a bit surprised that you appear to be believing in fairies like numerous other people, I thought you were more pragmatic than that to be honest.

 

Nobody here has any idea at all what Ashleys intentions are, you are only saying he will spend his money because you want him to, we all want him to.

 

Unfortunately, you can't demand that or expect it. Its his money and its up to him. Please don't you - or anyone else - say that he should just because he's the new owner and you want him to, because he doesn't. Significantly, he is a businessman, he can make small profits without being hugely successful, whereas if he was a keen football supporter, or better still a Newcastle supporter, he would have more urge to succeed on the pitch. I said this once before and was slightly slaughtered for it. And has been said by someone else, the money he has bought the club with is irrelevant, because he can just sell the club on in due course if he wants to do so.

 

 

so you have no judgement on it,because you cannot see into the future you have no judgement on it.

i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ?

 

not believing in fairies mate,but taking a punt where i think it may do us good.

 

i'm giving up now as you won't answer a simple either/or question that everone else understands (as do you).

 

i wish we could all live in the world you wish to believe in,only making decisions when the outcomes are known and certain.

 

mackems.gif

 

when the Halls etc took over the club, the only way really was up.#

 

To remind you, as you clearly weren't there, otherwise there is no way in a million years you would even mention such a thing.....the club had sold ALL its best players for years, were staring at the old 3rd division, were playing in front of a half empty 30,000 ground that was nothing more than a s*** heap, had qualified for europe 4 times in over 30 years, had finished in the top 5 once during this period, on the brink of going bankrupt and out of existence, and appointed a journeyman manager like Jim Smith - the EIGHTH choice [for those who think we appoint only s*** managers that nobody else wants], followed by a complete tosser straight out of the clowns book of managers ie Ossie Ardiles, that the chairman Forbes laughingly thought would bring the good times back to the club, in the form of challenging for promotion to the 1st division and that was the limit of ambition as it always was under such complete tossers, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club.

 

I was almost believing you had half a brain lately, as you had been raising some objective and interesting points, but this completely ridiculous post puts you among the micks of this world.

 

Go back to jail, go, or Old Kent Road, or somewhere, because you quite clearly don't have a clue.

 

 

yes i was there,that season i missed about half a dozen games home and away,probably and perversely the most fun i've had following nufc.(the tales from a lot of those trips are legendary in our circle).

 

you've also put nothing in your post you haven't posted a hundred times before and i agree about the position we were in yet no-one mentioned going to the wall,until hall took over and if you remember he was always a bit overdramatic.

 

 

but anyway,the question was about now,and like all questions about now you have to make it not knowing what the future holds,so would you prefer fred was still in charge or take the risk with ashley ?

 

I am pleased you accept that Ashley is a risk. That is my reply BTW. Maybe the vast majority of other people will have something to say about it, having assured everyone else that Shepherd was holding the club back single handed from world glory. What will they say if nothing happens, or we don't match the 3 consecutive top 5 finishes achieved under the old board, for the first time in 50 years ? Will this mean that the Halls and Shepherd weren't holding the club back after all ?

 

Just a thought.

 

EDIT: Ref your comments about Hall, you are correct, he and he alone said we were going to the wall. One thing for certain is that we were heading for the 3rd division, and total oblivion, and maybe the fans didn't deserve it but the people who ran the club for 30 years did and could hardly have expected anything else. As you do understand this why do you say " i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ? "

 

Everyone who supported the club knows the state the club was in at that time, its simply beyond discussion at all. I don't know anybody who I know supported the club who doesn't dispute it.

 

I think the outcome of the Halls and Shepherd was never in any doubt at all. We were always going to head back upwards.

 

 

i think i've stated that ashley is a risk each time i've posted the question,however all decisions carry risk,keeping fred would have been a risk (some may say a bigger risk!),what i don't understand is why you can't answer my simple question,everyone else could without needing to know exactly what will happen at the conclusion of each decision,everybody else weighs up the pros and cons in the here and now and projects it forward in their mind.thats how decisions are made,using todays information,accepting that it is difficuilt to make todays decision based on tomorrows info.

 

who would you prefer to be in charge of nufc right this very moment,fred ar ashley ?

 

is it only your vanity stopping you answering my simple question,the need to not be seen to turn your back on our previous chairman or the need to be seen to be right in the future so no matter how this turns out you can say "i was right" (naturally having technically backed both horses)

 

Fact is, if I say Ashley and he turns out not to back his managers as well as the Halls and Shepherd, then it makes my choice incorrect.

 

Without a track record, how do you know Ashley will be better ?

 

Do YOU think we will match and better the Champions League finishes under Bobby Robson with Shepherd as chairman ?

 

You have absolutely no grounds whatsoever for thinking that we will. You may be prepared to think that someone will be better than the last board - with no basis whatsoever - but I do not. This is why I have called the last board correctly and others haven't. They simply want rid of Fred because they are dragging personalities into their judgement. I will make mine on how I consider their view, knowledge of football, and ambition for their club, and if you don't mind.

 

If he backs his managers, he could be better. If he doesn't, he won't. You are asking the equivalent of judging whether someone will be a good manager without having been one before, or asking if someone will be a good footballer despite not knowing anything about him.

 

Asking if Ashley will be a good owner of a club is no different to asking if Alan Shearer will be a good manager, therefore would you be happy for him to take over from Allardyce ?

 

Its a silly question, nobody can answer, unless you have a personal greivance against one of the indivuduals concerned which prevents you from making a good judgement. The you will presume the new bloke will better, but that is only because you want him to be.

 

 

 

 

no...it makes it your choice,now,in this instant,in which it can be neither right nor wrong..just your choice......only in the as yet undetermined future can it be deemed right or wrong.

[NE5]

NE5--Would you mind answering the question "would you rather fred were still here or would you rather take the risk with ashley ?"

 

i've read your previous answers and they don't seem to make sense,you see when i asked my wife to marry me i'd have been pissed off had she replied "well my answer depends on how you treet me in our first few years" when i voted at the general election there was no box marked "depends on what happens in the next couple of years."

 

it's a question for now,i wish we could do it your way,no-one would ever make a mistake.

 

 

I didn't hear Ashley say he was going to bankroll managers, did you ? Has he had any previous experience of owning football clubs so we can judge him ?

 

If you did, please show me a link.

 

I wouldn't have liked that hedge fund though, and quite a lot of chairman at other premiership and big city clubs around the country either.

 

 

can i take it you would have preferred fred had stayed and ashley never took over then ?

 

please don't answer anything about seeing what ashley does as what he does in the future has sod all bearing on feelings now.

 

I think you should find where I say that or anything like it.

 

Please explain why anyone should have a judgement on Ashley's intentions or ambitions, when he has not ran a football club before, nor told anyone what his intentions and ambitions are ?

 

I'm a bit surprised that you appear to be believing in fairies like numerous other people, I thought you were more pragmatic than that to be honest.

 

Nobody here has any idea at all what Ashleys intentions are, you are only saying he will spend his money because you want him to, we all want him to.

 

Unfortunately, you can't demand that or expect it. Its his money and its up to him. Please don't you - or anyone else - say that he should just because he's the new owner and you want him to, because he doesn't. Significantly, he is a businessman, he can make small profits without being hugely successful, whereas if he was a keen football supporter, or better still a Newcastle supporter, he would have more urge to succeed on the pitch. I said this once before and was slightly slaughtered for it. And has been said by someone else, the money he has bought the club with is irrelevant, because he can just sell the club on in due course if he wants to do so.

 

 

so you have no judgement on it,because you cannot see into the future you have no judgement on it.

i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ?

 

not believing in fairies mate,but taking a punt where i think it may do us good.

 

i'm giving up now as you won't answer a simple either/or question that everone else understands (as do you).

 

i wish we could all live in the world you wish to believe in,only making decisions when the outcomes are known and certain.

 

mackems.gif

 

when the Halls etc took over the club, the only way really was up.#

 

To remind you, as you clearly weren't there, otherwise there is no way in a million years you would even mention such a thing.....the club had sold ALL its best players for years, were staring at the old 3rd division, were playing in front of a half empty 30,000 ground that was nothing more than a s*** heap, had qualified for europe 4 times in over 30 years, had finished in the top 5 once during this period, on the brink of going bankrupt and out of existence, and appointed a journeyman manager like Jim Smith - the EIGHTH choice [for those who think we appoint only s*** managers that nobody else wants], followed by a complete tosser straight out of the clowns book of managers ie Ossie Ardiles, that the chairman Forbes laughingly thought would bring the good times back to the club, in the form of challenging for promotion to the 1st division and that was the limit of ambition as it always was under such complete tossers, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club.

 

I was almost believing you had half a brain lately, as you had been raising some objective and interesting points, but this completely ridiculous post puts you among the micks of this world.

 

Go back to jail, go, or Old Kent Road, or somewhere, because you quite clearly don't have a clue.

 

 

yes i was there,that season i missed about half a dozen games home and away,probably and perversely the most fun i've had following nufc.(the tales from a lot of those trips are legendary in our circle).

 

you've also put nothing in your post you haven't posted a hundred times before and i agree about the position we were in yet no-one mentioned going to the wall,until hall took over and if you remember he was always a bit overdramatic.

 

 

but anyway,the question was about now,and like all questions about now you have to make it not knowing what the future holds,so would you prefer fred was still in charge or take the risk with ashley ?

 

I am pleased you accept that Ashley is a risk. That is my reply BTW. Maybe the vast majority of other people will have something to say about it, having assured everyone else that Shepherd was holding the club back single handed from world glory. What will they say if nothing happens, or we don't match the 3 consecutive top 5 finishes achieved under the old board, for the first time in 50 years ? Will this mean that the Halls and Shepherd weren't holding the club back after all ?

 

Just a thought.

 

EDIT: Ref your comments about Hall, you are correct, he and he alone said we were going to the wall. One thing for certain is that we were heading for the 3rd division, and total oblivion, and maybe the fans didn't deserve it but the people who ran the club for 30 years did and could hardly have expected anything else. As you do understand this why do you say " i wonder if you thought the same when the hall's took over from the previous regime ? "

 

Everyone who supported the club knows the state the club was in at that time, its simply beyond discussion at all. I don't know anybody who I know supported the club who doesn't dispute it.

 

I think the outcome of the Halls and Shepherd was never in any doubt at all. We were always going to head back upwards.

 

 

i think i've stated that ashley is a risk each time i've posted the question,however all decisions carry risk,keeping fred would have been a risk (some may say a bigger risk!),what i don't understand is why you can't answer my simple question,everyone else could without needing to know exactly what will happen at the conclusion of each decision,everybody else weighs up the pros and cons in the here and now and projects it forward in their mind.thats how decisions are made,using todays information,accepting that it is difficuilt to make todays decision based on tomorrows info.

 

who would you prefer to be in charge of nufc right this very moment,fred ar ashley ?

 

is it only your vanity stopping you answering my simple question,the need to not be seen to turn your back on our previous chairman or the need to be seen to be right in the future so no matter how this turns out you can say "i was right" (naturally having technically backed both horses)

 

Fact is, if I say Ashley and he turns out not to back his managers as well as the Halls and Shepherd, then it makes my choice incorrect.

 

Without a track record, how do you know Ashley will be better ?

 

Do YOU think we will match and better the Champions League finishes under Bobby Robson with Shepherd as chairman ?

 

You have absolutely no grounds whatsoever for thinking that we will. You may be prepared to think that someone will be better than the last board - with no basis whatsoever - but I do not. This is why I have called the last board correctly and others haven't. They simply want rid of Fred because they are dragging personalities into their judgement. I will make mine on how I consider their view, knowledge of football, and ambition for their club, and if you don't mind.

 

If he backs his managers, he could be better. If he doesn't, he won't. You are asking the equivalent of judging whether someone will be a good manager without having been one before, or asking if someone will be a good footballer despite not knowing anything about him.

 

Asking if Ashley will be a good owner of a club is no different to asking if Alan Shearer will be a good manager, therefore would you be happy for him to take over from Allardyce ?

 

Its a silly question, nobody can answer, unless you have a personal greivance against one of the indivuduals concerned which prevents you from making a good judgement. The you will presume the new bloke will better, but that is only because you want him to be.

 

no...it makes it your choice,now,in this instant,in which it can be neither right nor wrong..just your choice......only in the as yet undetermined future can it be deemed right or wrong.

 

what you are asking is the same thing as asking if someone is happy with a completely untried manager ? The answer is you don't know how good or bad he is.

 

Ashley is one of the better candidates around, he is a single owner who can absorb the debt undertaken with the stadium expansion. He is far less likely to asset strip and try to make a quick buck and sell the club down the river than the Hedge Fund would possibly have done, but I've been saying for ages that replacing the Halls and Shepherd with better would not necessarily bring automatic improvement, and it certainly wouldn't have done with that scenario. I sold my shares, a. because I had no choice, and b. in the hope he backs his managers.  But if he doesn't, then we won't make the Champions League and match the best performance of the last board. This is a fact. The fact is that nobody knows if he is ambitious and will back the board enough to beat his rivals. Many people have said that Shepherd has been holding the club back, what will you say if Ashley doesn't back his managers and we don't match these league positions and CL and european qualifications that we did a few years ago ? Will you then say that Ashley is holding the club back ? Because if you do, then you can't say you would be happy. You would also have to say that you were incorrect when you said it was Shepherd that was holding the club back.

 

It is up to Ashley to state his intentions, and/or show he means business and intends to do better than the last owners. Until he does this, I fail to see how anyone can say they are happy.

 

And signings of the calibre and price bracket that we have bought so far won't bring this level of success either. If this carries on, it will be interesting to see how many people who complained about these "trophy" signings the club used to buy - although who they think these players are is beyond me to be honest - will be squealing for "better quality".

 

 

[Dave]

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

Megaquote triangle time, yeah!

[madras]

 

ne5 said 

what you are asking is the same thing as asking if someone is happy with a completely untried manager ? The answer is you don't know how good or bad he is.

 

Ashley is one of the better candidates around, he is a single owner who can absorb the debt undertaken with the stadium expansion. He is far less likely to asset strip and try to make a quick buck and sell the club down the river than the Hedge Fund would possibly have done, but I've been saying for ages that replacing the Halls and Shepherd with better would not necessarily bring automatic improvement, and it certainly wouldn't have done with that scenario. I sold my shares, a. because I had no choice, and b. in the hope he backs his managers.  But if he doesn't, then we won't make the Champions League and match the best performance of the last board. This is a fact. The fact is that nobody knows if he is ambitious and will back the board enough to beat his rivals. Many people have said that Shepherd has been holding the club back, what will you say if Ashley doesn't back his managers and we don't match these league positions and CL and european qualifications that we did a few years ago ? Will you then say that Ashley is holding the club back ? Because if you do, then you can't say you would be happy. You would also have to say that you were incorrect when you said it was Shepherd that was holding the club back.

 

It is up to Ashley to state his intentions, and/or show he means business and intends to do better than the last owners. Until he does this, I fail to see how anyone can say they are happy.

 

And signings of the calibre and price bracket that we have bought so far won't bring this level of success either. If this carries on, it will be interesting to see how many people who complained about these "trophy" signings the club used to buy - although who they think these players are is beyond me to be honest - will be squealing for "better quality".

i would say in that circumstance i got it wrong after making a choice,instead of wriggling out of it due to vanity.

[OzzieMandias]

You'll never get a straight answer. He's too chicken to admit he'd rather Shepherd was still in charge -- and for the sad reason that change carries the risk that his interminable contortions on behalf of the Fat One will prove beyond doubt to have been a load of drivel.

 

Still, it's amusing to watch a grown man wriggle.

[NE5]

You'll never get a straight answer. He's too chicken to admit he'd rather Shepherd was still in charge -- and for the sad reason that change carries the risk that his interminable contortions on behalf of the Fat One will prove beyond doubt to have been a load of drivel.

 

Still, it's amusing to watch a grown man wriggle.

 

just when I thought it couldn't get any stupider

 

mackems.gif

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

You'll never get a straight answer. He's too chicken to admit he'd rather Shepherd was still in charge -- and for the sad reason that change carries the risk that his interminable contortions on behalf of the Fat One will prove beyond doubt to have been a load of drivel.

 

Still, it's amusing to watch a grown man wriggle.

 

just when I thought it couldn't get any stupider...

 

 

 

...along you come.

[OzzieMandias]

So tell us, are you glad we've taken the risk with Ashley, or would you rather we'd stuck with Fred?

[NE5]

 

ne5 said 

what you are asking is the same thing as asking if someone is happy with a completely untried manager ? The answer is you don't know how good or bad he is.

 

Ashley is one of the better candidates around, he is a single owner who can absorb the debt undertaken with the stadium expansion. He is far less likely to asset strip and try to make a quick buck and sell the club down the river than the Hedge Fund would possibly have done, but I've been saying for ages that replacing the Halls and Shepherd with better would not necessarily bring automatic improvement, and it certainly wouldn't have done with that scenario. I sold my shares, a. because I had no choice, and b. in the hope he backs his managers.  But if he doesn't, then we won't make the Champions League and match the best performance of the last board. This is a fact. The fact is that nobody knows if he is ambitious and will back the board enough to beat his rivals. Many people have said that Shepherd has been holding the club back, what will you say if Ashley doesn't back his managers and we don't match these league positions and CL and european qualifications that we did a few years ago ? Will you then say that Ashley is holding the club back ? Because if you do, then you can't say you would be happy. You would also have to say that you were incorrect when you said it was Shepherd that was holding the club back.

 

It is up to Ashley to state his intentions, and/or show he means business and intends to do better than the last owners. Until he does this, I fail to see how anyone can say they are happy.

 

And signings of the calibre and price bracket that we have bought so far won't bring this level of success either. If this carries on, it will be interesting to see how many people who complained about these "trophy" signings the club used to buy - although who they think these players are is beyond me to be honest - will be squealing for "better quality".

i would say in that circumstance i got it wrong after making a choice,instead of wriggling out of it due to vanity.

 

not wriggling out of anything.

 

I'm not judging anything without knowing capability or intentions. If Ashley is successful, I'll be pleased that he took over the club, if he doesn't back his managers and we don't reach the CL or win a trophy, then this takeover has not been for the best. It's hardly rocket science. Why are you so desperate for someone to say they are glad this change has been made when nothing whatsover has happened yet that would have happened anyway ?

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

So you'd prefer to still have Shepherd, then.