Mort is new Chairman - Shepherd leaves

[macbeth]

 

I don't think, I know.

 

It is obvious to anyone with half a brain. I'm not surprised in the slightest you either don't know the answer, or aren't prepared to admit it.

 

 

 

Excellent, enlighten us.

 

Well, as you clearly don't know, and you may tell the younger lads the wrong answer, being a bit of a bandwagon jumper, basically its because nobody was interested in the club, because they sold all their best players, who all wanted to go, spent years in the 2nd division, considered a promotion battle as fighting for honours, and once achieved, were happy to stay up, as cheaply as possible.[glow=red,2,300] [macbeth would like this sort of approach][/glow]

 

Of course, when you sell your best players and buy 2nd rate players - for years and years - and consider 15th in the old 1st division and staying up to be the height of ambition and success, then the fans who have higher ambitions sort of stop going to watch the club. I mean, who wants to support a club who sell their best players and get relegated and spend years in the old 2nd division buying players out of the 3rd and 4th divisions on a regular basis.

 

A cousin of mine spent 10-15 years telling me that I was mad for watching "that rubbish"  All of a sudden, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club and appointed Keegan, he - and thousands of others - started going to the match again. They were attracted back by a board who they now slate. They also say they have "always supported the club".

 

In fact, his name isn't Mick, or I could suspect you were him.

 

Please feel free to make something up, I'm expecting it  mackems.gif

 

i love it when you you put words (and things) in my mouth 

[NE5]

A team of 2m or 3m quid players may satisfy your desire to look after the accounts first and foremost, but it sure as hell won't give us a half decent team.

 

 

 

only just noticed this one

 

Do you think a team that has finished below 9th over the last ten season his half decent ? Under Shepherd we have spent about a net £100m on players, and we still only have a half decent side. How much more do you think Shepherd should have borrowed to get a side that could get in the top half more than the bottom half ? Woudl £10m be right, or £20m, or £35m.

 

You keep assuming that I didn't want to spend money. You'll never find me having said that. You will find me questioning how the people running the club could get us in such a bad position financially that we were losing £1m a month, and every summer we just HAD to borrow more because of the desperate situation we were in.

 

I still love you though. Simple folk make me smile  :smitten:

 

To clarify, do you or do you not think the club were right to buy Martins from the available money at the time ?

 

People who don't answer fairly straightforward questions make me smile, and laugh out loud  mackems.gif

 

Shepherd must have really hurt your feelings eh, not letting you a say in running the footballl club for free  mackems.gif

[NE5]

 

I don't think, I know.

 

It is obvious to anyone with half a brain. I'm not surprised in the slightest you either don't know the answer, or aren't prepared to admit it.

 

 

 

Excellent, enlighten us.

 

Well, as you clearly don't know, and you may tell the younger lads the wrong answer, being a bit of a bandwagon jumper, basically its because nobody was interested in the club, because they sold all their best players, who all wanted to go, spent years in the 2nd division, considered a promotion battle as fighting for honours, and once achieved, were happy to stay up, as cheaply as possible.[glow=red,2,300] [macbeth would like this sort of approach][/glow]

 

Of course, when you sell your best players and buy 2nd rate players - for years and years - and consider 15th in the old 1st division and staying up to be the height of ambition and success, then the fans who have higher ambitions sort of stop going to watch the club. I mean, who wants to support a club who sell their best players and get relegated and spend years in the old 2nd division buying players out of the 3rd and 4th divisions on a regular basis.

 

A cousin of mine spent 10-15 years telling me that I was mad for watching "that rubbish"  All of a sudden, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club and appointed Keegan, he - and thousands of others - started going to the match again. They were attracted back by a board who they now slate. They also say they have "always supported the club".

 

In fact, his name isn't Mick, or I could suspect you were him.

 

Please feel free to make something up, I'm expecting it  mackems.gif

 

i love it when you you put words (and things) in my mouth 

 

The old board, for 30 years pre-1992,, spent only the money they made. Fact. That is what you preach.

 

 

[Guest Geordiesned]

Same shit, different day I see.

[NE5]

Same shit, different day I see.

 

from the money obsessed macbeth and MICK I take it ?

 

Aye, thats right.

 

Maybe you could mention to MICK that a truthful reply may be a step in the right direction for him ......  mackems.gif

[Mick]

 

Well, as you clearly don't know, and you may tell the younger lads the wrong answer, being a bit of a bandwagon jumper, basically its because nobody was interested in the club, because they sold all their best players, who all wanted to go, spent years in the 2nd division, considered a promotion battle as fighting for honours, and once achieved, were happy to stay up, as cheaply as possible. [macbeth would like this sort of approach]

 

Of course, when you sell your best players and buy 2nd rate players - for years and years - and consider 15th in the old 1st division and staying up to be the height of ambition and success, then the fans who have higher ambitions sort of stop going to watch the club. I mean, who wants to support a club who sell their best players and get relegated and spend years in the old 2nd division buying players out of the 3rd and 4th divisions on a regular basis.

 

A cousin of mine spent 10-15 years telling me that I was mad for watching "that rubbish"  All of a sudden, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club and appointed Keegan, he - and thousands of others - started going to the match again. They were attracted back by a board who they now slate. They also say they have "always supported the club".

 

In fact, his name isn't Mick, or I could suspect you were him.

 

Please feel free to make something up, I'm expecting it  mackems.gif

 

I agree with most of that anyway, a lot of people were sick of the shit football and the way the club were being run, a lot also kept going because they still enjoyed it although it was as much for the day out as much as any expectations of how well we were going to do.  It still doesn't change the fact that our gates were not shit and were much better than they should have been, they were better than quite a few of those on the top division.

 

It also doesn't make our current gates an endorsement of Shepherd as he was clearly unpopular yet people still went.  You've just said that those who stopped going had higher ambition, is that why you're happy to support Shepherd, because you don't have high ambition?

 

Last season was the first time in years that our gates had dropped, does that mean people thought Shepherd was shit?

[macbeth]

To clarify, do you or do you not think the club were right to buy Martins from the available money at the time ?

 

People who don't answer fairly straightforward questions make me smile, and laugh out loud  mackems.gif

 

Shepherd must have really hurt your feelings eh, not letting you a say in running the footballl club for free  mackems.gif

 

you forogt to mention Adam Crozier 

 

still love you consistency though, that's nice in a man 

[NE5]

To clarify, do you or do you not think the club were right to buy Martins from the available money at the time ?

 

People who don't answer fairly straightforward questions make me smile, and laugh out loud  mackems.gif

 

Shepherd must have really hurt your feelings eh, not letting you a say in running the footballl club for free  mackems.gif

 

you forogt to mention Adam Crozier 

 

still love you consistency though, that's nice in a man 

 

You said that that shirt lifter Adam Crozier would be the idea chairman of NUFC

 

You don't need to put up those smillies, I'm not Crozier   mackems.gif

 

Shame you don't answer the question about Martins. Not that everyone reading this will not know why 

[NE5]

 

Well, as you clearly don't know, and you may tell the younger lads the wrong answer, being a bit of a bandwagon jumper, basically its because nobody was interested in the club, because they sold all their best players, who all wanted to go, spent years in the 2nd division, considered a promotion battle as fighting for honours, and once achieved, were happy to stay up, as cheaply as possible. [macbeth would like this sort of approach]

 

Of course, when you sell your best players and buy 2nd rate players - for years and years - and consider 15th in the old 1st division and staying up to be the height of ambition and success, then the fans who have higher ambitions sort of stop going to watch the club. I mean, who wants to support a club who sell their best players and get relegated and spend years in the old 2nd division buying players out of the 3rd and 4th divisions on a regular basis.

 

A cousin of mine spent 10-15 years telling me that I was mad for watching "that rubbish"  All of a sudden, when the Halls and Shepherd took over the club and appointed Keegan, he - and thousands of others - started going to the match again. They were attracted back by a board who they now slate. They also say they have "always supported the club".

 

In fact, his name isn't Mick, or I could suspect you were him.

 

Please feel free to make something up, I'm expecting it  mackems.gif

 

I agree with most of that anyway, a lot of people were sick of the shit football and the way the club were being run, a lot also kept going because they still enjoyed it although it was as much for the day out as much as any expectations of how well we were going to do.  It still doesn't change the fact that our gates were not shit and were much better than they should have been, they were better than quite a few of those on the top division.

 

It also doesn't make our current gates an endorsement of Shepherd as he was clearly unpopular yet people still went.  You've just said that those who stopped going had higher ambition, is that why you're happy to support Shepherd, because you don't have high ambition?

 

Last season was the first time in years that our gates had dropped, does that mean people thought Shepherd was shit?

 

Nice of you to admit it.

 

However, our gates were a long way from being half the capactiy of the stadium, or around the 20000 mark depending whether we had won the last game or not. If they were, it would indeed have made Shepherd an outright failure and if that had been the case I would have wanted him out just like anyone else

 

My ambitions are as high as you can get. I haven't supported this club for over 40 years to want to not win anything other than the Fairs Cup. The difference is that I am just realistic. There are 2 essential ingredients to make a successful football team. One is a good manager, the 2nd is financial backing from the board. We have gave backing to all our managers, and in Allardyce we now have a good manager who could deliver success. You are unable to accept that nobody makes good appointments every time, why, I don't know. But it is really a problem that you have got to come to terms with.

 

We don't know if Ashley will back his managers as much as the Halls and Shepherd. If he does, I'll be very happy with him. If he doesn't, even you will come round eventually and accept how important this is and how you underestimated its worth to a club. Whether it shocks you into realising that the Halls and Shepherd despite their faults were actually good owners of the club I doubt, and I certainly don't expect you to admit it.

 

It would be interesting to see just how many people are worried about the lack of backing that has been given to Allardyce so far.

Plenty of people are making excuses for it, but what will you say if it is in fact nothing whatsoever to do with the study into the clubs structure that is going on, and they are simply not going to pay the going rate for the top players, nor take gambles on top players and show ambition ?

 

Time will tell. Your hatred for Shepherd because he made daft comments to the press, have basically blinded your judgement but you aren't the only one. He has made stupid statements, but only made himself look daft I have no idea why you decided it made you look daft. At the end of the day, its only the team that counts. Ashleys silence style is the complete opposite, and while you say you welcome this, I don't think it will be long before he starts getting slated for it if the team isn't winning, and also if he appoints a duff manager after Allardyce, and only a complete fool would not think this is impossible. As i said, everybody makes mistakes and nobody makes a good appointment every time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest SpinTheBlackCircle]

Mort is a W*****

 

Big Sam The Journal: “While Freddie was hands-on and here every single day of the week, it isn’t quite that under this regime – that’s the difference from my point of view.

 

Fat Fred Telegraph: "I wouldn't presume to tell him how to run things but all I will say is that I don't believe it can be done by proxy.We may live in an age of communication but I believe Newcastle are a club who need dedicated day-to-day handling."

 

[NE5]

Mort is a W*****

 

Big Sam The Journal: “While Freddie was hands-on and here every single day of the week, it isn’t quite that under this regime – that’s the difference from my point of view.

 

Fat Fred Telegraph: "I wouldn't presume to tell him how to run things but all I will say is that I don't believe it can be done by proxy.We may live in an age of communication but I believe Newcastle are a club who need dedicated day-to-day handling."

 

 

I saw that quote and I agree with it, but I don't suppose too many people will quite have it in them to admit that he is right about anything at all.

 

Your two quotes are an excellent spot mate.

 

 

 

[Dokko]

Mort is a W*****

 

Big Sam The Journal: “While Freddie was hands-on and here every single day of the week, it isn’t quite that under this regime – that’s the difference from my point of view.

 

Fat Fred Telegraph: "I wouldn't presume to tell him how to run things but all I will say is that I don't believe it can be done by proxy.We may live in an age of communication but I believe Newcastle are a club who need dedicated day-to-day handling."

 

 

I saw that quote and I agree with it, but I don't suppose too many people will quite have it in them to admit that he is right about anything at all.

 

 

 

Isn't that going to be Morts job (and the team he brings in) though?

 

FS was doing the job of about 5 people in the end, and why not enough opinion was ever given only his and the Halls mattered. Surrounding himself with his own family didn't help the situation. I don't think we need Ashley to be hands on, we just need his money, what we do need though is his people, an d hopefully more arrivals will come in the coming months.

 

Mort himself probably hasn't had the time to be hands on with the manager etc, but maybe this is intentional as that role is seen for a DOF to come in and handle.

 

[Guest Knightrider]

There are 2 essential ingredients to make a successful football team. One is a good manager, the 2nd is financial backing from the board.

 

Agreed, but in today's climate you need far more than that NE5, we had that under SBR and although we finished 3rd and qualified for Europe, we were never going to be champions (Arsenal) or European Cup winners (Liverpool) or that success was never going to last (Souness?), and that is because as a club we lacked the planning and foundations, the planning to envisage changes in the market, the game, to plan to change and adapt (just look at SBR's sacking and who came in), or the foundations to sustain success. Under FS NUFC has been run from day to day, often on impulse and you just can't do thinks like that.

 

Arsenal proved you don't need mega money, they were and still are to some extent the perfect template for us, how to run a club, how to back the manager, i.e. funds are all good and well, but what if that manager can't even have his own number 2 (SBR - Wadsworth) or Prozone? How to appoint a manager, i.e. look at everything and pick the best man with the right skills, not based on name or experience or even CV, but what he can do for the club in every sense, and to let him buy and sell who he wants too (Speed, SBR never wanted rid, Shearer, he would have accepted good money for), Arsenal though, selling Henry and Vieira, all down to Wenger. Ironically they finally did that with SA and were finally letting go of control, but as things have turned out, it all came too late for them.

[NE5]

Mort is a W*****

 

Big Sam The Journal: “While Freddie was hands-on and here every single day of the week, it isn’t quite that under this regime – that’s the difference from my point of view.

 

Fat Fred Telegraph: "I wouldn't presume to tell him how to run things but all I will say is that I don't believe it can be done by proxy.We may live in an age of communication but I believe Newcastle are a club who need dedicated day-to-day handling."

 

 

I saw that quote and I agree with it, but I don't suppose too many people will quite have it in them to admit that he is right about anything at all.

 

 

 

Isn't that going to be Morts job (and the team he brings in) though?

 

FS was doing the job of about 5 people in the end, and why not enough opinion was ever given only his and the Halls mattered. Surrounding himself with his own family didn't help the situation. I don't think we need Ashley to be hands on, we just need his money, what we do need though is his people, an d hopefully more arrivals will come in the coming months.

 

Mort himself probably hasn't had the time to be hands on with the manager etc, but maybe this is intentional as that role is seen for a DOF to come in and handle.

 

 

It reads to me as saying that Sam is unhappy with the fact that he had someone to help him run the club and take weight off him, doing the day to day things that Shepherd did whatever they were, and now that isn't the case. Its a bit of a one in the eye for those who said he "interfered" to have a manager insinuate he found him helpful. Which backs up what other managers have said too, Gullit and Dalglish have both said they have no complaints about him at all.

 

The danger here is if the new owners want to run the club in this way, we could also lose Allardyce. Whether you are happy with this depends of course on how good you think he is, and who a replacement would be

 

But what Shepherd is saying is that Newcastle is too big a club not to need a small team of people running it in constant attendance on a day to day basis in their various roles whatever they may be, and he is right.

 

 

[Dokko]

Mort is a W*****

 

Big Sam The Journal: “While Freddie was hands-on and here every single day of the week, it isn’t quite that under this regime – that’s the difference from my point of view.

 

Fat Fred Telegraph: "I wouldn't presume to tell him how to run things but all I will say is that I don't believe it can be done by proxy.We may live in an age of communication but I believe Newcastle are a club who need dedicated day-to-day handling."

 

 

I saw that quote and I agree with it, but I don't suppose too many people will quite have it in them to admit that he is right about anything at all.

 

 

 

Isn't that going to be Morts job (and the team he brings in) though?

 

FS was doing the job of about 5 people in the end, and why not enough opinion was ever given only his and the Halls mattered. Surrounding himself with his own family didn't help the situation. I don't think we need Ashley to be hands on, we just need his money, what we do need though is his people, an d hopefully more arrivals will come in the coming months.

 

Mort himself probably hasn't had the time to be hands on with the manager etc, but maybe this is intentional as that role is seen for a DOF to come in and handle.

 

 

It reads to me as saying that Sam is unhappy with the fact that he had someone to help him run the club and take weight off him, doing the day to day things that Shepherd did whatever they were, and now that isn't the case. Its a bit of a one in the eye for those who said he "interfered" to have a manager insinuate he found him helpful. Which backs up what other managers have said too, Gullit and Dalglish have both said they have no complaints about him at all.

 

The danger here is if the new owners want to run the club in this way, we could also lose Allardyce. Whether you are happy with this depends of course on how good you think he is, and who a replacement would be

 

But what Shepherd is saying is that Newcastle is too big a club not to need a small team of people running it in constant attendance on a day to day basis in their various roles whatever they may be, and he is right.

 

 

 

Too right it takes a big team, but FS tried to run it all by himself. I remember, i think anyway, board members leaving, positions opening up, and those never replaced, but FS taking control of them instead, for long periods of time at least.

 

Its no wonder he made too many mistakes in the end, he was making far too many, and i think that's where people see it as interference. We will never know how much of a hand he had in transfers, but am sure he did, but if we had a DOF that would be his job, and if SA was happy with how he saw FS taking on a form of that role, then in the end SA is saying he could possibly work with a DOF in some capacity and make it work.

 

Am i reading too much into that?

 

[NE5]

Mort is a W*****

 

Big Sam The Journal: “While Freddie was hands-on and here every single day of the week, it isn’t quite that under this regime – that’s the difference from my point of view.

 

Fat Fred Telegraph: "I wouldn't presume to tell him how to run things but all I will say is that I don't believe it can be done by proxy.We may live in an age of communication but I believe Newcastle are a club who need dedicated day-to-day handling."

 

 

I saw that quote and I agree with it, but I don't suppose too many people will quite have it in them to admit that he is right about anything at all.

 

 

 

Isn't that going to be Morts job (and the team he brings in) though?

 

FS was doing the job of about 5 people in the end, and why not enough opinion was ever given only his and the Halls mattered. Surrounding himself with his own family didn't help the situation. I don't think we need Ashley to be hands on, we just need his money, what we do need though is his people, an d hopefully more arrivals will come in the coming months.

 

Mort himself probably hasn't had the time to be hands on with the manager etc, but maybe this is intentional as that role is seen for a DOF to come in and handle.

 

 

It reads to me as saying that Sam is unhappy with the fact that he had someone to help him run the club and take weight off him, doing the day to day things that Shepherd did whatever they were, and now that isn't the case. Its a bit of a one in the eye for those who said he "interfered" to have a manager insinuate he found him helpful. Which backs up what other managers have said too, Gullit and Dalglish have both said they have no complaints about him at all.

 

The danger here is if the new owners want to run the club in this way, we could also lose Allardyce. Whether you are happy with this depends of course on how good you think he is, and who a replacement would be

 

But what Shepherd is saying is that Newcastle is too big a club not to need a small team of people running it in constant attendance on a day to day basis in their various roles whatever they may be, and he is right.

 

 

 

Too right it takes a big team, but FS tried to run it all by himself. I remember, i think anyway, board members leaving, positions opening up, and those never replaced, but FS taking control of them instead, for long periods of time at least.

 

Its no wonder he made too many mistakes in the end, he was making far too many, and i think that's where people see it as interference. We will never know how much of a hand he had in transfers, but am sure he did, but if we had a DOF that would be his job, and if SA was happy with how he saw FS taking on a form of that role, then in the end SA is saying he could possibly work with a DOF in some capacity and make it work.

 

Am i reading too much into that?

 

 

No, I can agree with you that he was probably doing too much, and anyone doing too much makes more mistakes than they would.

 

That is entirely fair comment and significant too TT.

 

Baggio is going to come along now and tell us about his DOF's etc  but essentially if Sam feels he has lost some support and Mort is not an ally to him like Shepherd was, then it needs to rectified quickly with an appointment of someone, and someone else too if the club needs it to run the club on a day to day basis. Most managers need a number 2 these days, or they have them should I say, as well as whatever job Shepherd did.

 

Must admit, I'm not up to date on any backround changes he's made yet, have we missed something, I did read that a lot of his staff at Bolton handed in their notices, is this true ?

 

I'm all for the club changing its scouting, coaching and medical setup , thats one of the main reasons I wanted Allardyce as manager.

 

 

[Mick]

 

It reads to me as saying that Sam is unhappy with the fact that he had someone to help him run the club and take weight off him, doing the day to day things that Shepherd did whatever they were, and now that isn't the case. Its a bit of a one in the eye for those who said he "interfered" to have a manager insinuate he found him helpful. Which backs up what other managers have said too, Gullit and Dalglish have both said they have no complaints about him at all.

 

The danger here is if the new owners want to run the club in this way, we could also lose Allardyce. Whether you are happy with this depends of course on how good you think he is, and who a replacement would be

 

But what Shepherd is saying is that Newcastle is too big a club not to need a small team of people running it in constant attendance on a day to day basis in their various roles whatever they may be, and he is right.

 

 

 

Shepherd and Allardyce didn't have long to work together as Shepherd was in Hospital within days of his appointment, he was seen on TV at the Allardyce press conference in pain so how would Allardyce be able to make up his mind if he liked working with Shepherd or not?

 

Allardyce isn't at Newcastle to run the club so he wouldn't need help with that anyway and from what I'm aware he's been given all the help he's asked for as we've appointed the people that Allardyce has asked for, contracts permitting.

 

I get the impression that Chris Mort is not a 24/7 chairman at the minute because he's still got commitments to Freshfields, he's not taking on anything new but he's finishing what he was involved with.  Normally if you take on a new employee you have to wait until they have worked a period of notice, Mort didn't, he came in from day 1, that doesn't mean on that day he was finished with his previous employer, I also think that has something to do with him becoming vice-Chairman while he reduced his work-load in London.

 

[TRon]

I agree that Shepherd always backed his managers which was good. Unfortunately he didn't possess either the intelligence or judgement to make good appointments which makes the former good quality redundant.

 

Shepherd's appointments of Souness and Roeder spoke volumes of his lack of judgement. Let those who would defend him explain in detail how such important decisions were made or justified.

 

 

[Dave]

Just. Don't. Do. It.

[Mick]

 

Nice of you to admit it.

 

However, our gates were a long way from being half the capactiy of the stadium, or around the 20000 mark depending whether we had won the last game or not. If they were, it would indeed have made Shepherd an outright failure and if that had been the case I would have wanted him out just like anyone else

 

My ambitions are as high as you can get. I haven't supported this club for over 40 years to want to not win anything other than the Fairs Cup. The difference is that I am just realistic. There are 2 essential ingredients to make a successful football team. One is a good manager, the 2nd is financial backing from the board. We have gave backing to all our managers, and in Allardyce we now have a good manager who could deliver success. You are unable to accept that nobody makes good appointments every time, why, I don't know. But it is really a problem that you have got to come to terms with.

 

We don't know if Ashley will back his managers as much as the Halls and Shepherd. If he does, I'll be very happy with him. If he doesn't, even you will come round eventually and accept how important this is and how you underestimated its worth to a club. Whether it shocks you into realising that the Halls and Shepherd despite their faults were actually good owners of the club I doubt, and I certainly don't expect you to admit it.

 

It would be interesting to see just how many people are worried about the lack of backing that has been given to Allardyce so far.

Plenty of people are making excuses for it, but what will you say if it is in fact nothing whatsoever to do with the study into the clubs structure that is going on, and they are simply not going to pay the going rate for the top players, nor take gambles on top players and show ambition ?

 

Time will tell. Your hatred for Shepherd because he made daft comments to the press, have basically blinded your judgement but you aren't the only one. He has made stupid statements, but only made himself look daft I have no idea why you decided it made you look daft. At the end of the day, its only the team that counts. Ashleys silence style is the complete opposite, and while you say you welcome this, I don't think it will be long before he starts getting slated for it if the team isn't winning, and also if he appoints a duff manager after Allardyce, and only a complete fool would not think this is impossible. As i said, everybody makes mistakes and nobody makes a good appointment every time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Financial backing is no good if it brings the wrong people in, we've spent almost nil so far and have brought 4 players in, I'm more than happy that the 4 people we have brought in will do a job for us.  I want to see more coming in but I'd rather see another 4 come in for next to nothing than some of the shit we've paid over the odds for in the past.  I expect the Chairman to back the manager as much as he can and I think he will, it may not be this transfer window but I'm sure they want what's best for the club as they own it so have a lot at stake.

 

You say you'll be happy if Ashley backs the manager, I'll also be happy if he does that because we look as if we've got a manager who can take us forward, time will tell on that one.  If we don't look as if we're showing ambition at the minute then I'll accept it, that's not to say that I would accept it if it became the norm.

 

I don't have a hatred of Shepherd, I just don't want him running the club because he's made a pigs ear of it, what he's said to the press isn't something I've taken personally, I take it as a sign of us having an idiot running the club, only an idiot would repeatedly get caught out in the way he did, you've just said yourself that he was daft.  I don't think it's impossible to appoint the wrong manager, once is a mistake but to do it so often should have people questioning his ability to get it right, something he probably has done with his last one, that'll be two that will have turned out to be right, 4 that have turned out to be wrong, that’s a hell of a failure rate, a failure rate that I wouldn't get away with at work, why should he get away with it?

 

[Mick]

Just. Don't. Do. It.

 

[TRon]

[Dokko]

Mort is a W*****

 

Big Sam The Journal: “While Freddie was hands-on and here every single day of the week, it isn’t quite that under this regime – that’s the difference from my point of view.

 

Fat Fred Telegraph: "I wouldn't presume to tell him how to run things but all I will say is that I don't believe it can be done by proxy.We may live in an age of communication but I believe Newcastle are a club who need dedicated day-to-day handling."

 

 

I saw that quote and I agree with it, but I don't suppose too many people will quite have it in them to admit that he is right about anything at all.

 

 

 

Isn't that going to be Morts job (and the team he brings in) though?

 

FS was doing the job of about 5 people in the end, and why not enough opinion was ever given only his and the Halls mattered. Surrounding himself with his own family didn't help the situation. I don't think we need Ashley to be hands on, we just need his money, what we do need though is his people, an d hopefully more arrivals will come in the coming months.

 

Mort himself probably hasn't had the time to be hands on with the manager etc, but maybe this is intentional as that role is seen for a DOF to come in and handle.

 

 

It reads to me as saying that Sam is unhappy with the fact that he had someone to help him run the club and take weight off him, doing the day to day things that Shepherd did whatever they were, and now that isn't the case. Its a bit of a one in the eye for those who said he "interfered" to have a manager insinuate he found him helpful. Which backs up what other managers have said too, Gullit and Dalglish have both said they have no complaints about him at all.

 

The danger here is if the new owners want to run the club in this way, we could also lose Allardyce. Whether you are happy with this depends of course on how good you think he is, and who a replacement would be

 

But what Shepherd is saying is that Newcastle is too big a club not to need a small team of people running it in constant attendance on a day to day basis in their various roles whatever they may be, and he is right.

 

 

 

Too right it takes a big team, but FS tried to run it all by himself. I remember, i think anyway, board members leaving, positions opening up, and those never replaced, but FS taking control of them instead, for long periods of time at least.

 

Its no wonder he made too many mistakes in the end, he was making far too many, and i think that's where people see it as interference. We will never know how much of a hand he had in transfers, but am sure he did, but if we had a DOF that would be his job, and if SA was happy with how he saw FS taking on a form of that role, then in the end SA is saying he could possibly work with a DOF in some capacity and make it work.

 

Am i reading too much into that?

 

 

No, I can agree with you that he was probably doing too much, and anyone doing too much makes more mistakes than they would.

 

That is entirely fair comment and significant too TT.

 

Baggio is going to come along now and tell us about his DOF's etc  but essentially if Sam feels he has lost some support and Mort is not an ally to him like Shepherd was, then it needs to rectified quickly with an appointment of someone, and someone else too if the club needs it to run the club on a day to day basis. Most managers need a number 2 these days, or they have them should I say, as well as whatever job Shepherd did.

 

Must admit, I'm not up to date on any backround changes he's made yet, have we missed something, I did read that a lot of his staff at Bolton handed in their notices, is this true ?

 

I'm all for the club changing its scouting, coaching and medical setup , thats one of the main reasons I wanted Allardyce as manager.

 

 

 

His own staff are not here ATM are they? Loads of talk about them resigning, but i haven't heard of any coming here since then. Last i heard a 'war room' was being built at the training complex, but that's not going to be much use if its manned by Terry Mac & Lee Clark is it? An assistant would help, but maybe he finds enough of what he needs in Pearson for that. I hope so, i've taken a liking to him, but no real idea why. Bond i just didn't like from the start, again no idea why.

 

SA could possibly feel isolated ATM with the man who brought him in gone, no direct or working link to the board & owner, and press reports saying he might not be the man for the job, also not being backed so far in this very important transfer window might be playing on his mind. But whats clear right now is he has 99% of the players, and 99% of the fans, and that alone will keep him in a job, when either dwindles, then the board can act against, but i'm sure the fans will be more patient than usual (signing players is a different ball game as you can only do it at certain times, form picks up etc), and i think his personality is reaching all kinds of players (even Luque), and as long as that happens and were winning games and progressing, the fans are onside.

 

DOF? Wow, its a strange role isn't it? I'm not sold on the idea, simply as there is no real definition on it. Some people reckon its this, some something totally different, some find the role insulting, some find it useful, some think its key to a successful football club. For me a DOF is the go between from the board to manager. He should be working with the manager, and slightly against the board. Pushing for money and signings, the footballing voice on the board. For me, if thats how it is, we need one. Right now SA is so busy with training and tactics he doesn't have time for a now and then plan of players, academies, facilities and targeting and signing the right players or looking elsewhere and building up shortlists for the future, and the now. Signing players gets more difficult as the years go on, the market is cut throat, a DOF could ease the load on SA, and at least get him communicating with the board. For me FS saw himself as DOF and a Chairman, and it simply doesn't work, and again, another reason why people call him interfering, especially with transfers.

 

So if we theoretically decide on a DOF being a good idea, who has the larger input on who it should be? Board only appointment, a recommendation from SA or a joint decision? That's where it gets tricky.

 

 

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

Shame you don't answer the question about Martins. Not that everyone reading this will not know why 

 

Yeah, I know why. It's because, pulled out of context, it's a dumb question. We shouldn't have got into the position where we had to go even deeper into debt to buy a striker.

 

"Backing the manager" as the sole requirement of a chairman glosses over the fact that he's supposed to be managing club revenues in such a way as to make sustainable progress. No one can say that Peter Ridsdale didn't back David O'Leary. Look at Leeds now.

[Mick]

 

His own staff are not here ATM are they? Loads of talk about them resigning, but i haven't heard of any coming here since then. Last i heard a 'war room' was being built at the training complex, but that's not going to be much use if its manned by Terry Mac & Lee Clark is it? An assistant would help, but maybe he finds enough of what he needs in Pearson for that. I hope so, i've taken a liking to him, but no real idea why. Bond i just didn't like from the start, again no idea why.

 

SA could possibly feel isolated ATM with the man who brought him in gone, no direct or working link to the board & owner, and press reports saying he might not be the man for the job, also not being backed so far in this very important transfer window might be playing on his mind. But whats clear right now is he has 99% of the players, and 99% of the fans, and that alone will keep him in a job, when either dwindles, then the board can act against, but i'm sure the fans will be more patient than usual (signing players is a different ball game as you can only do it at certain times, form picks up etc), and i think his personality is reaching all kinds of players (even Luque), and as long as that happens and were winning games and progressing, the fans are onside.

 

DOF? Wow, its a strange role isn't it? I'm not sold on the idea, simply as there is no real definition on it. Some people reckon its this, some something totally different, some find the role insulting, some find it useful, some think its key to a successful football club. For me a DOF is the go between from the board to manager. He should be working with the manager, and slightly against the board. Pushing for money and signings, the footballing voice on the board. For me, if thats how it is, we need one. Right now SA is so busy with training and tactics he doesn't have time for a now and then plan of players, academies, facilities and targeting and signing the right players or looking elsewhere and building up shortlists for the future, and the now. Signing players gets more difficult as the years go on, the market is cut throat, a DOF could ease the load on SA, and at least get him communicating with the board. For me FS saw himself as DOF and a Chairman, and it simply doesn't work, and again, another reason why people call him interfering, especially with transfers.

 

So if we theoretically decide on a DOF being a good idea, who has the larger input on who it should be? Board only appointment, a recommendation from SA or a joint decision? That's where it gets tricky.

 

 

 

 

 

The last thing I heard about the resignations at Bolton was the Bolton Chairman saying they had 1 year contracts so would have to honour them, I don't know if they called his bluff.

 

As for how Mort and Allardyce get on, they seemed comfortable with each other when we played Celtic.  Did Allardyce not say that they were in daily contact but not always face to face?