Happy Face

#my old man Mike ashley, took our name rights for free I said fuck off, bollocks, you're a cunt.

I think much of what he says in these quotes is lies. Just acting Billy Big Bollocks when full of lager top.

I turned on the television in my Damascus hotel room to witness a dreary sight: all the boys and girls of BBC World wearing their little poppies again. Bright red they were, with that particularly silly green leaf out of the top – it was never part of the original Lady Haig appeal – and not one dared to appear on screen without it. Do these pathetic men and women know how they mock the dead? I trust that Jon Snow has maintained his dignity by not wearing it. Now I've mentioned my Dad too many times in The Independent. He died almost 20 years ago so, after today, I think it's time he was allowed to rest in peace, and that readers should in future be spared his sometimes bald wisdom. This is the last time he will make an appearance. But he had strong views about wearing the poppy. He was a soldier of the Great War, Battle of Arras 1918 – often called the Third Battle of the Somme – and the liberation of Cambrai, along with many troops from Canada. The Kaiser Wilhelm's army had charitably set the whole place on fire and he was appalled by the scorched earth policy of the retreating Germans. But of course, year after year, he would go along to the local cenotaph in Birkenhead, and later in Maidstone, where I was born 28 years after the end of his Great War, and he always wore his huge black coat, his regimental tie – 12th Battalion, the King's Liverpool Regiment –and his poppy. In those days, it was – I recall this accurately, I think – a darker red, blood-red rather than BBC-red, larger than the sorrow-lite version I see on the BBC and without that ridiculous leaf. So my Dad would stand and I would be next to him in my Yardley Court School blazer at 10 years old and later, aged 16, in my Sutton Valence School blazer, with my very own Lady Haig poppy, its long black wire snaking through the material, sprouting from my lapel. My Dad gave me lots of books about the Great War, so I knew about the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand at Sarajevo before I went to school – and 47 years before I stood, amid real shellfire, in the real Sarajevo and put my feet on the very pavement footprints where Gavrilo Princip fired the fatal shots. But as the years passed, old Bill Fisk became very ruminative about the Great War. He learned that Haig had lied, that he himself had fought for a world that betrayed him, that 20,000 British dead on the first day of the Somme – which he mercifully avoided because his first regiment, the Cheshires, sent him to Dublin and Cork to deal with another 1916 "problem" – was a trashing of human life. In hospital and recovering from cancer, I asked him once why the Great War was fought. "All I can tell you, fellah," he said, "was that it was a great waste." And he swept his hand from left to right. Then he stopped wearing his poppy. I asked him why, and he said that he didn't want to see "so many damn fools" wearing it – he was a provocative man and, sadly, I fell out with him in his old age. What he meant was that all kinds of people who had no idea of the suffering of the Great War – or the Second, for that matter – were now ostentatiously wearing a poppy for social or work-related reasons, to look patriotic and British when it suited them, to keep in with their friends and betters and employers. These people, he said to me once, had no idea what the trenches of France were like, what it felt like to have your friends die beside you and then to confront their brothers and wives and lovers and parents. At home, I still have a box of photographs of his mates, all of them killed in 1918. So like my Dad, I stopped wearing the poppy on the week before Remembrance Day, 11 November, when on the 11th hour of the 11 month of 1918, the armistice ended the war called Great. I didn't feel I deserved to wear it and I didn't think it represented my thoughts. The original idea came, of course, from the Toronto military surgeon and poet John McCrae and was inspired by the death of his friend Lieutenant Alexis Helmer, killed on 3 May 1915. "In Flanders fields the poppies blow/Between the crosses, row on row." But it's a propaganda poem, urging readers to "take up the quarrel with the foe". Bill Fisk eventually understood this and turned against it. He was right. I've had my share of wars, and often return to the ancient Western Front. Three years ago, I was honoured to be invited to give the annual Armistice Day Western Front memorial speech at the rebuilt Cloth Hall in Ypres. The ghost of my long-dead 2nd Lieutenant Dad was, of course, in the audience. I quoted all my favourite Great War writers, along with the last words of Nurse Edith Cavell, and received, shortly afterwards, a wonderful and eloquent letter from the daughter of that fine Great War soldier Edmund Blunden. (Read his Undertones of War, if you do nothing else in life.) But I didn't wear a poppy. And I declined to lay a wreath at the Menin Gate. This was something of which I was not worthy. Instead, while they played the last post, I looked at the gravestones on the city walls. As a young boy, I also went to Ypres with my Dad, stayed at the "Old Tom Hotel" (it is still there, on the same side of the square as the Cloth Hall) and met many other "old soldiers", all now dead. I remember that they wanted to remember their dead comrades. But above all, they wanted an end to war. But now I see these pathetic creatures with their little sand-pit poppies – I notice that our masters in the House of Commons do the same – and I despise them. Heaven be thanked that the soldiers of the Great War cannot return today to discover how their sacrifice has been turned into a fashion appendage.

Newcastle managing director Derek Llambias stunned Toon Army fans by unleashing an astonising, foul-mouthed rant in public on Geordie icons Alan Shearer and Kevin Keegan. The former casino boss — who virtually never gives media interviews — delivered a withering condemnation on the managerial abilities of the Magpies legends in front of startled onlookers in a Newcastle gastro bar. Llambias, who along with Toon owner Mike Ashley has enraged Toon fans by re-branding historic St. James’ Park as the Sports Direct Arena, blamed Shearer for Newcastle’s 2009 relegation and claimed there “will never be a right time” for the former England skipper in management. And in a blistering broadside aimed at Keegan, the Magpies MD claimed the former England boss is unable to cope with the stresses and strains of management. Llambias railed: “Kevin Keegan can’t take pressure. His f****** head is all over the place.” He also made a shocking claim in a meeting with fans last month that Keegan’s second coming as Newcastle manager in 2008 came about because he was the preferred choice of potential Arab buyers. He revealed: “Mike (Ashley) was selling to the Arabs and they wanted Kevin Keegan. “The Arabs wanted him, the fans wanted him — perfect!” A candid Llambias admitted he was at fault for recruiting Shearer as manager in April 2009 when Newcastle were battling to avoid the drop. Llambias said: “Shearer was my choice and I have to hold up my hands — the wrong choice.” Referring to the relegation battle and the managerial team of Shearer and Iain Dowie, he claimed: “Shearer, for this, destroys us. He gave all the responsibility to Dowie. Rubbish!” A supporter suggests “It wasn’t the right time” for Shearer. Llambias responded brusquely, and said: “It would never be the right time. Shearer? There would never be a right time in football.” When one of the onlookers suggested Shearer is arrogant, Llambias agreed and said: “You guys have given him that arrogance.” What will perplex Newcastle fans about Llambias’ put-down of the Geordie hero is the fact that days after ­ relegation, Ashley issued a statement in which he said: “Bringing Alan Shearer back to Newcastle United was the best decision I have made.” Chris Hughton succeeded Shearer as manager and led Toon back into the top flight at the first attempt as ­ champions (below, left). Hughton was sacked by Newcastle a year ago, and is now manager of Birmingham. He was also in the Llambias line of fire when one of the group asked why he was dismissed. Llambias responded: “He would never have taken us where we want to be. “That’s my decision by the way. “Chris can’t make decisions. If I am asking about a player, Ben Arfa? he says ‘I’m not sure, blah blah’. “With Chris, he couldn’t cope with where we are mentally. We are aggressive. “You need to be aggressive. I don’t want a manager below me who can’t argue.” But of all the colourful claims made by Llambias perhaps the one that will not be disputed by Toon fans is: “You guys don’t understand how f****** horrible we can be.” After last week’s act of soccer sacrilege at St. James’ Park, many Geordies believe they understand only too well. Newcastle declined to comment last night.

Derek Llambias, the man who brokered the deal that made Andy Carroll the most expensive Englishman in football history, has sensationally claimed: “He’s worth f*** all!” The Toon MD’s disparaging verdict on England striker Carroll (below) came when he was giving a group of Newcastle fans an insight into the £35million deal that took the England striker to Liverpool in January. Llambias insists that Newcastle got the better of the deal. The Anfield club’s first bid was £30m and Llambias told the fans: “I have to admit that £30m for Andy Carroll is a lot of money.” When one supporter asked him “Is he worth £30m?” Llambias responded: “No — he’s worth f*** all.” He then explains that after rejecting the £30m offer, Newcastle refused to sell even for £35m unless Liverpool paid the entire fee up front. A move that forced Liverpool to ask Chelsea to increase their first instalment of the £50m they had already agreed to pay for Fernando Torres! Llambias explained: “It is about control. “We had the control. We knew the Torres deal was there. “We drew that f****** deal, perhaps the ultimate. “So £30m? F*** off! Don’t waste my time and I slammed the phone down. “£35m? Everybody including Pardew [manager Alan Pardew] all agreed. “But the £35m they wanted to pay over four years. It was rubbish. Mike (Ashley) said — and he is a brave boy Mike I promise you — get all the £35m up front. “We got it all up front and then they never paid us on time and we charged them 12 grand f****** interest”

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Liverpool-striker-Andy-Carroll-worth-f-all-claims-Newcastle-MD-Derek-Llambias-article829815.html http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Newcastle-chief-Derek-Llambias-slams-Kevin-Keegan-and-Alan-Shearer-in-foul-rant-article829807.html oh dear

Haha Stick your tappy tappy up your arse.

Petition should be to get sbr foundation to 'showcase'. Expose the lies when they refuse.

Don't like the truth eh? It's nothing anyone (including me) hasn't said already.....which is why sponsors won't pay much to slap their name over an existing name with over a century of history behind it. history has been thrown away for nowt here, when it's a valuable commodity that could be exploited worldwide, like Old Trafford - the theatre of dreams.

someone change TP's name to Twatty Bollocks. it's ok though tp, we'll all know its still you.

Not read the thread in its entirety but I think most would take the trade off. EVERYONE knows that's not the intention behind the change though. You're insisting on a discussion about the fundamentals of football as a business versus heritage just to maintain your CT contrary game when everyone else is talking about the situation at Newcastle which isn't about competing in world football at all, but about competing in global fitness brand marketing. MPs will jump on any bandwagon without understanding the nature of opposition so I wouldn't listen to them. Seem to recall someone mentioned Ryder and Wraith being on telly saying they understand why moves like this in football are afoot, fans and pundits aren't thick, but in this case those reasons aren't Ashley's reasons.

I don't think it's as absolute as being bothered or not. Think that's a tad simplistic. If I lived in a flat with my partner and first born, I could be totally gutted about leaving the place I've been happiest in when she gets pregnant with a second kid while also seeing the logistical necessity for a move to somewhere bigger. I don't think the pyramid example bears any relation to football, because its ONLY use is as a heritage site. The example could have easily been SJP or Grainger town, it was just to emphasise the point that if you value heritage, there is no trade off. Your flat whilst having important sentimental value has no cultural value and hence no heritage. I think you get what am saying, it shouldnt detract from the wrongness of our situation I just think it's bullshit to say football's heritage wasn't affected by multiple stadium moves because of the payoff. It's a perverse argument. I was trying to show your pyramid argument was extreme and doesn't apply here. I agree my flat has no heritage value, but the pyramids have only heritage value. They're the 2 ends of the spectrum. St James and other football stadia are somewhere between the two. Wrong to say there can be no trade off where they're concerned in terms of cultural significance versus competitive progress.

I don't think it's as absolute as being bothered or not. Think that's a tad simplistic. If I lived in a flat with my partner and first born, I could be totally gutted about leaving the place I've been happiest in when she gets pregnant with a second kid while also seeing the logistical necessity for a move to somewhere bigger. I don't think the pyramid example bears any relation to football, because its ONLY use is as a heritage site.

Every time I hear of supporting a competitor to hurt fatty, it turns out he owns most of their shares. Is it nailed on he doesn't have a stake in it? If not, then I'm all for... We love you Kitbag, we do We love you Kitbag, we do We love you Kitbag, we do oh Kitbag, we love you

As I say, I'm OOT at the moment, but I get the impression just from what I've seen of this thread that the local reaction to the name change is far in excess of the proposal under the Halls to up sticks entirely to build a bigger stadium. People were calling the hippies worse than muck for putting a stop to that at the time as I recall. So it's not the fact that the name is changing that's annoying people imo, it's the reasons given, the actual reasons and the way Ashley goes about it that cause people to react more passionately and cling onto what remaining pieces of the past they have. Under the old plan to move the whole stadium, the reasons were genuine, would have benefited the entire region as well as the club, and would have left something on the old site that honoured the history of the place. Even the opponents of the move could see the benefits and things were done right. So I don't think in a general sense, outside the current situation, Newcastle fans are opposed to change whatever the cost in terms of being able to compete. In this instance though, people can see there is no benefit whatsoever for the club here, only for Mike Ashley and Sports Direct.

St. I've seen sources (official and unofficial) omit the full stop. But of course there's this... Even the council aren't sure... http://g.co/maps/agk6n

It all kicked off as I started a long weekend, so I've been frustratingly quiet via my phone, but finally in a hotel with good wifi (and a complimentary Mac in every room ) so, sorry if I repeat any thoughts but I've got loads, so here are my top 10.... 1. NUFC and Spots Direct aren't Ashley's children. Sports Direct is an only child. He's moved into St James Park like an ambitious parent moves close to the best catholic school and pretends to be religious, to increase opportunity for his child. 2. ‘‘Newcastle was a brand to him and he wanted to use it to market his business abroad” said Hall. http://www.thenorthe...s_big_concerns/ 3. For the above reasons, any suggestion that this will bring in funds is complete hogwash. 4. For the above reasons any comparison to Chelsea/Arsenal or any other club with a sponsors name on a stand is hogwash. 5. For the above reasons any comparison to a stadium move or the rebuilding of a stand is complete hogwash. 6. Even if a name change WAS used to bring in funds, it would not be reinvested in the team. We have a strict policy of not wasting spending money on things like proven goalscorers. 7. I don't think he'll have us playing in blue and red strips...I think he'll change a lot of the seats in the stadium to blue and red to spell out "Sports Direct" at some point though. 8. I'd be interested to know how many NUFC shirts are sold locally and how many are sold worldwide. I still can't decide if it's financially astute to put the Sports Direct name on the shirt. My initial thought was it would be a financial decision, so it wouldn't happen, as local sales would crash, but given point 1, I think that move would be excellent for his international interests with Sports Direct...so it will happen, whatever the cost to NUFC. 9. Following the logic of point 1, any sort of outcry/protest/reaction suits Mike Ashley down to the ground as it increases exposure of Sports Direct. This was true of the Keegan sacking, the first name change, pretending to sell, appointing Kinnear/Shearer, relegation, sacking Hughton etc. What Ashley is doing is a tightrope act of Keeping Newcastle in the upper echelons. and in the news by making many shrewd football decisions and offsetting those with controversial decisions to promote himself...and by extension his company. 10. Ashley is a cunt

Repeating myself, but I think the fan reaction is what he's after. Without it the name sports direct wouldn't be getting carried on the newswaves around the world free of charge. it's not an inconsequential byproduct for him, but the aim, which is why he's renamed it twice now.

From @Sammy_Ameobi: Guess my very 1st game at St James' Park...was also my last! :-(

Well exactly. They've clearly been planning this for a while, hence all the SD banners. All very sad. Is it even worth £8-£10m though, that's for both the shirt and stadium sponsorship. Realistically it's worth £4m on its own. which we'll never see, even if it was worth it. ---@iainmacintosh I don't buy this, 'we're changing the name to showcase how naming rights work' bobbins. We know how naming rights work. We're not cats.

there's no assumption this is free advertising. It is free advertising.

If we're doing rhetoricals would you change your name to sports direct if it meant winning the champions league. What was rhetorical? Stevie said that, I think that's hysterical. Getting any money from naming the stadium the sports direct arena.

If we're doing rhetoricals would you change your name to sports direct if it meant winning the champions league.

Snickers? It'll always be marathon.

You've all went (apart from PP, LM and me) "I can see where he's taking us here". Aye so can I, to a place he can make as much money as possible, while actually using us. As a business he's making us as an attractive a proposition for a buyer as possible, fine, but don't fuckin decimate and desecrate our heritage doing it. The word you used "defacing" the two stands, is perfect, that's exactly what it is. It's like someone getting a tattoo of a cock on their cheek, that's how bad it looks. Stevie man seriously have a word! Majority of people have commented that Pardew is due praise that wasn't forthcoming this time last year but you can count on one hand (with fingers to spare) the number of people posting on here who have a good word to say about Ashley - and even less about Llambias. Leazes is the only one to have suggested ashley will get us into the champions league