Souness Vs Shepherd

[LeazesMag 0]

Figures on nufc.com Craig.

 

We are about 50m down on transfers in the last 5 years, Shepherd hasn't backed his managers - it's a myth ! He is a gobshite [no, not Bellamy, Shepherd, but he backs his managers]

 

He has appointed them...yes, but Bobby Robson did alright ? Who was against Dalglish and Gullit at the time ? So why is their failure Shepherds fault.

 

The day Souness is binned is the day we start our recovery.

[Craig 6700]

I stand corrected on the Gullit situation as he did indeed resign. Dalglish was most definitely sacked though, despite the club denying it at the time!

 

And IMO, Gullit was more than likely asked to resign...

18830[/snapback]

 

 

Dalglish was sacked, quite correct even if that wasn't the official line. Some kind of deal so Dalglish's CV wasn't stained. That's why he got compensation.

 

Gullit walked but would have been sacked anyway. At least to his credit, he held his hands up and turned down any money owed to him.

 

For all his bad press in these parts, even Shearer says he was a canny bloke. Just shit at man management and two-faced at times but he was pleasent and well liked apparently.

18843[/snapback]

 

Agreed - Dalglish chased the legal angle far too much for him not to have been dismissed.

[Howaythetoon 0]

Agreed - Dalglish chased the legal angle far too much for him not to have been dismissed.

18849[/snapback]

 

It even turned sour a few times and got dragged out in the press if I remember right. He got 1.2m in compo I think. Not bad for someone who got sacked and did a crap job.

[gallowgatemag 0]

I stand corrected on the Gullit situation as he did indeed resign. Dalglish was most definitely sacked though, despite the club denying it at the time!

 

And IMO, Gullit was more than likely asked to resign...

18830[/snapback]

 

 

 

Gullit walked but would have been sacked anyway. At least to his credit, he held his hands up and turned down any money owed to him.

 

 

18843[/snapback]

 

 

Unlike Bobby

[Craig 6700]

Agreed - Dalglish chased the legal angle far too much for him not to have been dismissed.

18849[/snapback]

 

It even turned sour a few times and got dragged out in the press if I remember right. He got 1.2m in compo I think. Not bad for someone who got sacked and did a crap job.

18852[/snapback]

 

The word 'compensation' scares me about the potential sacking of Souness...

 

There's conflicting rumours as to what the length of his contract is, but if there is a potential 5 year deal in there (performance permitting or not) then there's also the potential for 4 years worth of compo if he went tomorrow...

 

Money better used invested in the team IMO!

[Bottled Dog 0]

Agreed - Dalglish chased the legal angle far too much for him not to have been dismissed.

18849[/snapback]

 

It even turned sour a few times and got dragged out in the press if I remember right. He got 1.2m in compo I think. Not bad for someone who got sacked and did a crap job.

18852[/snapback]

 

The word 'compensation' scares me about the potential sacking of Souness...

 

There's conflicting rumours as to what the length of his contract is, but if there is a potential 5 year deal in there (performance permitting or not) then there's also the potential for 4 years worth of compo if he went tomorrow...

 

Money better used invested in the team IMO!

18863[/snapback]

 

Whats conflicting?

As far as all reports I have seen when he signed he was given a 2 year contract with a third year on the proviso that both parties agreed to continue (much like the Kluivert deal).

 

Have you seen any articles stating something else?

[Howaythetoon 0]

The day Souness is binned is the day we start our recovery.

18848[/snapback]

 

What if he appoints another Souness? And how long will any success last until the mismanagement kicks in again, if for example we got a half decent manager?

 

I understand what you're saying and it's good you highlighting his good points because it adds a bit of balance to the debate and objectivity but when I look at Liverpool, man Utd, Arsenal et all, every single season their aim is to win the League.

 

That should be our aim. But it's not nor ever has been Freddy Shepherd's and this is one of the reason's why it will never happen under his reign.

 

For one, no manager will ever get complete control. Look at all the challenging club's, the manager has complete control on everything. The business people look after the business side of things and the manager looks after the footballing side.

 

FS doesn't like working like that. You just have to read bits of Sir Bobby's book or read a few books about KK. Once the club went PLC Shepherd and Co. got really hands on, and their grip is tight. You can have a bit of room, but take up too much and you get the boot.

 

Sir Bobby wanted Mouringho in, but FS wouldn't sanction it. He also wanted to sell Shearer to Liverpool but FS wouldn't sanction it. Right or wrong, you have to give the manager complete control on such managers otherwise as a partnership, it will breakdown, it will never work.

 

Shepherd would never appoint a foreign manager because a foreign manager wants complete control, the better ones anyway.

 

His decision making has been shown up to be very very poor over the last few years. No intelligent football Chairman at a club like Newcastle would appoint Souness, arguably one of the worst manager's in the League. It would be like handing over your Jaguar to a back alleyway mechanic, you just know it's gonna come back fucked.

 

His timing of his decisions are awful, showing no foresight or planning whatsoever.

 

His comments to the press do not inspire or lead either. He has no leadershio qualities. None of the fans respect or admire him. I doubt the players care a great deal so long as they get paid and the football community see him as a big oaf who can't keep his trap shut.

 

Basically he is a very very poor Chairman on all levels. If he was manager of the team, we'd be wanting him out.

 

The day he and the rest of the board go is the day we can move forward as a club and start to fulfil our promise.

 

In the meantime we will continue with these cycles we spin in. Good form, poor form, crisis to crisis.

[paddy 17]

The day Souness is binned is the day we start our recovery.

18848[/snapback]

 

What if he appoints another Souness? And how long will any success last until the mismanagement kicks in again, if for example we got a half decent manager?

 

I understand what you're saying and it's good you highlighting his good points because it adds a bit of balance to the debate and objectivity but when I look at Liverpool, man Utd, Arsenal et all, every single season their aim is to win the League.

 

That should be our aim. But it's not nor ever has been Freddy Shepherd's and this is one of the reason's why it will never happen under his reign.

 

For one, no manager will ever get complete control. Look at all the challenging club's, the manager has complete control on everything. The business people look after the business side of things and the manager looks after the footballing side.

 

FS doesn't like working like that. You just have to read bits of Sir Bobby's book or read a few books about KK. Once the club went PLC Shepherd and Co. got really hands on, and their grip is tight. You can have a bit of room, but take up too much and you get the boot.

 

Sir Bobby wanted Mouringho in, but FS wouldn't sanction it. He also wanted to sell Shearer to Liverpool but FS wouldn't sanction it. Right or wrong, you have to give the manager complete control on such managers otherwise as a partnership, it will breakdown, it will never work.

 

Shepherd would never appoint a foreign manager because a foreign manager wants complete control, the better ones anyway.

 

His decision making has been shown up to be very very poor over the last few years. No intelligent football Chairman at a club like Newcastle would appoint Souness, arguably one of the worst manager's in the League. It would be like handing over your Jaguar to a back alleyway mechanic, you just know it's gonna come back fucked.

 

His timing of his decisions are awful, showing no foresight or planning whatsoever.

 

His comments to the press do not inspire or lead either. He has no leadershio qualities. None of the fans respect or admire him. I doubt the players care a great deal so long as they get paid and the football community see him as a big oaf who can't keep his trap shut.

 

Basically he is a very very poor Chairman on all levels. If he was manager of the team, we'd be wanting him out.

 

The day he and the rest of the board go is the day we can move forward as a club and start to fulfil our promise.

 

In the meantime we will continue with these cycles we spin in. Good form, poor form, crisis to crisis.

18879[/snapback]

 

 

what Greames son??

[Papa Lazaru 0]

Sir Bobby wanted Mouringho in, but FS wouldn't sanction it. He also wanted to sell Shearer to Liverpool but FS wouldn't sanction it. Right or wrong, you have to give the manager complete control on such managers otherwise as a partnership, it will breakdown, it will never work

 

Mourinho has stated hismelf that he was asked to join us as Bobby's number two but that he himself turned it down because he knew Bobby would never quit nd hand over thr reigns to him when the time came, because he loves football management too much.

 

And Jose was right, but it had nothign to do with Shepherd.

[Craig 6700]

I've heard that he may have clauses offering him upto a 5 year contract....

[Howaythetoon 0]

Sir Bobby wanted Mouringho in, but FS wouldn't sanction it. He also wanted to sell Shearer to Liverpool but FS wouldn't sanction it. Right or wrong, you have to give the manager complete control on such managers otherwise as a partnership, it will breakdown, it will never work

 

Mourinho has stated hismelf that he was asked to join us as Bobby's number two but that he himself turned it down because he knew Bobby would never quit nd hand over thr reigns to him when the time came, because he loves football management too much.

 

And Jose was right, but it had nothign to do with Shepherd.

18883[/snapback]

 

 

Aye but it sounds better if Shepherd said no, the bastard

 

Nah, I stand corrected. Let you off FS. He's still 8-1 down though.

 

[Papa Lazaru 0]

Sir Bobby wanted Mouringho in, but FS wouldn't sanction it. He also wanted to sell Shearer to Liverpool but FS wouldn't sanction it. Right or wrong, you have to give the manager complete control on such managers otherwise as a partnership, it will breakdown, it will never work

 

Mourinho has stated hismelf that he was asked to join us as Bobby's number two but that he himself turned it down because he knew Bobby would never quit nd hand over thr reigns to him when the time came, because he loves football management too much.

 

And Jose was right, but it had nothign to do with Shepherd.

18883[/snapback]

 

 

Aye but it sounds better if Shepherd said no, the bastard

 

Nah, I stand corrected. Let you off FS. He's still 8-1 down though.

 

18886[/snapback]

 

We might as well stick to blaming for what he does actually do wrong!

[Wor Al 0]

I stand corrected on the Gullit situation as he did indeed resign. Dalglish was most definitely sacked though, despite the club denying it at the time!

 

And IMO, Gullit was more than likely asked to resign...

18830[/snapback]

 

 

 

Gullit walked but would have been sacked anyway. At least to his credit, he held his hands up and turned down any money owed to him.

 

 

18843[/snapback]

 

 

Unlike Bobby

18855[/snapback]

 

And why SBR should have not taken his money?!!

[gallowgatemag 0]

I stand corrected on the Gullit situation as he did indeed resign. Dalglish was most definitely sacked though, despite the club denying it at the time!

 

And IMO, Gullit was more than likely asked to resign...

18830[/snapback]

 

 

 

Gullit walked but would have been sacked anyway. At least to his credit, he held his hands up and turned down any money owed to him.

 

 

18843[/snapback]

 

 

Unlike Bobby

18855[/snapback]

 

And why SBR should have not taken his money?!!

18918[/snapback]

 

 

Cause he "bleeds black and white" but he bled us dry.

That money could have gone towards a player.

[Wor Al 0]

I stand corrected on the Gullit situation as he did indeed resign. Dalglish was most definitely sacked though, despite the club denying it at the time!

 

And IMO, Gullit was more than likely asked to resign...

18830[/snapback]

 

 

 

Gullit walked but would have been sacked anyway. At least to his credit, he held his hands up and turned down any money owed to him.

 

 

18843[/snapback]

 

 

Unlike Bobby

18855[/snapback]

 

And why SBR should have not taken his money?!!

18918[/snapback]

 

 

Cause he "bleeds black and white" but he bled us dry.

That money could have gone towards a player.

18925[/snapback]

 

he is entitled to it as much as anybody else.

[Howaythetoon 0]

SBR deserves his money, he's earned the club millions, made those in charge fortunes and because of him the players also got richer too.

 

As did we as fans.

 

The night in Feyenoord alone was priceless enough.

 

SBR = legend!

[LeazesMag 0]

Oh Dear.

 

Can't just admit you were wrong about Souness eh HTT ..... ???

 

Nice try diluting the blame. As Shepherd has been chairman of Newcastle under Bobby Robson [and backed all his managers with plenty of money] it can't be Shepherd can it, especially when Souness has failed and been turfed out of other clubs with good directors ie Liverpool the biggest like us.

 

Souness, easily, no contest. A shit job everywhere he's been, apart from Rangers, it's winning this 2 bob league which has carried him through the managerial game with the mistaken belief he's any good to anybody.

18799[/snapback]

 

 

What is there to admit to being wrong about Souness Leazes? From day one I have always said and maintained that he is a crap manager, that I do not rate him, that I think it will all end in tears. Just like you.

 

Unlike you however, I have said I'll back him. There is a difference between backing someone and rating them or wanting them in the job. This is where I get unfair stick because I have never ever claimed Souness is the right man for the job or that I wouldn't swap him for a better manager.

 

At least I don't change my opinions from one week to the next which should count for something.

 

I know there will come a time where I will join in with the Souness out fans, because there will be a time where he has to go. You think it should be now, aye in an ideal world I'd agree. But for the time being I'm backing him.

 

Bo, make that I'm supporting him but please don't take that as me rating him or wanting him at the club. I'll back Shola when he's out on the pitch but if we sold him tomorrow for a better player I'd be smiling.

 

And this isn't a Souness against Shepherd thing. Both are bad for the club, I know that. In an ideal world, get shot of the pair of them. They are as bad as each other in many respects but if I had a choice between one or the other, I'd pick Souness to stay and Shepherd to go.

 

Because results will determine whether Souness stays or go, regardless of who is Chairman.

 

Who fires Shepherd though?

 

Are you Leazes Mag, happy with FS and all this mismanagement?

18813[/snapback]

 

I don't change my opinions, and when I am wrong I will admit it.

 

I always said that Bellamy was a great player, in spite of all the others who produced championship manager type statistics to show whatever they thought they showed, especially the ludicrous ones that

Never took into account the fact he played carrying an injury for months, a fact still forgotten by people who point out that he was [quite rightly] upset when he thought the club might buy Rooney. Of course he Did, any half decent professional would be. So did Alan Shearer and Rob Lee in Gullits era. Whats the difference.

 

I have always said Amebi was a bag of shit, when lots of others who have all disappeared said he would replace Shearer, and that was only a year ago.

 

I have always said that Dyer was never a central midfield player, but a good right sided one that could play in the Bellamy role when Bellamy was injured all that time, in spite of the fact again, this was met with these mind numbing statistics in response by some. Consistently with Bellamy, I also said although Dyer was a horrible little stain on the club it was what he does on the field that matters most, having said that, now in his case the incident last season regarding the armband was one stunt too many for me.

 

You said, confidently, that we would win the league 2 years ago, after finishing 4th. You obviously thought Shepherd was OK then ..... why the change of mind ???

 

You said the fat dutchman would be a roaring success, when I told you he would be a waste of space and a total liability..

 

You and others are backing Souness as manager of Newcastle [providing he has an unlimited purse - what sort of joke is that ?] . Now he has messed up big style by getting rid of players he should not have done, for less than they are worth, you slag off the chairman for not giving him multi millions to cover his own mistakes. [EDIT: read the post by the lad from Blackburn, this is precisely what he says]

 

Check the transfer figures on nufc.com. And don't bother with the last 2 seasons, we went into the last 2 seasons with a big transfer deficit, look at the longer term or don't bother posting short sighted views.

 

The only reason you and others think Shepherd hasn't backed his managers is because you have never experienced a chairman who hasn't backed his managers. You have said somewhere on one of your editorials that fans of most other clubs say "Well Shepherd might be a tw*t but at least he backs his managers with cash". Take note. The grass is always greener on the other side.

 

Souness is responsible for the clubs demise over the last 11 months, no one else. All the playing decisions, and the transfers out and in, have been what he wants.

 

Is Shepherd responsible for 75% of the team not wanting to play for this hopeless manager ?? Is he ??? I don't think so, and you can say Shepherd appointed him as much as you like but those like you who support Souness will be as guilty as Shepherd if we get relegated, the same as the disastrous transfer dealings in the last year, because you are by your very stance on all of this taking the same view as Shepherd ie stick with him. So don’t complain later.

 

As for the poll, what is the point of a poll ? They’re daft man, in my opinion. Do you really think that 30 or 40 of us reflect mass opinion ?

 

If you think Souness is shite why do you then say support him, if he's shite he goes, end of.

 

This club is going the way of Leeds. And it isn't down to Shepherd "not splashing the cash" it is because of the idiotic manager who is forcing his chairman to sell 2 influential players for 4m quid then demanding 20m plus to replace them.

 

The managers gets shot of 3 forwards for 4.5m quid, spends 12m quid on 3 midfield players, and then demands 20m quid to replace the 3 forwards he wanted rid of ?

 

I can’t believe that people are actually and incredibly agreeing with this.

Edited August 26, 2005 by LeazesMag

[Guest alex]

You can only have one to go, who would you choose if you could, out of Shepherd or Souness, to go?

 

If you could fell that axe, who's head would it land on?

 

Souness Vs Shepherd

 

Souness or Shepherd?

 

Just trying to get people's opinions on who they think is the most damaging individual at the club.

18679[/snapback]

I reckon the sooner N-O is back up the better.

[LeazesMag 0]

aye, thats my point made - again. Can't be arsed with it anymore. The sooner Souness goes I might be optimistic about the future again.

[Something Special 0]

I don't think getting rid of either will make much difference. But i'd go for Shepard over Souness as losing a manager again will knock us back even further, and who exactly is gonna come in? It will probably be either Shearer or O'Leiry and they will not be able to change things anymore than Souness. Yes, we have gone backwards since Souness came in, but I feel that had Bobby stayed we would of finished no higher than we did. The squad he built was unbalanced and on the demise for some time.

 

Im am glad to see the backs of players like Robert, O'Brien, and Bellamy who were taking the club nowhere. Bellamy is a great player but his attitude cancels out his talent. I think Souness has done well with the players he has kept i.e Dyer and Bramble who looked shite and on their way under Bobby, and the players he has signed have been a class above those that went. We have been shite in the last to games but this is due to our squad being thread bare with a injuries, we were better than Arsenal in the first game and with Luque and another striker we should be up there with the best when everyone is fit. Although there is no denying that we need more depth in the squad to really compete, hopefully if Jenas fucks off then the money in can be put towards this.