Kevin Carr's Gloves 3859 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 (edited) If no please add what you think was the worst decision. Edited February 21, 2007 by Kevin Carr's Gloves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 21847 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 it was the worst decision since abraham lincoln said, "i'm tired of just beating around the house, lets go out and take in a show." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stevieintoon Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 it was the worst decision since abraham lincoln said, "i'm tired of just beating around the house, lets go out and take in a show." The worst decision made by a chairman was Sam Hamman, not from his point of view, selling Wimbledon knowing the Norwegian cunts wanted to move the club out of London. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Steve_Howey 0 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Firing Robson one would not have led to the other (presumably a point done to death, but the truth is the truth as Parky wouldn't say ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6682 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Didn't we run through this one 2½ years ago?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 If no please add what you think was the worst decision. you aren't aware that a previous Newcastle chairman decided to sell Gazza, Beardsley and Waddle are you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papa Lazaru 0 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 If no please add what you think was the worst decision. you aren't aware that a previous Newcastle chairman decided to sell Gazza, Beardsley and Waddle are you Sadly i'm aware of that, but employing Souness is a worse decision than those 3 combined! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 (edited) If no please add what you think was the worst decision. you aren't aware that a previous Newcastle chairman decided to sell Gazza, Beardsley and Waddle are you Sadly i'm aware of that, but employing Souness is a worse decision than those 3 combined! I know YOU are aware of it mate ..... I take your point, but don't think even the appointment of the Scottish fuckpig damaged the club as much as selling those 3 though, it didn't take us years to get back into the top league after sacking the Scottish fuckpig...however also I realise there are people who think we have always been in the top 2 or 3 teams though and Fat Fred is damned to eternal damnation for not carrying on those trophy laden decades we had previously ...... Edited February 20, 2007 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gejon 2 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Employing Souness was just No one could really understand it. He was heavily rumoured to be on his way out of Blackburn and was seen by most as a shocking choice. All comes down to sacking Robson at the wrong time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 3353 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 If no please add what you think was the worst decision. you aren't aware that a previous Newcastle chairman decided to sell Gazza, Beardsley and Waddle are you No defending anyone but Waddle actually wasn't sold by any Newcastle board. He left after refusing a new contract albeit because he wanted to go to a club with ambition. The club was then awarded by the FA a pitiful token transfer fee, pre-bosman days. Truth be known it was actually because of this that the board of the times sold Pedro and Gazza because they didn't want to lose them for nowt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papa Lazaru 0 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 If no please add what you think was the worst decision. you aren't aware that a previous Newcastle chairman decided to sell Gazza, Beardsley and Waddle are you Sadly i'm aware of that, but employing Souness is a worse decision than those 3 combined! I know YOU are aware of it mate ..... I take your point, but don't think even the appointment of the Scottish fuckpig damaged the club as much as selling those 3 though, it didn't take us years to get back into the top league after sacking the Scottish fuckpig...however also I realise there are people who think we have always been in the top 2 or 3 teams though and Fat Fred is damned to eternal damnation for not carrying on those trophy laden decades we had previously ...... The manager can have so much more influence than players and affect so many aspects of the club that i think it makes that decision the more crucial and thus far worse decision. As an example what would be worse, we sell say Owen, Martins and Given (over a period of time, they didn't all go at once with the other 3 mentioned) for a hell of alot of money or we re-employ Souness! And remember Souness would likely fall out with and kick out one of the 3 best players himself anyway, on top of destroying the club from top to bottom of course! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 If no please add what you think was the worst decision. you aren't aware that a previous Newcastle chairman decided to sell Gazza, Beardsley and Waddle are you Sadly i'm aware of that, but employing Souness is a worse decision than those 3 combined! I know YOU are aware of it mate ..... I take your point, but don't think even the appointment of the Scottish fuckpig damaged the club as much as selling those 3 though, it didn't take us years to get back into the top league after sacking the Scottish fuckpig...however also I realise there are people who think we have always been in the top 2 or 3 teams though and Fat Fred is damned to eternal damnation for not carrying on those trophy laden decades we had previously ...... The manager can have so much more influence than players and affect so many aspects of the club that i think it makes that decision the more crucial and thus far worse decision. As an example what would be worse, we sell say Owen, Martins and Given (over a period of time, they didn't all go at once with the other 3 mentioned) for a hell of alot of money or we re-employ Souness! And remember Souness would likely fall out with and kick out one of the 3 best players himself anyway, on top of destroying the club from top to bottom of course! As a comparison, neither Owen, Martins, and even Given have the same emotional attachment to the club that Gazza, Beardsley did, perhaps Given has similar to Waddle, but he is still here and has signed a new contract. You simply can't get worse than Newcastle United supporters, particularly Gazza and Beardsley, seeking to move elsewhere to win things and further their careers ? Who would you play for if YOU could choose ? And how much of a wrench would it be for you to admit that moving on was better for your career ? Do you think Lee Clark would ever have left if the manager had not thought he wasn't good enough ? Shearer came home and never left. This is the comparison, not Martins and Owen. The signals such a thing sends out to the football world, and did in Beardsley and Gazza's case, is/was unequalled and I honestly can't think of anything worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 If no please add what you think was the worst decision. you aren't aware that a previous Newcastle chairman decided to sell Gazza, Beardsley and Waddle are you No defending anyone but Waddle actually wasn't sold by any Newcastle board. He left after refusing a new contract albeit because he wanted to go to a club with ambition. The club was then awarded by the FA a pitiful token transfer fee, pre-bosman days. Truth be known it was actually because of this that the board of the times sold Pedro and Gazza because they didn't want to lose them for nowt. as i said. Beardsley wanted to go because the club wanted to sell him and build a stand with the money, and he wanted to go because he knew the club was shit from top to bottom. They didn't have the courage or the inclination to surround these players with other good players, tap the fanbase, so persuade them to stay, and fill the ground instead. His striking partner Waddle previously leaving proved that despite the club being left a good platform by Cox, nothing had changed and they were shit and always would be shit under those directors. By then, the message had got through loud and clearly to Gazza too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Employing Souness was just No one could really understand it. He was heavily rumoured to be on his way out of Blackburn and was seen by most as a shocking choice. All comes down to sacking Robson at the wrong time. As I said, shame our previous worthy directors - who were just as good as their successors - didn't appoint him when he was in his prime. He obviously just didn't fall into their laps as a stroke of luck. Noelie will perhaps cast his experienced and knowledgeable eye in at this point and englighten us .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gram 0 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Employing Souness was just No one could really understand it. He was heavily rumoured to be on his way out of Blackburn and was seen by most as a shocking choice. All comes down to sacking Robson at the wrong time. As I said, shame our previous worthy directors - who were just as good as their successors - didn't appoint him when he was in his prime. He obviously just didn't fall into their laps as a stroke of luck. Noelie will perhaps cast his experienced and knowledgeable eye in at this point and englighten us .. Current board are average. Is that what we aspire to? You sound shit scared of change Leazes. Don't be dense enough to think you were the only one to witness Westwood or McGarry's reigns. You weren't. If you are content with this lot then God bless you. The rest of us will acknowledge their strengths and not try to bullshit people who see their weaknesses. Change is inevitable. The dodgy factor in this is that Fred has a significant say in who takes over. Given his choices of men to put in charge - and you must take into account that it isn't just managers who have been given posts of responsibility e.g David Stonehouse - that fills me with trepidation. His heart is in the right place. His lack of foresight certainly, however, is staggering at times. I must remind you that his decision to tell the media before Bobby that he was going, and its impact - led to......Souness! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelie 103 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Employing Souness was just No one could really understand it. He was heavily rumoured to be on his way out of Blackburn and was seen by most as a shocking choice. All comes down to sacking Robson at the wrong time. As I said, shame our previous worthy directors - who were just as good as their successors - didn't appoint him when he was in his prime. He obviously just didn't fall into their laps as a stroke of luck. Noelie will perhaps cast his experienced and knowledgeable eye in at this point and englighten us .. The sacking of Robson after only 4 games into the season(2 losses, 2 draws) was not only shocking but a horrendous mistake made by the current board in view of the fact they had no one waiting in the wings to take over. The subsequent hiring of Souness(someone with a less than creditable track-record) was also a terrible mistake by the current board, and obviously one made in desperation after making the first big mistake. However, when one considers prior boards to current boards you have to go back to 1961 to see the poor choices of managers. Norman Smith..............35 Games............Won 12............Lost 15. Richard Dinnis..............40 Games............Won 12............Lost 18. Jack Charlton...............48 Games............Won 15............Lost 18. Ossie Ardilles...............47 Games.............Won10.............Lost 39. Ruud Gullit...................52 Games.............Won 18............Lost 20. It's hard to tell in which period did which board have the thickest of short planks but my vote goes to the ones who sacked Robson and hired Souness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3859 Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share Posted February 21, 2007 Employing Souness was just No one could really understand it. He was heavily rumoured to be on his way out of Blackburn and was seen by most as a shocking choice. All comes down to sacking Robson at the wrong time. As I said, shame our previous worthy directors - who were just as good as their successors - didn't appoint him when he was in his prime. He obviously just didn't fall into their laps as a stroke of luck. Noelie will perhaps cast his experienced and knowledgeable eye in at this point and englighten us .. What prime he has always been a shit manager. With Liverpool he took the best team in the world and ruined it. In Scotland there was only one team in the league at the time and he spent millions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 2 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Did we really need another one of these threads? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3859 Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share Posted February 21, 2007 Did we really need another one of these threads? Probably not but I am at work and waiting to be made redundant so am doing bog all and was bored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Employing Souness was just No one could really understand it. He was heavily rumoured to be on his way out of Blackburn and was seen by most as a shocking choice. All comes down to sacking Robson at the wrong time. As I said, shame our previous worthy directors - who were just as good as their successors - didn't appoint him when he was in his prime. He obviously just didn't fall into their laps as a stroke of luck. Noelie will perhaps cast his experienced and knowledgeable eye in at this point and englighten us .. What prime he has always been a shit manager. With Liverpool he took the best team in the world and ruined it. In Scotland there was only one team in the league at the time and he spent millions. He meant Robson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gejon 2 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Did we really need another one of these threads? Are you suggesting they ban Leazes? Bit harsh like! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Employing Souness was just No one could really understand it. He was heavily rumoured to be on his way out of Blackburn and was seen by most as a shocking choice. All comes down to sacking Robson at the wrong time. As I said, shame our previous worthy directors - who were just as good as their successors - didn't appoint him when he was in his prime. He obviously just didn't fall into their laps as a stroke of luck. Noelie will perhaps cast his experienced and knowledgeable eye in at this point and englighten us .. The sacking of Robson after only 4 games into the season(2 losses, 2 draws) was not only shocking but a horrendous mistake made by the current board in view of the fact they had no one waiting in the wings to take over. The subsequent hiring of Souness(someone with a less than creditable track-record) was also a terrible mistake by the current board, and obviously one made in desperation after making the first big mistake. However, when one considers prior boards to current boards you have to go back to 1961 to see the poor choices of managers. Norman Smith..............35 Games............Won 12............Lost 15. Richard Dinnis..............40 Games............Won 12............Lost 18. Jack Charlton...............48 Games............Won 15............Lost 18. Ossie Ardilles...............47 Games.............Won10.............Lost 39. Ruud Gullit...................52 Games.............Won 18............Lost 20. It's hard to tell in which period did which board have the thickest of short planks but my vote goes to the ones who sacked Robson and hired Souness. Indeed. Rather than the ones who considered 15th position to be success, or even just survival in the top league, as in the 60's, 70's and 80's ....... rather than the ones who sacked Souness and considered 14th to be failure ... I would say the thickest boards were those older ones who thought 15th or merely survival, was success, but I have already guessed you are totally oblivious to those times, Tony. BTW, you forgot Bill McGarry. Or didn't you know he was manager once, and left us in the bottom 3 of the 2nd division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Employing Souness was just No one could really understand it. He was heavily rumoured to be on his way out of Blackburn and was seen by most as a shocking choice. All comes down to sacking Robson at the wrong time. As I said, shame our previous worthy directors - who were just as good as their successors - didn't appoint him when he was in his prime. He obviously just didn't fall into their laps as a stroke of luck. Noelie will perhaps cast his experienced and knowledgeable eye in at this point and englighten us .. What prime he has always been a shit manager. With Liverpool he took the best team in the world and ruined it. In Scotland there was only one team in the league at the time and he spent millions. He meant Robson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelie 103 Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 (edited) However, when one considers prior boards to current boards you have to go back to 1961 to see the poor choices of managers. Norman Smith..............35 Games............Won 12............Lost 15. Richard Dinnis..............40 Games............Won 12............Lost 18. Jack Charlton...............48 Games............Won 15............Lost 18. Ossie Ardilles...............47 Games.............Won10.............Lost 19. Ruud Gullit...................52 Games.............Won 18............Lost 20. ...................................................................................................................................................... BTW, you forgot Bill McGarry. Or didn't you know he was manager once, and left us in the bottom 3 of the 2nd division. No way did I forget McGarry!! I just chose managers who were in charge for about 50 or less games, McGarry was in charge for 118, Livingstone for 99, Dalglish for 78, and Gordon Lee for 74. Actually I don't fault the board for hiring Ossie Ardilles even though his record was atrocious, he had the Lads playing good football but unfortuately it didn't win us games. If Ossie had proved to be a success at winning games we may never have seen Keegan as manager. Edited February 22, 2007 by Noelie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now