These New Owners of West Ham

[Shearergol 0]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

And Alex - I think people should address my points too. Nobody has, after all this time, suggested anyone better, with more desire, and capability to replace the current group of directors. And nobody has even remotedly conceded that qualifying for europe is reasonably successful, and signifies they must be doing something right, although we all want to be number 1 of which there is no doubt.

 

Shame you say "ridicule" though, because in my view, it is those who think a change of board would automatically be better to be ridiculous. Absolutely stupid, in fact. And they must think this, or they would not advocate a change without naming people, not having a clue who they would choose. Especially a hedge fund running the club.

 

So in order to criticise, we have to be able to predict someone who can guarantee success? Should fans have to do that for directors, manager and players from now on?

 

What a shite argument. Perhaps people haven't addressed it because it's not their job? I don't know the plans of many business men in this world tbh, do you?

[snakehips 0]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

And Alex - I think people should address my points too. Nobody has, after all this time, suggested anyone better, with more desire, and capability to replace the current group of directors. And nobody has even remotedly conceded that qualifying for europe is reasonably successful, and signifies they must be doing something right, although we all want to be number 1 of which there is no doubt.

 

Shame you say "ridicule" though, because in my view, it is those who think a change of board would automatically be better to be ridiculous. Absolutely stupid, in fact. And they must think this, or they would not advocate a change without naming people, not having a clue who they would choose. Especially a hedge fund running the club.

 

So in order to criticise, we have to be able to predict someone who can guarantee success? Should fans have to do that for directors, manager and players from now on?

 

What a shite argument. Perhaps people haven't addressed it because it's not their job? I don't know the plans of many business men in this world tbh, do you?

 

Exactly the argument I made a while back. It's not up to us to nominate anyone to take over if we are disaffected with a manager/chairman imo.

[Guest alex]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

And Alex - I think people should address my points too. Nobody has, after all this time, suggested anyone better, with more desire, and capability to replace the current group of directors. And nobody has even remotedly conceded that qualifying for europe is reasonably successful, and signifies they must be doing something right, although we all want to be number 1 of which there is no doubt.

 

Shame you say "ridicule" though, because in my view, it is those who think a change of board would automatically be better to be ridiculous. Absolutely stupid, in fact. And they must think this, or they would not advocate a change without naming people, not having a clue who they would choose. Especially a hedge fund running the club.

2+2=5 tbh. I'd love to know (before John Hall came on the horizon) who you wanted to take over the club. Had a list did you? Thought not.

[luckyluke 2]

better than Fred and our current board ?

 

They took over the club and had a "plan", so they obviously are ........

 

 

Blatant fishing by Leazes, and thirteen pages later you're still arguing with him. You deserve the frustration tbh.

[LeazesMag 0]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

And Alex - I think people should address my points too. Nobody has, after all this time, suggested anyone better, with more desire, and capability to replace the current group of directors. And nobody has even remotedly conceded that qualifying for europe is reasonably successful, and signifies they must be doing something right, although we all want to be number 1 of which there is no doubt.

 

Shame you say "ridicule" though, because in my view, it is those who think a change of board would automatically be better to be ridiculous. Absolutely stupid, in fact. And they must think this, or they would not advocate a change without naming people, not having a clue who they would choose. Especially a hedge fund running the club.

2+2=5 tbh. I'd love to know (before John Hall came on the horizon) who you wanted to take over the club. Had a list did you? Thought not.

 

Alex, my friend ........

 

Believe me, before the Halls and Shepherd, literally ANYONE WOULD HAVE BEEN better than McKeag, Westwood etc ..... one foot in the 3rd division, selling our best players, building a new stand proclaimed to be "the same as Watford" proves that ........

 

People were mentioned. Malcolm Dix tried to lead a takeover. McAlpine was prepared to build a new stand or even rebuild the whole ground for a seat on the board but were refused. Westwood and his cronies resigned when the bank asked them to donate 16,000 each to keep the club afloat...opening the door for McKeag Jnr to look after the family silver because it "was his duty".

 

Rob will confirm this to be true. Noelie might, but I suspect he won't know, and it will be just as much news to him as the younger lads on here, he also being unaware of the club pre-Halls and Shepherd but in his case by choice.

 

I actually always hoped that Newcastle Breweries would buy the club, or take a major role, instead of just sponsoring them. As good as anyone could have been at the time, I would say.

 

Apology for your last comment ie the bold bit, accepted. You can still buy me a pint !!!!

[LeazesMag 0]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

And Alex - I think people should address my points too. Nobody has, after all this time, suggested anyone better, with more desire, and capability to replace the current group of directors. And nobody has even remotedly conceded that qualifying for europe is reasonably successful, and signifies they must be doing something right, although we all want to be number 1 of which there is no doubt.

 

Shame you say "ridicule" though, because in my view, it is those who think a change of board would automatically be better to be ridiculous. Absolutely stupid, in fact. And they must think this, or they would not advocate a change without naming people, not having a clue who they would choose. Especially a hedge fund running the club.

 

So in order to criticise, we have to be able to predict someone who can guarantee success? Should fans have to do that for directors, manager and players from now on?

 

What a shite argument. Perhaps people haven't addressed it because it's not their job? I don't know the plans of many business men in this world tbh, do you?

 

Exactly the argument I made a while back. It's not up to us to nominate anyone to take over if we are disaffected with a manager/chairman imo.

 

it boils down to a lack of appreciation of at least playing in europe mate, and by defnition the implication that we have a divine right to that as a minimum, because we haven't. Nobody has. However, it IS an indication of how much the board have raised expectations since taking over the club.

[gram 0]

Many have shown their appreciation of the current board. I have said it myself and seen others say it. However, it doesnt prevent objective criticism of some appallingly bad decision making throughout their tenure. Whilst expectations have risen, it is all relative.

They have a responsibilty to shareholders and stakeholders to ensure they PLAN what is going to happen within the business.

Find me something with some academic rigour that tells me a plc is better off not planning its recruitment of key personnel and I will gladly accept your argument.

i await your response to the above request.

[Baggio 0]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

No Leazes, you don't answer because you know I'm right, so instead you either try to laugh it off by ridiculing the point someone has made or you just go off topic to avoid the question.

 

As I told you before, the redevelopment of St James Park cost just over £40 million, so that means the other £40 million has been borrowed to fund players, more than that if you consider that the stadium was extended in 2000, payments would have to be made on that.

 

Also, what does us having a larger fan base have to do with anything? The fact that we do have a larger fanbase yet we're still falling into deeper debt is an even bigger worry.

 

As for you saying "I don't believe I have ever said the club should carry on spending money." Didn't you say on Newcastle-Online that you would be happy to spend all of our money this summer on Tevez? That to me suggests you're happy to keep spending money we don't have.

 

Also this on your forum...

 

"Darren Bent would cost a big fee, do we have it ? Whether we have it or not, I think we have to find some money somewhere."

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index...?showtopic=2460

 

So more lies from you, I had to laugh at this bit though...

 

"Luke Young is an option, has he ever played left back ?"

Edited March 7, 2007 by Baggio

[Baggio 0]

Having already shown that it was not the chairman of the time ie SJH, who was responsible for appointing and choosing Keegan, but Shepherd, Hall Jnr and Fletcher

 

Why should we take Keegan's word as the truth? If you've read his book you'll know how bitter he is towards Sir John Hall over not speaking to him when he left the club, there's a good possibility that Keegan is saying that Sir John never wanted him as his way of getting back at him.

 

Similar to how you believe all the things Sir Bobby says about Fat Fred in his book are bollocks because he's bitter about being sacked.[/copy&paste]

[Fop 1]

Having already shown that it was not the chairman of the time ie SJH, who was responsible for appointing and choosing Keegan, but Shepherd, Hall Jnr and Fletcher

 

Why should we take Keegan's word as the truth? If you've read his book you'll know how bitter he is towards Sir John Hall over not speaking to him when he left the club, there's a good possibility that Keegan is saying that Sir John never wanted him as his way of getting back at him.

 

Similar to how you believe all the things Sir Bobby says about Fat Fred in his book are bollocks because he's bitter about being sacked.[/copy&paste]

 

TBH I'm hard pressed to believe that Feckless Hall could tie his own shoelaces never mind appoint a manager..... although everyone gets lucky occasionally I guess.

 

 

 

 

The thing with the current status is that whilst it could most certainly be worse, I'm not sure if it is in anyway helping, the Halls are just parasites these days effectively and FFS may or may not actually have NUFCs best interests at heart, but either way doesn't seem to massively clued up on how and where to take us forward.

[Guest alex]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

And Alex - I think people should address my points too. Nobody has, after all this time, suggested anyone better, with more desire, and capability to replace the current group of directors. And nobody has even remotedly conceded that qualifying for europe is reasonably successful, and signifies they must be doing something right, although we all want to be number 1 of which there is no doubt.

 

Shame you say "ridicule" though, because in my view, it is those who think a change of board would automatically be better to be ridiculous. Absolutely stupid, in fact. And they must think this, or they would not advocate a change without naming people, not having a clue who they would choose. Especially a hedge fund running the club.

2+2=5 tbh. I'd love to know (before John Hall came on the horizon) who you wanted to take over the club. Had a list did you? Thought not.

 

Alex, my friend ........

 

Believe me, before the Halls and Shepherd, literally ANYONE WOULD HAVE BEEN better than McKeag, Westwood etc ..... one foot in the 3rd division, selling our best players, building a new stand proclaimed to be "the same as Watford" proves that ........

 

People were mentioned. Malcolm Dix tried to lead a takeover. McAlpine was prepared to build a new stand or even rebuild the whole ground for a seat on the board but were refused. Westwood and his cronies resigned when the bank asked them to donate 16,000 each to keep the club afloat...opening the door for McKeag Jnr to look after the family silver because it "was his duty".

 

Rob will confirm this to be true. Noelie might, but I suspect he won't know, and it will be just as much news to him as the younger lads on here, he also being unaware of the club pre-Halls and Shepherd but in his case by choice.

 

I actually always hoped that Newcastle Breweries would buy the club, or take a major role, instead of just sponsoring them. As good as anyone could have been at the time, I would say.

 

Apology for your last comment ie the bold bit, accepted. You can still buy me a pint !!!!

Fair enough, just about anyone would have been better than the likes of McKeag I suppose, which isn't the case with the current lot. Still though, you don't need to have a list of possible replacements for Shepherd to criticise some of the things he and the board have done. We all know that things could be handled more professionally at board room level.

[LeazesMag 0]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

No Leazes, you don't answer because you know I'm right, so instead you either try to laugh it off by ridiculing the point someone has made or you just go off topic to avoid the question.

 

As I told you before, the redevelopment of St James Park cost just over £40 million, so that means the other £40 million has been borrowed to fund players, more than that if you consider that the stadium was extended in 2000, payments would have to be made on that.

 

Also, what does us having a larger fan base have to do with anything? The fact that we do have a larger fanbase yet we're still falling into deeper debt is an even bigger worry.

 

As for you saying "I don't believe I have ever said the club should carry on spending money." Didn't you say on Newcastle-Online that you would be happy to spend all of our money this summer on Tevez? That to me suggests you're happy to keep spending money we don't have.

 

Also this on your forum...

 

"Darren Bent would cost a big fee, do we have it ? Whether we have it or not, I think we have to find some money somewhere."

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index...?showtopic=2460

 

So more lies from you, I had to laugh at this bit though...

 

"Luke Young is an option, has he ever played left back ?"

 

Have it your way Baggio. We will stop spending money on players, go down, and then you will whinge about not spending money and really living among the also rans. Which is where we used to be before the Halls and Shepherd. Take my word for it, if you can't be arsed to look it up.

 

Can't see the problem with the question about Luke Young though, do you have a secret yearning to support Charlton because they don't spend money ?

[LeazesMag 0]

Having already shown that it was not the chairman of the time ie SJH, who was responsible for appointing and choosing Keegan, but Shepherd, Hall Jnr and Fletcher

 

Why should we take Keegan's word as the truth? If you've read his book you'll know how bitter he is towards Sir John Hall over not speaking to him when he left the club, there's a good possibility that Keegan is saying that Sir John never wanted him as his way of getting back at him.

 

Similar to how you believe all the things Sir Bobby says about Fat Fred in his book are bollocks because he's bitter about being sacked.[/copy&paste]

 

Says he who does nowt but copy and paste the achievements of Spurs over the last decade

 

Keegan isn't in his 70's, in case you didn't realise.

[Baggio 0]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

No Leazes, you don't answer because you know I'm right, so instead you either try to laugh it off by ridiculing the point someone has made or you just go off topic to avoid the question.

 

As I told you before, the redevelopment of St James Park cost just over £40 million, so that means the other £40 million has been borrowed to fund players, more than that if you consider that the stadium was extended in 2000, payments would have to be made on that.

 

Also, what does us having a larger fan base have to do with anything? The fact that we do have a larger fanbase yet we're still falling into deeper debt is an even bigger worry.

 

As for you saying "I don't believe I have ever said the club should carry on spending money." Didn't you say on Newcastle-Online that you would be happy to spend all of our money this summer on Tevez? That to me suggests you're happy to keep spending money we don't have.

 

Also this on your forum...

 

"Darren Bent would cost a big fee, do we have it ? Whether we have it or not, I think we have to find some money somewhere."

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index...?showtopic=2460

 

So more lies from you, I had to laugh at this bit though...

 

"Luke Young is an option, has he ever played left back ?"

 

Have it your way Baggio. We will stop spending money on players, go down, and then you will whinge about not spending money and really living among the also rans. Which is where we used to be before the Halls and Shepherd. Take my word for it, if you can't be arsed to look it up.

 

Can't see the problem with the question about Luke Young though, do you have a secret yearning to support Charlton because they don't spend money ?

 

As I've said Leazes, we should look at how other clubs have gone about building better squads than us without having to go into debt to do so, it really is that simple.

 

Why would you buy a right back and play him left back?!

[Baggio 0]

Having already shown that it was not the chairman of the time ie SJH, who was responsible for appointing and choosing Keegan, but Shepherd, Hall Jnr and Fletcher

 

Why should we take Keegan's word as the truth? If you've read his book you'll know how bitter he is towards Sir John Hall over not speaking to him when he left the club, there's a good possibility that Keegan is saying that Sir John never wanted him as his way of getting back at him.

 

Similar to how you believe all the things Sir Bobby says about Fat Fred in his book are bollocks because he's bitter about being sacked.[/copy&paste]

 

Says he who does nowt but copy and paste the achievements of Spurs over the last decade

 

Keegan isn't in his 70's, in case you didn't realise.

 

Where have I used copy and paste to post Spurs achievements over the last decade or have you made something up again?

 

I'm not sure what Keegan not being in his 70's has to do with anything, you've suggested Bobby has made the stuff up about Shepherd selling players behind his back because he's bitter about getting sacked, yet seem happy to quote Keegan when he says Sir John Hall didn't want him as manager even though he comes across as being bitter towards him in his book.

 

More double standards from you.

[LeazesMag 0]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

No Leazes, you don't answer because you know I'm right, so instead you either try to laugh it off by ridiculing the point someone has made or you just go off topic to avoid the question.

 

As I told you before, the redevelopment of St James Park cost just over £40 million, so that means the other £40 million has been borrowed to fund players, more than that if you consider that the stadium was extended in 2000, payments would have to be made on that.

 

Also, what does us having a larger fan base have to do with anything? The fact that we do have a larger fanbase yet we're still falling into deeper debt is an even bigger worry.

 

As for you saying "I don't believe I have ever said the club should carry on spending money." Didn't you say on Newcastle-Online that you would be happy to spend all of our money this summer on Tevez? That to me suggests you're happy to keep spending money we don't have.

 

Also this on your forum...

 

"Darren Bent would cost a big fee, do we have it ? Whether we have it or not, I think we have to find some money somewhere."

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index...?showtopic=2460

 

So more lies from you, I had to laugh at this bit though...

 

"Luke Young is an option, has he ever played left back ?"

 

Have it your way Baggio. We will stop spending money on players, go down, and then you will whinge about not spending money and really living among the also rans. Which is where we used to be before the Halls and Shepherd. Take my word for it, if you can't be arsed to look it up.

 

Can't see the problem with the question about Luke Young though, do you have a secret yearning to support Charlton because they don't spend money ?

 

As I've said Leazes, we should look at how other clubs have gone about building better squads than us without having to go into debt to do so, it really is that simple.

 

Why would you buy a right back and play him left back?!

 

Whats wrong with it, its a question, has he or hasn't he ? Can he or can't he ? Phil Neville for one can play left back as well as right back, and I bet plenty of others could too. You don't have to be left footed to be a good left back. One of our best ever left backs only used his left foot for standing on.

[Baggio 0]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

No Leazes, you don't answer because you know I'm right, so instead you either try to laugh it off by ridiculing the point someone has made or you just go off topic to avoid the question.

 

As I told you before, the redevelopment of St James Park cost just over £40 million, so that means the other £40 million has been borrowed to fund players, more than that if you consider that the stadium was extended in 2000, payments would have to be made on that.

 

Also, what does us having a larger fan base have to do with anything? The fact that we do have a larger fanbase yet we're still falling into deeper debt is an even bigger worry.

 

As for you saying "I don't believe I have ever said the club should carry on spending money." Didn't you say on Newcastle-Online that you would be happy to spend all of our money this summer on Tevez? That to me suggests you're happy to keep spending money we don't have.

 

Also this on your forum...

 

"Darren Bent would cost a big fee, do we have it ? Whether we have it or not, I think we have to find some money somewhere."

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index...?showtopic=2460

 

So more lies from you, I had to laugh at this bit though...

 

"Luke Young is an option, has he ever played left back ?"

 

Have it your way Baggio. We will stop spending money on players, go down, and then you will whinge about not spending money and really living among the also rans. Which is where we used to be before the Halls and Shepherd. Take my word for it, if you can't be arsed to look it up.

 

Can't see the problem with the question about Luke Young though, do you have a secret yearning to support Charlton because they don't spend money ?

 

As I've said Leazes, we should look at how other clubs have gone about building better squads than us without having to go into debt to do so, it really is that simple.

 

Why would you buy a right back and play him left back?!

 

Whats wrong with it, its a question, has he or hasn't he ? Can he or can't he ? Phil Neville for one can play left back as well as right back, and I bet plenty of others could too. You don't have to be left footed to be a good left back. One of our best ever left backs only used his left foot for standing on.

 

To answer your question Leazes - as far as I'm aware he's never played left back, he maybe able to do a job there but it would be a bit stupid spending good money on him (Charlton paid £4 million for him) on the off chance that he could adapt.

 

Ben Haim from Bolton would be a better shout if you're looking for a versatile defender that can play left back.

[LeazesMag 0]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

No Leazes, you don't answer because you know I'm right, so instead you either try to laugh it off by ridiculing the point someone has made or you just go off topic to avoid the question.

 

As I told you before, the redevelopment of St James Park cost just over £40 million, so that means the other £40 million has been borrowed to fund players, more than that if you consider that the stadium was extended in 2000, payments would have to be made on that.

 

Also, what does us having a larger fan base have to do with anything? The fact that we do have a larger fanbase yet we're still falling into deeper debt is an even bigger worry.

 

As for you saying "I don't believe I have ever said the club should carry on spending money." Didn't you say on Newcastle-Online that you would be happy to spend all of our money this summer on Tevez? That to me suggests you're happy to keep spending money we don't have.

 

Also this on your forum...

 

"Darren Bent would cost a big fee, do we have it ? Whether we have it or not, I think we have to find some money somewhere."

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index...?showtopic=2460

 

So more lies from you, I had to laugh at this bit though...

 

"Luke Young is an option, has he ever played left back ?"

 

Have it your way Baggio. We will stop spending money on players, go down, and then you will whinge about not spending money and really living among the also rans. Which is where we used to be before the Halls and Shepherd. Take my word for it, if you can't be arsed to look it up.

 

Can't see the problem with the question about Luke Young though, do you have a secret yearning to support Charlton because they don't spend money ?

 

As I've said Leazes, we should look at how other clubs have gone about building better squads than us without having to go into debt to do so, it really is that simple.

 

Why would you buy a right back and play him left back?!

 

Whats wrong with it, its a question, has he or hasn't he ? Can he or can't he ? Phil Neville for one can play left back as well as right back, and I bet plenty of others could too. You don't have to be left footed to be a good left back. One of our best ever left backs only used his left foot for standing on.

 

To answer your question Leazes - as far as I'm aware he's never played left back, he maybe able to do a job there but it would be a bit stupid spending good money on him (Charlton paid £4 million for him) on the off chance that he could adapt.

 

Ben Haim from Bolton would be a better shout if you're looking for a versatile defender that can play left back.

 

I don't recall saying we should spend anything on him. You can find such a comment if you can.

 

As I've always said, I think whatever money the club has should be targetted primarily on a striker

[Baggio 0]

I don't recall saying we should spend anything on him. You can find such a comment if you can.

 

I don't recall saying that you did.

[LeazesMag 0]

Baggio, see the quote you made here

 

As I've said Leazes, we should look at how [four] other clubs have gone about building better squads than us without having to go into debt to do so, it really is that simple.

 

you missed an important word - I've put it in brackets for you.

 

Without mentioning the debts that Chelsea and Liverpools new owners inherited, and manures now have, and Arsenals also now have.

 

 

Hey - but keep making things up

 

Tell you what mate, you may use Spurs as your yardstick, which is a bit odd anyway, but I wouldn't swap our club for theirs, or their last decade for ours, would you ?

Edited March 10, 2007 by LeazesMag

[gram 0]

Only 4 clubs have a better squad than us?

[Baggio 0]

Baggio, see the quote you made here

 

As I've said Leazes, we should look at how [four] other clubs have gone about building better squads than us without having to go into debt to do so, it really is that simple.

 

you missed an important word - I've put it in brackets for you.

 

Without mentioning the debts that Chelsea and Liverpools new owners inherited, and manures now have, and Arsenals also now have.

 

 

Hey - but keep making things up

 

Tell you what mate, you may use Spurs as your yardstick, which is a bit odd anyway, but I wouldn't swap our club for theirs, or their last decade for ours, would you ?

 

As per usual Leazes you're twisting things in your own childish way, you add a word to my post so that you can argue about it even though you put it there.

 

I'll try and explain it to you so you don't get to confused.

Arsenal and Spurs have better squads than us, they've built these squads without having to go into debt to do so (ie not borrowing to fund player transfers, understand?) they've done it by using a DOF to spot bargain players and help set up a top class scouting network, I think we should do the same.

 

It isn't hard to get your head around.

 

You speak about Chelsea having debt when Abramovich took over but they did exactly the same as us, borrowed money to fund player transfers, it came out after that if Abramovich hadn't bought the club when he did they would have gone into administration. did you think Ken Bates was a good chairman?

[LeazesMag 0]

Baggio, see the quote you made here

 

As I've said Leazes, we should look at how [four] other clubs have gone about building better squads than us without having to go into debt to do so, it really is that simple.

 

you missed an important word - I've put it in brackets for you.

 

Without mentioning the debts that Chelsea and Liverpools new owners inherited, and manures now have, and Arsenals also now have.

 

 

Hey - but keep making things up

 

Tell you what mate, you may use Spurs as your yardstick, which is a bit odd anyway, but I wouldn't swap our club for theirs, or their last decade for ours, would you ?

 

As per usual Leazes you're twisting things in your own childish way, you add a word to my post so that you can argue about it even though you put it there.

 

I'll try and explain it to you so you don't get to confused.

Arsenal and Spurs have better squads than us, they've built these squads without having to go into debt to do so (ie not borrowing to fund player transfers, understand?) they've done it by using a DOF to spot bargain players and help set up a top class scouting network, I think we should do the same.

 

It isn't hard to get your head around.

 

You speak about Chelsea having debt when Abramovich took over but they did exactly the same as us, borrowed money to fund player transfers, it came out after that if Abramovich hadn't bought the club when he did they would have gone into administration. did you think Ken Bates was a good chairman?

 

As usual, you whinge on about a few clubs that have done better than us. That is all. A few clubs, not dozens, or more, a few.

 

Everybody wants to match these clubs. We have came closer than most. We all want to match them. In your naive desperation to match them, you make things up and overstate the "failure" of your own club, which the vast majority of other fans would like to have matched, and completely fail to grasp that you actually support a good club, one of the best, such is the modern NUFC fan - like you - who whinge on like bairns that qualifying for europe and buying major England players is "shit".

 

You should give yourself a good shake mate - and some of your chums - and understand this. Sadly, it will take a shit board to come in and make you realise just what complete rubbish you have been spouting.

 

As usual, some people on here will understand, but I don't expect the idiots on here to understand, nor the KK bandwagon jumpers.

 

I'm not interested in comparing us to Spurs and their fcuking "planning" BTW, give me Alex Ferguson or Arsene Wenger as manager instead anyday.

[Baggio 0]

I'm not whinging like a bairn at all, I'm saying the club can't continue to borrow money to finance the signing of players as we're getting deeper into debt and that we need to look at an alternative way of operating.

 

Do you think the club should carry on borrowing money to finance signings or do you think we should look to an alternative way of operating?

[gram 0]

Terms and Conditions of 'debate' with Leazes

You cant see the boards shortcomings.

Indicate that ANY potential owner will be better than McKeag et al

We should settle for what we are given.

Bad planning doesnt matter cos planning is pointless

Anyone over 70 is senile. Thus meaning Bobbys comments on the sale of Gary Speed are conveniently inaccurate.

Anyone who knows more than Leazes doesnt exist.

Anyone with a degree is an arsehole.

Anyone who disagrees hasnt watched a game pre-1992.

We have finished top half 5 times in 10 years. Dont complain about the other 5.

Craig Bellamy is the bestest footballer ever and the chairman of our club would love him back.....cos he didnt send those messages, he 'lost' his phone......anyone could see it was 'propaganda'....well until Craig admitted lying about it two weeks ago....

Leazes didnt say he liked the look of Peter Ramage as a footballer - someone else got his account and wrote it.

 

Anyone who fails to accept the above conditions is a complete 'doublewanker'

Edited March 10, 2007 by gram