Losing 500k a week apparently.

[LeazesMag 0]

And almost as if it was planned...:

 

Hughton Thanks Ashley for Cash

 

(Sorry if already been posted in some form)

 

"planning"..........

 

according to wankers like Renton and Baggio a few years ago, this was the key to a golden future the likes of which Fat Fred and the Halls had never delivered

 

You could not make it up if you tried.

 

 

Talking bollocks and comparing me to Baggio now, nice one . All I said was it would have made sense to plan for Robson's replacement, rather than sack him 5 games into a season with the transfer window shut and no replacement, hence ending up with Souness.

 

 

See, this is an area I have mentioned before, at the time, and was roundly condemned by clever dicks like you, but I was and still am correct, when you harped on about this "planning" business. The ONLY thing that matter is getting a manager who gets results ie knows what he is doing. Did you say the same thing when Gullit was replaced by Sir Bob a handful of games into the season ie "bad planning"

 

You spout complete bollocks as usual Renton.

 

 

i think renton's post is spot on tbh. don't sack a gem of a manager like robson when there isn't a better alternative.

 

i think even as fat fred's biggest fan, you would admit that he got that one wrong. souness replacing sbr for me marked the beginning of our current plight. excacerbated by the fact that fat fred backed him to the hilt.

 

hmmm.....well, I remember - at the time - the team being booed for finishing 5th in the league and a growing feeling that Sir Bob was starting to get things wrong and needed replaced. Still, I expect some people will try and deny this is true.

 

If that was the case in May, why did he wait another 4 months until September and let Robson overhaul the team?

 

 

isn't hindsight wonderful

 

Thats my whole point about "planning". Football changes quickly.

[LeazesMag 0]

And almost as if it was planned...:

 

Hughton Thanks Ashley for Cash

 

(Sorry if already been posted in some form)

 

"planning"..........

 

according to wankers like Renton and Baggio a few years ago, this was the key to a golden future the likes of which Fat Fred and the Halls had never delivered

 

You could not make it up if you tried.

 

 

Talking bollocks and comparing me to Baggio now, nice one . All I said was it would have made sense to plan for Robson's replacement, rather than sack him 5 games into a season with the transfer window shut and no replacement, hence ending up with Souness.

 

 

See, this is an area I have mentioned before, at the time, and was roundly condemned by clever dicks like you, but I was and still am correct, when you harped on about this "planning" business. The ONLY thing that matter is getting a manager who gets results ie knows what he is doing. Did you say the same thing when Gullit was replaced by Sir Bob a handful of games into the season ie "bad planning"

 

You spout complete bollocks as usual Renton.

 

 

i think renton's post is spot on tbh. don't sack a gem of a manager like robson when there isn't a better alternative.

 

i think even as fat fred's biggest fan, you would admit that he got that one wrong. souness replacing sbr for me marked the beginning of our current plight. excacerbated by the fact that fat fred backed him to the hilt.

 

hmmm.....well, I remember - at the time - the team being booed for finishing 5th in the league and a growing feeling that Sir Bob was starting to get things wrong and needed replaced. Still, I expect some people will try and deny this is true.

 

His point is about timing and "planning", not the quality of the manager. MY point is about the quality of the manager, there is no "bad time" to get a quality manager.

 

 

These are the memories I have of his last season. In particular he seemed to "forget" about being able to use substitutes and as such they were always in the last 10 minutes.

 

Didnt only 5,000 or so stay for the lap of honour that year which really pissed SBR off.

 

correct. Why do people disregard this. Were they not there or something, or just have a selective memory ?

Edited February 26, 2010 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

I think most people appreciate you can't plan for every eventuality in a volatile 'business' like football but Bobby Robson was over 70 and on a rolling one year contract so some sort of contingency plan should have been in place. Likewise, don't get rid of someone like that if you haven't got someone better lined up. The appointment of Souness proves we didn't have. Douggie Hall's suggestion he was sacked because we were headed towards relegation is as shameful as it was patently untrue.

 

correct, it also shows that the Halls were instrumental in the running of the club [of course they must have been] but that still won't stop cretins like Renton to continue blaming one person who had less than 30% of shares taking the blame for everything. Not exactly the sort of view smart lads should be spouting.....

 

WRONG.

 

I've always blamed Douglas Hall as much as Shepherd and have always made my dislike of him more vocal. Feel free to prove otherwise.

 

Keep up with the childish jibes as well you big bairn.

 

sense of humour failure.

 

keep the irony going too

 

What irony?

 

Aye, because it's really hilarious to keep referring to me as a wanker, tosser, cretin (whether replying to me or someone else), and making up a load of cobblers I've never said. You should consider stand up.

 

Like to answere the point of the timing of Robson's dismissal? Do you back the board on this one or not?

 

It was the same time as Gullits, wasn't it ? Or do you think they should have stuck with Gullit if that was also the "wrong time" This IS your point isn't it ie "planning"

 

Other than that, give it a rest, admit when you are wrong and stop being such a smart arse.

 

Hardly being a smart arse, I seriously don't know what I'm supposed to be wrong about here.

 

Gullit was different, we were further into the season, in a much worse position, and he'd completely lost the dressing room including Alan Shearer. More importantly, Robson was available. If you have inside information that we had a quality manager lined up after Robson, I'm all ears. I think the board ballsed up massive style and it has been downhill ever since. Fwiw I blame Hall more for this than Shepherd, always have.

 

 

we were 7 games into the season [about 7 anyway] with almost the entire season left. Do you or do you not accept therefore that your comments about "timing" are irrelevant and you are in fact talking about the quality of the manager as you were happy for Robson to take over at that time from Gullitt ie with most of the season left.

 

We had a manager lined up to take over from Sir Bob, that is what I said, yes.

[Guest alex]

I think most people appreciate you can't plan for every eventuality in a volatile 'business' like football but Bobby Robson was over 70 and on a rolling one year contract so some sort of contingency plan should have been in place. Likewise, don't get rid of someone like that if you haven't got someone better lined up. The appointment of Souness proves we didn't have. Douggie Hall's suggestion he was sacked because we were headed towards relegation is as shameful as it was patently untrue.

 

correct, it also shows that the Halls were instrumental in the running of the club [of course they must have been] but that still won't stop cretins like Renton to continue blaming one person who had less than 30% of shares taking the blame for everything. Not exactly the sort of view smart lads should be spouting.....

Did you not agree with the rest of it then?

 

yes, I have posted - on here or NO - before that they did have someone lined up who agreed to take over then changed their mind at the last moment. And it was not Steve Bruce.

Sounds a bit of a convenient excuse to me like.

 

been telling people this for years.

 

It is true though.

It could have come from Shepherd himself and I'd still take it with a massive pinch of salt. Sounds just like something he'd say tbh, i.e. making an initial approach for a top manager, getting some promising responses then saying the dirty was done on him when it didn't work out.

[LeazesMag 0]

I think most people appreciate you can't plan for every eventuality in a volatile 'business' like football but Bobby Robson was over 70 and on a rolling one year contract so some sort of contingency plan should have been in place. Likewise, don't get rid of someone like that if you haven't got someone better lined up. The appointment of Souness proves we didn't have. Douggie Hall's suggestion he was sacked because we were headed towards relegation is as shameful as it was patently untrue.

 

correct, it also shows that the Halls were instrumental in the running of the club [of course they must have been] but that still won't stop cretins like Renton to continue blaming one person who had less than 30% of shares taking the blame for everything. Not exactly the sort of view smart lads should be spouting.....

Did you not agree with the rest of it then?

 

yes, I have posted - on here or NO - before that they did have someone lined up who agreed to take over then changed their mind at the last moment. And it was not Steve Bruce.

Sounds a bit of a convenient excuse to me like.

 

been telling people this for years.

 

It is true though.

It could have come from Shepherd himself and I'd still take it with a massive pinch of salt. Sounds just like something he'd say tbh, i.e. making an initial approach for a top manager, getting some promising responses then saying the dirty was done on him when it didn't work out.

 

The manager concerned told his chairman at the time he was leaving, then changed his mind.

[Renton 22001]

I think most people appreciate you can't plan for every eventuality in a volatile 'business' like football but Bobby Robson was over 70 and on a rolling one year contract so some sort of contingency plan should have been in place. Likewise, don't get rid of someone like that if you haven't got someone better lined up. The appointment of Souness proves we didn't have. Douggie Hall's suggestion he was sacked because we were headed towards relegation is as shameful as it was patently untrue.

 

correct, it also shows that the Halls were instrumental in the running of the club [of course they must have been] but that still won't stop cretins like Renton to continue blaming one person who had less than 30% of shares taking the blame for everything. Not exactly the sort of view smart lads should be spouting.....

 

WRONG.

 

I've always blamed Douglas Hall as much as Shepherd and have always made my dislike of him more vocal. Feel free to prove otherwise.

 

Keep up with the childish jibes as well you big bairn.

 

sense of humour failure.

 

keep the irony going too

 

What irony?

 

Aye, because it's really hilarious to keep referring to me as a wanker, tosser, cretin (whether replying to me or someone else), and making up a load of cobblers I've never said. You should consider stand up.

 

Like to answere the point of the timing of Robson's dismissal? Do you back the board on this one or not?

 

It was the same time as Gullits, wasn't it ? Or do you think they should have stuck with Gullit if that was also the "wrong time" This IS your point isn't it ie "planning"

 

Other than that, give it a rest, admit when you are wrong and stop being such a smart arse.

 

Hardly being a smart arse, I seriously don't know what I'm supposed to be wrong about here.

 

Gullit was different, we were further into the season, in a much worse position, and he'd completely lost the dressing room including Alan Shearer. More importantly, Robson was available. If you have inside information that we had a quality manager lined up after Robson, I'm all ears. I think the board ballsed up massive style and it has been downhill ever since. Fwiw I blame Hall more for this than Shepherd, always have.

 

 

we were 7 games into the season [about 7 anyway] with almost the entire season left. Do you or do you not accept therefore that your comments about "timing" are irrelevant and you are in fact talking about the quality of the manager as you were happy for Robson to take over at that time from Gullitt ie with most of the season left.

 

We had a manager lined up to take over from Sir Bob, that is what I said, yes.

 

If we had a brilliant manager to take over from Robson, then that would have been fair enough. It didn't happen though, did it? And I'm sorry but why should I take your word for it (or anybody's word for it on here for that matter)? I can only draw conclusions from what I know personally or are in the public domain.

[Guest alex]

I think most people appreciate you can't plan for every eventuality in a volatile 'business' like football but Bobby Robson was over 70 and on a rolling one year contract so some sort of contingency plan should have been in place. Likewise, don't get rid of someone like that if you haven't got someone better lined up. The appointment of Souness proves we didn't have. Douggie Hall's suggestion he was sacked because we were headed towards relegation is as shameful as it was patently untrue.

 

correct, it also shows that the Halls were instrumental in the running of the club [of course they must have been] but that still won't stop cretins like Renton to continue blaming one person who had less than 30% of shares taking the blame for everything. Not exactly the sort of view smart lads should be spouting.....

Did you not agree with the rest of it then?

 

yes, I have posted - on here or NO - before that they did have someone lined up who agreed to take over then changed their mind at the last moment. And it was not Steve Bruce.

Sounds a bit of a convenient excuse to me like.

 

been telling people this for years.

 

It is true though.

It could have come from Shepherd himself and I'd still take it with a massive pinch of salt. Sounds just like something he'd say tbh, i.e. making an initial approach for a top manager, getting some promising responses then saying the dirty was done on him when it didn't work out.

 

The manager concerned told his chairman at the time he was leaving, then changed his mind.

Who was it btw? And what was your source?

I already know you won't answer

[Renton 22001]

I think most people appreciate you can't plan for every eventuality in a volatile 'business' like football but Bobby Robson was over 70 and on a rolling one year contract so some sort of contingency plan should have been in place. Likewise, don't get rid of someone like that if you haven't got someone better lined up. The appointment of Souness proves we didn't have. Douggie Hall's suggestion he was sacked because we were headed towards relegation is as shameful as it was patently untrue.

 

correct, it also shows that the Halls were instrumental in the running of the club [of course they must have been] but that still won't stop cretins like Renton to continue blaming one person who had less than 30% of shares taking the blame for everything. Not exactly the sort of view smart lads should be spouting.....

Did you not agree with the rest of it then?

 

yes, I have posted - on here or NO - before that they did have someone lined up who agreed to take over then changed their mind at the last moment. And it was not Steve Bruce.

Sounds a bit of a convenient excuse to me like.

 

been telling people this for years.

 

It is true though.

It could have come from Shepherd himself and I'd still take it with a massive pinch of salt. Sounds just like something he'd say tbh, i.e. making an initial approach for a top manager, getting some promising responses then saying the dirty was done on him when it didn't work out.

 

The manager concerned told his chairman at the time he was leaving, then changed his mind.

 

Why?

[LeazesMag 0]

I think most people appreciate you can't plan for every eventuality in a volatile 'business' like football but Bobby Robson was over 70 and on a rolling one year contract so some sort of contingency plan should have been in place. Likewise, don't get rid of someone like that if you haven't got someone better lined up. The appointment of Souness proves we didn't have. Douggie Hall's suggestion he was sacked because we were headed towards relegation is as shameful as it was patently untrue.

 

correct, it also shows that the Halls were instrumental in the running of the club [of course they must have been] but that still won't stop cretins like Renton to continue blaming one person who had less than 30% of shares taking the blame for everything. Not exactly the sort of view smart lads should be spouting.....

Did you not agree with the rest of it then?

 

yes, I have posted - on here or NO - before that they did have someone lined up who agreed to take over then changed their mind at the last moment. And it was not Steve Bruce.

Sounds a bit of a convenient excuse to me like.

 

been telling people this for years.

 

It is true though.

It could have come from Shepherd himself and I'd still take it with a massive pinch of salt. Sounds just like something he'd say tbh, i.e. making an initial approach for a top manager, getting some promising responses then saying the dirty was done on him when it didn't work out.

 

The manager concerned told his chairman at the time he was leaving, then changed his mind.

 

Why?

 

Loyalty to his club, I think.

[LeazesMag 0]

I think most people appreciate you can't plan for every eventuality in a volatile 'business' like football but Bobby Robson was over 70 and on a rolling one year contract so some sort of contingency plan should have been in place. Likewise, don't get rid of someone like that if you haven't got someone better lined up. The appointment of Souness proves we didn't have. Douggie Hall's suggestion he was sacked because we were headed towards relegation is as shameful as it was patently untrue.

 

correct, it also shows that the Halls were instrumental in the running of the club [of course they must have been] but that still won't stop cretins like Renton to continue blaming one person who had less than 30% of shares taking the blame for everything. Not exactly the sort of view smart lads should be spouting.....

Did you not agree with the rest of it then?

 

yes, I have posted - on here or NO - before that they did have someone lined up who agreed to take over then changed their mind at the last moment. And it was not Steve Bruce.

Sounds a bit of a convenient excuse to me like.

 

been telling people this for years.

 

It is true though.

It could have come from Shepherd himself and I'd still take it with a massive pinch of salt. Sounds just like something he'd say tbh, i.e. making an initial approach for a top manager, getting some promising responses then saying the dirty was done on him when it didn't work out.

 

The manager concerned told his chairman at the time he was leaving, then changed his mind.

Who was it btw? And what was your source?

I already know you won't answer

 

 

That's right. I won't, because I can't.

[LeazesMag 0]

I think most people appreciate you can't plan for every eventuality in a volatile 'business' like football but Bobby Robson was over 70 and on a rolling one year contract so some sort of contingency plan should have been in place. Likewise, don't get rid of someone like that if you haven't got someone better lined up. The appointment of Souness proves we didn't have. Douggie Hall's suggestion he was sacked because we were headed towards relegation is as shameful as it was patently untrue.

 

correct, it also shows that the Halls were instrumental in the running of the club [of course they must have been] but that still won't stop cretins like Renton to continue blaming one person who had less than 30% of shares taking the blame for everything. Not exactly the sort of view smart lads should be spouting.....

 

WRONG.

 

I've always blamed Douglas Hall as much as Shepherd and have always made my dislike of him more vocal. Feel free to prove otherwise.

 

Keep up with the childish jibes as well you big bairn.

 

sense of humour failure.

 

keep the irony going too

 

What irony?

 

Aye, because it's really hilarious to keep referring to me as a wanker, tosser, cretin (whether replying to me or someone else), and making up a load of cobblers I've never said. You should consider stand up.

 

Like to answere the point of the timing of Robson's dismissal? Do you back the board on this one or not?

 

It was the same time as Gullits, wasn't it ? Or do you think they should have stuck with Gullit if that was also the "wrong time" This IS your point isn't it ie "planning"

 

Other than that, give it a rest, admit when you are wrong and stop being such a smart arse.

 

Hardly being a smart arse, I seriously don't know what I'm supposed to be wrong about here.

 

Gullit was different, we were further into the season, in a much worse position, and he'd completely lost the dressing room including Alan Shearer. More importantly, Robson was available. If you have inside information that we had a quality manager lined up after Robson, I'm all ears. I think the board ballsed up massive style and it has been downhill ever since. Fwiw I blame Hall more for this than Shepherd, always have.

 

 

we were 7 games into the season [about 7 anyway] with almost the entire season left. Do you or do you not accept therefore that your comments about "timing" are irrelevant and you are in fact talking about the quality of the manager as you were happy for Robson to take over at that time from Gullitt ie with most of the season left.

 

We had a manager lined up to take over from Sir Bob, that is what I said, yes.

 

If we had a brilliant manager to take over from Robson, then that would have been fair enough. It didn't happen though, did it? And I'm sorry but why should I take your word for it (or anybody's word for it on here for that matter)? I can only draw conclusions from what I know personally or are in the public domain.

 

 

that is your prerogative

[Guest alex]

I think most people appreciate you can't plan for every eventuality in a volatile 'business' like football but Bobby Robson was over 70 and on a rolling one year contract so some sort of contingency plan should have been in place. Likewise, don't get rid of someone like that if you haven't got someone better lined up. The appointment of Souness proves we didn't have. Douggie Hall's suggestion he was sacked because we were headed towards relegation is as shameful as it was patently untrue.

 

correct, it also shows that the Halls were instrumental in the running of the club [of course they must have been] but that still won't stop cretins like Renton to continue blaming one person who had less than 30% of shares taking the blame for everything. Not exactly the sort of view smart lads should be spouting.....

Did you not agree with the rest of it then?

 

yes, I have posted - on here or NO - before that they did have someone lined up who agreed to take over then changed their mind at the last moment. And it was not Steve Bruce.

Sounds a bit of a convenient excuse to me like.

 

been telling people this for years.

 

It is true though.

It could have come from Shepherd himself and I'd still take it with a massive pinch of salt. Sounds just like something he'd say tbh, i.e. making an initial approach for a top manager, getting some promising responses then saying the dirty was done on him when it didn't work out.

 

The manager concerned told his chairman at the time he was leaving, then changed his mind.

Who was it btw? And what was your source?

I already know you won't answer

 

 

That's right. I won't, because I can't.

Of course you can. No one knows who you are on here anyway and the people are no longer at the club. Difficult to see any major consequences for revealing the source or the manager. It's just hearsay on a messageboard. It's your choice to keep it to yourself and that's fine but if you're going to bring it up without being able to back it up you can't blame people for being sceptical.

Edited February 26, 2010 by alex

[LeazesMag 0]

I think most people appreciate you can't plan for every eventuality in a volatile 'business' like football but Bobby Robson was over 70 and on a rolling one year contract so some sort of contingency plan should have been in place. Likewise, don't get rid of someone like that if you haven't got someone better lined up. The appointment of Souness proves we didn't have. Douggie Hall's suggestion he was sacked because we were headed towards relegation is as shameful as it was patently untrue.

 

correct, it also shows that the Halls were instrumental in the running of the club [of course they must have been] but that still won't stop cretins like Renton to continue blaming one person who had less than 30% of shares taking the blame for everything. Not exactly the sort of view smart lads should be spouting.....

Did you not agree with the rest of it then?

 

yes, I have posted - on here or NO - before that they did have someone lined up who agreed to take over then changed their mind at the last moment. And it was not Steve Bruce.

Sounds a bit of a convenient excuse to me like.

 

been telling people this for years.

 

It is true though.

It could have come from Shepherd himself and I'd still take it with a massive pinch of salt. Sounds just like something he'd say tbh, i.e. making an initial approach for a top manager, getting some promising responses then saying the dirty was done on him when it didn't work out.

 

The manager concerned told his chairman at the time he was leaving, then changed his mind.

Who was it btw? And what was your source?

I already know you won't answer

 

 

That's right. I won't, because I can't.

Of course you can. No one knows who you are on here anyway and the people are no longer at the club. Difficult to see any major consequences for revealing the source or the manager. It's just hearsay on a messageboard. It's your choice to keep it to yourself and that's fine but if you're going to bring it up without being able to back it up you can't blame people for being sceptical.

 

you can't when the bloke is still in football, albeit with another club now. The person was only one of a small number who knew too. I know people will be sceptical, but I can't help that.

[Phil 6]

i think even as fat fred's biggest fan, you would admit that he got that one wrong. souness replacing sbr for me marked the beginning of our current plight. excacerbated by the fact that fat fred backed him to the hilt.

 

hmmm.....well, I remember - at the time - the team being booed for finishing 5th in the league and a growing feeling that Sir Bob was starting to get things wrong and needed replaced. Still, I expect some people will try and deny this is true.

 

 

I recall it very differently.

 

 

Shepard totally undermind SBR authority in august just before the season was about to start by telling the press his contract would not be renewed.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...ted/3943617.stm

 

This culminated in Dyer refusing to start the season on the right wing, and SBR dropped him to the bench.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/tyne/content/articles...le_result.shtml

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/...obson-down.html

 

This is also why the mongs in the crowd and on the board thought Souness was the strong minded person we needed.

 

 

Rather than fining the player and telling him he'd rot in the reserves, he sacked the manager with no backup plan. Nice one Fred.

 

 

This chain of events are where all my disdain toward Shepard stems from.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Phil

[LeazesMag 0]

i think even as fat fred's biggest fan, you would admit that he got that one wrong. souness replacing sbr for me marked the beginning of our current plight. excacerbated by the fact that fat fred backed him to the hilt.

 

hmmm.....well, I remember - at the time - the team being booed for finishing 5th in the league and a growing feeling that Sir Bob was starting to get things wrong and needed replaced. Still, I expect some people will try and deny this is true.

 

 

I recall it very differently.

 

 

Shepard totally undermind SBR authority in august just before the season was about to start by telling the press his contract would not be renewed.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...ted/3943617.stm

 

This culminated in Dyer refusing to start the season on the right wing, and SBR dropped him to the bench.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/tyne/content/articles...le_result.shtml

 

 

This is also why the mongs in the crowd and on the board thought Souness was the strong minded person we needed.

 

 

Rather than fining the player and telling him he'd rot in the reserves, he sacked the manager with no back plan. Nice one Fred.

 

 

This chain of events are where all my disdain toward Shepard stems from.

 

See, this is a perfect example of what I said. He signed a 12 month rolling contract so should have been perfectly aware he only had 12 months left. This is what a rolling contract is.

 

Another point is Shepherd's use of the word "we". Not "I" when talking about the contract.

 

By all means, blame someone with less than a 30% shareholding for making the decisions single handed if you want to.

 

The club could do with someone of the ambition of the Halls and Shepherd now though, just like they needed it for decades prior to 1992.

[Phil 6]

He talked to the press, which is what underminded the manager.

[Christmas Tree 4827]

i think even as fat fred's biggest fan, you would admit that he got that one wrong. souness replacing sbr for me marked the beginning of our current plight. excacerbated by the fact that fat fred backed him to the hilt.

 

hmmm.....well, I remember - at the time - the team being booed for finishing 5th in the league and a growing feeling that Sir Bob was starting to get things wrong and needed replaced. Still, I expect some people will try and deny this is true.

 

 

I recall it very differently.

 

 

Shepard totally undermind SBR authority in august just before the season was about to start by telling the press his contract would not be renewed.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...ted/3943617.stm

 

This culminated in Dyer refusing to start the season on the right wing, and SBR dropped him to the bench.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/tyne/content/articles...le_result.shtml

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/...obson-down.html

 

This is also why the mongs in the crowd and on the board thought Souness was the strong minded person we needed.

 

 

Rather than fining the player and telling him he'd rot in the reserves, he sacked the manager with no backup plan. Nice one Fred.

 

 

This chain of events are where all my disdain toward Shepard stems from.

 

 

All of what you talk about follows a season when a lot of people thought he had lost it and were grumbling about him generally culminating in the 5,000 lap of honour.

 

I am sure all of this would have started to effect the judgement of the re-actionary shepherd.

 

They should have had a manager ready to take over as soon as the season finished.

[LeazesMag 0]

He talked to the press, which is what underminded the manager.

 

 

But BBC Sport understands that Robson was told back in May that his current deal will not be extended when it ends at the end of the current season .

[NUFC_Mag 0]

Any prospective buyer who is prepared to inherit debts to former owners which far outweigh the actual value in the club would need to be clinically certified.

 

Forget these 'loans'. They do not exist. They are merely paper transactions to simplify Ashley's tax position. When you are faces with a buyout situation where there are shareholder loans then these loans are considered as quasi-equity and settled into the overall bargain. Kitman could not be more wrong- the debt should be totally written off, at a discount, as part of the wholesale price.

 

People are not buying this club to make money. Football is a SHIT business. You are better off putting your money in government bonds and going off for a wank.

 

People are buying this for the control element. Leaving in massive debt to former owners removes this element of control and would negate the one reason for actually buying the club.

 

If we are sold, the intercompany loans would be gone, or we'd be in the hands of genuine idiots.

 

These loans do exist...they reflect the true cost of Newcastle United following a regime of excentric spending followed by relegation

and after such patterns of behaviour one would expect a high degree of debt.

 

Ashley loaned the £100m into the club to pay Shepherds debts and understandably wishes this to be transfered in the case of a new owner; it is unrealistic to expect him to pay the financial burden of our club alone and accept a lower label price. It is probably the reason he couldnt find a buyer last time round and I predict if he cant find anyone wishing to inherit such debt, then we will be with him for sometime. Although negotiations around this £100m figure are possible, to expect him to write it fully off are naive.

 

Also, can you elaborate on what you mean by "control factor," investors will indeed look at potential financial gains (present through TV and commerical channels) and if run correctly, a football club is a potentially lucrative, if risky business. Claiming that Newcastle will be purchased simply on controlling egoistic grounds is simply not true.

 

You view is idealistic and does not consider Mike Ashleys capitalist, self interested motivations

Edited February 26, 2010 by NUFC_Mag

[Phil 6]

He talked to the press, which is what underminded the manager.

 

 

But BBC Sport understands that Robson was told back in May that his current deal will not be extended when it ends at the end of the current season .

 

 

Be blind to facts if you want.

 

 

When asked by the BBC,

'Robson reacted angrily to Shepherd's announcement that his contract would not be renewed, claiming he was unaware any such decision had been made' ... and said "I need a dialogue with the chairman"

 

When asked by the BBC, Shepherd confirmed

"We have no plans to extend that arrangement."

 

 

Sound like he was running his mouth off to me.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Phil

[Matt 0]

NUFC Mag- you have entirely missed my point. I'm not saying the loans don't physically exist but they would be factored into any sale price. Most (around £70m) of the £100m was actually to refinance sensibly-priced debt occured when expanding the stadium. The rest was to plug the horrific cash black hole at the time.

 

As for 'control'- if a new owner still owed Ashley all that money, he'd need to run the club to pay the interest. And when those loans expire and banks rightly won't touch us with a bargepole, Ashley can re-negotiate the terms upwards, putting even more pressure on the club to make cash just to pay the interest on the loans. Who would really be determining how the club is run? The creditors of course, ie Ashley. He'd still be controlling the club. Even worse when that creditor will know exactly how your business is run and get his accountants to work out just how much he can squeeze out without killing the club entirely.

 

Expecting him to write it off is not naive, its standard practice. The club, if sold, should be done on an external debt basis only. Leaving us still on the hook to Ashley would be catastophic.

[LeazesMag 0]

He talked to the press, which is what underminded the manager.

 

 

But BBC Sport understands that Robson was told back in May that his current deal will not be extended when it ends at the end of the current season .

 

 

Be blind to facts if you want.

 

 

When asked by the BBC,

'Robson reacted angrily to Shepherd's announcement that his contract would not be renewed, claiming he was unaware any such decision had been made' ... and said "I need a dialogue with the chairman"

 

When asked by the BBC, Shepherd confirmed

"We have no plans to extend that arrangement."

 

 

Sound like he was running his mouth off to me.

 

 

But BBC Sport understands that Robson was told back in May that his current deal will not be extended when it ends at the end of the current season .

 

how did the "BBC understand........" - do you think they were also running their mouth off too ?

 

Fact is, a rolling contract is precisely that. Any party can give 12 months notice at any time. I don't see your problem, if the manager was told first and then later was asked a question by the press about it.

[PaddockLad 17653]

And almost as if it was planned...:

 

Hughton Thanks Ashley for Cash

 

(Sorry if already been posted in some form)

 

"planning"..........

 

according to wankers like Renton and Baggio a few years ago, this was the key to a golden future the likes of which Fat Fred and the Halls had never delivered

 

You could not make it up if you tried.

 

 

Talking bollocks and comparing me to Baggio now, nice one . All I said was it would have made sense to plan for Robson's replacement, rather than sack him 5 games into a season with the transfer window shut and no replacement, hence ending up with Souness.

 

 

See, this is an area I have mentioned before, at the time, and was roundly condemned by clever dicks like you, but I was and still am correct, when you harped on about this "planning" business. The ONLY thing that matter is getting a manager who gets results ie knows what he is doing. Did you say the same thing when Gullit was replaced by Sir Bob a handful of games into the season ie "bad planning"

 

You spout complete bollocks as usual Renton.

 

 

i think renton's post is spot on tbh. don't sack a gem of a manager like robson when there isn't a better alternative.

 

i think even as fat fred's biggest fan, you would admit that he got that one wrong. souness replacing sbr for me marked the beginning of our current plight. excacerbated by the fact that fat fred backed him to the hilt.

 

hmmm.....well, I remember - at the time - the team being booed for finishing 5th in the league and a growing feeling that Sir Bob was starting to get things wrong and needed replaced. Still, I expect some people will try and deny this is true.

 

His point is about timing and "planning", not the quality of the manager. MY point is about the quality of the manager, there is no "bad time" to get a quality manager.

 

 

These are the memories I have of his last season. In particular he seemed to "forget" about being able to use substitutes and as such they were always in the last 10 minutes.

 

Didnt only 5,000 or so stay for the lap of honour that year which really pissed SBR off.

 

correct. Why do people disregard this. Were they not there or something, or just have a selective memory ?

 

You're spot on about the fans...they influenced a weak and foolish man (in this case) who, seeing as he was drawing a 6 figure sum from the club every season in a salary may have been expected to see a bigger picture....For me Shep thought he knew more about football than Sir Bob on this issue which is patent bollocks. Why not back the man who had delivered for him in the previous two seasons? Why not back the man and be stronger than the rabble? Theres a significant minority of Arsenal fans who want rid of Wenger...do you think the Arsenal board are going to be weak enough to sack him?

 

Shep shot the goose who'd been laying golden eggs for him....and in doing so he laid the foundations for his own downfall at the club....but it has to be said Sir Bob was dreadfully let down by the fans as well.

[NUFC_Mag 0]

NUFC Mag- you have entirely missed my point. I'm not saying the loans don't physically exist but they would be factored into any sale price. Most (around £70m) of the £100m was actually to refinance sensibly-priced debt occured when expanding the stadium. The rest was to plug the horrific cash black hole at the time.

 

As for 'control'- if a new owner still owed Ashley all that money, he'd need to run the club to pay the interest. And when those loans expire and banks rightly won't touch us with a bargepole, Ashley can re-negotiate the terms upwards, putting even more pressure on the club to make cash just to pay the interest on the loans. Who would really be determining how the club is run? The creditors of course, ie Ashley. He'd still be controlling the club. Even worse when that creditor will know exactly how your business is run and get his accountants to work out just how much he can squeeze out without killing the club entirely.

 

Expecting him to write it off is not naive, its standard practice. The club, if sold, should be done on an external debt basis only. Leaving us still on the hook to Ashley would be catastophic.

 

Matt, I think I am finally with you, although I think we will have to agree to disagree on whether this is 'standard practice' or not. I concur that the implications would be catastrohpic for Newcastle United if we were in a position of debt to him, however, we have seen what a ruthless capitalist Ashley is, and the official finance books published in 2008 say in writing that this £100 is transferable to the new owners. Consider that a drastically reduced wage bill will ameliorate the level of debt relative to turnover, yet whether or not this is at a level which is deemed acceptable remains to be seen.

 

Perhaps Ashley will be willing to negiotiate upon these figures or perhaps he will opt to run the club on threadbare cost levels and gradually recoup that £100m. Hopefully next year we will be able to shed more light on this debate.

[Christmas Tree 4827]

Dont know if this has already being posted.

 

Simon Bird

 

Is Mike Ashley finally listening and making sensible decisions?

 

 

One wage bill I’ve no problem with Mick Ashley slashing is Newcastle’s - and he’s certainly done that this season trimming £40 million from the accounts, yet still the Geordies are top of the table.

 

After the last two years on Tyneside I am still loathe to say much good about Ashley. He’s got a long long way to go before the damage he’s done is repaired, broken bonds are restored and respect is regained.

 

But it appears a solid job has been made of the transfer window, albeit from our low expectations.

 

He has backed Chris Hughton, made sensible signings which undoubtedly leave the squad stronger than on January 1, and he’s not over committed the club, signing young players, or doing business on loan.

 

Gone are the days when Newcastle blundered into transfer negotiations throwing around £3 million a year contracts as the norm, and blew rivals out of the water with massive cash bids.

 

Ashley made those mistakes in his first summer in charge when he allowed Sam Allardyce burn a fortune on the likes of Joey Barton, Alan Smith and David Rozenhal.

 

A bit of cunning is needed. Mike Williamson could prove a bargain buy in defence, Danny Simpson will do a job at right back, Wayne Routledge adds pace to the right wing. Leon Best’s three year contract is a surprise as we his arrival in a white Bentley, but I’m sure Kevin Nolan will knock any grand pretensions out of him.

 

Loan signing Patrick Van Aanholt could win a permanent deal and Fitz Hall is cover.

 

Newcastle refused to be mugged by Leeds for Jermaine Beckford (at 26 why wasn’t he already at a bigger club?) and wouldn’t pay Victor Moses his £1 million a year wage demands.

 

I only ask the question:

 

Is Ashley finally getting Newcastle on a solid financial footing ahead of promotion? Is he finally listening and making sensible decisions?

 

 

Indeed he is sir, indeed he is.