Alan Pardew - Poltroon sacked by a forrin team

[manc-mag 1]

I think they had a clear view of how the budget was going to go down and they wanted a yes man on board for that and Pardew fit that bill. That's the 'holding together' aspect of it, because he will continue to toe the party line and create the conditions for unity far more so than a manager who could reasonably claim they'd been misled about the clubs plans. If he turns out to be a competent manager against that backdrop (and it presents management issues of itself, perhaps even the most challenging single issue), then in that respect it will have been a 'good' decision from the board.

 

They were certainly looking for a yes man but if that was their prime reason for appointing Pardew then it was a ridiculous one. We've already seen that Pardew has vented his frustration in public about the club's attempts to sign a striker this summer, I can't remember Hughton making such comments. Hughton was already doing a good job of holding the team together in the face of a lack of investment, though I have a feeling that he did so by creating a siege mentality against the board, something Ashley obviously wasn't happy with.

 

My point is that whether Pardew is a good football manager was a secondary consideration in his appointment and should it turn out that he actually does have the team playing good, winning football then that'll be a stroke of luck rather than a stroke of genius from the board.

 

Have to disagree, Pardew has seen his established big earners sold from under him and seen £35 million flow into the club in one go without being able to spend it and not made a peep in relative terms. At least in respect of the first point, Nolan, Barton and Enrique going will have been foreseen/desired by the powers that be. Colo will also go in about a year. That's 2x club captains. As a board, if you know that's what you're about to embark upon, while at the same time adopting the player acquisition process we have, it makes absolute sense to have a manager that comes in and face-to-face when putting pen to paper has to say "yes, I'm on board with that".

[PaddockLad 17698]

Can't see how he's done anymore than Hughton. If anything Hughton was even more reluctant to toe the party line so get the vote over AP from me

Can you give an example of Hughton's reluctance to toe the party line?

 

He played hell when Carroll was sold and not replaced and was sacked soon after.

 

Pardew has had Barton, Enrique and Nolan flogged and has barely grumbled. Let's not pretend Pardew wasn't solely employed as a YES man just because Joey Barton said something nice about him.

 

Neither could hold a candle to Keegan or Robson either btw. Like either of those would have stood for MA changing the name of the ground, plastering huge signs everywhere or buying and selling players behind the managers backs.

That happened to Robson, and he stood for it.

 

Can you give an example of this during Sir Bob's time here?

 

The sands were shifting beneath my feet.

 

Towards the end of that season, Charlie Woods came into my office. "Bobby, you won't believe this, but David Pleat has been on and wants to know what's up with Lee Bowyer," he said. David was the director of football at Tottenham Hotspur.

 

"David Pleat's been on the phone asking what?" I replied incredulously.

 

Charlie ploughed on with his story. "David was asking whether Lee is injured or something. He said, "The reason I'm asking is that he's been offered to me."

 

"The kids worth 4 million," I erupted. "Who's offered him to Spurs?"

 

Charlie had the answer - "The chairman."

 

Freddy Shepherd had apparently rung David Giess, Bowyer's agent, saying, "Get him out of this club. I want him out. I'm not paying his salary," and so on and so on. He hadn't come to me for my opinion or asked, "Are you happy with Bowyer?"

 

I realised Bowyer wasn't playing very well and so did the chairman, but his response was to take the law into his own hands.

 

Bolton did manage to poach Gary Speed from us, however, and therein lies another tale of how disjointed the manager-chairman relationship had become. On our tour of the Far East, John Carver suddenly informed me, “We’ve had an offer for Gary Speed from Bolton.” I knew nothing about it, so I went in search of the chairman for clarification. On no account did I want Gary Speed to leave.

 

First I caught up with the player himself. “Gary, what’s all this about you wanting to go to Bolton Wanderers? I know nothing about it. The chairman hasn’t mentioned it to me. When John Carver told me an hour ago I was aghast. What do you want to go to Bolton for?”

 

“The club are going to let me go,” Gary said. “If you don’t know anything about it, you’d better see the chairman.” “As far as I’m concerned, you’re not going to Bolton Wanderers,” I told him. “You’re staying here.”

 

That Saturday night, the day of our game, I tried the chairman’s room, reception, the restaurant and bar. Eventually, I was told he was out. I was so angry I sat in the foyer, waiting, for half an hour.

 

Finally, the chairman’s figure appeared in the doorway and I confronted him there and then.

 

Under cross-examination he denied all knowledge of Gary’s impending move. It was heading into the realms of farce.

 

The next step, naturally, was to go back to Gary. I spoke to him on our flight from Hong Kong. “The chairman says he knows nothing about this Bolton thing,” I said and left it there.

 

We arrived back in Newcastle on the Monday morning and, early that afternoon, the chairman called me. “Gary Speed is here with me, he wants to see you. He wants to say goodbye,” he said.

 

“What?” I exclaimed.

 

The deal had been completed that morning. Fifty years in the game had taught me that you cannot construct a transfer in four hours. The idea that a player of Gary Speed’s calibre can be sold in four hours is absurd and yet I was being told throughout the weekend that the club knew nothing of Bolton’s interest in one of our most valued players.

 

Robson also wanted to sell Shearer to Liverpool after they offered £5 million for him, but Shepherd wouldn't let him do so.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/...es-decline.html

 

All true. Speed was on his way out as a player and we'd bought (expensively and on paper, quite well iyam) his replacement/s in Jenas and Viana. Bowyer was apparently disliked by Shepherd and seeing as how he was brought in on free Shep may have seen a profit to be made and a wage off the bill. And I thiink you've read the Shearer thing wrong. They got an offer and it was turned down. Shearer was bigger than the club and Shepherd both knew it and allowed it to happen when he shouldve been replaced before he retired. Sir Bob's book (your source for the other two examples) doesnt state that he wanted to sell him, it says he wanted to bring in Emile M'penza and ease Shearer out of the first team picture.

 

I didnt state that it hadnt happened. I gave a plausible reason why things like that do happen at football clubs. There are others as you've stated. What about the rest of my post though?....any manager of KK or Sir Bob's vintage wouldnt put up with whats going on at SJP in 2011. Things are changing in football in this country, things are going a lot more "continental"...we've got that set up here. I just can't see where its going to go with a manager not being given the profits made on players to reinvest in the squad, like the financial support Redknapp has received at Spurs. We're not going to progress as a football club with the policy we have here at the moment.

[PaddockLad 17698]

Howay man, stop posting real facts that go against the flow !!!

 

Be alright, Leazes'll have a different book that says something different from the horses mouth, from a different time than the horses mouth said the above.

 

That was my question that was being answered and not Leazes. What the fuck has it got to do with him in this thread?....you can answer my pioints if you like, but anyone would think that you were trying to hijack this thread to start a petty argument with him....again...

[ewerk 31225]

I think they had a clear view of how the budget was going to go down and they wanted a yes man on board for that and Pardew fit that bill. That's the 'holding together' aspect of it, because he will continue to toe the party line and create the conditions for unity far more so than a manager who could reasonably claim they'd been misled about the clubs plans. If he turns out to be a competent manager against that backdrop (and it presents management issues of itself, perhaps even the most challenging single issue), then in that respect it will have been a 'good' decision from the board.

 

They were certainly looking for a yes man but if that was their prime reason for appointing Pardew then it was a ridiculous one. We've already seen that Pardew has vented his frustration in public about the club's attempts to sign a striker this summer, I can't remember Hughton making such comments. Hughton was already doing a good job of holding the team together in the face of a lack of investment, though I have a feeling that he did so by creating a siege mentality against the board, something Ashley obviously wasn't happy with.

 

My point is that whether Pardew is a good football manager was a secondary consideration in his appointment and should it turn out that he actually does have the team playing good, winning football then that'll be a stroke of luck rather than a stroke of genius from the board.

 

Have to disagree, Pardew has seen his established big earners sold from under him and seen £35 million flow into the club in one go without being able to spend it and not made a peep in relative terms. At least in respect of the first point, Nolan, Barton and Enrique going will have been foreseen/desired by the powers that be. Colo will also go in about a year. That's 2x club captains. As a board, if you know that's what you're about to embark upon, while at the same time adopting the player acquisition process we have, it makes absolute sense to have a manager that comes in and face-to-face when putting pen to paper has to say "yes, I'm on board with that".

 

Let me get this straight, you think that given our situation, a yes man was more important than a genuinely good football manager?

[manc-mag 1]

Can't see how he's done anymore than Hughton. If anything Hughton was even more reluctant to toe the party line so get the vote over AP from me

Can you give an example of Hughton's reluctance to toe the party line?

 

He played hell when Carroll was sold and not replaced and was sacked soon after.

 

Pardew has had Barton, Enrique and Nolan flogged and has barely grumbled. Let's not pretend Pardew wasn't solely employed as a YES man just because Joey Barton said something nice about him.

 

Neither could hold a candle to Keegan or Robson either btw. Like either of those would have stood for MA changing the name of the ground, plastering huge signs everywhere or buying and selling players behind the managers backs.

That happened to Robson, and he stood for it.

 

Can you give an example of this during Sir Bob's time here?

 

The sands were shifting beneath my feet.

 

Towards the end of that season, Charlie Woods came into my office. "Bobby, you won't believe this, but David Pleat has been on and wants to know what's up with Lee Bowyer," he said. David was the director of football at Tottenham Hotspur.

 

"David Pleat's been on the phone asking what?" I replied incredulously.

 

Charlie ploughed on with his story. "David was asking whether Lee is injured or something. He said, "The reason I'm asking is that he's been offered to me."

 

"The kids worth 4 million," I erupted. "Who's offered him to Spurs?"

 

Charlie had the answer - "The chairman."

 

Freddy Shepherd had apparently rung David Giess, Bowyer's agent, saying, "Get him out of this club. I want him out. I'm not paying his salary," and so on and so on. He hadn't come to me for my opinion or asked, "Are you happy with Bowyer?"

 

I realised Bowyer wasn't playing very well and so did the chairman, but his response was to take the law into his own hands.

 

Bolton did manage to poach Gary Speed from us, however, and therein lies another tale of how disjointed the manager-chairman relationship had become. On our tour of the Far East, John Carver suddenly informed me, “We’ve had an offer for Gary Speed from Bolton.” I knew nothing about it, so I went in search of the chairman for clarification. On no account did I want Gary Speed to leave.

 

First I caught up with the player himself. “Gary, what’s all this about you wanting to go to Bolton Wanderers? I know nothing about it. The chairman hasn’t mentioned it to me. When John Carver told me an hour ago I was aghast. What do you want to go to Bolton for?”

 

“The club are going to let me go,” Gary said. “If you don’t know anything about it, you’d better see the chairman.” “As far as I’m concerned, you’re not going to Bolton Wanderers,” I told him. “You’re staying here.”

 

That Saturday night, the day of our game, I tried the chairman’s room, reception, the restaurant and bar. Eventually, I was told he was out. I was so angry I sat in the foyer, waiting, for half an hour.

 

Finally, the chairman’s figure appeared in the doorway and I confronted him there and then.

 

Under cross-examination he denied all knowledge of Gary’s impending move. It was heading into the realms of farce.

 

The next step, naturally, was to go back to Gary. I spoke to him on our flight from Hong Kong. “The chairman says he knows nothing about this Bolton thing,” I said and left it there.

 

We arrived back in Newcastle on the Monday morning and, early that afternoon, the chairman called me. “Gary Speed is here with me, he wants to see you. He wants to say goodbye,” he said.

 

“What?” I exclaimed.

 

The deal had been completed that morning. Fifty years in the game had taught me that you cannot construct a transfer in four hours. The idea that a player of Gary Speed’s calibre can be sold in four hours is absurd and yet I was being told throughout the weekend that the club knew nothing of Bolton’s interest in one of our most valued players.

 

Robson also wanted to sell Shearer to Liverpool after they offered £5 million for him, but Shepherd wouldn't let him do so.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/...es-decline.html

 

All true. Speed was on his way out as a player and we'd bought (expensively and on paper, quite well iyam) his replacement/s in Jenas and Viana. Bowyer was apparently disliked by Shepherd and seeing as how he was brought in on free Shep may have seen a profit to be made and a wage off the bill. And I thiink you've read the Shearer thing wrong. They got an offer and it was turned down. Shearer was bigger than the club and Shepherd both knew it and allowed it to happen when he shouldve been replaced before he retired. Sir Bob's book (your source for the other two examples) doesnt state that he wanted to sell him, it says he wanted to bring in Emile M'penza and ease Shearer out of the first team picture.

 

I didnt state that it hadnt happened. I gave a plausible reason why things like that do happen at football clubs. There are others as you've stated. What about the rest of my post though?....any manager of KK or Sir Bob's vintage wouldnt put up with whats going on at SJP in 2011. Things are changing in football in this country, things are going a lot more "continental"...we've got that set up here. I just can't see where its going to go with a manager not being given the profits made on players to reinvest in the squad, like the financial support Redknapp has received at Spurs. We're not going to progress as a football club with the policy we have here at the moment.

 

Without making excuses for Ashley (because it isn't that), what actual sense is there in saying that profits on player transactions should be ringfenced for player acquisitions? It actually bears no relationship to the overall budget of the club. Also, in a way it endorses the practice of buying and then selling at a profit-the very thing that everyone is up in arms about.

 

I think you have to dissociate the two things tbh. Obviously it's easy for players to come out and say that's what should happen, but then they're only interested in that money ending up in their pockets at the end of the day and wouldn't have the first inkling as to the economy of running a football club-even if they are disposed to imply that they do

[manc-mag 1]

I think they had a clear view of how the budget was going to go down and they wanted a yes man on board for that and Pardew fit that bill. That's the 'holding together' aspect of it, because he will continue to toe the party line and create the conditions for unity far more so than a manager who could reasonably claim they'd been misled about the clubs plans. If he turns out to be a competent manager against that backdrop (and it presents management issues of itself, perhaps even the most challenging single issue), then in that respect it will have been a 'good' decision from the board.

 

They were certainly looking for a yes man but if that was their prime reason for appointing Pardew then it was a ridiculous one. We've already seen that Pardew has vented his frustration in public about the club's attempts to sign a striker this summer, I can't remember Hughton making such comments. Hughton was already doing a good job of holding the team together in the face of a lack of investment, though I have a feeling that he did so by creating a siege mentality against the board, something Ashley obviously wasn't happy with.

 

My point is that whether Pardew is a good football manager was a secondary consideration in his appointment and should it turn out that he actually does have the team playing good, winning football then that'll be a stroke of luck rather than a stroke of genius from the board.

 

Have to disagree, Pardew has seen his established big earners sold from under him and seen £35 million flow into the club in one go without being able to spend it and not made a peep in relative terms. At least in respect of the first point, Nolan, Barton and Enrique going will have been foreseen/desired by the powers that be. Colo will also go in about a year. That's 2x club captains. As a board, if you know that's what you're about to embark upon, while at the same time adopting the player acquisition process we have, it makes absolute sense to have a manager that comes in and face-to-face when putting pen to paper has to say "yes, I'm on board with that".

 

Let me get this straight, you think that given our situation, a yes man was more important than a genuinely good football manager?

 

No, I made that point in the post before.

[PaddockLad 17698]

Can't see how he's done anymore than Hughton. If anything Hughton was even more reluctant to toe the party line so get the vote over AP from me

Can you give an example of Hughton's reluctance to toe the party line?

 

He played hell when Carroll was sold and not replaced and was sacked soon after.

 

Pardew has had Barton, Enrique and Nolan flogged and has barely grumbled. Let's not pretend Pardew wasn't solely employed as a YES man just because Joey Barton said something nice about him.

 

Neither could hold a candle to Keegan or Robson either btw. Like either of those would have stood for MA changing the name of the ground, plastering huge signs everywhere or buying and selling players behind the managers backs.

That happened to Robson, and he stood for it.

 

Can you give an example of this during Sir Bob's time here?

 

The sands were shifting beneath my feet.

 

Towards the end of that season, Charlie Woods came into my office. "Bobby, you won't believe this, but David Pleat has been on and wants to know what's up with Lee Bowyer," he said. David was the director of football at Tottenham Hotspur.

 

"David Pleat's been on the phone asking what?" I replied incredulously.

 

Charlie ploughed on with his story. "David was asking whether Lee is injured or something. He said, "The reason I'm asking is that he's been offered to me."

 

"The kids worth 4 million," I erupted. "Who's offered him to Spurs?"

 

Charlie had the answer - "The chairman."

 

Freddy Shepherd had apparently rung David Giess, Bowyer's agent, saying, "Get him out of this club. I want him out. I'm not paying his salary," and so on and so on. He hadn't come to me for my opinion or asked, "Are you happy with Bowyer?"

 

I realised Bowyer wasn't playing very well and so did the chairman, but his response was to take the law into his own hands.

 

Bolton did manage to poach Gary Speed from us, however, and therein lies another tale of how disjointed the manager-chairman relationship had become. On our tour of the Far East, John Carver suddenly informed me, “We’ve had an offer for Gary Speed from Bolton.” I knew nothing about it, so I went in search of the chairman for clarification. On no account did I want Gary Speed to leave.

 

First I caught up with the player himself. “Gary, what’s all this about you wanting to go to Bolton Wanderers? I know nothing about it. The chairman hasn’t mentioned it to me. When John Carver told me an hour ago I was aghast. What do you want to go to Bolton for?”

 

“The club are going to let me go,” Gary said. “If you don’t know anything about it, you’d better see the chairman.” “As far as I’m concerned, you’re not going to Bolton Wanderers,” I told him. “You’re staying here.”

 

That Saturday night, the day of our game, I tried the chairman’s room, reception, the restaurant and bar. Eventually, I was told he was out. I was so angry I sat in the foyer, waiting, for half an hour.

 

Finally, the chairman’s figure appeared in the doorway and I confronted him there and then.

 

Under cross-examination he denied all knowledge of Gary’s impending move. It was heading into the realms of farce.

 

The next step, naturally, was to go back to Gary. I spoke to him on our flight from Hong Kong. “The chairman says he knows nothing about this Bolton thing,” I said and left it there.

 

We arrived back in Newcastle on the Monday morning and, early that afternoon, the chairman called me. “Gary Speed is here with me, he wants to see you. He wants to say goodbye,” he said.

 

“What?” I exclaimed.

 

The deal had been completed that morning. Fifty years in the game had taught me that you cannot construct a transfer in four hours. The idea that a player of Gary Speed’s calibre can be sold in four hours is absurd and yet I was being told throughout the weekend that the club knew nothing of Bolton’s interest in one of our most valued players.

 

Robson also wanted to sell Shearer to Liverpool after they offered £5 million for him, but Shepherd wouldn't let him do so.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/...es-decline.html

 

All true. Speed was on his way out as a player and we'd bought (expensively and on paper, quite well iyam) his replacement/s in Jenas and Viana. Bowyer was apparently disliked by Shepherd and seeing as how he was brought in on free Shep may have seen a profit to be made and a wage off the bill. And I thiink you've read the Shearer thing wrong. They got an offer and it was turned down. Shearer was bigger than the club and Shepherd both knew it and allowed it to happen when he shouldve been replaced before he retired. Sir Bob's book (your source for the other two examples) doesnt state that he wanted to sell him, it says he wanted to bring in Emile M'penza and ease Shearer out of the first team picture.

 

I didnt state that it hadnt happened. I gave a plausible reason why things like that do happen at football clubs. There are others as you've stated. What about the rest of my post though?....any manager of KK or Sir Bob's vintage wouldnt put up with whats going on at SJP in 2011. Things are changing in football in this country, things are going a lot more "continental"...we've got that set up here. I just can't see where its going to go with a manager not being given the profits made on players to reinvest in the squad, like the financial support Redknapp has received at Spurs. We're not going to progress as a football club with the policy we have here at the moment.

 

Without making excuses for Ashley (because it isn't that), what actual sense is there in saying that profits on player transactions should be ringfenced for player acquisitions? It actually bears no relationship to the overall budget of the club. Also, in a way it endorses the practice of buying and then selling at a profit-the very thing that everyone is up in arms about.

 

I think you have to dissociate the two things tbh. Obviously it's easy for players to come out and say that's what should happen, but then they're only interested in that money ending up in their pockets at the end of the day and wouldn't have the first inkling as to the economy of running a football club-even if they are disposed to imply that they do

 

I'm not an accountant or all that business literate tbh. But I can see Spurs selling Berbatov and Carrick and susequently qualifying for the champions league, something they didnt acheive with those players in the side. And Spurs acheived it with a wages cieling. And the'll be there or there abouts 4-6th this season again, possibly even higher. Thats because they got a manager of proven ability and gave him some money to make his own choices with. They generated a lot of that cash by selling players they already had. All that is vastly different to how things have been done here, apart from selling our best players.

 

What the players have subsequently said has to be taken with a bucket load of salt as you say. Fuck knows what Barton and Nolan wanted in the first place, but there was a chance for compromise iyam, not just shoving them out the door. So if theyd signed at the start of the year would Enrique have stayed?...probably not, but we'll never know because there was no intention to keep him anyway, judging by his contract offer of the same money he was on. And as you say we dont know if new contracts for those 3 wouldve made us financially head towards the receivership courts but I doubt if it they would have. Look at Spurs...We're 10-15k fans a fortnight better off than them and we act like fuckin Wigan. I suppose we're all guessing to a large extent but we're going nowhere and it doesnt matter if Pardew is the secret lovechild of the little known unholy union of Sir Matt Busby,Jose Mourihno and Roy of the fuckin Rovers thats not going to change with the clowns we have in charge.

[manc-mag 1]

I'm not an accountant or all that business literate tbh. But I can see Spurs selling Berbatov and Carrick and susequently qualifying for the champions league, something they didnt acheive with those players in the side. And Spurs acheived it with a wages cieling. And the'll be there or there abouts 4-6th this season again, possibly even higher. Thats because they got a manager of proven ability and gave him some money to make his own choices with. They generated a lot of that cash by selling players they already had. All that is vastly different to how things have been done here, apart from selling our best players.

 

What the players have subsequently said has to be taken with a bucket load of salt as you say. Fuck knows what Barton and Nolan wanted in the first place, but there was a chance for compromise iyam, not just shoving them out the door. So if theyd signed at the start of the year would Enrique have stayed?...probably not, but we'll never know because there was no intention to keep him anyway, judging by his contract offer of the same money he was on. And as you say we dont know if new contracts for those 3 wouldve made us financially head towards the receivership courts but I doubt if it they would have. Look at Spurs...We're 10-15k fans a fortnight better off than them and we act like fuckin Wigan. I suppose we're all guessing to a large extent but we're going nowhere and it doesnt matter if Pardew is the secret lovechild of the little known unholy union of Sir Matt Busby,Jose Mourihno and Roy of the fuckin Rovers thats not going to change with the clowns we have in charge.

 

Nah, fair do's that's pretty much the way I feel too. I wasn't suggesting retaining Barton, Nolan and Enrique would have seen us bust either, I just think it was never realistically going to happen in the context of the pay re-structuring we've rolled out. More tellingly I think not bringing a striker in last window was a massive let down and the sort of thing that really distinguishes us from Spurs.

 

Totally incidental point, but I'd be interested to know just how much better our full house matchday revenues are than Spurs like. No doubt slightly more, but then surely most tickets at Spuds cost more than most at SJP? Better than the likes of Everton and Villa though, obviously.

[Park Life 71]

Think he's doing a decent job as it goes, but 'holding the club together' is a bridge too far.

[Guest alex]

Cunt of a man but a decent manager, to quote DannyB (iirc).

[snakehips 0]

Warped is an anagram of Pardew, I've just realised.

 

I bet he knew, but never let on.......the little tinker.

[LeazesMag 0]

I don't know about 'lucky' to have him. He was a very deliberate choice to perform a very clear function, at the expense of an encumbent, good manager. If he does well for us you'd therefore have to concede that it was a good administrative decision, if he does badly then the reverse will apply. But luck won't enter into it one way or another.

 

In terms of what Barton's getting at ie holding the place together because the players want more cash-well yes that will probably be the case to a large degree, but that's very clearly part of his remit. Ie he's the public mouthpiece for the current spending and remuneration policy and he knows he will lose existing players to it/lose transfer targets to it and then have to spin that positively to the media. But again that's the deal he's signed up for. He had the benefit of knowing all this when he took the job on, so it's not like a rug has been pulled from under him, and therefore not as adverse as Barton would imply.

 

Basically Barton should just be honest and say money is his and other players priority and that's an equal cause of the tensions.

 

Pardew is a better manager than Hughton. Easily.

[LeazesMag 0]

Can't see how he's done anymore than Hughton. If anything Hughton was even more reluctant to toe the party line so get the vote over AP from me

Can you give an example of Hughton's reluctance to toe the party line?

 

He played hell when Carroll was sold and not replaced and was sacked soon after.

 

Pardew has had Barton, Enrique and Nolan flogged and has barely grumbled. Let's not pretend Pardew wasn't solely employed as a YES man just because Joey Barton said something nice about him.

 

Neither could hold a candle to Keegan or Robson either btw. Like either of those would have stood for MA changing the name of the ground, plastering huge signs everywhere or buying and selling players behind the managers backs.

That happened to Robson, and he stood for it.

 

Can you give an example of this during Sir Bob's time here?

 

The sands were shifting beneath my feet.

 

Towards the end of that season, Charlie Woods came into my office. "Bobby, you won't believe this, but David Pleat has been on and wants to know what's up with Lee Bowyer," he said. David was the director of football at Tottenham Hotspur.

 

"David Pleat's been on the phone asking what?" I replied incredulously.

 

Charlie ploughed on with his story. "David was asking whether Lee is injured or something. He said, "The reason I'm asking is that he's been offered to me."

 

"The kids worth 4 million," I erupted. "Who's offered him to Spurs?"

 

Charlie had the answer - "The chairman."

 

Freddy Shepherd had apparently rung David Giess, Bowyer's agent, saying, "Get him out of this club. I want him out. I'm not paying his salary," and so on and so on. He hadn't come to me for my opinion or asked, "Are you happy with Bowyer?"

 

I realised Bowyer wasn't playing very well and so did the chairman, but his response was to take the law into his own hands.

 

Bolton did manage to poach Gary Speed from us, however, and therein lies another tale of how disjointed the manager-chairman relationship had become. On our tour of the Far East, John Carver suddenly informed me, “We’ve had an offer for Gary Speed from Bolton.” I knew nothing about it, so I went in search of the chairman for clarification. On no account did I want Gary Speed to leave.

 

First I caught up with the player himself. “Gary, what’s all this about you wanting to go to Bolton Wanderers? I know nothing about it. The chairman hasn’t mentioned it to me. When John Carver told me an hour ago I was aghast. What do you want to go to Bolton for?”

 

“The club are going to let me go,” Gary said. “If you don’t know anything about it, you’d better see the chairman.” “As far as I’m concerned, you’re not going to Bolton Wanderers,” I told him. “You’re staying here.”

 

That Saturday night, the day of our game, I tried the chairman’s room, reception, the restaurant and bar. Eventually, I was told he was out. I was so angry I sat in the foyer, waiting, for half an hour.

 

Finally, the chairman’s figure appeared in the doorway and I confronted him there and then.

 

Under cross-examination he denied all knowledge of Gary’s impending move. It was heading into the realms of farce.

 

The next step, naturally, was to go back to Gary. I spoke to him on our flight from Hong Kong. “The chairman says he knows nothing about this Bolton thing,” I said and left it there.

 

We arrived back in Newcastle on the Monday morning and, early that afternoon, the chairman called me. “Gary Speed is here with me, he wants to see you. He wants to say goodbye,” he said.

 

“What?” I exclaimed.

 

The deal had been completed that morning. Fifty years in the game had taught me that you cannot construct a transfer in four hours. The idea that a player of Gary Speed’s calibre can be sold in four hours is absurd and yet I was being told throughout the weekend that the club knew nothing of Bolton’s interest in one of our most valued players.

 

Robson also wanted to sell Shearer to Liverpool after they offered £5 million for him, but Shepherd wouldn't let him do so.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/...es-decline.html

 

Howay man, stop posting real facts that go against the flow !!!

 

Be alright, Leazes'll have a different book that says something different from the horses mouth, from a different time than the horses mouth said the above.

 

obsessed.

 

I suppose Alex Ferguson having to sell Ronaldo is the same, by your criteria ?

 

Where is the Andy Carroll cash ? When are we going to qualify for europe again and act bigger than the likes of Bolton, Blackburn etc ? When will soopa Mike attract supporters back to games again, that he has lost ?

 

What PaddockLad says is absolutely correct btw.

Edited September 19, 2011 by LeazesMag

[Happy Face 29]

I don't know about 'lucky' to have him. He was a very deliberate choice to perform a very clear function, at the expense of an encumbent, good manager. If he does well for us you'd therefore have to concede that it was a good administrative decision, if he does badly then the reverse will apply. But luck won't enter into it one way or another.

 

In terms of what Barton's getting at ie holding the place together because the players want more cash-well yes that will probably be the case to a large degree, but that's very clearly part of his remit. Ie he's the public mouthpiece for the current spending and remuneration policy and he knows he will lose existing players to it/lose transfer targets to it and then have to spin that positively to the media. But again that's the deal he's signed up for. He had the benefit of knowing all this when he took the job on, so it's not like a rug has been pulled from under him, and therefore not as adverse as Barton would imply.

 

Basically Barton should just be honest and say money is his and other players priority and that's an equal cause of the tensions.

 

Pardew is a better manager than Hughton. Easily.

 

NUFC PL records

 

Hughton P16 W5 D4 L7 - Win% = 31% - Points% = 39%

Pardoo P26 W7 D12 L7 - Win% = 27% - Points% = 42%

 

Close

[LeazesMag 0]

I don't know about 'lucky' to have him. He was a very deliberate choice to perform a very clear function, at the expense of an encumbent, good manager. If he does well for us you'd therefore have to concede that it was a good administrative decision, if he does badly then the reverse will apply. But luck won't enter into it one way or another.

 

In terms of what Barton's getting at ie holding the place together because the players want more cash-well yes that will probably be the case to a large degree, but that's very clearly part of his remit. Ie he's the public mouthpiece for the current spending and remuneration policy and he knows he will lose existing players to it/lose transfer targets to it and then have to spin that positively to the media. But again that's the deal he's signed up for. He had the benefit of knowing all this when he took the job on, so it's not like a rug has been pulled from under him, and therefore not as adverse as Barton would imply.

 

Basically Barton should just be honest and say money is his and other players priority and that's an equal cause of the tensions.

 

Pardew is a better manager than Hughton. Easily.

 

NUFC PL records

 

Hughton P16 W5 D4 L7 - Win% = 31% - Points% = 39%

Pardoo P26 W7 D12 L7 - Win% = 27% - Points% = 42%

 

Close

 

thats as maybe, but you aren't one of the clowns on here that will actually believe any of that is the complete picture.

[McFaul 35]

Has Jaythesoutherntwat given his opinion on this yet?

Has it been confirmed?

 

As I said yesterday I was waiting to see what happens, IF its Pardew then its a fucking disaster and he's not an improvement on what we had

Doilham

You are a bit of a retard

Says the lad who was asking what we'd say if we got Jol and he got us to 6th.

Yes, the word being IF

 

A decent manager plus a good transfer budget

 

IF

Which was never going to happen, which is why people were annoyed at Hughton's dismissal. FFS, what a fucking bungalow this lad is.

It might have taken me ten month, but the penny finally dropped. Got nowt upstairs.

[Guest alex]

I stand by that comment.

[Happy Face 29]

He's on Talksport right now.

 

Empty platitudes so far. Can't see him saying owt interesting.

[Lake Bells tits 1]

hes a right prick/slythertongue who has gotten lucky with a string of results, owt else. Arsenal, sunderland and fulham not to mention QPR could/should have gone the other way...

[StoneColdStephenIreland 74]

He's on Talksport right now.

 

Empty platitudes so far. Can't see him saying owt interesting.

 

I'm guessing nothing note worthy was said?

[jaythesouthernmag 0]

hes a right prick/slythertongue who has gotten lucky with a string of results, owt else. Arsenal, sunderland and fulham not to mention QPR could/should have gone the other way...

One of the best defences in the prem so far

Getting goals out of Leon Best

Playing Villa off the park last week

 

All just luck?

 

Fuck of you mong, he's doing very well considering what he's working with. People like you who are negative just for the sake of it must have a pretty sad life

[Happy Face 29]

He's on Talksport right now.

 

Empty platitudes so far. Can't see him saying owt interesting.

 

I'm guessing nothing note worthy was said?

 

He said Nile Ranger will never play for him again. He's gonna get together with Tiote, Shola and Sammy and drive-by the mo-fo.

[Barney 0]

He's on Talksport right now.

 

Empty platitudes so far. Can't see him saying owt interesting.

 

I'm guessing nothing note worthy was said?

 

He said Nile Ranger will never play for him again. He's gonna get together with Tiote, Shola and Sammy and drive-by the mo-fo.

 

 

100% ?

[Lake Bells tits 1]

hes a right prick/slythertongue who has gotten lucky with a string of results, owt else. Arsenal, sunderland and fulham not to mention QPR could/should have gone the other way...

One of the best defences in the prem so far

Getting goals out of Leon Best

Playing Villa off the park last week

 

All just luck?

Fuck of you mong, he's doing very well considering what he's working with. People like you who are negative just for the sake of it must have a pretty sad life

 

We have used up our luck for the entire season, bothroyd should have scored a hattrick alone in the QPR game.

One of the best defences in the league? I`d love you to tell me with a straight face that you consider our back-four amongst the most watertight..because it isnt. Gott mit uns when we face teams with strikers who can put away a ball..

 

and......

 

 

Yes.

Edited September 22, 2011 by Saltwater

[sandman02uk 0]

fuck off man, any team with a decent strike force is going to fucking rape us, I cant wait to see what this board is going to be like when city/manure put 5 or 6 past us