F.A.O Leazesmag

[NJS 4389]

Leazes, if Toonpack/NJS etc concede that the period 1992 - 2007 will never be surpassed under the current regime and that it saw us realise our potential because the chairman understood football and backed his managers, will you concede that the previous board had taken us as far as they could? In parcticular light of the new super rich owners in the game etc.

 

I've said on numerous occasions that the appointment of Allardyce was an admittance a change of direction was needed [same as after Gullit and Dalglish]. The point is, the new owner, "hasn't done better" has he ?

 

There is NO excuse for NUFC becoming a selling club again, selling our best players above the managers head and not backing him with the cash, and settling for competing at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn.

 

I would like an oil Sheikh or a Russian mega billionaire just like anybody else, but the new owner has not done better, and these people ALL said that anybody would do better. They wanted someone who would stop buying trophy players, stay out of the limelight, stop renting warehouses, taking small change dividends etc, but thought the ambition was automatic . My point was ALWAYS that the ambition was NOT automatic, so the next owner was not guaranteed to be better at all. And since he took over, we have been relegated, we set our sights lower, the profle and appeal of the club has gone down and accordingly revenues against our competitors, our best players look elsewhere to fulfill career ambitions. If THAT is better, and not a decline, what would they call a decline ? NJS is actually endorsing the fact that we shouldn't have spent more than 12.7m quid on transfers in over a decade, and shouldn't have expanded the stadium - or if he agrees with it, seems to think we should have done it without taking out a loan ? Does he think we should have saved the money up first ? It's mind boggling, and blind hatred gone mad.

 

Maybe they HAD taken us as far as they could, but no way in the world would we have been relegated and settled for competing at the levels we do now. My point is that - during their time - they reached levels which may not be matched for decades, yes. As I've also said, comparing it to the era now, is like saying Jackie Milburn wouldn't be as good as current players because he played with a heavier ball and heavier boots. You can only compete with the situation and competitors at the time. The new owner is not "better", despite the assertions that "anybody" would be.

 

No he didn't ,and now you are stating it as fact.

 

 

Over the entire length of the previous regime no profits were made which is perfectly fine as any spare money was spent on the team - great - we all want to see that.[/b]

 

 

That's what I said - where' the endorsment of 12.7m LM?

[LeazesMag 0]

Leazes, if Toonpack/NJS etc concede that the period 1992 - 2007 will never be surpassed under the current regime and that it saw us realise our potential because the chairman understood football and backed his managers, will you concede that the previous board had taken us as far as they could? In parcticular light of the new super rich owners in the game etc.

 

I've said on numerous occasions that the appointment of Allardyce was an admittance a change of direction was needed [same as after Gullit and Dalglish]. The point is, the new owner, "hasn't done better" has he ?

 

There is NO excuse for NUFC becoming a selling club again, selling our best players above the managers head and not backing him with the cash, and settling for competing at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn.

 

I would like an oil Sheikh or a Russian mega billionaire just like anybody else, but the new owner has not done better, and these people ALL said that anybody would do better. They wanted someone who would stop buying trophy players, stay out of the limelight, stop renting warehouses, taking small change dividends etc, but thought the ambition was automatic . My point was ALWAYS that the ambition was NOT automatic, so the next owner was not guaranteed to be better at all. And since he took over, we have been relegated, we set our sights lower, the profle and appeal of the club has gone down and accordingly revenues against our competitors, our best players look elsewhere to fulfill career ambitions. If THAT is better, and not a decline, what would they call a decline ? NJS is actually endorsing the fact that we shouldn't have spent more than 12.7m quid on transfers in over a decade, and shouldn't have expanded the stadium - or if he agrees with it, seems to think we should have done it without taking out a loan ? Does he think we should have saved the money up first ? It's mind boggling, and blind hatred gone mad.

 

Maybe they HAD taken us as far as they could, but no way in the world would we have been relegated and settled for competing at the levels we do now. My point is that - during their time - they reached levels which may not be matched for decades, yes. As I've also said, comparing it to the era now, is like saying Jackie Milburn wouldn't be as good as current players because he played with a heavier ball and heavier boots. You can only compete with the situation and competitors at the time. The new owner is not "better", despite the assertions that "anybody" would be.

 

No he didn't ,and now you are stating it as fact.

 

what IS he endorsing then ie how they got the money, or raised the money ? You are also appearing to endorse a club run on these lines, if not, state your alternative, and make it clear that by doing so you by defnition are also stating that all those league positions and Champions League runs should have been sacrified for "better financial stability".

 

This IS the financial model being put in place that you are endorsing, isn't it ? Yes or no ?

 

And you can answer the rest of the post in your own time. I'm sure you will take your time.

[NJS 4389]

There is NO excuse for NUFC becoming a selling club again, selling our best players above the managers head and not backing him with the cash, and settling for competing at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn.

 

How about we can't affford to be anything else in 2011 without a rich underwriter?

 

Where will the money for your push-on come from?

[LeazesMag 0]

Chez - at the end of the day, I've been saying what I'm saying here for years, they won't change my mind, only Mike Ashley can do that. I'm 100% sure that this will not happen.

 

Alternatively, I'll just stop "arguing" with them, and let them carry on their deluded ways, changing history, and moving the goalposts rather than admit they have been wrong.

[LeazesMag 0]

There is NO excuse for NUFC becoming a selling club again, selling our best players above the managers head and not backing him with the cash, and settling for competing at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn.

 

How about we can't affford to be anything else in 2011 without a rich underwriter?

 

Where will the money for your push-on come from?

 

answer the rest of the post and my questions to you or FFS stop making things up, "anybody but Fred" didn't do better, did they ?

 

Was that the basis for saying anybody would do better, at the time ? Yes or no ?

Edited May 20, 2011 by LeazesMag

[ChezGiven 0]

Leazes, if Toonpack/NJS etc concede that the period 1992 - 2007 will never be surpassed under the current regime and that it saw us realise our potential because the chairman understood football and backed his managers, will you concede that the previous board had taken us as far as they could? In parcticular light of the new super rich owners in the game etc.

 

I've said on numerous occasions that the appointment of Allardyce was an admittance a change of direction was needed [same as after Gullit and Dalglish]. The point is, the new owner, "hasn't done better" has he ?

 

There is NO excuse for NUFC becoming a selling club again, selling our best players above the managers head and not backing him with the cash, and settling for competing at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn.

 

I would like an oil Sheikh or a Russian mega billionaire just like anybody else, but the new owner has not done better, and these people ALL said that anybody would do better. They wanted someone who would stop buying trophy players, stay out of the limelight, stop renting warehouses, taking small change dividends etc, but thought the ambition was automatic . My point was ALWAYS that the ambition was NOT automatic, so the next owner was not guaranteed to be better at all. And since he took over, we have been relegated, we set our sights lower, the profle and appeal of the club has gone down and accordingly revenues against our competitors, our best players look elsewhere to fulfill career ambitions. If THAT is better, and not a decline, what would they call a decline ? NJS is actually endorsing the fact that we shouldn't have spent more than 12.7m quid on transfers in over a decade, and shouldn't have expanded the stadium - or if he agrees with it, seems to think we should have done it without taking out a loan ? Does he think we should have saved the money up first ? It's mind boggling, and blind hatred gone mad.

 

Maybe they HAD taken us as far as they could, but no way in the world would we have been relegated and settled for competing at the levels we do now. My point is that - during their time - they reached levels which may not be matched for decades, yes. As I've also said, comparing it to the era now, is like saying Jackie Milburn wouldn't be as good as current players because he played with a heavier ball and heavier boots. You can only compete with the situation and competitors at the time. The new owner is not "better", despite the assertions that "anybody" would be.

Actually saying 'taking us as far as they could' is a little unfair. They gave the club everything it needed to win the league and a cup or two. They cant be held accountable for the the manager/players bottling it or bad luck on the pitch. The infrastructure, investment and backing was there, It goes without saying that its a shame they didnt get the trophy they deserved.

 

You can only compete with the situation at the time. The point i'm trying to raise is that Bolton and Stoke have essentially the same commercial revenue as us now, as their benefactors make up the shortfall towards our ticket sales and extra TV money. They may be samller clubs but that isnt currently being translated into smaller revenue or less resources available. In fact they probably have more for now.

 

On that note, if we've been operating with expenses of around £90m and they have been operating with expenses around e.g. £30m for a couple of season, this injection of benefactor cash gives them a short term benefiit over us. Eventually, they need to operate at their natural level though and (if this summer is done correctly), we will recover our strength and be able to flex our stronger financial muscles than them.

[NJS 4389]

what IS he endorsing then ie how they got the money, or raised the money ? You are also appearing to endorse a club run on these lines, if not, state your alternative, and make it clear that by doing so you by defnition are also stating that all those league positions and Champions League runs should have been sacrified for "better financial stability".

 

This IS the financial model being put in place that you are endorsing, isn't it ? Yes or no ?

 

And you can answer the rest of the post in your own time. I'm sure you will take your time.

 

There is no alternative that I can see to Ashley's at the moment. Every other club is now ran the same way bar a couple - it's a fucking tragedy but that doesn't make it less of a fact.

 

Do you honestly think it would be possible to increase revenues by an amount to fund major "promotion" within the league?

 

If so how?

[NJS 4389]

There is NO excuse for NUFC becoming a selling club again, selling our best players above the managers head and not backing him with the cash, and settling for competing at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn.

 

How about we can't affford to be anything else in 2011 without a rich underwriter?

 

Where will the money for your push-on come from?

 

answer the rest of the post and my questions to you or FFS stop making things up, "anybody but Fred" didn't do better, did they ?

 

Was that the basis for saying anybody would do better, at the time ? Yes or no ?

 

I don't give a fuck about your "anyone but Fred" shite because I didn't necessarily want rid of them unless it was to an Abramovitch which we didn't get and I don't give a fuck if there was one person or 20000 people who wanted him out.

 

I also don't give a fuck about Skunkers because 98% of the posts on there are insults or wind-ups - the fact that you use them as an example of people who you have to prove wrong is beyond sad.

 

It's completely irrelevant to the matter at hand - how can we fund the club in 2011.

[LeazesMag 0]

I believe I have answered the questions posed to me by Mad Jock. Despite him saying he would come back and reply, accordingly, he hasn't. He may have looked, but obviously doesn't reply because he has now been made to look a right stupid arsehole especially with his claim that Mike Ashley [maybe] finishing in the top 10 once in 4 years is somehow superior to Fat Fred [no mention of the major shareholders there though] finishing in the top 10 on 4 occasions out of 6.

 

However, this paved the way for a discussion on why the Halls and Shepherd sold the club, when it has been claimed by numerous supporters that "anybody would have been better than Fred". So the question is, what have our league positions been under Mike Ashley ? Have they been "better than Fred". Or not.

 

Lets not derail the thread anymore with discussions which involve moving the goalposts and making up other reasons for the claim that "anybody but Fred would do better", where the said people claimed to want [the Halls and] Shepherd replaced for instance, because they had looked into the future and are now claiming that they wanted this change because they foreseen a few other clubs would be bought by rich benefactors - and for some strange reason, this transformed NUFC into a selling club, selling their best players above the managers head and replacing them with 2nd rate replacements at as low a price as is possible, with the result now that they claim achieving a position of "safety" is "better" than qualifying for europe regularly and aiming for this qualification and a top league position accordingly as often as possible, by bringing to the club, players of sufficent quality to achieve it.

Edited May 20, 2011 by LeazesMag

[NJS 4389]

Lets not derail the thread anymore with discussions which involve moving the goalposts and making up other reasons for the claim that "anybody but Fred would do better", where the said people claimed to want [the Halls and] Shepherd replaced for instance, because they had looked into the future and are now claiming that they wanted this change because they foreseen a few other clubs would be bought by rich benefactors - and for some strange reason, this transformed NUFC into a selling club, selling their best players above the managers head and replacing them with 2nd rate replacements at as low a price as is possible, with the result now that they claim achieving a position of "safety" is "better" than qualifying for europe regularly and aiming for this qualification and a top league position accordingly as often as possible, by bringing to the club, players of sufficent quality to achieve it.

 

I don't claim some kind of hindsight - if you read the linked article its reality - the only way clubs are existing at the moment is through underwritten debt.

 

I'd love to get back into Europe - but there still no answer forthcoming about how to finance the push.

 

"We did it before" doesn't cut in 2011.

[LeazesMag 0]

Lets not derail the thread anymore with discussions which involve moving the goalposts and making up other reasons for the claim that "anybody but Fred would do better", where the said people claimed to want [the Halls and] Shepherd replaced for instance, because they had looked into the future and are now claiming that they wanted this change because they foreseen a few other clubs would be bought by rich benefactors - and for some strange reason, this transformed NUFC into a selling club, selling their best players above the managers head and replacing them with 2nd rate replacements at as low a price as is possible, with the result now that they claim achieving a position of "safety" is "better" than qualifying for europe regularly and aiming for this qualification and a top league position accordingly as often as possible, by bringing to the club, players of sufficent quality to achieve it.

 

I don't claim some kind of hindsight - if you read the linked article its reality - the only way clubs are existing at the moment is through underwritten debt.

 

I'd love to get back into Europe - but there still no answer forthcoming about how to finance the push.

 

"We did it before" doesn't cut in 2011.

 

you haven't read a thing I've posted have you ?

 

Why did people want rid of [the Halls] and Fred at the time ? Last chance. I'm not answering you again, if Fat Ash has took the club into a decline, there is nobody to blame but Mike Ashley, and why people wanted rid of the old owners [anyone would do better than Fred, so they said, shame he hasn't] is NOT relevant to how Mike Ashley is or isn't running the club at the present time. He has NO excuse for NUFC becoming a selling club again, but it's a different argument entirely anyway.

[NJS 4389]

Lets not derail the thread anymore with discussions which involve moving the goalposts and making up other reasons for the claim that "anybody but Fred would do better", where the said people claimed to want [the Halls and] Shepherd replaced for instance, because they had looked into the future and are now claiming that they wanted this change because they foreseen a few other clubs would be bought by rich benefactors - and for some strange reason, this transformed NUFC into a selling club, selling their best players above the managers head and replacing them with 2nd rate replacements at as low a price as is possible, with the result now that they claim achieving a position of "safety" is "better" than qualifying for europe regularly and aiming for this qualification and a top league position accordingly as often as possible, by bringing to the club, players of sufficent quality to achieve it.

 

I don't claim some kind of hindsight - if you read the linked article its reality - the only way clubs are existing at the moment is through underwritten debt.

 

I'd love to get back into Europe - but there still no answer forthcoming about how to finance the push.

 

"We did it before" doesn't cut in 2011.

 

you haven't read a thing I've posted have you ?

 

Why did people want rid of [the Halls] and Fred at the time ? Last chance. I'm not answering you again, if Fat Ash has took the club into a decline, there is nobody to blame but Mike Ashley, and why people wanted rid of the old owners [anyone would do better than Fred, so they said, shame he hasn't] is NOT relevant to how Mike Ashley is or isn't running the club at the present time. He has NO excuse for NUFC becoming a selling club again, but it's a different argument entirely anyway.

 

I don't see what an imagined campaign has to do with now.

 

The Halls didn't sell because of mass protests or even the booing you mentioned. You make it sound like everybody wanted them out apart from you so now it serves us right that we have a worse owner. They sold because they knew what was coming and you have yet to post any other feasible reason.

 

Mike Ashley's "excuse" is what I've speculated on many times - I don't know what he wants but what is clear is that he isn't going to massively invest in the team. In light of that we are fucked until he fucks off. Of course everything he has done is his fault - nobody denies that but in a discussion on football finances the fact remains that it seems like there is no alternative at present to clubs being ran with underwritten debt. As I keep saying its a complete pisser but demanding he somehow magic up the 10s of millions we'd need to push on when he won't spend any more is wishful thinking.

 

I'd love you to forget about discussing the Halls and concentrate on the present - what I and others have tried to get across is that in 2011 football is different as the figures for all of the other clubs prove. The days of big crowds = spending power are gone as is cheap credit. That's why your constant "we shouldn't have to be so shit" is heartfelt and agreed by everyone but in practical terms its reality.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Th

[LeazesMag 0]

Lets not derail the thread anymore with discussions which involve moving the goalposts and making up other reasons for the claim that "anybody but Fred would do better", where the said people claimed to want [the Halls and] Shepherd replaced for instance, because they had looked into the future and are now claiming that they wanted this change because they foreseen a few other clubs would be bought by rich benefactors - and for some strange reason, this transformed NUFC into a selling club, selling their best players above the managers head and replacing them with 2nd rate replacements at as low a price as is possible, with the result now that they claim achieving a position of "safety" is "better" than qualifying for europe regularly and aiming for this qualification and a top league position accordingly as often as possible, by bringing to the club, players of sufficent quality to achieve it.

 

I don't claim some kind of hindsight - if you read the linked article its reality - the only way clubs are existing at the moment is through underwritten debt.

 

I'd love to get back into Europe - but there still no answer forthcoming about how to finance the push.

 

"We did it before" doesn't cut in 2011.

 

you haven't read a thing I've posted have you ?

 

Why did people want rid of [the Halls] and Fred at the time ? Last chance. I'm not answering you again, if Fat Ash has took the club into a decline, there is nobody to blame but Mike Ashley, and why people wanted rid of the old owners [anyone would do better than Fred, so they said, shame he hasn't] is NOT relevant to how Mike Ashley is or isn't running the club at the present time. He has NO excuse for NUFC becoming a selling club again, but it's a different argument entirely anyway.

 

I don't see what an imagined campaign has to do with now.

 

The Halls didn't sell because of mass protests or even the booing you mentioned. You make it sound like everybody wanted them out apart from you so now it serves us right that we have a worse owner. They sold because they knew what was coming and you have yet to post any other feasible reason.

 

People who wanted them out, wanted them out because they undervalued what they did and said "anyone would do better" on the basis I've already explained. Anything else they say, is basically, bollocks and lies and its just a convenient excuse that a few clubs since have been acquired by rich benefactors, rather than admit that what they said has turned out to be bollocks. The club is in decline, in fact, it is nowhere near "doing better", as I predicted almost before Mike Ashley had got behind his desk. What has happened since he bought the club is entirely of his own making and nobody elses. The Halls sold because they had an offer they found acceptable, whether or not they "knew what was coming" is just your opinion, although how they knew Man City were about to be taken over by Arabs, I've no idea, you can believe that if you like, as it suits your "opinion" based on hatred, or the usual envy you have for people who make money. What is important, is what they did when they owned the club, not what happened when someone else took it over and changed things.

 

 

Mike Ashley's "excuse" is what I've speculated on many times - I don't know what he wants but what is clear is that he isn't going to massively invest in the team. In light of that we are fucked until he fucks off. Of course everything he has done is his fault - nobody denies that but in a discussion on football finances the fact remains that it seems like there is no alternative at present to clubs being ran with underwritten debt. As I keep saying its a complete pisser but demanding he somehow magic up the 10s of millions we'd need to push on when he won't spend any more is wishful thinking.

 

I'd love you to forget about discussing the Halls and concentrate on the present - what I and others have tried to get across is that in 2011 football is different as the figures for all of the other clubs prove. The days of big crowds = spending power are gone as is cheap credit. That's why your constant "we shouldn't have to be so shit" is heartfelt and agreed by everyone but in practical terms its reality.

 

Th

 

The present day is irrelevant to the previous owners. What matters is the current owner has taken the club backwards, there is no-one else to blame.

[NJS 4389]

It's not a few clubs - its all of them - read the article - the thing is some are richer than others.

 

Again you suggest the fans got what they deserved. We didn't vote one lot out and another in a Barcelona type election so I don't get your suggestion of "guilt".

 

Two men brought Mike Ashley to this club, two men facilitated its purchase - do they deserve any blame for our present situation?

[LeazesMag 0]

It's not a few clubs - its all of them - read the article - the thing is some are richer than others.

 

Again you suggest the fans got what they deserved. We didn't vote one lot out and another in a Barcelona type election so I don't get your suggestion of "guilt".

 

Two men brought Mike Ashley to this club, two men facilitated its purchase - do they deserve any blame for our present situation?

 

are you real do you care who you sell your house to ? In fact, ref your hatred of people/them making money from business, do you share a profit of your property with the estate agent when you sell it ?

 

What a load of crap, sorry like, but that is absolute crap.

 

And - what Mike Ashley does with the club, from the moment he buys it, is his concern, and his responsibility, and nobody elses. What a shame he has taken it into decline, a selling club again, like where the previous owners found it.

 

I'm not repeating this anymore. I'll wait for Mad Jock to reply like he said he would, although true to form, probably won't.

[NJS 4389]

It's not a few clubs - its all of them - read the article - the thing is some are richer than others.

 

Again you suggest the fans got what they deserved. We didn't vote one lot out and another in a Barcelona type election so I don't get your suggestion of "guilt".

 

Two men brought Mike Ashley to this club, two men facilitated its purchase - do they deserve any blame for our present situation?

 

are you real do you care who you sell your house to ? In fact, ref your hatred of people/them making money from business, do you share a profit of your property with the estate agent when you sell it ?

 

What a load of crap, sorry like, but that is absolute crap.

 

And - what Mike Ashley does with the club, from the moment he buys it, is his concern, and his responsibility, and nobody elses. What a shame he has taken it into decline, a selling club again, like where the previous owners found it.

 

I'm not repeating this anymore. I'll wait for Mad Jock to reply like he said he would, although true to form, probably won't.

 

If you sold your house to someone who didn't do a survey, knowing it had a huge subsidence problem (the debt) and didn't tell them I'd consider you a cunt.

 

Ashley was an idiot but the conmen should be noted.

[LeazesMag 0]

It's not a few clubs - its all of them - read the article - the thing is some are richer than others.

 

Again you suggest the fans got what they deserved. We didn't vote one lot out and another in a Barcelona type election so I don't get your suggestion of "guilt".

 

Two men brought Mike Ashley to this club, two men facilitated its purchase - do they deserve any blame for our present situation?

 

are you real do you care who you sell your house to ? In fact, ref your hatred of people/them making money from business, do you share a profit of your property with the estate agent when you sell it ?

 

What a load of crap, sorry like, but that is absolute crap.

 

And - what Mike Ashley does with the club, from the moment he buys it, is his concern, and his responsibility, and nobody elses. What a shame he has taken it into decline, a selling club again, like where the previous owners found it.

 

I'm not repeating this anymore. I'll wait for Mad Jock to reply like he said he would, although true to form, probably won't.

 

If you sold your house to someone who didn't do a survey, knowing it had a huge subsidence problem (the debt) and didn't tell them I'd consider you a cunt.

 

Ashley was an idiot but the conmen should be noted.

 

what are you babbling on about ? What does this have to do with the Halls and Shepherd transforming the club into one with the 5th most qualifications for the champions league and europe, and the 5th highest average league placing, the stadium from a cow shed into one of the best in the country, and one which couldn't raise 1.25m quid on the stock exchange in 1990 into one worth anywhere between 100m and 200m quid in 2007 ?

[LeazesMag 0]

Oh what a shame.

 

Mad Jock must have said the club under Mike Ashley didn't finish in the top 10 at all during 4 years, while the hopeless Shepherd had an inferior record of 4 out of 6 ?

 

 

As Mad Jock has evidently disappeared with his head up his arse, could we have the comments of Toonpack, NJS, Tiotes Nutz or Christmas Tree on these facts please ?

Edited May 22, 2011 by LeazesMag

[NJS 4389]

Did you jump out of your seat when the equaliser went in LM, knowing the finish meant you are "right"?

[LeazesMag 0]

Did you jump out of your seat when the equaliser went in LM, knowing the finish meant you are "right"?

 

all 1360 quid of me

 

How much have you paid again ?

[ewerk 30657]

The thread that keeps on giving.

[NJS 4389]

Did you jump out of your seat when the equaliser went in LM, knowing the finish meant you are "right"?

 

all 1360 quid of me

 

How much have you paid again ?

 

I've said before I consider my position on Ashley to be a factor in not bothering anymore.

 

It's a win-win for you - if we win you can be a proper fan and if we fail you know it'll let you score points on internet message boards while nudging people and saying "See? - I told you".

 

I'd also imagine buying a ST is wanting to feel part of things after returning to the NE after exile - what was your excuse when I was traveling 3 times the distance you would have had to for years?

[ChezGiven 0]

Forget about the one-upmanship, its more important to flag that anyone considering the last 5 minutes of that match significantly changing the perspective on the future deserves a lobotomy for failing to use their brain properly.

 

The tightness of the league and the role of luck etc means that if we had finished 9th yesterday, it should not be viewed any diffferently to finishing 14th, just as finishing 12th instead of 9th takes on little or no significance. We finfished about where we deserved to, whether PokChoi scores that equaliser or not, it doesnt change the probability of us being relegated next season without investment. If you see my point....

[LeazesMag 0]

Did you jump out of your seat when the equaliser went in LM, knowing the finish meant you are "right"?

 

all 1360 quid of me

 

How much have you paid again ?

 

I've said before I consider my position on Ashley to be a factor in not bothering anymore.

 

It's a win-win for you - if we win you can be a proper fan and if we fail you know it'll let you score points on internet message boards while nudging people and saying "See? - I told you".

 

I'd also imagine buying a ST is wanting to feel part of things after returning to the NE after exile - what was your excuse when I was traveling 3 times the distance you would have had to for years?

 

its not a win-win at all, I pay my money and want to see the team win. I paid my money and said that replacing the Halls and Shepherd would be difficult, whereas a lot of people wanted rid of them because they "embarrassed them", rented a warehouse, took a small amount in dividends, bought "trophy players", and thought anybody else would use the revenues [built up by the Halls and Shepherd] better and "do better", taking the ambition for granted.

 

The fact is, the ambition was a choice. We now have someone who doesn't have it. Stop moving the goalposts and pretending that 4-5 years ago people like you were saying you wanted rid of them because a few clubs would be taken over by rich benefactors, although what Birmingham and Blackburn being bought by rich benefactors impacts NUFC from choosing to become a selling club again I've no idea.

 

I knew almost from the outset that Mike Ashley was going to change the way this club operated and become a selling club again. I said so, and was massively disagreed with. I hoped he would be an ambitious owner, but he isn't. I was right, but it doesn't stop me from still paying my money. Some people may think "why" ? I said in a different thread about 6 or 7 weeks ago why. But one thing I won't do, is move the goalposts to avoid admitting I got it wrong if he suddenly changes direction. I'll hold my hands up and I'll be happy to do it so cut the crap about wanting the team to lose.

[Guest alex]

Forget about the one-upmanship, its more important to flag that anyone considering the last 5 minutes of that match significantly changing the perspective on the future deserves a lobotomy for failing to use their brain properly.

 

The tightness of the league and the role of luck etc means that if we had finished 9th yesterday, it should not be viewed any diffferently to finishing 14th, just as finishing 12th instead of 9th takes on little or no significance. We finfished about where we deserved to, whether PokChoi scores that equaliser or not, it doesnt change the probability of us being relegated next season without investment. If you see my point....

Said before the game, and for the same reasons more or less, that where we finished wasn't significant in any great way.