F.A.O Leazesmag

[manc-mag 1]

hindsight.

 

I saw your post from a while back saying club ultimately "wasn't professional or ruthless enough" to actually win. Do you think, by that comment, the likes of the smoggies, Birmingham, Leicester etc were more professional and ruthless ? because personally I think that is bollocks and it came down to inferior oppositon on the day of the final, and selections and tactics, and performance of players on the day. You can't say those teams had better teams than the ones we had when we were finishing in the top 5 places etc.

 

I think that misses the point tbh, because as you rightly say, we shouldn't be measuring ourselves by the standards of Boro, Birmingham or Leicester-we're Newcastle United. If they had easier opposition on the day then thats random and beyond their control. We on the other hand should be prepared to measure ourselves against the likes of Arsenal and Man U (our opponents) and beat them. Again I don't think there's much point in dwelling on the individual games because I'm trying to make a more general point (see my latter remarks about our games away vs Man U over the entire history of the Premiership, where the point is far more cogent), but even if we look at those two finals, not only did we not win, but as per the actual wording of my point, we didn't even compete if we're totally honest.

 

And that's all I'm saying really.

 

Not really embarking on an argument because I can honestly say I've put all that behind me now, I just think if you take anything other than a moderate position this long after the event it's a bit crazy. Yes it's with hindsight-but after all they say hindsight is a benefit. So we have that benefit now to reflect upon it. And that's how I see it. And as I've said it's entirely without reference to the fat cockney barrow boy because they are stand alone points as NJS has rightly pointed out.

[LeazesMag 0]

anyway, the clips from Keegans book is in the other thread, for the benefit of TP, Renton, NJS or anybody else trying to make things up to suit their "opinions"

 

Including KK ?? After all they're his contradictory statements.

 

thought you didn't want to argue anymore ?

[Renton 22006]

Cups and leagues are apples and oranges anyway.

[manc-mag 1]

Cups and leagues are apples and oranges anyway.

 

Yeah they are but they're all trophies at the end of the day.

 

Anyway as I said, my point was a broader one; the away record against the top teams over the history of the Prem is the key indicator for me of how close we were to rivalling them over the period that's consistently referred to.

[LeazesMag 0]

hindsight.

 

I saw your post from a while back saying club ultimately "wasn't professional or ruthless enough" to actually win. Do you think, by that comment, the likes of the smoggies, Birmingham, Leicester etc were more professional and ruthless ? because personally I think that is bollocks and it came down to inferior oppositon on the day of the final, and selections and tactics, and performance of players on the day. You can't say those teams had better teams than the ones we had when we were finishing in the top 5 places etc.

 

I think that misses the point tbh, because as you rightly say, we shouldn't be measuring ourselves by the standards of Boro, Birmingham or Leicester-we're Newcastle United. If they had easier opposition on the day then thats random and beyond their control. We on the other hand should be prepared to measure ourselves against the likes of Arsenal and Man U (our opponents) and beat them. Again I don't think there's much point in dwelling on the individual games because I'm trying to make a more general point (see my latter remarks about our games away vs Man U over the entire history of the Premiership, where the point is far more cogent), but even if we look at those two finals, not only did we not win, but as per the actual wording of my point, we didn't even compete if we're totally honest.

 

And that's all I'm saying really.

 

Not really embarking on an argument because I can honestly say I've put all that behind me now, I just think if you take anything other than a moderate position this long after the event it's a bit crazy. Yes it's with hindsight-but after all they say hindsight is a benefit. So we have that benefit now to reflect upon it. And that's how I see it. And as I've said it's entirely without reference to the fat cockney barrow boy because they are stand alone points as NJS has rightly pointed out.

 

my point is, and always has been, that relatively we were the 5th most qualified team for europe, had the 5th highest league position, the only 4 clubs to do better in both this criteria being the same 4 clubs, expanded the ground and transformed the club from a selling club with one foot in the 3rd division to one of the biggest clubs in the country and europe.

 

The best board to have ran the club in half a century, at least.

 

That remains. The likes of yourself, NJS, TP, or any halfwit on skunkers or NO can bleat all they like about their irrational "opinions" but these are the basic facts. Not to be sneezed at. There can only be one number 1, it wasn't us, but nobody else has got near what they did and it may be a long time before anybody else does, its a shame people can't accept it and put their hatred to one side and base their "likes" on those who do well for the club, which is what counts.

 

We all have our theories on why those players played poorly in those 2 Cup Finals, or why the managers played weakened teams in the League Cup, or why we didn't win the title when we had a big league, but none of those can be attributed to the board. The players were good enough, the managers had the pedigree and the experience of having been there before [apart from Keegan], so if you want to attach any "blame" then it has to be there.

 

To decry it however, in view of what came before, and what has came after, only shows what halfwits and idiots have short memories and how they had raised expectations.

 

Anyway. If anybody can produce some facts to disprove they weren't the best board at the club for half a century by miles, post them up and let us all have a look.

[McFaul 35]

17th would have been acceptable THIS season, 10th or above would be excellent.

Tell me a club that we are above in this division who probably have a higher wage bill than us please.

[LeazesMag 0]

 

No different from their viewpoint - that's the point.

 

As for your quote, finishing in the top 10 given that no money will be spent is realistic from their point of view. You've written off 4 teams, I'd extend that to 6 so a margin of 7th to 10th isn't that huge.

 

Of course we all want to aim higher and achieve it but as in everything in life there is a cost for that - Ashley won't pay the cost so I don't see the point in the bravado of saying we want higher.

 

so selling your best player is no different to keeping him ?

 

3rd bottom is no different to 3rd top ? They are both "failures" ?

 

Aiming for 10th minimum is no different than aiming for top 4/5 minimum ?

 

I'm trying to be patient here mate, but you're way off any logical common sense here.

 

Anyway, I've got to go.

 

 

FROM MAN UNITED'S POINT OF VIEW.

 

It doesn't matter to them where we finish as long as it's not top - their standards not ours - tha's what matters to them.

 

 

Chelsea are probably going to sack their manager for failing to win the league - with high expectations comes high price of failure. Of course we would all love to finish 2nd but because they now expect to win it, 2nd is failure.

 

so you confirm that finishing 3rd bottom is no worse than 3rd top, and if you are going to only finish 3rd top there is no point in bothering ?

 

Yet you and other idiots on skunkers etc will be doing cartwheels if we finish 10th this season ?

 

Breathtakingly Fantastic.

 

 

I said I wanted to finish as high as possible about 10 fucking times - when will you actually read what I'm writing just for fucking once.

 

You call me negative for settling on aiming to be top of the also-rans but when I point out that wanting to join the winners means looking on second as failure you deliberately ignore the point.

 

Ancelotti will be sacked for finishing second - by those standards Keegan wouldn't have even been given 96-97.

 

So do you want to have those standards or are you happy wanking over finishing 4th?

 

but you are wanking over surviving in the premiership like those other halfwits on skunkers aren't you ?

[Toonpack 9973]

17th would have been acceptable THIS season, 10th or above would be excellent.

Tell me a club that we are above in this division who probably have a higher wage bill than us please.

 

Can't, the accounts covering this season aren't our for a while yet? Not that it means owt anyway. Where'd you expect to finish this season ?

Edited May 13, 2011 by Toonpack

[LeazesMag 0]

17th would have been acceptable THIS season, 10th or above would be excellent.

Tell me a club that we are above in this division who probably have a higher wage bill than us please.

 

we'll be above fewer clubs next season too

[jonasjuice 0]

17th would have been acceptable THIS season, 10th or above would be excellent.

Tell me a club that we are above in this division who probably have a higher wage bill than us please.

West Ham's must be approaching ours, if ever theres an example that throwing money about at 'quality' players isnt always the best idea. Benni McArthy on 35k ffs.

 

We may well have the highest outside the top six like when you think colo, taylor, tiote, smith, nola, barton and jose must all be on a fair whack, and considering a lot of our more average squad players are still on 20-30k kinda deals.

[manc-mag 1]

hindsight.

 

I saw your post from a while back saying club ultimately "wasn't professional or ruthless enough" to actually win. Do you think, by that comment, the likes of the smoggies, Birmingham, Leicester etc were more professional and ruthless ? because personally I think that is bollocks and it came down to inferior oppositon on the day of the final, and selections and tactics, and performance of players on the day. You can't say those teams had better teams than the ones we had when we were finishing in the top 5 places etc.

 

I think that misses the point tbh, because as you rightly say, we shouldn't be measuring ourselves by the standards of Boro, Birmingham or Leicester-we're Newcastle United. If they had easier opposition on the day then thats random and beyond their control. We on the other hand should be prepared to measure ourselves against the likes of Arsenal and Man U (our opponents) and beat them. Again I don't think there's much point in dwelling on the individual games because I'm trying to make a more general point (see my latter remarks about our games away vs Man U over the entire history of the Premiership, where the point is far more cogent), but even if we look at those two finals, not only did we not win, but as per the actual wording of my point, we didn't even compete if we're totally honest.

 

And that's all I'm saying really.

 

Not really embarking on an argument because I can honestly say I've put all that behind me now, I just think if you take anything other than a moderate position this long after the event it's a bit crazy. Yes it's with hindsight-but after all they say hindsight is a benefit. So we have that benefit now to reflect upon it. And that's how I see it. And as I've said it's entirely without reference to the fat cockney barrow boy because they are stand alone points as NJS has rightly pointed out.

 

my point is, and always has been, that relatively we were the 5th most qualified team for europe, had the 5th highest league position, the only 4 clubs to do better in both this criteria being the same 4 clubs, expanded the ground and transformed the club from a selling club with one foot in the 3rd division to one of the biggest clubs in the country and europe.

 

The best board to have ran the club in half a century, at least.

 

That remains. The likes of yourself, NJS, TP, or any halfwit on skunkers or NO can bleat all they like about their irrational "opinions" but these are the basic facts. Not to be sneezed at. There can only be one number 1, it wasn't us, but nobody else has got near what they did and it may be a long time before anybody else does, its a shame people can't accept it and put their hatred to one side and base their "likes" on those who do well for the club, which is what counts.

 

We all have our theories on why those players played poorly in those 2 Cup Finals, or why the managers played weakened teams in the League Cup, or why we didn't win the title when we had a big league, but none of those can be attributed to the board. The players were good enough, the managers had the pedigree and the experience of having been there before [apart from Keegan], so if you want to attach any "blame" then it has to be there.

 

To decry it however, in view of what came before, and what has came after, only shows what halfwits and idiots have short memories and how they had raised expectations.

 

Anyway. If anybody can produce some facts to disprove they weren't the best board at the club for half a century by miles, post them up and let us all have a look.

 

I think that prevents you from addressing opposing points as they're actually made though. You think any criticism is due to hatred (which is just not the case) and as a result your counter argument gets overly emotive. Again I said it was without reference to the current regime so the comparison with them (or any other board of the last 50 years) is not relevant. That's old ground though, you'll quote that however the point is worded so I won't attempt to re-word it in the expectation you'll afford me its true (literal) meaning.

 

I'm not disputing any of the 5th place claims just for the avoidance of doubt.

[manc-mag 1]

In my whole life I reckon I've easily viewed 5,000 doilums with my own eyes. None of them are bigger doilums than these...

 

 

Seriously, their lasses must've watched that and just been cringing.

[LeazesMag 0]

hindsight.

 

I saw your post from a while back saying club ultimately "wasn't professional or ruthless enough" to actually win. Do you think, by that comment, the likes of the smoggies, Birmingham, Leicester etc were more professional and ruthless ? because personally I think that is bollocks and it came down to inferior oppositon on the day of the final, and selections and tactics, and performance of players on the day. You can't say those teams had better teams than the ones we had when we were finishing in the top 5 places etc.

 

I think that misses the point tbh, because as you rightly say, we shouldn't be measuring ourselves by the standards of Boro, Birmingham or Leicester-we're Newcastle United. If they had easier opposition on the day then thats random and beyond their control. We on the other hand should be prepared to measure ourselves against the likes of Arsenal and Man U (our opponents) and beat them. Again I don't think there's much point in dwelling on the individual games because I'm trying to make a more general point (see my latter remarks about our games away vs Man U over the entire history of the Premiership, where the point is far more cogent), but even if we look at those two finals, not only did we not win, but as per the actual wording of my point, we didn't even compete if we're totally honest.

 

And that's all I'm saying really.

 

Not really embarking on an argument because I can honestly say I've put all that behind me now, I just think if you take anything other than a moderate position this long after the event it's a bit crazy. Yes it's with hindsight-but after all they say hindsight is a benefit. So we have that benefit now to reflect upon it. And that's how I see it. And as I've said it's entirely without reference to the fat cockney barrow boy because they are stand alone points as NJS has rightly pointed out.

 

my point is, and always has been, that relatively we were the 5th most qualified team for europe, had the 5th highest league position, the only 4 clubs to do better in both this criteria being the same 4 clubs, expanded the ground and transformed the club from a selling club with one foot in the 3rd division to one of the biggest clubs in the country and europe.

 

The best board to have ran the club in half a century, at least.

 

That remains. The likes of yourself, NJS, TP, or any halfwit on skunkers or NO can bleat all they like about their irrational "opinions" but these are the basic facts. Not to be sneezed at. There can only be one number 1, it wasn't us, but nobody else has got near what they did and it may be a long time before anybody else does, its a shame people can't accept it and put their hatred to one side and base their "likes" on those who do well for the club, which is what counts.

 

We all have our theories on why those players played poorly in those 2 Cup Finals, or why the managers played weakened teams in the League Cup, or why we didn't win the title when we had a big league, but none of those can be attributed to the board. The players were good enough, the managers had the pedigree and the experience of having been there before [apart from Keegan], so if you want to attach any "blame" then it has to be there.

 

To decry it however, in view of what came before, and what has came after, only shows what halfwits and idiots have short memories and how they had raised expectations.

 

Anyway. If anybody can produce some facts to disprove they weren't the best board at the club for half a century by miles, post them up and let us all have a look.

 

I think that prevents you from addressing opposing points as they're actually made though. You think any criticism is due to hatred (which is just not the case) and as a result your counter argument gets overly emotive. Again I said it was without reference to the current regime so the comparison with them (or any other board of the last 50 years) is not relevant. That's old ground though, you'll quote that however the point is worded so I won't attempt to re-word it in the expectation you'll afford me its true (literal) meaning.

 

I'm not disputing any of the 5th place claims just for the avoidance of doubt.

 

it isn't emotive at all. It's factual. They have all had the same club, same fanbase, same opportunities to capitalise, and they have done the best by miles.

 

Mike Ashley is making a right dogs dinner of it, just like McKeag, Seymour etc

[manc-mag 1]

hindsight.

 

I saw your post from a while back saying club ultimately "wasn't professional or ruthless enough" to actually win. Do you think, by that comment, the likes of the smoggies, Birmingham, Leicester etc were more professional and ruthless ? because personally I think that is bollocks and it came down to inferior oppositon on the day of the final, and selections and tactics, and performance of players on the day. You can't say those teams had better teams than the ones we had when we were finishing in the top 5 places etc.

 

I think that misses the point tbh, because as you rightly say, we shouldn't be measuring ourselves by the standards of Boro, Birmingham or Leicester-we're Newcastle United. If they had easier opposition on the day then thats random and beyond their control. We on the other hand should be prepared to measure ourselves against the likes of Arsenal and Man U (our opponents) and beat them. Again I don't think there's much point in dwelling on the individual games because I'm trying to make a more general point (see my latter remarks about our games away vs Man U over the entire history of the Premiership, where the point is far more cogent), but even if we look at those two finals, not only did we not win, but as per the actual wording of my point, we didn't even compete if we're totally honest.

 

And that's all I'm saying really.

 

Not really embarking on an argument because I can honestly say I've put all that behind me now, I just think if you take anything other than a moderate position this long after the event it's a bit crazy. Yes it's with hindsight-but after all they say hindsight is a benefit. So we have that benefit now to reflect upon it. And that's how I see it. And as I've said it's entirely without reference to the fat cockney barrow boy because they are stand alone points as NJS has rightly pointed out.

 

my point is, and always has been, that relatively we were the 5th most qualified team for europe, had the 5th highest league position, the only 4 clubs to do better in both this criteria being the same 4 clubs, expanded the ground and transformed the club from a selling club with one foot in the 3rd division to one of the biggest clubs in the country and europe.

 

The best board to have ran the club in half a century, at least.

 

That remains. The likes of yourself, NJS, TP, or any halfwit on skunkers or NO can bleat all they like about their irrational "opinions" but these are the basic facts. Not to be sneezed at. There can only be one number 1, it wasn't us, but nobody else has got near what they did and it may be a long time before anybody else does, its a shame people can't accept it and put their hatred to one side and base their "likes" on those who do well for the club, which is what counts.

 

We all have our theories on why those players played poorly in those 2 Cup Finals, or why the managers played weakened teams in the League Cup, or why we didn't win the title when we had a big league, but none of those can be attributed to the board. The players were good enough, the managers had the pedigree and the experience of having been there before [apart from Keegan], so if you want to attach any "blame" then it has to be there.

 

To decry it however, in view of what came before, and what has came after, only shows what halfwits and idiots have short memories and how they had raised expectations.

 

Anyway. If anybody can produce some facts to disprove they weren't the best board at the club for half a century by miles, post them up and let us all have a look.

 

I think that prevents you from addressing opposing points as they're actually made though. You think any criticism is due to hatred (which is just not the case) and as a result your counter argument gets overly emotive. Again I said it was without reference to the current regime so the comparison with them (or any other board of the last 50 years) is not relevant. That's old ground though, you'll quote that however the point is worded so I won't attempt to re-word it in the expectation you'll afford me its true (literal) meaning.

 

I'm not disputing any of the 5th place claims just for the avoidance of doubt.

 

it isn't emotive at all. It's factual. They have all had the same club, same fanbase, same opportunities to capitalise, and they have done the best by miles.

 

Mike Ashley is making a right dogs dinner of it, just like McKeag, Seymour etc

 

They did aye, and for completeness, I also think they got out at the best possible time too.

[Mad Jock 0]

Ariston and on and on:

 

Leazesmag says:

 

The FACTS are that from 1992 until 2007 the club was owned by THE HALLS AND SHEPHERD . Nobody during all of that time, had sole control of the club. Keegan was approached by Hall Jnr, Fletcher and Shepherd without Hall Snr knowing about it, they forced him to sack Ardiles and appoint Keegan. This has been said dozens of times, quite why people like you insist Halls Snr gets all the credit when he knew nothing about it, is quite astonishing.

You just really couldn't believe such shite. It's mind boggling.

How can this be ..................

 

Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Keegan

I remember Sir John Hall phoning me when I came back from Spain to live in Hampshire in a farmhouse I had from my Southampton days. I was going to breed horses.

‘It was a Thursday night when he rang. I’d only been back for two days. He said, “Only two people can save Newcastle United. They are talking to each other now. You’ve got the passion; I’ve got the finance”.’

[Toonpack 9973]

They did aye, and for completeness, I also think they got out at the best possible time too.

 

Just as the money tap dried up, funny that.

[jonasjuice 0]

Jesus in all honesty do you think anything you say is gonna change leazes opinion? Especially minor point scoring on a story it seems even kk himself has given 2 different versions of?

[NJS 4411]

So do you want to have those standards or are you happy wanking over finishing 4th?

but you are wanking over surviving in the premiership like those other halfwits on skunkers aren't you ?

 

Why can't you see the difference between where people want us be based on our stature and in an ideal world versus where they think finishing in the real world given the fact that we have an arsehole owner and limited resources compared with the teams above is reasonable?

 

 

I can't believe you also still can't get the simple idea that what we saw as success and were ecstatic about perfectly correctly, by other peoples standards we failed.

 

I would love us to win the next 20 league titles and get to the point where if we did finish 4th or god forbid 13th a couple of times we'd consider it abject failure in the same way Man Utd would now. That's the point I'm trying to make -- their honest opinion of us as failures from their perspective is fair.

[LeazesMag 0]

Jesus in all honesty do you think anything you say is gonna change leazes opinion? Especially minor point scoring on a story it seems even kk himself has given 2 different versions of?

 

keep saying, I state facts , its the others who have opinions.

 

Qualifying for europe more than anybody but 4 over the time span is a FACT, not shit.

[LeazesMag 0]

So do you want to have those standards or are you happy wanking over finishing 4th?

but you are wanking over surviving in the premiership like those other halfwits on skunkers aren't you ?

 

Why can't you see the difference between where people want us be based on our stature and in an ideal world versus where they think finishing in the real world given the fact that we have an arsehole owner and limited resources compared with the teams above is reasonable?

 

 

 

arsehole owner = correct

limited resources [because of the arsehole owner] = correct

compared to the teams above us = rubbish

 

Which is the entire point.

[NJS 4411]

So do you want to have those standards or are you happy wanking over finishing 4th?

but you are wanking over surviving in the premiership like those other halfwits on skunkers aren't you ?

 

Why can't you see the difference between where people want us be based on our stature and in an ideal world versus where they think finishing in the real world given the fact that we have an arsehole owner and limited resources compared with the teams above is reasonable?

 

 

 

arsehole owner = correct

limited resources [because of the arsehole owner] = correct

compared to the teams above us = rubbish

 

Which is the entire point.

 

 

Which brings us back to square one.

 

Given that he won't invest his money, where will it come from?

 

Please don't say something about maximum revenues - as I've said before even if we suddenly made £50m profit a year which we never came within a million miles of doing in the past it would still take investment at that level for about 5 years before we'd be where we all want to be.

 

That's why the realists among us think talking as if we are going there is pointless.

[Toonpack 9973]

So do you want to have those standards or are you happy wanking over finishing 4th?

but you are wanking over surviving in the premiership like those other halfwits on skunkers aren't you ?

 

Why can't you see the difference between where people want us be based on our stature and in an ideal world versus where they think finishing in the real world given the fact that we have an arsehole owner and limited resources compared with the teams above is reasonable?

 

 

 

arsehole owner = correct

limited resources [because of the arsehole owner] = correct

compared to the teams above us = rubbish

 

Which is the entire point.

 

Could've been posted in 2007 that one (if pluralised)

[Jusoda Kid 1]

The way I look at things is 99% of us have came to terms with whats going on and as much as it hurts us we've accepted it as there is very little we can do about it, leazes clearly hasn't accepted it yet and probably never will, I can fully understand this.

 

imo It would be like having a beautiful lass who you adore and you've been with for years but she occasionally goes out and fucks another bloke but always comes home to you and tells you about it.

 

As much as it kills you, you can't bring yourself to tell her to fuck off because you love her and would miss her something rotten.

 

life is a bitch so they say.

Edited May 13, 2011 by Jusoda Kid

[jonasjuice 0]

Jesus in all honesty do you think anything you say is gonna change leazes opinion? Especially minor point scoring on a story it seems even kk himself has given 2 different versions of?

 

keep saying, I state facts , its the others who have opinions.

 

Good for you dear

[LeazesMag 0]

I expected responses from fannys with no idea, and it looks like I was right.