Christmas Tree 4856 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Embarrasing thread. Exactly. So the media can discuss it, the manager can discuss it, but the fans can't. Sad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 (edited) I've yet to see evidence Douglas Hall isn't an idiot, although that's a side issue. Edited February 3, 2012 by alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I've yet to see evidence Douglas Hall isn't an idiot, although that's a side issue. but they weren't idiots when they took the club from where they found it to one of the biggest clubs in europe ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14013 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Tempted to merge this with the 'Euro express thread' where anyone less devoted to seeking attention would have put it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6700 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 these constant references to Freddie Shepherd runnning the club single handed, and appointing managers all on his own, are far worse than that. No wonder people laugh at Geordies. Such rubbish gives us all a bad name. Are you daring to suggest that Shepherd wasn't in the least bit autocratic? are you saying that Sir John Hall and Douglas, were stupid ? This sort of rubbish, is exactly what proves people engage their irrational personality hatred before any brains that they may possibly have. Not for the first time.....sigh http://news.bbc.co.u...ted/4281369.stm Side-step my point completely why don't you? Remind me again who sold Gary Speed. Who sold Jonathan Woodgate (and the argument that the sale of the latter was the right decision is irrelevant - it should never have been his decision). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 46132 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 One of the biggest clubs in Europe? "No wonder people laugh at Geordies. Such rubbish gives us all a bad name." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 20876 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Another thread de-railed *sigh* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 Sir John stressed that as he was no longer on the Newcastle United board they were his personal views, and that he was fully behind Freddy Shepherd. He says: "It was a very difficult decision to make. I would guess that the board thought this particular season Newcastle would finish fourth and get into the Champions League. But we had a poor start to the season. "The problems in the dressing room seemed to continue through into the season and I can understand Freddy Shepherd, the chairman's decision. "It was the right decision, to my mind, and I'm standing by him. "Probably the only thing to be criticised was the timing. "It might have been better if Bobby had taken an ambassadorial role at the end of last season." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Embarrasing thread. these constant references to Freddie Shepherd runnning the club single handed, and appointing managers all on his own, are far worse than that. No wonder people laugh at Geordies. Such rubbish gives us all a bad name. Are you daring to suggest that Shepherd wasn't in the least bit autocratic? It's beside the point anyway though. It's because he's got this bee in his bonnet about it being Shepherd AND Hall as opposed to just Shepherd (when anyone refers to just Shepherd alone). Like anyones arsed about the distinction or it means anything; they're just using 'Shepherd' as shorthand for 'Shepherd AND Hall'. It's all to do with some sort of bum love he has to protect Shepherd at all costs, but it doesnt actually mean anything as far as the overall debate goes. It's due to the fact he's obsessed with the personality issue of it (Shepherd v Ashley) and can't move on from that. It means absolutely nowt to any other bugger though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I've yet to see evidence Douglas Hall isn't an idiot, although that's a side issue. but they weren't idiots when they took the club from where they found it to one of the biggest clubs in europe ? I regarded him as such at the time tbh. He'd be fuck all without the backing of his fatha imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 One of the biggest clubs in Europe? "No wonder people laugh at Geordies. Such rubbish gives us all a bad name." 8th biggest club in Europe financially as recently ago as 2003. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 31230 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 One of the biggest clubs in Europe? "No wonder people laugh at Geordies. Such rubbish gives us all a bad name." 8th biggest club in Europe financially as recently ago as 2003. 9th. And given that it was our only ever appearance in the top 10, I'm sure Leazes will agree that it was a 'blip'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 (edited) One of the biggest clubs in Europe? "No wonder people laugh at Geordies. Such rubbish gives us all a bad name." 8th biggest club in Europe financially as recently ago as 2003. 9th. And given that it was our only ever appearance in the top 10, I'm sure Leazes will agree that it was a 'blip'. We were 5th in 1998, and definitely 8th one of the years. So I have ABSOLUTELY no idea why you said we've been in the top 10 once. Four times to my mind. Edited February 3, 2012 by McFaul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Ranked according to 1997-98 turnover in pounds m 1 Manchester United (Eng) 87.9 2 Real Madrid (Sp) 72.2 3 Bayern Munich (Ger) 65.2 4 Juventus (It) 55.3 5 Newcastle United (Eng) 49.2 6 Barcelona (Sp) 48.6 7 Milan (It) 48.5 8 Internazionale (It) 48.2 9 Chelsea (Eng) 47.5 10 Liverpool (Eng) 45.5 11 Borussia Dortmund (Ger) 41.5 12 Lazio (It) 41.1 13 Arsenal (Eng) 40.4 14 Parma (It) 33.4 15 Paris Saint-Germain (Fr) 32.9 16 Rangers (Sco) 32.5 17 Aston Villa (Eng) 31.8 18 Tottenham Hotspur (Eng) 31.2 19 Roma (It) 30.7 20 Leeds United (Eng) 28.3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 46132 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 So you'd be comfortable arguing that we're one of the biggest clubs in Europe then? No domestic trophies, no European finals and very limited success in the CL on the rare occasions we qualified. All those numbers prove is that we can fill a big stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 31230 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I stand corrected. We had two blips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 So you'd be comfortable arguing that we're one of the biggest clubs in Europe then? No domestic trophies, no European finals and very limited success in the CL on the rare occasions we qualified. All those numbers prove is that we can fill a big stadium. and now, we aren't, right ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 So you'd be comfortable arguing that we're one of the biggest clubs in Europe then? No domestic trophies, no European finals and very limited success in the CL on the rare occasions we qualified. All those numbers prove is that we can fill a big stadium. No those figures prove that we were marketed brilliantly, gained vast media incomes due to our status then, the corporate side was booming, and people were paying bigger money for tickets than the vast majority of more successful clubs. Bigger club is a very ambiguous caveat (did I use that right Alex?), it's all very personal, but we're not a successful club no one can argue that we are. I'd say there were two truly big clubs in England (Arsenal and Man Utd), two in Spain, three in Italy and one in Germany. The rest regardless what anyone says about trophies and finance, can at any time usurp all of the others outside of the 8 big clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 So you'd be comfortable arguing that we're one of the biggest clubs in Europe then? No domestic trophies, no European finals and very limited success in the CL on the rare occasions we qualified. All those numbers prove is that we can fill a big stadium. No those figures prove that we were marketed brilliantly, gained vast media incomes due to our status then, the corporate side was booming, and people were paying bigger money for tickets than the vast majority of more successful clubs. Bigger club is a very ambiguous caveat (did I use that right Alex?), it's all very personal, but we're not a successful club no one can argue that we are. I'd say there were two truly big clubs in England (Arsenal and Man Utd), two in Spain, three in Italy and one in Germany. The rest regardless what anyone says about trophies and finance, can at any time usurp all of the others outside of the 8 big clubs. far too complicated for some people that is, Stevie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 46132 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 So you'd be comfortable arguing that we're one of the biggest clubs in Europe then? No domestic trophies, no European finals and very limited success in the CL on the rare occasions we qualified. All those numbers prove is that we can fill a big stadium. and now, we aren't, right ? Aren't what? Try and make some sense please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 So you'd be comfortable arguing that we're one of the biggest clubs in Europe then? No domestic trophies, no European finals and very limited success in the CL on the rare occasions we qualified. All those numbers prove is that we can fill a big stadium. No those figures prove that we were marketed brilliantly, gained vast media incomes due to our status then, the corporate side was booming, and people were paying bigger money for tickets than the vast majority of more successful clubs. Bigger club is a very ambiguous caveat (did I use that right Alex?), it's all very personal, but we're not a successful club no one can argue that we are. I'd say there were two truly big clubs in England (Arsenal and Man Utd), two in Spain, three in Italy and one in Germany. The rest regardless what anyone says about trophies and finance, can at any time usurp all of the others outside of the 8 big clubs. No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I stand corrected. We had two blips. There's at least 4, from 1996 onward and we were top 13 virtually every season till relegation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 31230 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I stand corrected. We had two blips. There's at least 4, from 1996 onward and we were top 13 virtually every season till relegation. Does that make us one of the biggest clubs in Europe? Which was the initial point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 46132 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 (edited) So you'd be comfortable arguing that we're one of the biggest clubs in Europe then? No domestic trophies, no European finals and very limited success in the CL on the rare occasions we qualified. All those numbers prove is that we can fill a big stadium. No those figures prove that we were marketed brilliantly, gained vast media incomes due to our status then, the corporate side was booming, and people were paying bigger money for tickets than the vast majority of more successful clubs. Bigger club is a very ambiguous caveat (did I use that right Alex?), it's all very personal, but we're not a successful club no one can argue that we are. I'd say there were two truly big clubs in England (Arsenal and Man Utd), two in Spain, three in Italy and one in Germany. The rest regardless what anyone says about trophies and finance, can at any time usurp all of the others outside of the 8 big clubs. I think it's an absolute nonsense to claim that we are one of the biggest clubs in Europe. The problem, and the point that everyone tries to drum home to LM is that whatever good Shepherd and them had done had been completely fucked up by the time Ashley took over. We were on a downward trajectory and the club was on its way to financial ruin. LM completely deletes this from history whenever he talks about Shepherd's legacy at the club. He just leaves it at "5th best at everything and one of the biggest clubs in Europe". Ashley has undoubtedly made some big mistakes since he got here, but the one thing he has got right (and it was a mammoth task given what he had to work with) is putting the club on something approaching a good financial standing. Absolutely ZERO recognition of that from LM - quite the opposite in fact, he insists that money should be being lashed left right and centre. Which is why it's an utterly fruitless task trying to engage in conversation with him. Edited February 3, 2012 by Gemmill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I stand corrected. We had two blips. There's at least 4, from 1996 onward and we were top 13 virtually every season till relegation. Does that make us one of the biggest clubs in Europe? Which was the initial point. and my point was and is we WERE financially in terms of income one of Europe's biggest clubs, which in modern football says a lot about a clubs size because it's not something that can be debated, it's there in front of you. We weren't articially supported like Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool etc...we made our own money and we spent it, we were at times making more money than Milan and Barcelona two of the four biggest clubs in the world. That in itself for a club which hasn't won a trophy since 1969, is one of the most staggering things you will ever read, and absolutely magnifies the sheer potential and size of Newcastle, and also the great job The Halls and Shepherd did, certainly up to 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now