Terry Venables

[Scottish Mag 3]

Odds down to 4/1 for the managers job with Ladbrokes.

 

[MattM4 0]

he might be coming in until the end of the season? who knows. With Roeder as an assistant ??

[Bizza 105]

Oh.Joy.

[Ugly Mackems 134]

More chance of getting the Pope to practice safe sex.

[Jusoda Kid 1]

Rather have him than the over rated Mackem Lepricorn

Edited March 11, 2006 by Wacky Jnr

[Guest Sima]

Venables is one of 2 managers that if they get the job I'm not going back.

 

The other is Harry fucking Redknapp (yes, that is his middle name)

[Bombadil 0]

I can't see it happening, surely even Fat Fred must know that making Venables manager would be suicide.

[ewerk 31195]

Rather have him than the over rated Mackem Lepricorn

105550[/snapback]

 

 

Is that a cross between a leprechaun and a unicorn?

[Ugly Mackems 134]

There's more chance he'll get the mackems job than ours.

[Jusoda Kid 1]

Rather have him than the over rated Mackem Lepricorn

105550[/snapback]

 

 

Is that a cross between a leprechaun and a unicorn?

105562[/snapback]

 

You tell me, Paddy!

[Guest Sima]

Besides which, Freddy leaked a story out about Venables getting the job before Souness to test the water. He got a bad response then and he'll get an even worse one now.

[ewerk 31195]

Rather have him than the over rated Mackem Lepricorn

105550[/snapback]

 

 

Is that a cross between a leprechaun and a unicorn?

105562[/snapback]

 

You tell me, Paddy!

105567[/snapback]

 

I'm not sure but it could explain O'Neill's penchant for virgins and screaming "der after me lucky charms!" at the top of his voice.

[LeazesMag 0]

Reason why I think the board may choose Venables is on a short 12 month contract, to work alongside Roeder and then to work alongside and/or keep the seat warm for Shearer when he has his badges and has taken his break from the game.

[Bombadil 0]

Reason why I think the board may choose Venables is on a short 12 month contract, to work alongside Roeder and then to work alongside and/or keep the seat warm for Shearer when he has his badges and has taken his break from the game.

105599[/snapback]

 

Absolute nightmare scenario.

 

Would you still be happy with Shepherd and his cronies if that happened?

[LeazesMag 0]

Reason why I think the board may choose Venables is on a short 12 month contract, to work alongside Roeder and then to work alongside and/or keep the seat warm for Shearer when he has his badges and has taken his break from the game.

105599[/snapback]

 

Absolute nightmare scenario.

 

Would you still be happy with Shepherd and his cronies if that happened?

105602[/snapback]

 

I can think of worse.

 

However I think you should provide the answer to how come all the big city clubs such as Leeds, Villa, Birmingham, Everton, Man City, Wolves, West Ham, Southampton, Portsmouth, mackems, Spurs, Sheff Wed who could all match us and beat us having done so in the past, haven't in the last decade ?

 

And how all our previous sets of directors before 1992 didn't fill the ground, build on the Fairs Cup Win, appoint England managers, buy England players and qualify regularly for europe and reach a couple of Cup Finals ?

 

When you have done this, you can tell me who the mystery Abramovic is lurking in the backround who will put millions of quid into the club and not want anything back ?

 

As no one else has answered these questions yet

Edited March 11, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Papa Lazaru 0]

Never going to happen, with one reason being as somebody said above, there were reports of Venables practically havign the job last time and the response from the fans ammounted to "Fuck off" and he was never mentioned again.

 

If Shepherd did it he'd be signing his own death warrant and any fan who wants Venables obviously pays very litte attention to football as he is unbeilievably overrated and is merely a cockney wideboy who the London media love to shoot their load over.

 

In this country he has 1 FA cup with Spurs and absolutely fuck all else, he did the Souness trick of winning a trophy in a country where 2 clubs basically take turns at winning. With England he scraped his way to a semi final despite playing every game in his home stadium and with the then greatets striker in football only playing well against Holland and Germany, yet you'd think he'd masterminded 3 world cup wins in a row!

 

Having said all that when Shepherd decided to have a lobotmy and hire Souness i'd have taken Venables over him like a shot. He'd have done nothing special, kept the club basically ticking over but he would not have acted like a spoilt bastard and cost us Bellamy, he'd probably have got on better and used Robert better and would have been on a short term contract.

[peasepud 59]

Reason why I think the board may choose Venables is on a short 12 month contract, to work alongside Roeder and then to work alongside and/or keep the seat warm for Shearer when he has his badges and has taken his break from the game.

105599[/snapback]

 

Absolute nightmare scenario.

 

Would you still be happy with Shepherd and his cronies if that happened?

105602[/snapback]

 

I can think of worse.

 

However I think you should provide the answer to how come all the big city clubs such as Leeds, Villa, Birmingham, Everton, Man City, Wolves, West Ham, Southampton, Portsmouth, mackems, Spurs, Sheff Wed who could all match us and beat us having done so in the past, haven't in the last decade ?

 

And how all our previous sets of directors before 1992 didn't fill the ground, build on the Fairs Cup Win, appoint England managers, buy England players and qualify regularly for europe and reach a couple of Cup Finals ?

 

When you have done this, you can tell me who the mystery Abramovic is lurking in the backround who will put millions of quid into the club and not want anything back ?

 

As no one else has answered these questions yet

105606[/snapback]

 

 

I'll think you'll find I did answer these but you refused to reply to the stuff I posted. Also, currently Everton, Man City, West Ham and Spurs are all above us so surely that means they have surpassed us this season?

 

Nope, not got a clue on the last one though.

 

EDIT: Oh and I'll state this now so its recorded but Venables will be the death of this club. The man is a dodgy, cokerneee wideboy geezer.

[LeazesMag 0]

Reason why I think the board may choose Venables is on a short 12 month contract, to work alongside Roeder and then to work alongside and/or keep the seat warm for Shearer when he has his badges and has taken his break from the game.

105599[/snapback]

 

Absolute nightmare scenario.

 

Would you still be happy with Shepherd and his cronies if that happened?

105602[/snapback]

 

I can think of worse.

 

However I think you should provide the answer to how come all the big city clubs such as Leeds, Villa, Birmingham, Everton, Man City, Wolves, West Ham, Southampton, Portsmouth, mackems, Spurs, Sheff Wed who could all match us and beat us having done so in the past, haven't in the last decade ?

 

And how all our previous sets of directors before 1992 didn't fill the ground, build on the Fairs Cup Win, appoint England managers, buy England players and qualify regularly for europe and reach a couple of Cup Finals ?

 

When you have done this, you can tell me who the mystery Abramovic is lurking in the backround who will put millions of quid into the club and not want anything back ?

 

As no one else has answered these questions yet

105606[/snapback]

 

 

I'll think you'll find I did answer these but you refused to reply to the stuff I posted. Also, currently Everton, Man City, West Ham and Spurs are all above us so surely that means they have surpassed us this season?

 

Nope, not got a clue on the last one though.

 

EDIT: Oh and I'll state this now so its recorded but Venables will be the death of this club. The man is a dodgy, cokerneee wideboy geezer.

105663[/snapback]

 

Actually PP.....you were probably one of the LAST people I expected to answer, and certainly not one of the ones the questions were aimed at, who still don't.

 

You mention those clubs above...the question was "over the last decade" ie consistently, to go further have any of those clubs filled their ground, played in europe, played in the Champions League, bought England players including the nr 1 goalscorer, appointed trophy winning managers, and reached a couple of Cup Finals ? There are also Leeds, Southampton, Portsmouth, Wolves, Villa at least that I mentioned initially.

 

And why did our old directors not fill the ground every week with the same fanbase, play in europe regularly, buy England players, appoint trophy winning managers, and build on the Fairs Cup win ?

[Holden McGroin 6782]

Never say *cough Owen signing for the Toon cough* never...

[peasepud 59]

Actually PP.....you were probably one of the LAST people I expected to answer, and certainly not one of the ones the questions were aimed at, who still don't.

 

You mention those clubs above...the question was "over the last decade" ie consistently, to go further have any of those clubs filled their ground, played in europe, played in the Champions League, bought England players including the nr 1 goalscorer, appointed trophy winning managers, and reached a couple of Cup Finals ? There are also Leeds, Southampton, Portsmouth, Wolves, Villa at least that I mentioned initially.

 

And why did our old directors not fill the ground every week with the same fanbase, play in europe regularly, buy England players, appoint trophy winning managers, and build on the Fairs Cup win ?

105666[/snapback]

 

Then yes, consistently over the last decade we have done better than these clubs however I still stand by my reasons for Spurs, Man City. Villa & Birmingham out of that lot not filling their grounds and being as big generally and thats down to the proximity of other big clubs to them. Whereas the nearest we have are the makems We also have been extremely succesful in reaching the later stages of the FA cup over that time but again, reaching the semis and finals means nowt if at the end of the day you dont get that silverware.

 

Using that logic of big succesful clubs being based on the number of fans going through the gates then how are Arsenal one of the biggest clubs in Europe?

 

I also still stand by my reasoning for why previous chairmen havent filled the ground, football was totally different in those days, it was not seen as a family day out, was not a safe place to go at times. If you take the total number of football fans in this country nowadays Im guessing you'd find its probably at least double what it was 20 years ago yet still spread across the same 92 teams. The advent of SKY meant people would start and support teams that they had no real allegiance to (a la ManUre) and someone growing up now somewhere between Arsenal and Spurs will probably decide to support the Arse purely on how succesful they are.

 

We I believe, fill our ground and sell our shirts because we are the only team in this city, we also have Keegan and Hall to thank for the out of city fanbase, these are people who at the time of footballs renaissance put the telly on and saw us flying away with the League, playing amazing football and having a manager that even women with no football interest knew the name of. Im not saying that Shepherd hasnt kept this up and made sensible business decisions to keep us up there, at the end of the day we're in the top 10 (or is it 11th) richest clubs in the world and frankly we have no right to be there, based on success. But, ultimately, its not down to him that we got there.

[LeazesMag 0]

Actually PP.....you were probably one of the LAST people I expected to answer, and certainly not one of the ones the questions were aimed at, who still don't.

 

You mention those clubs above...the question was "over the last decade" ie consistently, to go further have any of those clubs filled their ground, played in europe, played in the Champions League, bought England players including the nr 1 goalscorer, appointed trophy winning managers, and reached a couple of Cup Finals ? There are also Leeds, Southampton, Portsmouth, Wolves, Villa at least that I mentioned initially.

 

And why did our old directors not fill the ground every week with the same fanbase, play in europe regularly, buy England players, appoint trophy winning managers, and build on the Fairs Cup win ?

105666[/snapback]

 

Then yes, consistently over the last decade we have done better than these clubs however I still stand by my reasons for Spurs, Man City. Villa & Birmingham out of that lot not filling their grounds and being as big generally and thats down to the proximity of other big clubs to them. Whereas the nearest we have are the makems We also have been extremely succesful in reaching the later stages of the FA cup over that time but again, reaching the semis and finals means nowt if at the end of the day you dont get that silverware.

 

Using that logic of big succesful clubs being based on the number of fans going through the gates then how are Arsenal one of the biggest clubs in Europe?

 

I also still stand by my reasoning for why previous chairmen havent filled the ground, football was totally different in those days, it was not seen as a family day out, was not a safe place to go at times. If you take the total number of football fans in this country nowadays Im guessing you'd find its probably at least double what it was 20 years ago yet still spread across the same 92 teams. The advent of SKY meant people would start and support teams that they had no real allegiance to (a la ManUre) and someone growing up now somewhere between Arsenal and Spurs will probably decide to support the Arse purely on how succesful they are.

 

We I believe, fill our ground and sell our shirts because we are the only team in this city, we also have Keegan and Hall to thank for the out of city fanbase, these are people who at the time of footballs renaissance put the telly on and saw us flying away with the League, playing amazing football and having a manager that even women with no football interest knew the name of. Im not saying that Shepherd hasnt kept this up and made sensible business decisions to keep us up there, at the end of the day we're in the top 10 (or is it 11th) richest clubs in the world and frankly we have no right to be there, based on success. But, ultimately, its not down to him that we got there.

105673[/snapback]

 

Your first paragraph is true, but is irrelevant because, as I say, they have all done so in the past. If the criteria people are using here is to be the best, or win one of two big domestic trophies, then you are using the comparative method of judging, and I am saying that being the 3rd best in the country over the last decade [excluding manu and now Chelsea who unfortunately have their own rules to everyone else] isn't shit at all. The same comparison whereby all our old directors had the same advantages but didn't make them count as well as the current ones.

I could also point out a simple fact, that we also have a big club on our doorsteps.

You are in your 40's, you know as well as myself that the mackems have more potential too than most other big clubs and with the right setup could also compete at the top level and fill their ground.

 

The world and football didn't begin in 1992, and so doesnt' make NUFC a bunch of thieving crooks and run by shit directors just because we have came close to winning top trophies 4 times but not managed the big one in 13 years.

Which is what a canny few people seem to imply ....

 

We didn't fill the ground and sell loads of scarves etc in the past, why not ? You totally ignore the fact that we have not always done this, why not ? "At the time of footballs renaissance" is an irrelevant point, when the premiership was formed every club had the opportunity, the playing field among the big clubs was just as level, or not, as it had always been. It didn't change our status in the game, or potential status at all, the other clubs could still have matched us if they had been up to it.

 

Your last paragraph is indeed true, SJH was the driving force behind our resurgence, but as with all other clubs it is easily thrown away and Freddie and the rest of the board have kept us at this height...to be fair once you actually reach such a height it isn't so easy to go further ..... correct ? My point is and always has been that they are doing all they can to go further, it is simply a matter of appointing the winning manager which contrary to what others seem to think, doesn't just drop into your lap, or even take great judgement, the clubs who have appointed the winning managers ie Manu, Arsenal and Liverpool also made mistakes - I don't mean you but I really think that those who just expect us to appoint one of the 2 trophy winning managers automatically as a right need to take a reality check, having said that as some people seem to think the chairman is actually the team manager its hardly surprising they blame Fred for all the bad players bought and best ones sold etc ... I see no one has actually answered the question yet, that if appointing trophy winning managers and backing them with the cash to repeat this success isn't the criteria to use [which is what the club has done] then what exactly do they think the club should be doing ??

Edited March 12, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Bombadil 0]

I think a lot of people are just tired of discussing the role of the current board with you, Leazes - I know I am. What I will say is that I would be absolutely disgusted if Terry fucking Venables was offered a job in any capacity at NUFC. He's no better than Souness, and he's a vile and dodgy character who would be an embarrassment to the club.

[LeazesMag 0]

I think a lot of people are just tired of discussing the role of the current board with you, Leazes - I know I am. What I will say is that I would be absolutely disgusted if Terry fucking Venables was offered a job in any capacity at NUFC. He's no better than Souness, and he's a vile and dodgy character who would be an embarrassment to the club.

105763[/snapback]

 

Unfortunately that is because you are all wrong, and none of you have any

idea whatsoever how easy it would be to go backwards even though I have gave plenty of examples.

 

At the end of the day, if you are right, someone answer the questions with factual information, and if you do that then there would be nothing else to debate would there

 

If you can't take european matches on a consistent basis, buying England players, appointing England managers, reaching a couple of Cup Finals and filling the ground every week, the only conclusion I can come to is that if we ever really were shit, you would all fuck off and not bother supporting the club, just like what happened before ...

[peasepud 59]

I think a lot of people are just tired of discussing the role of the current board with you, Leazes - I know I am. What I will say is that I would be absolutely disgusted if Terry fucking Venables was offered a job in any capacity at NUFC. He's no better than Souness, and he's a vile and dodgy character who would be an embarrassment to the club.

105763[/snapback]

 

Unfortunately that is because you are all wrong, and none of you have any

idea whatsoever how easy it would be to go backwards even though I have gave plenty of examples.

 

At the end of the day, if you are right, someone answer the questions with factual information, and if you do that then there would be nothing else to debate would there

 

If you can't take european matches on a consistent basis, buying England players, appointing England managers, reaching a couple of Cup Finals and filling the ground every week, the only conclusion I can come to is that if we ever really were shit, you would all fuck off and not bother supporting the club, just like what happened before ...

105813[/snapback]