Our turnover of playing staff since our last promotion must be the highest.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bruce got deservedly sacked after an appaling year of bad results and then blamed the fans for his sacking, whinging on about it for almost 2 years.

Keane walked and, so far as I know, has never bad mouthed the fans.

You don't need to write 10000 words to point out why the fans hold Keane in higher regard, even if objectively Bruce is at least a good a manager as Keane.
 


Bruce got deservedly sacked after an appaling year of bad results and then blamed the fans for his sacking, whinging on about it for almost 2 years.

Keane walked and, so far as I know, has never bad mouthed the fans.

You don't need to write 10000 words to point out why the fans hold Keane in higher regard, even if objectively Bruce is at least a good a manager as Keane.
Keane didn't have thousands of fans calling him a horrible Irish b@stard and telling him to get out club either. He had a couple of fans have a pop at him against Northampton and he got irritated.
We obviously aren't privy to the what went on behind closed doors with Keane but it seemed from outside looking in he didn't like being answerable to Short and walked out. How after resigning he felt he was owed anything I'm really not sure but he felt strongly enough to drag the club through courts to pursue it.
As I've said before if Bruce had done the same thing it's a cast iron guarantee it would be another stick to beat the porky lad with regardless of being unaware of the facts.
 
You'll find it helps to be pithy when making points.
Bruce and all his media cronies refused to admit the real reason for his sacking. The fans didn't turn on him and he didn't get sacked for being fat or a Geordie. They turned on him because of his sh8t tactics and dire results.
If he'd been ginger instead of geordie we'd have shouted 'get out of our club, you fat ginger bastard' instead.

And he kept on whining about it to all his media mates for 2 years afterwards too.

Keane dragged us out if the sh8t and left us in the Prem. He's never slagged off or blamed the fans, so we like him more.
 
You'll find it helps to be pithy when making points.
Bruce and all his media cronies refused to admit the real reason for his sacking. The fans didn't turn on him and he didn't get sacked for being fat or a Geordie. They turned on him because of his sh8t tactics and dire results.
If he'd been ginger instead of geordie we'd have shouted 'get out of our club, you fat ginger bastard' instead.

And he kept on whining about it to all his media mates for 2 years afterwards too.

Keane dragged us out if the sh8t and left us in the Prem. He's never slagged off or blamed the fans, so we like him more.
Does any manager come out and say his tactics and results were shit so he deserved the sack? Not many.

Keane, O'Neill and Di Canio have blamed everyone else but themselves too.
 
None have blamed the fans have they? At least nowhere near as consistently and as whingingly as Bruce.
If you want people to like you, best not to slag them off in the press accusing them of effective sectarianism for two years.
 
Does any manager come out and say his tactics and results were shit so he deserved the sack? Not many.

Keane, O'Neill and Di Canio have blamed everyone else but themselves too.
Spot on.

None have blamed the fans have they? At least nowhere near as consistently and as whingingly as Bruce.
If you want people to like you, best not to slag them off in the press accusing them of effective sectarianism for two years.
At the risk of repeating myself none have had thousands of fans chanting personal abuse at them either. As I've said Keane got a tiny taste of it against Northampton and was straight to the press talking about how he wouldn't tolerate it.
Not one sunderland manager in my lifetime has had personal abuse threw at him by our fans. Terry butcher on the dole about as nasty as it got.
 
Last edited:
Prices were high but whether you like it or not Antin Ferdinand never was or never will be a 8m player. George McCartney was never a 6m player. There's nothing relative at all regarding fees paid for them and a few others.

Prices were high though, so of course Anton wasn't worth that, you would be lucky if he was worth half tbh. I'd disagree about McCartney's form at West Ham though, he'd progressed massively it was just unfortunate a) we sold him for pennies when his contract was running down and b) he looked constantly unfit/injured on his return.
So your advocating basically throwing big money at players just for the sake of even though you aren't convinced by them? That is a ludicrous policy. It's hardly surprising we found ourselves in a pickle with that scattergun approach.

How on earth am I advocating that? What on earth are you blithering on about?

All I've said is that Keane and the powers that be couldn't get the higher bracket players they wanted, so bought lesser players to still make sure we stayed up. It was either that or probably go down.

Well given oneil came in and achieved safety with relative ease I would say that the situation Bruce left wasn't quite as dire as you've tried to make out. That squad stayed up with ease in comparison to squad Keanr left and that was with a man in charge who you have been very critical of.

I've never said the Bruce situation was 'dire' the squad was average to poor and the performances had been dire over a long period meaning it needed a bit more to turn it around.

O'Neill is a competent manager though (or at least was). He had a cracking start getting everyone together and fighting, which more or less made us safe and then a shocking end to the season which he never really recovered from and the squad Bruce left is a large reason for that, though his spending didn't help much.

Had we got someone competent in when Keane left he'd have had the core of a reasonable lower to mid table team, with players to sell and money to spend. any reasonable manager would have been an improvement and seen us safe, even Sbragia managed it eventually.

We spent several seasons pissing about? That's an extremely blasé way of putting a 20th,21st,12th and again 20th (when Reid came in)league positions in the the old division one mind. A cup final did little to disguise the utter mess we were in. A tired old ground, Regular attendances of 13s and 14000s. We stayed up in 93 after losing our final game at Notts County due to other results going our way. Think that goes beyond just pissing around mind. Getting humped at home to teams like brentford and Southend, having to play at Grimsby in THEIR away kit due to some mix up with ours, bringing in Matteo on loan and playing him despite not being registered. It was a truly horrific time for our club. It was exactly as dismal and depressing as I'm making out Perry.

Yes several seasons pissing about. I remember it too see and the cup final DID absolutely disguise the mess we were in as it coincided with a massive return to form under Crosby which saw us have a long unbeaten run and people expecting a play off push. We then actually took our eyes off the league as we progressed in the cup and even rested almost a full side for Blackburn away, as the cup took priority and the season petered out, in truth nobody much cared by then as we were in the cup final.

It was 18, 21,12, 20 btw.

The following seasons certainly weren't good and that's why I said pissing about, firstly giving Crosby his chance (or not really doing so), not giving Brace more than a 1 year deal, Butcher in, giving Butcher millions and the expectation that created and then nothing from it etc and Butcher out, Featherstone in and all that bollocks. All the stuff about the ground 13 and 14o00 attendances, that's bollocks though, because that was all we were all used to anyway and had been for several years. We only averaged 17989 when we finished sixth and went up in 1990, yet there was only two seasons we averaged 1000 or less during the seasons you talk of, in fact in 1988 we actually averaged 4000 less, despite finishing 11th and despite having many matches where school kids got in for nowt towards the end of the season, me being one of them. The Notts County end of season was a low point and the Buxton second season was full of apathy, but back then these things weren't massively disconnected from what we were used to.

I've mentioned Reid due to you claiming that Keane was faced with our lowest Ebb since 87. Me bringing the situation Reid faced up is relevant to disagreeing with your assessment thus not changing the discussions course at all.

It was the detail and length you went into on one pretty meaningless part. Reid maybe faced a harder task overall, but the club was at breaking point and the most important period in God knows how long when Keane came in.

Expectation was low because the club was dying a slow painful death. People had began to stop caring as the attendances showed. To breath life back into that with the resources available was nothing short of a miracle. Having two dismal seasons of top flight football is still a lot better than 4 seasons of dismal second tier stuff. Don't get me wrong without Keane it could well have headed the way of the early 90s who knows but he had a chance to halt the slide before it became fatal and he did that and some.

Attendances don't really show anything over that period, barring 1995 which was because obviously we were poor and because there was absolutely no entertainment on show.

Paul Stewart played 2 games tops and one of them he lasted half an hour at Ipswich and his loan ended. He didn't sign permenant until the summer. Mullin was a kid who cost about 50k who I can't even remember playing that season to be honest. Peter Reid didn't sign Howey. Kelly was his only real cash signing.
To say anybody reasonably competent would have kept a side up who were 18th when they took over is bizarre mind. I fail to see how you can so confidently say that. We weren't a particularly good side.

Stewart was on loan like I said and yes he played two games earlier in the season, got injured and went back. He came back on a permanent deal in March and played the end of the season up front in place of Phil Gray.

It's not bizarre given the situation. We had a reasonable squad of players, who had a bad run over a five or six week period when the manager, a novice at that, was losing the plot. Anyone capable could have came in and turned it around, probably the worst manager I have ever seen at Sunderland (I call him a manager, he clearly wasn't) kept us up, so why couldn't someone competent?

We were never in the bottom 3 under Bruce in 2 and a half seasons! How is that taking periods in isolation? How much longer a period can I take it over? Just pointing out a fact.

You never said that originally, you said in the 9 month period, when previously you said you wouldn't take anything but seasons into consideration. Now, when it suits, you're taking two and a half!

As for the last paragraph what on earth are you rambling on about? At what point have I excused Bruce? I have repeatedly stated it was the right decision to sack him and that he has to take his share of responsibility for the struggles since. What we have established in this discussion though is a more rounded view of the facts in regards to positions we were when both Bruce and Keane left. The similarities are spooky yet one manager gets away Scott free while the other is a pariah.

I pointed out that the situations in cold hard facts were virtually identical, yet you have been treating Bruce's as a lesser situation and you've been doing this from the start, purely on the basis of us not being in the bottom three when he left. You've made out the difference to be wider that it actually is on that basis.

And Keane only gets away scott free in your eyes, because of the downer you have on him.
 
Prices were high though, so of course Anton wasn't worth that, you would be lucky if he was worth half tbh. I'd disagree about McCartney's form at West Ham though, he'd progressed massively it was just unfortunate a) we sold him for pennies when his contract was running down and b) he looked constantly unfit/injured on his return.


How on earth am I advocating that? What on earth are you blithering on about?

All I've said is that Keane and the powers that be couldn't get the higher bracket players they wanted, so bought lesser players to still make sure we stayed up. It was either that or probably go down.



I've never said the Bruce situation was 'dire' the squad was average to poor and the performances had been dire over a long period meaning it needed a bit more to turn it around.

O'Neill is a competent manager though (or at least was). He had a cracking start getting everyone together and fighting, which more or less made us safe and then a shocking end to the season which he never really recovered from and the squad Bruce left is a large reason for that, though his spending didn't help much.

Had we got someone competent in when Keane left he'd have had the core of a reasonable lower to mid table team, with players to sell and money to spend. any reasonable manager would have been an improvement and seen us safe, even Sbragia managed it eventually.



Yes several seasons pissing about. I remember it too see and the cup final DID absolutely disguise the mess we were in as it coincided with a massive return to form under Crosby which saw us have a long unbeaten run and people expecting a play off push. We then actually took our eyes off the league as we progressed in the cup and even rested almost a full side for Blackburn away, as the cup took priority and the season petered out, in truth nobody much cared by then as we were in the cup final.

It was 18, 21,12, 20 btw.

The following seasons certainly weren't good and that's why I said pissing about, firstly giving Crosby his chance (or not really doing so), not giving Brace more than a 1 year deal, Butcher in, giving Butcher millions and the expectation that created and then nothing from it etc and Butcher out, Featherstone in and all that bollocks. All the stuff about the ground 13 and 14o00 attendances, that's bollocks though, because that was all we were all used to anyway and had been for several years. We only averaged 17989 when we finished sixth and went up in 1990, yet there was only two seasons we averaged 1000 or less during the seasons you talk of, in fact in 1988 we actually averaged 4000 less, despite finishing 11th and despite having many matches where school kids got in for nowt towards the end of the season, me being one of them. The Notts County end of season was a low point and the Buxton second season was full of apathy, but back then these things weren't massively disconnected from what we were used to.



It was the detail and length you went into on one pretty meaningless part. Reid maybe faced a harder task overall, but the club was at breaking point and the most important period in God knows how long when Keane came in.



Attendances don't really show anything over that period, barring 1995 which was because obviously we were poor and because there was absolutely no entertainment on show.



Stewart was on loan like I said and yes he played two games earlier in the season, got injured and went back. He came back on a permanent deal in March and played the end of the season up front in place of Phil Gray.

It's not bizarre given the situation. We had a reasonable squad of players, who had a bad run over a five or six week period when the manager, a novice at that, was losing the plot. Anyone capable could have came in and turned it around, probably the worst manager I have ever seen at Sunderland (I call him a manager, he clearly wasn't) kept us up, so why couldn't someone competent?



You never said that originally, you said in the 9 month period, when previously you said you wouldn't take anything but seasons into consideration. Now, when it suits, you're taking two and a half!



I pointed out that the situations in cold hard facts were virtually identical, yet you have been treating Bruce's as a lesser situation and you've been doing this from the start, purely on the basis of us not being in the bottom three when he left. You've made out the difference to be wider that it actually is on that basis.

And Keane only gets away scott free in your eyes, because of the downer you have on him.
Jesus christ man Wikipedia is using less bandwidth at the moment. .
 
That's an incredibly harsh set of criteria that mind, Perry. The nature of the club we support means that anyone who has a resale value will be sold. I've supported SAFC since the late 70s, and barring a few of Reid's signings between 1997-99, I'd struggle to name any manager who signed more than one player who gave decent service and had a reasonable resale value. Gabbiadini, Goodman, Mignolet as you say. Now I'm struggling. That's 35 years worth.

I know it is, intentionally. Because Mr Jardine (MBH, not so much) and especially that numpty Des (Lee Street or whatever) were continually whining about the lack of value, sell on, contribution etc etc from Keane's signings. So because they were ignoring certain aspects, what was happening at the time, players who stayed on etc I similarly hand picked something which was virtually impossible for them to answer, especially under Bruce where anyone decent is sold within minutes as he lines up his next set of signings

Jesus christ man Wikipedia is using less bandwidth at the moment. .

Don't worry, I was quite enjoying it yesterday as I had the litte one all day and couldn't be bothered to move. I'm certainly not going to reply at the same rate given I'm now eating into my time, as I've got too much to do.
 
I know it is, intentionally. Because Mr Jardine (MBH, not so much) and especially that numpty Des (Lee Street or whatever) were continually whining about the lack of value, sell on, contribution etc etc from Keane's signings. So because they were ignoring certain aspects, what was happening at the time, players who stayed on etc I similarly hand picked something which was virtually impossible for them to answer, especially under Bruce where anyone decent is sold within minutes as he lines up his next set of signings



Don't worry, I was quite enjoying it yesterday as I had the litte one all day and couldn't be bothered to move. I'm certainly not going to reply at the same rate given I'm now eating into my time, as I've got too much to do.
Forgive me if history leaves me a tad sceptical mind;)..
 
I know it is, intentionally. Because Mr Jardine (MBH, not so much) and especially that numpty Des (Lee Street or whatever) were continually whining about the lack of value, sell on, contribution etc etc from Keane's signings. So because they were ignoring certain aspects, what was happening at the time, players who stayed on etc I similarly hand picked something which was virtually impossible for them to answer, especially under Bruce where anyone decent is sold within minutes as he lines up his next set of signings.

Fair enough. Having thought about it a bit more, I came up with Chris Turner and Kenwyne Jones, and wondered about Colin Pascoe (I have no recollection of his transfer fee whatsoever). But that's going back as far as the Jimmy Adamson era, and its even less likely nowadays when players can just run their contracts down and leave on a free
 
Fair enough. Having thought about it a bit more, I came up with Chris Turner and Kenwyne Jones, and wondered about Colin Pascoe (I have no recollection of his transfer fee whatsoever). But that's going back as far as the Jimmy Adamson era, and its even less likely nowadays when players can just run their contracts down and leave on a free

Think Pascoe in was about 60 to 90k, don't think he fetched anything going as injuries and age caught up with him. Just more reasons why I asked it I suppose.

I did mention Sess after I posted the question though, he kinda fits. I like the fact you mentioned Jones, because he was a Keane signing and apparently all Keane done was sign players with no resell value.

Not one sunderland manager in my lifetime has had personal abuse threw at him by our fans. Terry butcher on the dole about as nasty as it got.

Maybe not to the same level in a one off tirade, but Bruce was telling us months before he got abuse or left the club that we placed too much importance on derby games, that he was only being criticised because of the results in derby games and because of where he came from. He was antagonising the support and playing the "it's because I'm a Geordie" before it got to personal abuse during the Wigan game.

Peter Reid achieved a helluva lot more here and had beer thrown over him and a lot of criticism, but never bad mouthed us in the same way.
 
Last edited:
Think Pascoe in was about 60 to 90k, don't think he fetched anything going as injuries and age caught up with him. Just more reasons why I asked it I suppose.

I did mention Sess after I posted the question though, he kinda fits. I like the fact you mentioned Jones, because he was a Keane signing and apparently all Keane done was sign players with no resell value.



Maybe not to the same level in a one off tirade, but Bruce was telling us months before he got abuse or left the club that we placed too much importance on derby games, that he was only being criticised because of the results in derby games and because of where he came from. He was antagonising the support and playing the "it's because I'm a Geordie" before it got to personal abuse during the Wigan game.

Peter Reid achieved a helluva lot more here and had beer thrown over him and a lot of criticism, but never bad mouthed us in the same way.
Re-Writing history in afraid perry. Bruce never once said he was being criticised for his roots prior to the Wigan game. He did say we placed too much emphasis on the derby which I agree with however he also didn't help himself on that score by building it up himself. His record in the derby games coupled with his heritage was what made the fans turn so viciously on him. As I've said there would certainly have been mutterings much as was with oneil due to our form but it wouldn't have turned as ugly as it did.
Reid did achieve a helluva lot more. More than any manager apart from stokoe in the last 50 year and he did receive criticism including that awful incident with the beer but it still wasn't as ugly as the end of that Wigan game. Any manager would feel a little bitter after that. As I've said Keane was given the smallest imaginable taster of what Bruce got and he was straight to the press to vent his spleen. The fans would have got a lot more back off him than what Bruce gave if shoe roles reversed believe me.

Prices were high though, so of course Anton wasn't worth that, you would be lucky if he was worth half tbh. I'd disagree about McCartney's form at West Ham though, he'd progressed massively it was just unfortunate a) we sold him for pennies when his contract was running down and b) he looked constantly unfit/injured on his return.


How on earth am I advocating that? What on earth are you blithering on about?

All I've said is that Keane and the powers that be couldn't get the higher bracket players they wanted, so bought lesser players to still make sure we stayed up. It was either that or probably go down.



I've never said the Bruce situation was 'dire' the squad was average to poor and the performances had been dire over a long period meaning it needed a bit more to turn it around.

O'Neill is a competent manager though (or at least was). He had a cracking start getting everyone together and fighting, which more or less made us safe and then a shocking end to the season which he never really recovered from and the squad Bruce left is a large reason for that, though his spending didn't help much.

Had we got someone competent in when Keane left he'd have had the core of a reasonable lower to mid table team, with players to sell and money to spend. any reasonable manager would have been an improvement and seen us safe, even Sbragia managed it eventually.



Yes several seasons pissing about. I remember it too see and the cup final DID absolutely disguise the mess we were in as it coincided with a massive return to form under Crosby which saw us have a long unbeaten run and people expecting a play off push. We then actually took our eyes off the league as we progressed in the cup and even rested almost a full side for Blackburn away, as the cup took priority and the season petered out, in truth nobody much cared by then as we were in the cup final.

It was 18, 21,12, 20 btw.

The following seasons certainly weren't good and that's why I said pissing about, firstly giving Crosby his chance (or not really doing so), not giving Brace more than a 1 year deal, Butcher in, giving Butcher millions and the expectation that created and then nothing from it etc and Butcher out, Featherstone in and all that bollocks. All the stuff about the ground 13 and 14o00 attendances, that's bollocks though, because that was all we were all used to anyway and had been for several years. We only averaged 17989 when we finished sixth and went up in 1990, yet there was only two seasons we averaged 1000 or less during the seasons you talk of, in fact in 1988 we actually averaged 4000 less, despite finishing 11th and despite having many matches where school kids got in for nowt towards the end of the season, me being one of them. The Notts County end of season was a low point and the Buxton second season was full of apathy, but back then these things weren't massively disconnected from what we were used to.



It was the detail and length you went into on one pretty meaningless part. Reid maybe faced a harder task overall, but the club was at breaking point and the most important period in God knows how long when Keane came in.



Attendances don't really show anything over that period, barring 1995 which was because obviously we were poor and because there was absolutely no entertainment on show.



Stewart was on loan like I said and yes he played two games earlier in the season, got injured and went back. He came back on a permanent deal in March and played the end of the season up front in place of Phil Gray.

It's not bizarre given the situation. We had a reasonable squad of players, who had a bad run over a five or six week period when the manager, a novice at that, was losing the plot. Anyone capable could have came in and turned it around, probably the worst manager I have ever seen at Sunderland (I call him a manager, he clearly wasn't) kept us up, so why couldn't someone competent?



You never said that originally, you said in the 9 month period, when previously you said you wouldn't take anything but seasons into consideration. Now, when it suits, you're taking two and a half!



I pointed out that the situations in cold hard facts were virtually identical, yet you have been treating Bruce's as a lesser situation and you've been doing this from the start, purely on the basis of us not being in the bottom three when he left. You've made out the difference to be wider that it actually is on that basis.

And Keane only gets away scott free in your eyes, because of the downer you have on him.
McCartney was never worth that much. A very average player in my opinion.
You're advocating it by saying he had no choice but to spend what he did on what he did. Here's a novel idea. Try signing players who give us value as they are out there if look hard enough. No manager gets it 100% correct in market but keanes strike rate was particularly poor.
So oneil was a competent manager at first(which suits your argument) then became incompetent more or less overnight? You really are doing a lot of tailoring here mind.
Under Crosby we had what happens a lot in regards to a new manager with new ideas galvanising things for a period. We were never in the reckoning for a play off place. You mention one game when we fielded a significantly weak side the rest of games was the usual ordinary bunch who miraculously got us to a cup final. 18th place doesn't and in running for play offs? Come off it man.
Pissing about really doesn't do nearly enough justice to the situation we were in mind. We were one game away for the third tier for goodness sake. To then say its nothing that we weren't used to shows just how low we were at the point Reid came in. To even try and say the club was at a lower ebb upon Keanes arrival is simply wrong.
Crowds in the 80 a were generally low though due to a lot of cried trouble at time. By the time of the early 90s and boom of the premier league they were gradually increasing again and we were being left completely behind.
I felt I needed to go into detail as I don't think a 'Reids situation was worse end of story' would really have been satisfactory would it?
As for Stewart I really can't remember him coming back at end of season but you are quite correct Bonny lad.
Sbragia was far from the answer but you are being very disrespectful towards a bloke who did what he was tasked to do and something that was beginning to look beyond Keanes capabilities at the time.
I never said over a 9 month period at all I just said we were never in the bottom 3 under Bruce. May not mean a great deal in grand scheme of things but worth pointing out.
The amount of posts on here that have stated we were definitely going down under Bruce as oppose to Keane is staggering. It was during the course of our discussion on this and me having to pretty much twist your arm up your back that you finally accepted that the situations were identical. At first you tried to pass off Keanes predicament as a blip which could easily have been rectified over the course of some cushy games while not caring to mention the same could have been said of Bruce.
As for a downer on Keane you couldn't be more wrong. One of my favourite players and also think he's superb value as a pundit, while I have openly stated that he did some good work whilst here. All I have tried to do is add some balance to what is such a one sided impression of the two managers spells. Even the fact Keane dragged us through the courts is conveniently swept under the carpet on here whilst Steve Bruce having a celebratory song picked out should we have won the derby (even you mentioned it) is used as an example of some kind of sacrilege.
 
Last edited:
Re-Writing history in afraid perry. Bruce never once said he was being criticised for his roots prior to the Wigan game. He did say we placed too much emphasis on the derby which I agree with however he also didn't help himself on that score by building it up himself. His record in the derby games coupled with his heritage was what made the fans turn so viciously on him. As I've said there would certainly have been mutterings much as was with oneil due to our form but it wouldn't have turned as ugly as it did.
Reid did achieve a helluva lot more. More than any manager apart from stokoe in the last 50 year and he did receive criticism including that awful incident with the beer but it still wasn't as ugly as the end of that Wigan game. Any manager would feel a little bitter after that. As I've said Keane was given the smallest imaginable taster of what Bruce got and he was straight to the press to vent his spleen. The fans would have got a lot more back off him than what Bruce gave if shoe roles reversed believe me.

So him saying "he thinks some fans have an agenda against him" here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...iticism-of-his-sides-start-to-the-season.html isn't meaning exactly that? Of course it is.

The fans didn't turn so ugly on him, don't try and confuse a small but audible selection of fans singing "fat Geordie bastard get out of our club" for a small amount of time as being something out of the ordinary at a football ground, I've seen some home bred players called far worse. It was embarrassing, but a reaction at the time to the crowds frustration at going further behind, the results and the manager constantly antagonising the support with his comments in the media, very little to do with derbies I'm afraid, only according to uncle Steve to deflect away from our terrible form.

And no having beer poured over you at a football ground when your the manager is worse than than a few hundered fans singing what they did for a minute or so. The atmosphere around that time was more poisonus than anything Bruce saw.
 
So him saying "he thinks some fans have an agenda against him" here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...iticism-of-his-sides-start-to-the-season.html isn't meaning exactly that? Of course it is.

The fans didn't turn so ugly on him, don't try and confuse a small but audible selection of fans singing "fat Geordie bastard get out of our club" for a small amount of time as being something out of the ordinary at a football ground, I've seen some home bred players called far worse. It was embarrassing, but a reaction at the time to the crowds frustration at going further behind, the results and the manager constantly antagonising the support with his comments in the media, very little to do with derbies I'm afraid, only according to uncle Steve to deflect away from our terrible form.

And no having beer poured over you at a football ground when your the manager is worse than than a few hundered fans singing what they did for a minute or so. The atmosphere around that time was more poisonus than anything Bruce saw.
It means whatever you interpret it to mean perry. He certainly wasn't a lot of the fans first choice and definitely wasn't mine. He also never had the
charisma or reputation of his predecessor either. The more the results went against us the more his early footballing allegiances came to the forefront I'm afraid.
I have heard players get called worse yes but never heard thousands (not hundreds) singing vile abuse at an individual simply because it's never happened here before.
Once again you play down one situation in order to dramatise another to suit your agenda. The beer incident was terrible and can't be condoned but you can't really account for one arsehole at a pre season friendly doing something stupid. Reids end was met with choruses of boos and a lot of frustration but he was never subject to an extremely audible volley of abuse from his own fans like Bruce was. If you can't see why he feels a little bitter towards us you have your head buried in the sand in afraid.
 
McCartney was never worth that much. A very average player in my opinion.

Yes we know, you said he was shit in 2004 when you weren't even going.....

McCartney was excellent until injury here around 2003-5. Then moved to West Ham and looked one of the more capable left fullbacks in the top flight for a couple of seasons.

You're advocating it by saying he had no choice but to spend what he did on what he did. Here's a novel idea. Try signing players who give us value as they are out there if look hard enough. No manager gets it 100% correct in market but keanes strike rate was particularly poor.

No I'm not advocating the amount of players he signed, but we did need to sign many to stay up. He got some very good value out of some too, which you try to ignore or sway away from. Would you rather we hadn't signed many of them and been relegated or close to it first season up?

You also ignore he did compete for better players, but we couldn't sign many of them, we set our stall out quite high and even Quinn came out and said we had funds, but not massess of them. If like you say it's all about money and we had shitloads, why did most turn us down in that period? Answer that please, rather than ignoring it again.

So oneil was a competent manager at first(which suits your argument) then became incompetent more or less overnight? You really are doing a lot of tailoring here mind.

Ok, what would you say O'Neill is? A shit manager? a poor manager here? a manager with a good record that appeared to lose his way?

Did he not have a good start and then turn shit, is that not what I've said and happened?

Call it what you want, but he galvanised the squad (as it needed it), got us safe then it turned to dogshit. How is that tayloring?

In terms of players who contributed under Keane and done the specific jobs asked of them, Keane's record was about 50/50, which according to Alex Ferguson is good. Just because you ignore how some left or you dislike Keane so much you question many of the better signings doesn't change that.

Under Crosby we had what happens a lot in regards to a new manager with new ideas galvanising things for a period. We were never in the reckoning for a play off place. You mention one game when we fielded a significantly weak side the rest of games was the usual ordinary bunch who miraculously got us to a cup final. 18th place doesn't and in running for play offs? Come off it man.

Read what I said again, I never said Crosby deserved anything, I just said off the back of the FA Cup and his appointment we had an excellent run, which we did. I also said that due to the cup run we completely took out eye of the league (as we were safe) when due to our form people were talking about a late play off charge.. I highlighted the change in priority by the selection of a completely different side against Blackburn away. Now I'm not quite sure what on earth you're rambling on about or why, but those things happened.

Pissing about really doesn't do nearly enough justice to the situation we were in mind. We were one game away for the third tier for goodness sake. To then say its nothing that we weren't used to shows just how low we were at the point Reid came in. To even try and say the club was at a lower ebb upon Keanes arrival is simply wrong.

Many of the supporters were used to just that though, there were fewer expectations and we'd only been in the league below 6 or 7 seasons earlier. It wasn't good, it would have been awful but it just wasn't the same, we were a different club al ltogether in 2006 and that's why it hit us harder.

Crowds in the 80 a were generally low though due to a lot of cried trouble at time. By the time of the early 90s and boom of the premier league they were gradually increasing again and we were being left completely behind.

Clubs like us, Boro, Southampton, Derby, Leicester and many others didn't see any kind of boom till we/they had new shiny stadiums and a bit of Premiership football, there was no such thing as a "90's boom" unless you had a bit of one or both of those. Besides the attendances you talk of, barring one in 1995 when we were full of apathy were little different from the 10 years previous.

Sbragia was far from the answer but you are being very disrespectful towards a bloke who did what he was tasked to do and something that was beginning to look beyond Keanes capabilities at the time.

He was an embarrasment, he remains the worst manager I've seen in charge for any length of time.

.
As for a downer on Keane you couldn't be more wrong. One of my favourite players and also think he's superb value as a pundit, while I have openly stated that he did some good work whilst here. All I have tried to do is add some balance to what is such a one sided impression of the two managers spells. Even the fact Keane dragged us through the courts is conveniently swept under the carpet on here whilst Steve Bruce having a celebratory song picked out should we have won the derby (even you mentioned it) is used as an example of some kind of sacrilege.

Here we got claiming balance again. I think you're about as balanced towards Keane as I am with Bruce.

So Bruce didn't get a pay off? Do you think he wouldn't have disputed it and dragged us through the courts if he hadn't? He dragged our names through the mud everytime he done an interview for the year or so afterward and he was kind enough to do it everytime he put himself in front of a camera putting his name forward for another job.

And no I never ever ever said it was some kind of sacrilege at all. I merely used it in the context of a post when showing how Bruce himself contradicted himself in the way of building up derbies, then when his side doesn't perform playing them down, because that's what Bruce does. I've clarified that about three times now and each time you ignore it and repeat the same type of thing.

It means whatever you interpret it to mean perry. He certainly wasn't a lot of the fans first choice and definitely wasn't mine. He also never had the
charisma or reputation of his predecessor either. The more the results went against us the more his early footballing allegiances came to the forefront I'm afraid.
I have heard players get called worse yes but never heard thousands (not hundreds) singing vile abuse at an individual simply because it's never happened here before.
Once again you play down one situation in order to dramatise another to suit your agenda. The beer incident was terrible and can't be condoned but you can't really account for one arsehole at a pre season friendly doing something stupid. Reids end was met with choruses of boos and a lot of frustration but he was never subject to an extremely audible volley of abuse from his own fans like Bruce was. If you can't see why he feels a little bitter towards us you have your head buried in the sand in afraid.

It could only have really meant two things; A) they have an agenda because of derby results or B) they have an agenda because of where I come from.

Seeing as he's kept on mentioning to anyone who would listen to about two years, hindsight tells us it's certainly B.

You always have a few idiots who wont like someone because of where they come from, but do a good job and don't act like a twat and you'll here virtually nothing. Look outside our stadium and you'll see Bob Stokoe, on a lesser level today I have 'liked' the fact that on this day in 1997 a fullback joined us from Wimbledon and is still a cult hero today, despite being a Newcastle supporter as a boy. Barring the odd throwaway comment many have never really criticised Colback for where he came from either. Even when Bruce suffered the 5-1 defeat, in a few weeks later and whilst on an excellent run, many couldn't care less as we were playing excellent football. Where he came from, didn't really matter.

It wasn't just one arsehole at a preseason friendly though, there was a poisonous atmosphere around the club and Reid at the time and it was the same on the same trip with the treatment Kilbane got.

*87 not 1997 for John Kay.
 
Last edited:
Yes we know, you said he was shit in 2004 when you weren't even going.....

McCartney was excellent until injury here around 2003-5. Then moved to West Ham and looked one of the more capable left fullbacks in the top flight for a couple of seasons.



No I'm not advocating the amount of players he signed, but we did need to sign many to stay up. He got some very good value out of some too, which you try to ignore or sway away from. Would you rather we hadn't signed many of them and been relegated or close to it first season up?

You also ignore he did compete for better players, but we couldn't sign many of them, we set our stall out quite high and even Quinn came out and said we had funds, but not massess of them. If like you say it's all about money and we had shitloads, why did most turn us down in that period? Answer that please, rather than ignoring it again.



Ok, what would you say O'Neill is? A shit manager? a poor manager here? a manager with a good record that appeared to lose his way?

Did he not have a good start and then turn shit, is that not what I've said and happened?

Call it what you want, but he galvanised the squad (as it needed it), got us safe then it turned to dogshit. How is that tayloring?

In terms of players who contributed under Keane and done the specific jobs asked of them, Keane's record was about 50/50, which according to Alex Ferguson is good. Just because you ignore how some left or you dislike Keane so much you question many of the better signings doesn't change that.



Read what I said again, I never said Crosby deserved anything, I just said off the back of the FA Cup and his appointment we had an excellent run, which we did. I also said that due to the cup run we completely took out eye of the league (as we were safe) when due to our form people were talking about a late play off charge.. I highlighted the change in priority by the selection of a completely different side against Blackburn away. Now I'm not quite sure what on earth you're rambling on about or why, but those things happened.



Many of the supporters were used to just that though, there were fewer expectations and we'd only been in the league below 6 or 7 seasons earlier. It wasn't good, it would have been awful but it just wasn't the same, we were a different club al ltogether in 2006 and that's why it hit us harder.



Clubs like us, Boro, Southampton, Derby, Leicester and many others didn't see any kind of boom till we/they had new shiny stadiums and a bit of Premiership football, there was no such thing as a "90's boom" unless you had a bit of one or both of those. Besides the attendances you talk of, barring one in 1995 when we were full of apathy were little different from the 10 years previous.



He was an embarrasment, he remains the worst manager I've seen in charge for any length of time.



Here we got claiming balance again. I think you're about as balanced towards Keane as I am with Bruce.

So Bruce didn't get a pay off? Do you think he wouldn't have disputed it and dragged us through the courts if he hadn't? He dragged our names through the mud everytime he done an interview for the year or so afterward and he was kind enough to do it everytime he put himself in front of a camera putting his name forward for another job.

And no I never ever ever said it was some kind of sacrilege at all. I merely used it in the context of a post when showing how Bruce himself contradicted himself in the way of building up derbies, then when his side doesn't perform playing them down, because that's what Bruce does. I've clarified that about three times now and each time you ignore it and repeat the same type of thing.



It could only have really meant two things; A) they have an agenda because of derby results or B) they have an agenda because of where I come from.

Seeing as he's kept on mentioning to anyone who would listen to about two years, hindsight tells us it's certainly B.

You always have a few idiots who wont like someone because of where they come from, but do a good job and don't act like a twat and you'll here virtually nothing. Look outside our stadium and you'll see Bob Stokoe, on a lesser level today I have 'liked' the fact that on this day in 1997 a fullback joined us from Wimbledon and is still a cult hero today, despite being a Newcastle supporter as a boy. Barring the odd throwaway comment many have never really criticised Colback for where he came from either. Even when Bruce suffered the 5-1 defeat, in a few weeks later and whilst on an excellent run, many couldn't care less as we were playing excellent football. Where he came from, didn't really matter.

It wasn't just one arsehole at a preseason friendly though, there was a poisonous atmosphere around the club and Reid at the time and it was the same on the same trip with the treatment Kilbane got.

*87 not 1997 for John Kay.
When did I say McCartney was shit in 2004 and when did I say I pretty much stopped supporting them then which is pretty much what you're getting at? I said he was an average full back who looked decent evough at chamionship level. He was never a 6m player.
I'm well aware he needed to buy but that doesn't justify simply throwing money away which in a lot cases he pretty much did.
High level players such as David Nugent? That would have went down as another waste so awe dodged a bullet there and happy Harry was throwing money around like no tomorrow at Pompey which is why hel have plumped for them. I never claimed we were a bottomless pit but in grand scheme of things we had a very healthy budget and it wasn't utilised properly. I see no avoidance at all there mind I will always maintain if you offer enough wages they will come regardless of perceived status. You make it sound like we were scraping the barrel when we most certainly weren't.
I would say Oneil has been a very good manager and I was delighted he came but you have been very critical of him on here and some of your comments haven't given the impression you think of the man as competent. However it seems you're happy to class him as just that in order to back up your argument.
What better signings have I questioned? Jones done a good job, Richardson and bardsley gave us good service then he had a few such as higinbotham and Etuhu who we made money back on. Your success rate of 50% is beyond fanciful as well mind.
The only one rambling regarding crosbys spell is you with your talk of a play off charge. Yes he had a good initial run (not nearly great enough for any level headed person to think of play offs mind) but come the new year that soon gave way to a tumble down table with only the cup final disguising just how poor we were.
Of course we were a diffrent club and that was because of what Reid achieved from absolutely nothing. There was a feeling of apathy around the place I couldn't agree more which makes that particular turnaround all the more remarkable than the one Keane achieved. It was only a couple of seasons before Roy arrived that we had went down from the top flight with a record low total and bounced back up almost straight away so it wasn't exactly a bolt from the blue what he done although it was more than I was expecting.
The boom was the premiership which we were looking further and further from in the early 90s whilst our nearest and dearest were on the crest of wave out of pretty much nothing. That period is the most disillusioned I've known our fan base become and the stats show a gradual decline in attendances in that time. As you have said not by much but if we had slipped into the third tier before Reid took over it's highly doubtful this shiny new stadium you speak of would even be here.
Again very harsh on Sbragia who never professed to anything he wasn't and kept us up. Got no problem with the bloke.
It's easier for me to show balance as I actually like Keane as oppose to your sheer dislike for Bruce. I have no problem with either.
Bruce got sacked so he naturally gets a pay off as you or I would if made redundant. Keane walked out. Now I don't claim to know ins and outs butsurely if you walk you get nothing? Keane obviously disagrees .
As for Bruce bringing us up at every turn he's probably had hundreds of press conferences since he left and has probably mentioned us half a dozen times at most and then only when we have been directly linked to the nature of the conference. Really surprised at you going down the sensatilising route mind.
As for ignoring your remark regarding Bruce building up the derbies only to play them down when it went wrong I've already stated he never helped himself with that.
Bob stokoe was a success though and it was also a totally diffrent time when the level of hostility wasn't close to what it is now. Chopras one of us went the song. Made a balls up in the derby game and he was public enemy number one and low and behold his boyhood allegiances were brought up. It's the easiest stick to beat them with.
Colback hasn't had any stick????? I don't think there's enough smilies on here to do that comment justice mind. Have you not read some of the things that have been posted on here?
It was one arsehole who threw the beer though but I concede there was also a lot of anti Reid fans out there and understandably so given we were on a massive slippery slope. He still never suffered the indignity of his own fans chanting a vicious personal song solely aimed at him though. Bruce is the only manager to suffer that particular fate as far as I'm aware.
 
When did I say McCartney was shit in 2004 and when did I say I pretty much stopped supporting them then which is pretty much what you're getting at? I said he was an average full back who looked decent evough at chamionship level. He was never a 6m player.

You know what I'm talking about.£6m was pretty much standard fare at the time. McCartney looked a class above at Championship level and went onto play really well at West Ham. That justified a £6m fee at the time, even if his performances on coming back were garbage.


I'm well aware he needed to buy but that doesn't justify simply throwing money away which in a lot cases he pretty much did.

We needed a lot of players, in 06/07 and in 07/08. In 08/09 we needed to add to the ones in 07/08. There was a bit of a scattergun approach going on, but we were trying to build quickly as Keane basically started with nothing. You see I can understand some was wasted due to the nature of the approach, but with you not once does the importance of momentum or guaranteeing staying up, rather than taking chances even enter your head.

High level players such as David Nugent? That would have went down as another waste so awe dodged a bullet there and happy Harry was throwing money around like no tomorrow at Pompey which is why hel have plumped for them.

David Nugent was on promotion and a Championship player looking to step up. That shows the problems though, if we're competing for the best at that level and get out done on some of them like Nugent. Pompey had also been up three seasons at that point and like us also had money to spend. You're either very foolish or naive if you think that wouldn't be a factor.

I never claimed we were a bottomless pit but in grand scheme of things we had a very healthy budget and it wasn't utilised properly. I see no avoidance at all there mind I will always maintain if you offer enough wages they will come regardless of perceived status. You make it sound like we were scraping the barrel when we most certainly weren't.

We had cash to inject, but obviously we weren't paying massive wages in context to rest of the league. What you never seem to understand is that whilst you will get some good players, a club like us would have to offer a massive increase on what he was going to get elsewhere to get a player to take a chance on coming here, given the reputation we had and to an extent still do and the amount of times we got turned down on Baines, Forlan, Defoe and whoever else would suggest we weren't able to do so.

Oh and players do turn down higher offers, like Bent did at West Ham United, like Baines hinted at here. Like I've said countless times, long gone are the days Blackburn, Newcastle or Boro could offer 25k, 30k or 40k for a top player and they'd be getting 10 to 15k more than Man Utd would pay them. You're living in a bygone age, clubs like Citeh and Chelsea crazy investment and the CL has put an end to it.

I would say Oneil has been a very good manager and I was delighted he came but you have been very critical of him on here and some of your comments haven't given the impression you think of the man as competent. However it seems you're happy to class him as just that in order to back up your argument.

I think he was competent, but limited. Limited also by what he had at his disposal. Great start here, Everton found out how to play our workman like high pressure counter attack game a couple of times and others followed and the arse dropped out of it, confidence dropped and he had no faith in the players, resulting in being very negative. When it came to signings he made a couple of big ones who were only a marginal success (debatable), made a few poor ones and relied too heavily on players from Bruce's last window. I liked the man very much, but I do think he's a bit of a dinosaur.

What better signings have I questioned? Jones done a good job, Richardson and bardsley gave us good service then he had a few such as higinbotham and Etuhu who we made money back on. Your success rate of 50% is beyond fanciful as well mind.

I could go through most and say many contributed well enough in areas, barring only a handful - your Halford's, Prica, McShane, Healy and a few more. You could certainly say not many gave a long term return, but many were dismissed quickly as we tried to push on. Most would regard Chopra as a failure, he was certainly overpriced, but the guy scored something like 7 or 8 key league goals in 38 games, mostly as a wideman which wasn't his position. He was then moved back to Cardiff for an apparent £4m. Even if that was just what we owed them, short term that's a good return. Andy Reid was another, a poor long term signing (though he was underused first season when in form under Bruce) but his signing was intergral at the point it came.


The only one rambling regarding crosbys spell is you with your talk of a play off charge. Yes he had a good initial run (not nearly great enough for any level headed person to think of play offs mind) but come the new year that soon gave way to a tumble down table with only the cup final disguising just how poor we were.

It was paper talk and talk among fans at time it happened. Think you should check your facts....Smith was sacked at the end of December. In January we won all three league games beating Millwall 6-2 in one and we were 11th in the table 6 points off the play offs. In February we won one, drew two and lost two as we progressed in the Cup. As our form began to tail off more, even in mid March we were in 14th place but only 8 points off a play off place, with two games in hand over a few clubs above us and due to the cup run it was certainly being talked about, but our form just got worse, especially running into April where we had a fixture pile up.

Despite our form totally dropping off and ending up in 18th, we were never in any danger. So no, that point wasn't anything close to being as bad as you're making out.

Of course we were a diffrent club and that was because of what Reid achieved from absolutely nothing. There was a feeling of apathy around the place I couldn't agree more which makes that particular turnaround all the more remarkable than the one Keane achieved. It was only a couple of seasons before Roy arrived that we had went down from the top flight with a record low total and bounced back up almost straight away so it wasn't exactly a bolt from the blue what he done although it was more than I was expecting.

It was a sequence of event that made it so bad, plus it was a second lowest points total in two seasons, that led to just as much apathy and lost belief. There wasn't the squad left to use either, Reid arguably had a better squad when he arrived as mad as it sounds Alnwick, Ward, Wright, Caldwell, Elliott, Clarke, Cunningham, Collins, Murphy, Whitehead, Elliot, Arnau, Moquet, Nos, Brown, Lawrence ffs. We had managers and players turning us down and an horrendous start, with finished players coming in and Quinn in charge. For you to actually say you fancied to head in the opposite direction at the time, when no one else could see it, especially given games like the Southend one, you know one of the clubs you used in an example of how bad it was in the nineties and defeats to Plymouth and Brum at home, it could have been a very sorry state of affairs and needed something a little bit different to turn it around.


The boom was the premiership which we were looking further and further from in the early 90s whilst our nearest and dearest were on the crest of wave out of pretty much nothing. That period is the most disillusioned I've known our fan base become and the stats show a gradual decline in attendances in that time. As you have said not by much but if we had slipped into the third tier before Reid took over it's highly doubtful this shiny new stadium you speak of would even be here.

Nope, the boom was a combintation of factors, Premiership and new improved grounds, which attracted new customers. That period is your most disillusioned though, possibly because of age and shattered expectations. For me whose first game was Barnsley in 87 leading to the play offs it wasn't too far removed from what we were used to. The stadium was on the cards long before Reid was coming in though, Nissan and Gatehead council were the reasons we weren't already building one.,

I could just as easily say had we got the Keane appointment wrong at that time, we could have been going the opposite way and done what Sheff Wed, Leeds and countless others have too, despite spending money after relegation.

It's easier for me to show balance as I actually like Keane as oppose to your sheer dislike for Bruce. I have no problem with either.

Bullshit :D

The last ten pages or so show otherwise, you can't fool people with feint praise then take it away and expect them to believe balance you know, some of us are too long in the tooth for it.

Bruce got sacked so he naturally gets a pay off as you or I would if made redundant. Keane walked out. Now I don't claim to know ins and outs butsurely if you walk you get nothing? Keane obviously disagrees .

Depends on what grounds he 'walked' I suppose. Not always black and white is it.
 
As for Bruce bringing us up at every turn he's probably had hundreds of press conferences since he left and has probably mentioned us half a dozen times at most and then only when we have been directly linked to the nature of the conference. Really surprised at you going down the sensatilising route mind.

When he left it was constant. When he'd been paid off and was looking for another job it was constant and shameful. Since then he's mentioned us and it on occasions without being pressed on it.

As for ignoring your remark regarding Bruce building up the derbies only to play them down when it went wrong I've already stated he never helped himself with that.

I know you have, but you keep posting the song comment as if I've said it in a different context, when I haven't. It's baffling you keep mentioning it when it was clearly only used to show how he'd been building things up and then back tracked, I wasn't actually bothered about it, just made him look a bit petty.

Bob stokoe was a success though and it was also a totally diffrent time when the level of hostility wasn't close to what it is now. Chopras one of us went the song. Made a balls up in the derby game and he was public enemy number one and low and behold his boyhood allegiances were brought up. It's the easiest stick to beat them with.

Stokoe was a success, there you have it.

Colback hasn't had any stick????? I don't think there's enough smilies on here to do that comment justice mind. Have you not read some of the things that have been posted on here?

For being a Geordie he hasn't had much until he got linked with the move. He'd had plenty of stick on here over the years when people disagree with what he offers, but plenty of praise too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top