• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

NUFC/Sportswashing - Summer 2022

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Fish said:
... Don't you get what I mean when I said "If the situations were reversed"?

e.g. for the 14 years prior you were regularly in Europe, getting far in the cups, fielding good players and all that, then the new owner comes in and you're very quickly relegated, rarely progress at all in the cups, he falls out with fans, players, managers and club legends among other things.

Would you think he was a good owner then? Course not, you'd f***ing hate him.
Click to expand...
maybe we'd think that the previous 14 years was paid for by borrowing money to the point of bankruptcy and wasn't sustainable.
 

Father Jack Hackett said:
Carr was lauded as one of the biggest geniuses in British football for a few years when you were signing the like of Cabaye and Ben Arfa. You were all dressed-up in French gear for a game man.
Click to expand...
Is it just the done thing on here to answer a point that wasn't made?

In the last 30 years NUFC has had 15 years of mostly ambition and excitement, and then 15 years of mostly regression and disillusionment. Ashley was the catalyst for that change.

The only reason you think Ashley isn't a bad owner, is because we thought he was. If we wanted to put up a statue of Keegan you'd insist he did nothing, won nothing and so shouldn't get one. If you wanted to put up a statue of Sewpa Kev, we wouldn't care.
 
DrManhattan said:
I actually agree with most of this. Ashley might have ran the club sustainably but he neglected the clubs facilities and used it as a cheap advertising tool for his sports tat. He did take on a financial burden when he first took the club over and didn’t seem to do much to increase revenue streams.

The real world wasn’t the Hall and Shepherd days though - spending money you haven’t got to keep up with clubs who have higher revenue streams. There’s a happy medium - whether Newcastle fans would accept that happy medium is a different question.
Click to expand...
Honestly?

If we were bought by people with modest wealth and they followed a Brighton model, I think we'd have been happy with that.
 
The Fish said:
Honestly?

If we were bought by people with modest wealth and they followed a Brighton model, I think we'd have been happy with that.
Click to expand...
Haway Fish man. You know that's bollocks. Personally you may think that but 99% of your fanbase wouldn't. This club that tries is bollocks tbh
 
Exile 1968 said:
Haway Fish man. You know that's bollocks. Personally you may think that but 99% of your fanbase wouldn't. This club that tries is bollocks tbh
Click to expand...
99%? Give over.

Put it this way, imagine the situation; it's May 2019, Ashley announces he's selling to Henry Mauriss who has provided proof of funds, HM announces he's lined up Dan Ashworth and Eddie Howe. After Lee Charnley and Steve Bruce, we'd have been over the f***ing moon. It's difficult to imagine now because we're owned by the Saudis so anything less than vast wealth will seem like a step down but, from where we were, modest ambition, and competence would have seemed like the club has touched the big ominous obelisk.

But here's the thing Exile, I've seen your contributions to this thread, and I've seen your twitter account. It is overwhelmingly anti-Newcastle stuff. I don't believe you're remotely objective when it comes to this club or it's fans.
 
The Fish said:
Is it just the done thing on here to answer a point that wasn't made?

In the last 30 years NUFC has had 15 years of mostly ambition and excitement, and then 15 years of mostly regression and disillusionment. Ashley was the catalyst for that change.

The only reason you think Ashley isn't a bad owner, is because we thought he was. If we wanted to put up a statue of Keegan you'd insist he did nothing, won nothing and so shouldn't get one. If you wanted to put up a statue of Sewpa Kev, we wouldn't care.
Click to expand...
You mentioned not investing in scouting. Therefore the point was made
 
The Fish said:
99%? Give over.

Put it this way, imagine the situation; it's May 2019, Ashley announces he's selling to Henry Mauriss who has provided proof of funds, HM announces he's lined up Dan Ashworth and Eddie Howe. After Lee Charnley and Steve Bruce, we'd have been over the f***ing moon. It's difficult to imagine now because we're owned by the Saudis so anything less than vast wealth will seem like a step down but, from where we were, modest ambition, and competence would have seemed like the club has touched the big ominous obelisk.

But here's the thing Exile, I've seen your contributions to this thread, and I've seen your twitter account. It is overwhelmingly anti-Newcastle stuff. I don't believe you're remotely objective when it comes to this club or it's fans.
Click to expand...

Logon or register to see this image
 
The Fish said:
99%? Give over.

Put it this way, imagine the situation; it's May 2019, Ashley announces he's selling to Henry Mauriss who has provided proof of funds, HM announces he's lined up Dan Ashworth and Eddie Howe. After Lee Charnley and Steve Bruce, we'd have been over the f***ing moon. It's difficult to imagine now because we're owned by the Saudis so anything less than vast wealth will seem like a step down but, from where we were, modest ambition, and competence would have seemed like the club has touched the big ominous obelisk.

But here's the thing Exile, I've seen your contributions to this thread, and I've seen your twitter account. It is overwhelmingly anti-Newcastle stuff. I don't believe you're remotely objective when it comes to this club or it's fans.
Click to expand...
If Ashley had presented you with Howe there would have been hell on. Same as Burn and Targett. And you know it.

And thanks I'll take your comment as a compliment.
 
Father Jack Hackett said:
You mentioned not investing in scouting. Therefore the point was made
Click to expand...
He didn't invest in scouting man, we had Alan Carr's dad in France. We didn't have an analytics department up to PL standard, we didn't have a large team scouring the globe for talent, he fundamentally didn't invest in the scouting.

A few hits doesn't mean the overall strategy was the right one, nor that it was sufficiently financed.
 
The Fish said:
Is it just the done thing on here to answer a point that wasn't made?

In the last 30 years NUFC has had 15 years of mostly ambition and excitement, and then 15 years of mostly regression and disillusionment. Ashley was the catalyst for that change.

The only reason you think Ashley isn't a bad owner, is because we thought he was. If we wanted to put up a statue of Keegan you'd insist he did nothing, won nothing and so shouldn't get one. If you wanted to put up a statue of Sewpa Kev, we wouldn't care.
Click to expand...
wouldnt it be more accurate to say running out of money was the catalyst? the previous owners couldn't sustain it by borrowing any more. ashley couldnt/wouldnt either.
 
Last edited:
Exile 1968 said:
If Ashley had presented you with Howe there would have been hell on. Same as Burn and Targett. And you know it.

And thanks I'll take your comment as a compliment.
Click to expand...
There wasn't hell on when Ashley presented us with McClaren, or Hughton, why would there be hell on if he appointed a fairly well respected young manager with a reputation for playing good football like Howe? You're just making shit up man.

Don't take my comment as a compliment, it was a criticism, I'd have thought that was clear by the tone? You tweet the same thing daily and you cheapen your legitimate concerns about the Saudis by bringing your own club's record against ours into it.
Squat said:
wouldnt it be more accurate to say running out of money was the catalyst? the previous owners couldn't sustain it. ashley couldnt/wouldnt either.
Click to expand...

No. It wasn't parsimony that got us relegated twice, it was mismanagement. It wasn't lack of funds that meant we didn't strengthen when we ended up 5th, it was lack of ambition.
 
Last edited:
The Fish said:
He didn't invest in scouting man, we had Alan Carr's dad in France. We didn't have an analytics department up to PL standard, we didn't have a large team scouring the globe for talent, he fundamentally didn't invest in the scouting.

A few hits doesn't mean the overall strategy was the right one, nor that it was sufficiently financed.
Click to expand...
A few hits is generally what all but the very top teams can expect man.
You referenced Palace - they signed Connor Wickham for £9m and Christian Benteke for £32. They also brought in Remy and Cabaye well after yoi'd done so and when past their best.
Is that the scouting you'd have wanted?
 
Father Jack Hackett said:
A few hits is generally what all but the very top teams can expect man.
You referenced Palace - they signed Connor Wickham for £9m and Christian Benteke for £32. They also brought in Remy and Cabaye well after yoi'd done so and when past their best.
Is that the scouting you'd have wanted?
Click to expand...
And Brighton, don't forget Brighton, you know that team that's finished 15th, 17th, 15th, 16th and 9th.
They'd be over the moon with those finishes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top