Congrats Sir Bob


Status
Not open for further replies.
More fool you, then. Everyone has an agenda. I prefer to examine a range of sources objectively and come to my own conclusions. You start believing everything you hear and you wind up a mindless drone and agent of whatever propaganda you have been spoon-fed.

Niall Quinn says Bob is reet canny as owt so that means the 15 and 19 pointers which happened on his watch, with his managers, with the budgets he approved, and the mistakes he repeated, weren't anything to do with him? Aye.... riiiiiightio marra. Those two seasons, in my opinion anyway, which is just as good, valid, and considered as anyone else's, set us back years, and the only real constant pressence at the business end of the club during those seasons was Bob Murray. The Stadium and Training ground counted for nothing when we were scraping the barrell looking in the lower leagues for people to sign for us because no one else dared. Only when Keane came, which was Quinn's appointment, did we get a semblence of pulling power back, and most of that was just borrowed from Roy Keane. Even then it we couldn't persuade the likes of Nugent, Baird, and Taylor we were a better bet that Portsmouth, Fulham, or Bolton on which to gamble their careers.

I am just trying to be objective. Some things he deserves credit for, some things he deserves criticism for, and on balance I think the damage he did to our reputation on the field negates the quality of the work he did off the pitch with regards the infrastructure he built. Therefor I have no interest in villainising the bloke, but I don't see cause for showering him with unreserved credit either. Those are just the conclusions I have come to, and you won't be persuading me they are unfair.

Drumaville (and Short) said it was vital to them that the club already had the infrastructure they wanted. That makes sense. Why would I want to go round looking for something else to believe?

You really do talk utter nonsense sometimes, for the sake of it it seems.

I'm not denying that there were low times on the pitch, but both the 15 and 19pt seasons were quickly recovered from in the great scheme of things, and there were also equivalent high times.

What is far more important, to anyone with any kind of objectivity, is that that the foundations of the club was being built up to something resembling a proper, top football club. When you've got that, everything else will come if you play your cards right - which RSM did spectacularly well with Drumaville.

He also deserves massive credit for playing his (and our) cards right on other occasions, when he had to go against the grain of the support:

1) Moving from Roker Park
2) Investing in infrastructure when we'd all have happily had him buy half a dozen Flos.
3) Not selling to the first potential buyer, instead waiting for the right one.

We're reaping the benefits of that wisdom now. Who gives a shit that we once got 15 points in a season - that's transient, gone, and if it still matters so much, then you need something else in your life (an iPad??).
 
Drumaville (and Short) said it was vital to them that the club already had the infrastructure they wanted. That makes sense. Why would I want to go round looking for something else to believe?

You really do talk utter nonsense sometimes, for the sake of it it seems.

I'm not denying that there were low times on the pitch, but both the 15 and 19pt seasons were quickly recovered from in the great scheme of things, and there were also equivalent high times.

What is far more important, to anyone with any kind of objectivity, is that that the foundations of the club was being built up to something resembling a proper, top football club. When you've got that, everything else will come if you play your cards right - which RSM did spectacularly well with Drumaville.

He also deserves massive credit for playing his (and our) cards right on other occasions, when he had to go against the grain of the support:

1) Moving from Roker Park
2) Investing in infrastructure when we'd all have happily had him buy half a dozen Flos.
3) Not selling to the first potential buyer, instead waiting for the right one.

We're reaping the benefits of that wisdom now. Who gives a shit that we once got 15 points in a season - that's transient, gone, and if it still matters so much, then you need something else in your life (an iPad??).

I have never once desputed any of those. From my very first post on this thread I have given him credit. I agree that Murray built foundations here, but I just think Quinn had to do a fair bit of repair work on them before he could really utilize them. We are simply at odds regarding to what extent his role has played in where we are now, although it is hardly a massive issue. Personally, looking at the wider picture, I think that going over the top with this praise for Murray takes a hell of a lot away from what his successor has achieved. You seem to disagree on that point. Fair enough. I respect your right to do so.

But we are essentially in agreement that Murray deserves credit, which is the key point, and it is why I find your desperation to create an argument here so baffling. May be consider that the next time you want to accuse someone of "talking nonsense for the sake of it".
 
I have never once desputed any of those. From my very first post on this thread I have given him credit. I agree that Murray built foundations here, but I just think Quinn had to do a fair bit of repair work on them before he could really utilize them. We are simply at odds regarding to what extent his role has played in where we are now, although it is hardly a massive issue. Personally, looking at the wider picture, I think that going over the top with this praise for Murray takes a hell of a lot away from what his successor has achieved. You seem to disagree on that point. Fair enough. I respect your right to do so.

But we are essentially in agreement that Murray deserves credit, which is the key point, and it is why I find your desperation to create an argument here so baffling. May be consider that the next time you want to accuse someone of "talking nonsense for the sake of it".

Captain_Fishpaste said:
A completely hopeless football chairman,
Captain_Fishpaste said:
he was an absolutely awful football chairman.
Captain_Fishpaste said:
By the time he left us we were the same old shite as the club he walked into

Your change in position is duly noted and welcomed.
 
Your change in position is duly noted and welcomed.

Captain Fishpaste said:
He did extremely well to deliver a Stadium of the quality we have for what it cost us, and fair play to him for selling up to Quinny for a very reasonable sum

Captain Fishpaste said:
He deserves enourmous credit for what he did with the Stadium.

Captain Fishpaste said:
I am perfeclty happy to give Murray huge credit for the Stadium and the dilligence when it came to identifying a suitable buyer

Captain Fishpaste said:
Any reasonable and objective appraisal of his Chairmanship would arrive at the conclusion that he excelled in some areas

And your penchant for selective quoting to fit an agenda is similarly noted, although only with a tinge of boredom and predictability.

I have been pretty much adamant throughout that the fella is deserving of credit. I just don't see why the credit should be blanket. Are you suggesting you can only think he did a brilliant job or think he did a shite job? For me the truth lies in the middle. Yes, I will give him credit for some of the things he did, but I think he botched up and missed entirely far more opportunities to progress the club than he grapsed, so for me that makes him a pretty poor chairman on balance. Doesn't mean I can't give him credit for the good things he did, though, does it?
 
And your penchant for selective quoting to fit an agenda is similarly noted, although only with a tinge of boredom and predictability.

I have been pretty much adamant throughout that the fella is deserving of credit. I just don't see why the credit should be blanket. Are you suggesting you can only think he did a brilliant job or think he did a shite job? For me the truth lies in the middle. Yes, I will give him credit for some of the things he did, but I think he botched up and missed entirely far more opportunities to progress the club than he grapsed, so for me that makes him a pretty poor chairman on balance. Doesn't mean I can't give him credit for the good things he did, though, does it?

I've never said the credit should be blanket. I've said he got the most important things right while, all along, you've been calling him the worst football chairman ever - clearly and unambiguously.

You credit him with the stadium (which you couldn't not do) but don't seem to think having a world class, superbly located stadium, with room for expansion (commercial and football), world class training, medical and education facilities, strong ties into the community (eg. Foundation) and a national reputation for being a good, professional club are part of being a football club. That's what baffles me, because they're the most important part. They're the only things that aren't transient.
 
I've never said the credit should be blanket. I've said he got the most important things right while, all along, you've been calling him the worst football chairman ever - clearly and unambiguously.

You credit him with the stadium (which you couldn't not do) but don't seem to think having a world class, superbly located stadium, with room for expansion (commercial and football), world class training, medical and education facilities, strong ties into the community (eg. Foundation) and a national reputation for being a good, professional club are part of being a football club. That's what baffles me, because they're the most important part. They're the only things that aren't transient.

:lol: Eh? When? I have described his chairmanship unfavourably on the whole, yes, but I haven't compared him directly to anyone here up until now never mind stated I believed him to be the worst ever. With that in mind, let me state categorically for the record right now that I most certainly do not consider Bob Murray to be the worst football chairman of all time. He isn't even the worst Sunderland chairman of all time ffs. Nowhere near.

Once again, this has seemed to have descended into your usual trick of becoming so obsessed with discrediting individuals, that you lose sight of the discussion entirely. Doing your spin doctor stuff. Selectively quoting what you want to display to create the illusion they are lacking credibility, and now even putting words in their mouth entirely as highlighted above, before condemning them for them. At this point, we are not even having the same discussion anymore.

I certainly agree that the points you have mentioned are an important part of building a football club. That is why I am happy to give him credit for them. However there is another huge part of building a football club and that is delivering success on the pitch, and if success cannot be achieved then at the very least it should be stability. Murray's record showed he failed repeatedly to deliver that. One question that I would like to throw out there is this... Whilst conceding that he built foundations at the club, and foundations that, in some small part at the very least, we are benefitting from now, should we necessarily consider foundations to be enough of a result from 20 years work? Surely it is not unreasonable to ask whether, given the opportunities we had during his tenure, he could and should have achieved considerably more?
 
:lol: Eh? When? I have described his chairmanship unfavourably on the whole, yes, but I haven't compared him directly to anyone here up until now never mind stated I believed him to be the worst ever. With that in mind, let me state categorically for the record right now that I most certainly do not consider Bob Murray to be the worst football chairman of all time. He isn't even the worst Sunderland chairman of all time ffs. Nowhere near.

Once again, this has seemed to have descended into your usual trick of becoming so obsessed with discrediting individuals, that you lose sight of the discussion entirely. Doing your spin doctor stuff. Selectively quoting what you want to display to create the illusion they are lacking credibility, and now even putting words in their mouth entirely as highlighted above, before condemning them for them. At this point, we are not even having the same discussion anymore.

I certainly agree that the points you have mentioned are an important part of building a football club. That is why I am happy to give him credit for them. However there is another huge part of building a football club and that is delivering success on the pitch, and if success cannot be achieved then at the very least it should be stability. Murray's record showed he failed repeatedly to deliver that. One question that I would like to throw out there is this... Whilst conceding that he built foundations at the club, and foundations that, in some small part at the very least, we are benefitting from now, should we necessarily consider foundations to be enough of a result from 20 years work? Surely it is not unreasonable to ask whether, given the opportunities we had during his tenure, he could and should have achieved considerably more?

You must be on a wind up now - I just posted three of your quotes that clearly show what you think of RSM as "football chairman". How could it be any worse??

And if there are also other, less harsh, quotes, it just shows what a moving target you set. It was like that with the Keane leaving saga. First we weren't in a relegation scrap, then we were. Then he left honourably, then he didn't. Each time, they mutable key points drowned in buckets of word soup.

Let's just agree that the most commonly stated opinion in this thread is the right one.
 
You must be on a wind up now - I just posted three of your quotes that clearly show what you think of RSM as "football chairman". How could it be any worse??

And if there are also other, less harsh, quotes, it just shows what a moving target you set. It was like that with the Keane leaving saga. First we weren't in a relegation scrap, then we were. Then he left honourably, then he didn't. Each time, they mutable key points drowned in buckets of word soup.

Let's just agree that the most commonly stated opinion in this thread is the right one.

Here we go again... all about me now and focused entirely on discrediting me, whilst ignoring the actual discussion, even when asked a direct question. The last time I checked this thread was about Sir Bob Murray, not about Captain Fishpaste and whether or not he is a creditable individual. For some reason, you have taken it upon yourself, through nothing but conjecture and spin, to make the leap from me saying I thought he was a bad football chairman to me "calling him the worst football chairman ever - clearly and unambiguously".

Then you bring up one occasion where I was happy to concede I was wrong after a rethink, and somehow think it has some relevence tothis discussion. It doesn't. It has relevence to the discussion you are dying to have, which is one about me, but nothing what-so-ever to do with Bob Murray and his charimanship of Sunderland football club.

If you have as much respect for Murray as you claim, perhaps you can leave this thread for those who want to congratulate him, and may be start your own thread about me if you want to have the discussion. You have done so in the past, so you wiull be familiar with the process.

Or, if you want to continue to pretend you do actually want a discussion which isn't about me, perhaps you coud start a thread regarding your final sentence. About how the popular opinion is always the right one. Showing a little humility and admitting you have been talking nothing but complete bollocks about Craig Gordon for a couple of years should be an excellent place to start.
 
Here we go again... all about me now and focused entirely on discrediting me, whilst ignoring the actual discussion, even when asked a direct question. The last time I checked this thread was about Sir Bob Murray, not about Captain Fishpaste and whether or not he is a creditable individual. For some reason, you have taken it upon yourself, through nothing but conjecture and spin, to make the leap from me saying I thought he was a bad football chairman to me "calling him the worst football chairman ever - clearly and unambiguously".

Then you bring up one occasion where I was happy to concede I was wrong after a rethink, and somehow think it has some relevence tothis discussion. It doesn't. It has relevence to the discussion you are dying to have, which is one about me, but nothing what-so-ever to do with Bob Murray and his charimanship of Sunderland football club.

If you have as much respect for Murray as you claim, perhaps you can leave this thread for those who want to congratulate him, and may be start your own thread about me if you want to have the discussion. You have done so in the past, so you wiull be familiar with the process.

Or, if you want to continue to pretend you do actually want a discussion which isn't about me, perhaps you coud start a thread regarding your final sentence. About how the popular opinion is always the right one. Showing a little humility and admitting you have been talking nothing but complete bollocks about Craig Gordon for a couple of years should be an excellent place to start.

I'm sorry but the world doesn't revolve around you, it's simply a case of facts.

1) "Worst xxx ever" is a popular expression. It means you think xxx is really bad.

2) And you clearly did about RSM, because you said:
Captain_Fishpaste said:
A completely hopeless football chairman,
Captain_Fishpaste said:
he was an absolutely awful football chairman.
Captain_Fishpaste said:
By the time he left us we were the same old shite as the club he walked into

So then you accuse me of taking you out of context, and wriggle and squirm and chuck out words by the thousand, but these are facts, and they are clear.

I suggest you just let it lie, it isn't that important. I think most people see the bigger picture better than you, and you can't edge your way towards that by maintaining that your previously stated, conflicting view was something other than what it was.
 
I'm sorry but the world doesn't revolve around you, it's simply a case of facts.

1) "Worst xxx ever" is a popular expression. It means you think xxx is really bad.

2) And you clearly did about RSM, because you said:




So then you accuse me of taking you out of context, and wriggle and squirm and chuck out words by the thousand, but these are facts, and they are clear.

I suggest you just let it lie, it isn't that important. I think most people see the bigger picture better than you, and you can't edge your way towards that by maintaining that your previously stated, conflicting view was something other than what it was.

Yawn. Another post pretty much entirely about me. That must be about 3-4 in a row from you. Give it up buttercup, it's your obsession. No one else, including me, could give a toss.
 
Yawn. Another post pretty much entirely about me. That must be about 3-4 in a row from you. Give it up buttercup, it's your obsession. No one else, including me, could give a toss.

It's not about you, it's about what you said, which gave rise to what I said, in the usual manner of a dialogue. Were you expecting me to quote Hattie Jacques or summat?

Interesting psychological insight though.
 
Why as the council would have issued a CPN on the terraced house around the park.

You cannit just gan up and say "council, I want a CPN so I can develop a footy ground", there's a bit more to it than that. Pretty sure you have to issue a CPN on each individually owned piece of land (i.e each house), it would have been a costly legal nightmare. Even if the new stadium was built below ground level the stands would have been massive and blocked sightlines of people in houses nearby that weren't bought and they would have objected. Another pre-requisite of any planning permission for a new ground would have been parking spaces, and after the ground had been built there wouldn't have been much room for those. There would have been years of legal wrangling, and I'm pretty sure we were running out of time in the grace period (3-5 years?) you had to convert your ground to all seats if you were in the top flight. In fact I'm pretty sure we only got away with having standing in the last season cos construction was underway on the SoL.

This ground would have taken a couple of years to build anarl. Where would we have played in the meantime? I'd be f*cked if I wanted to watch the Lads play at SJP or Boro every other week, even for only a couple of years.

Anyone who thinks staying at RP was an option is wearing nostalgic glasses with a slight hint of red in the lenses.

More fool you, then. Everyone has an agenda. I prefer to examine a range of sources objectively and come to my own conclusions. You start believing everything you hear and you wind up a mindless drone and agent of whatever propaganda you have been spoon-fed.

Niall Quinn says Bob is reet canny as owt so that means the 15 and 19 pointers which happened on his watch, with his managers, with the budgets he approved, and the mistakes he repeated, weren't anything to do with him? Aye.... riiiiiightio marra. Those two seasons, in my opinion anyway, which is just as good, valid, and considered as anyone else's, set us back years, and the only real constant pressence at the business end of the club during those seasons was Bob Murray. The Stadium and Training ground counted for nothing when we were scraping the barrell looking in the lower leagues for people to sign for us because no one else dared. Only when Keane came, which was Quinn's appointment, did we get a semblence of pulling power back, and most of that was just borrowed from Roy Keane. Even then it we couldn't persuade the likes of Nugent, Baird, and Taylor we were a better bet that Portsmouth, Fulham, or Bolton on which to gamble their careers.

I am just trying to be objective. Some things he deserves credit for, some things he deserves criticism for, and on balance I think the damage he did to our reputation on the field negates the quality of the work he did off the pitch with regards the infrastructure he built. Therefor I have no interest in villainising the bloke, but I don't see cause for showering him with unreserved credit either. Those are just the conclusions I have come to, and you won't be persuading me they are unfair.

Didn't players turn us down even after the two 7th place finishes? Gudjohnsen? Robbie Keane? I think the reason given then was cos we we're not an established PL club. Even Roy Keane struggled to attract players, hence his rant about WAGS.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-131847/Football-Reid-hot-water-Sunderland-fans-revolt.html
 
It should be remembered that Murray was a non-football man who had to manage slightly deranged characters like Reid, McCarthy and Wilkinson ............ it must've been a nightmare dealing with established and strong minded football people demanding this and advising that.

When all is said and done Murray took on a lame duck when many others walked past and couldn't have cared if it lived or died ......... he looked after it as well as his total lack of experience allowed, built it a new nest and left it in the hands of someone who we all hoped would know what he was doing.

I find it sad that Murray should be demonised, by some, and it reminds me of the treatment of another Sir Bob just up the road from here.
 
It should be remembered that Murray was a non-football man who had to manage slightly deranged characters like Reid, McCarthy and Wilkinson ............ it must've been a nightmare dealing with established and strong minded football people demanding this and advising that.

When all is said and done Murray took on a lame duck when many others walked past and couldn't have cared if it lived or died ......... he looked after it as well as his total lack of experience allowed, built it a new nest and left it in the hands of someone who we all hoped would know what he was doing.

I find it sad that Murray should be demonised, by some, and it reminds me of the treatment of another Sir Bob just up the road from here.
What was out reputation and profile like before Murray took over? I'm too young to know.
 
What was out reputation and profile like before Murray took over? I'm too young to know.

To be honest things are just starting to change over the last few months ........ for decades SAFC were adored by the hardcore of fans but thought of as 'plucky no-hopers with a following that deserves better'.

Very little really changed under Murray if people are being honest.
 
To be honest things are just starting to change over the last few months ........ for decades SAFC were adored by the hardcore of fans but thought of as 'plucky no-hopers with a following that deserves better'.

Very little really changed under Murray if people are being honest.

You really have to be joking.
 
To be honest things are just starting to change over the last few months ........ for decades SAFC were adored by the hardcore of fans but thought of as 'plucky no-hopers with a following that deserves better'.

Very little really changed under Murray if people are being honest.

I take it you mean , nothing changed much in on pitch performance , rather than off pitch .
He will be remebered fondly for the Stadium , the AOL and involving Niall Quinn after Quinn's retirement , which turned out to be a masterstroke.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top