SAFC vs NUFC

[Jaan]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

1. uvv, Sajetsil on õigus. Klubi edu huvitab Freddy\'s niikaua väga vähe kui on võimalik dividende rämedalt välja võtta. Seda on ta siiamaani edukalt teinud, palju õnne.

2. Piletid - koduleheküljelt on võimalik neid nii umbes paari järgmise mängu jaoks osta. Ametlikult kodulehelt siis (nufc.cock). Regada tuleb muidugi, aga see ei ole ju probleem.

[Sajets]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

Kelle viga oli see, et pandi pukki mees, kelle resümees on ainuke uhkustamist väärt rida Rangersi Šoti meistriks viimine kahe hobuse sõidus üle 15 aastat tagasi?

Kelle viga on see, et klubi rahaasjad on perses?

Kelle viga on see, et elatakse tuleviku arvelt, kuigi lähiminevikust on üks näide, kui perse võib minna, olemas?

Kas see on hooliva omaniku käitumine, kes sitas majanduslikus seisus suuri dividente välja võtab?

Kelle süü on see, et tehakse hiigelost lihtsalt selleks, et fänne rõõmustada problemaatilisematele kohtadele mitte tähelepanu pöörates?

Kelle süü on see, et lastakse lahti peatreener 2 päeva peale üleminekuakna sulgumist, luues sellega olukorra, kus uus peatreener peab hakkama saama sama sitaga, mille eelmine kokku keeras?

[uvv]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

kõik õige.
sisulised küsimused. ehki mõned kordavad ja kõlavad rohkemalt ainult retoorilises, mitte sisulises plaanis.
ainult, et vastuseid neile teab vaid Jml taevas.
see, kas mulle/sulle üks lahendus meeldib või ei ei anna märku millestki muust, kui et meile need lahendused ei meeldi. kas asjad lähevad õigesti või valesti, seda me saame näha mingi aja pärast. loogiline?
lõpuks Souness ei suutnud meeskonda tööle panna. kas keegi tahab öelda, et ostud olid sitad? mina ei ole käigu pealt valmis ütlema ühtegi sitta ostu praegu. See, et ostja ei osanud mehi mängima panna, on teine asi.
See, et Freddy Sounessi lambist hooaja alguses ei vallandanud on kah omamoodi märk alalhoidlikusest, lootuses, et mees ennast siiski tõestab.
See, et vallandati peale akna sulgemist andis selge signaali ja hoidis meeskonna sees ära spekulatsioonid ja ärevuse. See oli otsekui lause \"klubile tundub, et tiim platsil on kõva ja kedagi teid lambist ei müüda. aeg on mängida\"
On see mõte mõistetav?
Pekske pikka, pikk on pealik. nats labane, kas pole?

ma läheks veelgi kaugemale. SBR ei saanud lõpuks \"staarikambaga\" hakkama. Lootus, et uus reha rapsab korralikult loogu oli lihtsalt liiga kõrge. Liiga suur press sattus nii meeskonnale kui ka treeneri kambale. Asjad läksid liiga keeruliseks, pealegi keeras Souey kaklus Bellarsiga kõik tulised fännid esimese vastu. Samas, kuhu meie \"superstaar\" maandus? Ma saan aru, meist tabelis ettepoole jah, aga apelleerida sellele ja raiuda, et BB on kõva sats on ikka natuke demagoogiline....
Meie ei olnud valmis kannatama ja surve kogu meeskonnale, ka treeneritele oli liiga suur.
Puudu on see fan, millega mängivad näiteks Änfiildi kuked. Koledasti, jah (mulle ei meeldi (ja see ei loe ju ometi midagi!!!), aga efektiivne see on). Aga raisk, isu on neil olnud selline, et teeb kadedaks ka Linda kivi Ülemiste järves. Meil ei ole 3 aastat tuju olnud. Kõik see aeg, kui ma olen seda satsi mängimas jälginud.
Ja see on tõesti Freddy viga. Lõpeks on kõik, mis klubis halvasti, tema viga.
Hästi olevate asjade taga on ju reeglina see, kes hetk tagadi värava lõi....
Ja lepime kokku, Al oleks pidanud loobuma eelmise hooaja sees.
Ei ole kerge kui su liider on Vana Ja Väsinud Jumal....

[mjkk]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

Algselt postitas uvv
see, kas mulle/sulle üks lahendus meeldib või ei ei anna märku millestki muust, kui et meile need lahendused ei meeldi. kas asjad lähevad õigesti või valesti, seda me saame näha mingi aja pärast. loogiline?

ei ole loogiline. tahad sa väita, et freddy fat shepherdil on mingisugune aastate pikkune plaan, kuhu mahtus ka härra souness ja \'näiline/ajutine\' põrumine? või teistpidi... rohkem valesti minna kui viimased 18 kuud newcastle unitedi jaoks on olnud, enam minna ei saa. ausalt. või noh, steve bruce võibolla.

lõpuks Souness ei suutnud meeskonda tööle panna. kas keegi tahab öelda, et ostud olid sitad? mina ei ole käigu pealt valmis ütlema ühtegi sitta ostu praegu. See, et ostja ei osanud mehi mängima panna, on teine asi.

See, et Freddy Sounessi lambist hooaja alguses ei vallandanud on kah omamoodi märk alalhoidlikusest, lootuses, et mees ennast siiski tõestab.

omamoodi õige. parem oleks ehk öelda: tal ei jätkunud \'palle\', et seda teha.

See, et vallandati peale akna sulgemist andis selge signaali ja hoidis meeskonna sees ära spekulatsioonid ja ärevuse. See oli otsekui lause \"klubile tundub, et tiim platsil on kõva ja kedagi teid lambist ei müüda. aeg on mängida\"
On see mõte mõistetav?
Pekske pikka, pikk on pealik. nats labane, kas pole?

see, et souness vallandati pärast jaanuarikuud, oli shepherdi, ma usun, et juba kusagil novembris-detsembris hauduma pandud plaan. oletus muidugi. igatahes on selge see, et souness vallandati mitte jaanuarikuu teises pooles, kus tema lahkumine selge oli, vaid veebruari alguses, kuna see võttis juhtkonnal ära pinge otsida kohe uus peatreener ja talle raha anda. sest rahaga ei saa enam eriti loopiv olla hetke tabeliseisu vaadates. ja nüüd on ajaga ka lõdvem. väide, et see oli mõeldud motivatsiooni/inspiratsiooniallikana praegusele meestele, on küll absurd.

[uvv]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

noh, seda lauset võib mjkk muidugi mitut moodi mõelda, võib lugeda ju ka nii, et uus treener ei saa arvestada väga suurte võimalustega mehi osta, vaid peab hakkama saama olemasoleva materjaliga. See, kas selline on motiveeriv või mitte, seda saame meie jälle ainult takkajärgi teada.
igaljuhul oli see klubi praegust seisu arvestades loogiline samm. treener kes tuleb ei saa kaela miskit ostusurvet. tal on need, kes tal on.
ma ei taha paksu freddyt kaitsta.
mulle tundub lihtsalt mage ja liiga sile öelda, et see mees, see asjaolu on süüdi ja täts it. see on nagu kolmeaastaste jalgpalliarmastus, kus lemmik on see, kes viimasene kolli lõi.
motivatsioonist ja inspiratsioonist mina ei rääkinud, rääkisin sellest, et see annab signaali. annab igaljuhul. nüüd on küsimus, et millise. mina usun, et meeskonnale positiivse, sina ei näe selles muud kui freddy rumalust, kellegi jaoks (arvatavasti just nende, kes hea meelega näeks harakaid divaris näiteks) ka seda, et näpud on põhjas vüi lausa põhjast läbi. kolm arvamust, see mis meeskond tegelikult tunneb on näha igast järgmisest mängust.

aa see jutt ka, et kas freddyl on mingi plaan. no ma väga loodan. selge on see, et häda vanus ei ole 18 kuud. häda on oluliselt vanem. see häda sai alguse siis kui SBR i ajal sai kokku meeskond, kellega sir hakkama ei saanud. Kas see oli freddy süü?
lõppkokkuvõttes muidugi.

ja ma kardan, et vallandamine oli tõesti nii, nagu siin keegi kirjutas, vist Jaan, kus teineteist mitu korda sinna saadeti ja siis veel paar korda. Lepime kokku, mehed OLID kõik katki ja paksul freddyl ei jäänud muud üle kui kuulata ja noogutada ja võib-olla räusata vahel, aga tõsi see oli. aga nüüd olid need paar meest platsil ja pakk oli siiski liiga valus.
miks, küsis freddy. ära käi mulle närvidel, paks pedekas, vastas souy, ma lasen su lahti, karjus freddy. essugi sa lased jne.
On mis on. tõest oleme me ilmselt sama kaugel nagu Kohila meestelaul Bronxi gängsta kultuurist.
Aga üks on ometi, järelemõtlemist on selles kordi rohkem kui kodumaises jalka ümber käivas kukepoksis. ja ärgem välistagem, vaid loogem variante. Freddy on loll, selline on kõlanud ja mina sellele vastu ei vaidle. Aga tavaliselt ei ole miski nii lihtne selle poolkuu all.

[Graeme]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

Vastuse leiab siit

http://www.nufc4arab.tk/

[Sajets]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

Muidugi ei saa süüdistada aja pöördumatuses ja juhuste kokkulangemises, liblikas ja tormis Freddyt. Kuid on olnud olukordi, kus tema tegutsemine või tegutsematus on teie jalgpalliklubi vastu lausa kriminaalne olnud. Ja seda ei saa keegi kuidagi õigustada või valgeks rääkida.

On mis on. Aeg näitab..

[uvv]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

muidugi ei saa. ei tahagi valgeks rääkida, olen Sinuga täiesti nõus.
aga ei ole nõus \"asjad hakkavad hästi minema, kui freddy on läinud\" suhtumisega. see on liiga lihtne, et see kuidagigi töötada võiks. Pealegi ei vaja see klubi praegu enam vaenlase otsimist. vajab.... rõõmu. kõlab triviaalselt? muidugi. aga see on tõsi.

[Sajets]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

Ei saa muidugi väita, et Freddyle jalaga andmine midagi muudaks. Aga kuna asja don teil juba päris pikalt allamäge veerenud ja raha on samas loobitud nagu sõnnikut asfaldile - loobi palju tahad, kasvama ei hakka, siis peaks pukis ka muudatus tulema.

[Jussinen]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

Miskise torrenti saab siit.
Newcastle vs. Pompey highlights, u. 55 minutit ja 350+ mega. Ise pole veel küll vaadanud, kuid hakake aga sikutama.
Mäng, kus siis Bramble olla hea olnud

[Graeme]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

Algselt postitas Jussinen


Miskise torrenti saab siit.
Newcastle vs. Pompey highlights, u. 55 minutit ja 350+ mega. Ise pole veel küll vaadanud, kuid hakake aga sikutama.
Mäng, kus siis Bramble olla hea olnud

Tänan torrenti eest.Imelik mäng jah Kaitse peab ja rünnak lippab.
Given oli üllatuslikult nõrgim lüli ses mängus meil.Kaks väha ohtlikku viga temapoolt aga noh kõigil juhtub

[mjkk]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

ma postitan siia ühe teise inimese postituse ühest teisest foorumist.

Everyone suddenly seems pretty pleased at the minute, but lets not forget the role of Shepherd in all this, who yet again has only been moved to action when his own name is at risk. From what is in the NOTW today it looks like we are hearing the start of his drive to make sure we all get our season tickets, filling the stadium and getting him his money, something he really does not deserve.

This is the ninth season of his utterly disastrous reign in charge of our club, easily one of the top 5 richest in the league, probably fourth or maybe even third before prize money is factored in. And yet only two seasons have resembled anything close to acceptability for a club generating as much wealth as we are.

“But he puts his money in”. No he doesn’t. I’m probably telling you something you already know seeing as I just followed the link to http://www.nufc-finances.org.uk/ , but here it is anyway. Firstly, that is all our money, and secondly, there is loads of it.

In terms of turnover, we are closer to Liverpool than any other club, yet since 1998, our net transfer spend is £86m. Liverpool’s is £130m. How can they spend so much more than us? Since 1998, Shepherd and Hall have taken £23.6m in dividends. In 2004 and 2003, (and I am told, for all of the last 10 years) Liverpool’s board did not take any dividend. In recent years, Liverpool’s total board salary has been around £0.65m per year. For doing a vastly inferior job, Shepherd and co award themselves double this amount. But this can’t be true: He is just a fan like us! Sorry, but Shepherd does not get much credit from me for “putting his (our) money in”, particularly when an utterly obscene amount is diverted into his pockets along the way. He currently awards himself one of the biggest dividends of any UK company for doing a frankly appalling job.

“We always back our manager”. When you actually look at which manager was given what to spend and, crucially, when, you see that actually, no he doesn’t. When Kenny Dalglish was here, he was given the net total of £6.5m to spend in the transfer market. Fair enough, but in reality this meant balancing the books the whole time he was here. Finally given a bit of finance, he bought Solano and Hamann and a few others in the summer, before being sacked 2 games in. I can’t recall how much that pay-off cost us.
Ruud Gullit was the same. He got a net spend of just under £8 million. Again, that’s not a huge amount to turn around a team, but its not bad. The reality was that of the 41 league games he had with us, he spent 35 games balancing the books until the summer arrived and he got to splash a bit of cash uninhibited.

The fact he ****ed it up after he spent the money is beside the point I’m making. In my view, Shepherd failed in his duty to these managers. This may have more to do with the timing of the sackings than anything else, it doesn’t matter. It is his fault.

Then Bobby Robson arrived. Even Shepherd couldn’t miss this appointment – one of the few decent things he has done at this club landed in his lap. Like both his predecessors, he faced a long spell balancing the books, clearing out some utter rubbish to somehow make a profit in transfers between September 99 and Summer 01.

So far in Shepherd’s time there is only one party connected with NUFC who received millions to spend when they wanted it: While 3 managers have struggled over 4 years, Shepherd and Hall have been raking it in. The football on the whole, has been dreadful. Our league points totals are as follows: 44 points, 46 points, 52 points, 51 points. On top of this shambles he has also managed to get caught out by a fake sheik in a brothel, embarrass himself and everyone else, resign as director, and then return as chairman.

But anyway, at this stage in our history we are now playing in the second biggest stadium in the Premiership, so of course the dividend increases accordingly. Shepherd has a new challenge if he is to maintain his increased income: He must fill the stadium – especially since it has come with an enormous debt, secured against season ticket sales.

But there is still no transfer money to spend. Or is there? David Stonehouse, Newcastle season-ticket holder, was appointed financial director, partly to improve relations with the fans after the Save Our Seats fiasco (and later that FLC farce – I’m missing stuff out here). In February 2001 Stonehouse indicated there was still no money, saying: “we have made mistakes in the transfer market in the past and Bobby Robson and the board are not keen to spend.\" Douglas Hall, however, saw things differently. 4 weeks after the above quote he breezed in from Gibraltar to inform us that we had more money than Man United, were going to expand the stadium again, as well as sign Rivaldo.

So from this we could judge that the summer spending will come to somewhere between 0 and £100m. As it happens, the spending came to £16m, despite Stonehouse’s warning. This was the first time Shepherd had given a manager our money at the start of the summer and then gone the whole season without sacking him.

But again, to me finally achieving this simplest of tasks is not the main point. Our financial director did not know how much we would be spending. His job title suggests to me that in a properly-run club perhaps he would. If he doesn’t know then who does? Certainly not the manager, that’s for sure, something hinted at in Robson’s book (see below).

How are you supposed to build a squad if you don’t even know this? In the event we weren’t building a squad, and in my opinion, never have been. There is no plan. Just sign a big player that will fill the ground. We bought 2 players – both forwards obviously, defenders won’t shift season tickets – for big fees. A pattern was set that we are still following now. To the watching fans it seemed that it was going to take more than two players to get this squad going places, but this was more than had been hoped for.

Incidentally, Stonehouse resigned shortly afterwards. He had previously worked for the mackems, holding a season ticket the whole time, which can have done himself no favours with the unwashed. He will have known of the slightly shady ways in which football clubs operate. But despite moving to a bigger club who he also happened to support, he turned down the opportunity to team up with the wholesome characters who lead us. He has since been working in similar executive roles outside football. Makes you wonder.

But Robson sent us top by Christmas 2001 and all that was forgotten. Jenas followed for £5 million, the football was class, and we were in the Champions League. Shepherd collected the year’s dividend and lapped up the plaudits.

Now, though a new transfer policy was now on view: Buy few players for big money. This makes sense while in the Champions League, but we are still pursuing it now. In the space of 9 months, Viana, Bramble, Ambrose and Woodgate (his finest moment?) arrived for £24.5 million. There were then no transfer fees spent for a year and a quarter, until Summer 2004.

Does Shepherd deserve credit for this 2 year spell? Perhaps he does. However, I would point out that Liverpool’s board manage to make the occasional sensible decision on just half the wages and a fraction of the dividend pay-outs. I am also of the opinion that this is the standard we should achieve on a regular basis.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that the only reason Shepherd gained relative success once was because a top coach who happened to be brought up within 20 miles of the ground landed in his lap. This will never happen again. And even then, it was all over by Summer 2003 when the plundering of the cash kitty for his enormous dividend caught up with him and there was no money, despite a season in the Champions League. We always back our manager!

Looking back, the amazing thing about Robson’s team wasn’t the pace or the young players or anything like that. It was the likes of Griffin, Dabizas, O’Brien, and Hughes playing in the top 4 week in, week out. Acuna and McClen hurtling around St James’ against Viera and co. LuaLua helping us away at Arsenal and Derby. (All those fight backs. Remember them? Team spirit)Brian Kerr on the wing at Leeds in a 3-0 win. Under the current chairman, that is the standard of coaching required to get us to a place where a club our size should regularly feature. It cannot be done regularly, it isn’t possible. At every other top club, top managers get to build a full squad before being asked to bring home a trophy. But not this one. That is not the transfer policy.

But surely Shepherd would make more money in the Champions League. Why gamble on that though? Any risky investment in the team might cut into the precious dividend, with no guarantee of return. Plus supporters might want that reinvested in the team to, you know, win things. Far better to wheel out one big signing / new manager a year, fill the stadium, and pocket one of the biggest dividends of any UK company. Best throw in a few lines about us turning it around this year as well. Something about being second only to Chelsea will do. This appears to be the strategy, certainly since the Champions League became a million miles away

Well he’s a sound businessman. Is he? It looks to me that even aside from dividends; we are haemorrhaging cash in every possible direction. From reserves getting £0.3m a year for playing in front of 100 people, to Dyer on 80k a week for doing nothing. From private jets for individual players, to using Bruce Shepherd’s warehouse for nearly half a million pounds. From ridiculous pay-outs to employ shite managers to ridiculous pay-outs to sack them. (By the way, did you know that Souness’ agency is Proactive? The same as Wayne Rooney’s, and the same that Kenneth Shepherd works for – we were busy with them for a few weeks, weren’t we).

If Shepherd is such a sound businessman, then how can our financial situation be explained? Why is it that a team which will probably finish the season with less than 46 points for the 4th time in the last 9 years has a 90 million pound debt? Not to mention the fact wages now make up 59% of all turnover. And why has he got so many players on massive long-term contracts that extent far beyond the next tv deal, expected to be a greatly reduced one?

According to Robson (in his book), Shepherd was denying him information on player’s contracts and transfer negotiations. Why would Shepherd do this? Robson went on to criticize both Shepherd and Hall for their focus only on the first team and St James\' Park. He said the training ground, scouts and youth talent were being neglected.

In Summer 2004, Shepherd was strongly rumoured to have interfered in the Butt and Kliuvert deals. The Rooney bid was surprising to say the least. Whatever was going on there, we didn’t need it. We needed a centre half. Instead we sold one. I heard from someone who was pretty convinced of their source that the Woodgate deal had been wrapped up months beforehand. It certainly happened extremely quickly, and the press missed it entirely. Yet Shepherd appeared not to inform Robson. Even if you don’t believe that, it doesn’t matter, its just one sorry chapter in a nine year story of utter greed and incompetence. Meanwhile, Robson was being dragged out in front of sky tv to stand next to Shepherd talking about Woodgate’s great opportunity, and a Rooney bid for ****s sake, all with him days away from the sack. Not for the first time he appeared to have no idea what Shepherd was doing. This was disgusting from Shepherd. Robson was far from perfect in later days, but this man had taken Shepherd as close to success at this club as he is ever likely to come, and he was humiliated by him over a number of days. This just confirmed Shepherd’s true character. After all the bluster, Robson was “backed” to the tune of minus 7 million that summer, including having his centre back sold behind his back, before being handed the sack.

The other thing confirmed at this time, if it was needed, was the input Shepherd has on transfers. To be honest, I find the amount of control he appears to have in this area pretty disturbing. It seems that Souness just gave him a list and then crossed his fingers, Shepherd does the rest. Robson also refers to Shepherd’s authority in this area in his book, and no one appears to have any idea of how much and when we will spend apart from him, including, it would seem, the manager and the financial director.

It makes you think about some of our other transfers as well. Viana for example. £8.5m was an enormous price for a 19 year old, bigger clubs than us were in for him, he clearly wasn’t suited to England, there was no place for him in the squad. Robson showed how much faith he had in “his” signing when Speed went off injured once. Rather than sub him on in his own position, we played for 10 minutes with 10 men while the crowd went mental. £8.5 million would have been useful in the summer of 2003.

Another concern of mine: From what Mike Newell says, as Shepherd tours the globe, wheeling and dealing on his way, he may come into contact with some pretty corrupt people. He will have to be careful. In fact just recently, the Daily Express alleged that a manager and chairman of a Premiership club received 3.5m from the signing of a central defender who cost less than 10 million. It is a cesspool, according to Sven’s agent.

Staggeringly, Summer 2004 was the third time Shepherd had overseen the removal of someone just weeks into the season – surely a record for incompetence. Yet again, the season was a complete write-off, even before Souness was appointed. When all the deserved criticism for this and everything else was flying his way, one thing Shepherd seemed to get away with here was the removal of Charlie Woods and Gordon Milne. During the five years under Robson, they had apparently built up some Arsene Wenger style contacts across Europe, and had finally got a player in, in the shape of Charlie N’Zogbia.. But Shepherd turfed them out with Robson. Why? **** knows. That’s how committed to getting a squad together Freddie Shepherd is. We followed up Robson’s 56 points with 44 points. But Shepherd got his dividend, as usual. That’s what counts.

The summer just gone is another example of Shepherd’s baffling transfer policy, so I wasn’t rushing to pat him on the back as many were. Like Robson and Stonehouse before him Souness clearly did not have a ****ing clue what was going on. He thought 2 deals were in the bag when in fact neither of them happened because we wouldn’t “be held to ransom” on their comparatively tiny fees. Then on the last day we blow a colossal £28 million which appeared from nowhere, and Christ knows how much on wages. By this stage we had already played four league games without scoring (could yet prove costly) and got knocked out of the inter-toto. But never mind that, we’ll polish off those season tickets easily now.

Souness’ jaw must have hit the floor. Perhaps we would have been better off actually backing our manager and coughing up for the slightly less exotic signings he requested. Then maybe we might have been able to fill out our squad a little bit, and if it turned out the signings were shite and the manager was clueless, we could even afford to pay him off. This is how professional clubs operate. But, as I said before, I genuinely do not think building a squad is on the agenda. It is certainly a poor second to chucking some pop star signing into the team, regardless of anything else. This will be the third consecutive season we finish with a group of reserve team youngsters filling out the side. Top eight in the world Freddie? Don’t think so. Throughout just about the whole of the Shepherd era, even Robson’s time, we have had a small core of quality players, surrounded by those who one way or another, aren’t up to it.

You can say, well we would settle for this before ’92, but that was then and this is now. Football has changed, and with Keegan and Hall, Newcastle United changed as well. We now have the muscle to compete if not right at the top, then very close to it. What we’ve got at the moment isn’t good enough. That’s the rhetoric that comes out of SJP anyway.

So, after nine years in the job, what can any potential managers expect from Freddie Shepherd? First he must accept that there is no long-term plan whatsoever, and that this will be the case for as long as he is here. He cannot expect to be given money when he wants it, in fact if this happens he is probably going to get sacked. He should watch out for some odd transfer activity beyond his control. He may make a list of players he wishes to purchase, and they can be, in fact they must be, as expensive as he likes. But after this he will not be allowed to build a squad, so he must use cheap players and free transfers who belong in the lower leagues, and mould them with this years pop star signing(s) into his team. Oh, he must finish in the top 4. Because anything less just isn’t good enough for Newcastle United, and we are a massive and ambitious club, second only to Chelsea. If this sounds almost impossible, you are right – it is. But don’t worry, he will receive a massive pay-off when sacked in mid-season, and we will get some other “saviour” to do it all again.

[mikk]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

Newcastel jääb siisetulekute polest Liverpoolile kõvasti alla, nii et see võrdlus pole õige. Alla jäädakse loomulikult ka manule, Arsenaleile ja Chelsealile. Mõni aasta tagasi jäädi üsna selgelt sissetuleku poolest alla ka Leedsile.

[Graeme]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

Algselt postitas mikk


Newcastel jääb siisetulekute polest Liverpoolile kõvasti alla, nii et see võrdlus pole õige. Alla jäädakse loomulikult ka manule, Arsenaleile ja Chelsealile. Mõni aasta tagasi jäädi üsna selgelt sissetuleku poolest alla ka Leedsile.

Kle sissetulekud nagu igaaasta erinevad oleneb kas euroopasse pääsed mis tehinguid teed,sponsorid jne.Loomulikult jäädi leedsile alla kui mõni aasta tagasi leeds enamus mängijaid maha müüs.Piletimüügi tuludes me peale Manu ei tohiks kellelegi alla jääda.

[mikk]

Vastus teemale \'SAFC vs NUFC\'

Algselt postitas Graeme

Algselt postitas mikk


Newcastel jääb siisetulekute polest Liverpoolile kõvasti alla, nii et see võrdlus pole õige. Alla jäädakse loomulikult ka manule, Arsenaleile ja Chelsealile. Mõni aasta tagasi jäädi üsna selgelt sissetuleku poolest alla ka Leedsile.

Kle sissetulekud nagu igaaasta erinevad oleneb kas euroopasse pääsed mis tehinguid teed,sponsorid jne.Loomulikult jäädi leedsile alla kui mõni aasta tagasi leeds enamus mängijaid maha müüs.Piletimüügi tuludes me peale Manu ei tohiks kellelegi alla jääda.

nufc jäi Leedsile sissetulekute poolest alla mitu aastat järjest ning märkimisväärselt palju. See polnud seotud mingite mängijate müügiga, vaid sellega et Ridsdale, vaatamata oma puudustele, oskas klubi teha suureks ning raha teenima panna. (Ise arvan siiamaani, et põhimõtteliselt oli tema strateegia õige.)

Aga see ei puutu asjasse. Minu vastus oli rohkem sellele eelmisele tekstile mõeldud, kust võis jääda mulje, et miks Nufc kulutab Liverpoolist palju vähem raha kui sissetulekud on samas suurusjärgus. Viimane pool sellest pole õige. Liverpool teenib stabiilselt suurusjärgu võrra rohkem, nagu ka Arsenal ja Chelsea, Manust rääkimata.