Newcastle Thread - 2023/24

[Keeper!]

The hypocrisy from this fat geordie c*nt. He's thick as a plank.

 

[Mr Blue Moon]

It seems to me that Howe for Newcastle is what Hughes was for us. If the owners want to push on, I can’t see him lasting until the end of the season

 

[johnevans]

The hypocrisy from this fat geordie c*nt. He's thick as a plank.

Perhaps this herbert might do some research and check up on the history behind all of this FFP guff.

He might find, for example, articles such as the one on the ESPN news page of 7 February 2013 (i.e. ELEVEN years ago) which included the following in its report:


"Premier League clubs have voted in favour of introducing a Financial Fair Play deal and restrictions on wages.

Representatives of the clubs first met in December to discuss proposals on a new system obliging teams to break even, as well as imposing some sort of cap on wages. The clubs agreed to reconvene on Thursday with 13 votes out of 20 needed to accept the proposals.

Chelsea, Arsenal, Manchester United, Tottenham, Liverpool, Everton and Newcastle were all expected to back the new plans, while Manchester City, Fulham, West Brom and Aston Villa were expected to vote against.

In actual fact, the vote for the financial regulations could hardly have been closer - as six were against with Reading abstaining. It meant that the 'yes' vote only narrowly achieved the necessary two-thirds majority of the 19 votes cast.

Clubs sources say Fulham, West Brom, Manchester City, Aston Villa, Swansea and Southampton all voted against.

Chelsea, who had initially been viewed as opponents of financial fair play regulations, voted in favour."


Said herbert might also research the pages of our own, beloved Bluemoon Forum to find reactions to the above Premier League vote which warned of the consequences of this development for English football, all in some considerable, prescient detail.

Oh and finally, the said herbert might usefully spend time reorganising the following to make a well known phrase and saying:

'For. Turkeys. Christmas. Voting.'

 

[mancboy]

Perhaps this herbert might do some research and check up on the history behind all of this FFP guff.

He might find, for example, articles such as the one on the ESPN news page of 7 February 2013 (i.e. ELEVEN years ago) which included the following in its report:


"Premier League clubs have voted in favour of introducing a Financial Fair Play deal and restrictions on wages.

Representatives of the clubs first met in December to discuss proposals on a new system obliging teams to break even, as well as imposing some sort of cap on wages. The clubs agreed to reconvene on Thursday with 13 votes out of 20 needed to accept the proposals.

Chelsea, Arsenal, Manchester United, Tottenham, Liverpool, Everton and Newcastle were all expected to back the new plans, while Manchester City, Fulham, West Brom and Aston Villa were expected to vote against.

In actual fact, the vote for the financial regulations could hardly have been closer - as six were against with Reading abstaining. It meant that the 'yes' vote only narrowly achieved the necessary two-thirds majority of the 19 votes cast.

Clubs sources say Fulham, West Brom, Manchester City, Aston Villa, Swansea and Southampton all voted against.

Chelsea, who had initially been viewed as opponents of financial fair play regulations, voted in favour."


Said herbert might also research the pages of our own, beloved Bluemoon Forum to find reactions to the above Premier League vote which warned of the consequences of this development for English football, all in some considerable, prescient detail.

Oh and finally, the said herbert might usefully spend time reorganising the following to make a well known phrase and saying:

'For. Turkeys. Christmas. Voting.'

do you really think that wankers like him and goldbridge et al do any sort of research, they just rant louder than anyone else and talk over anyone that proves that they are talking nonsense by engaging in reasoned and sensible debate.

 

[Vienna_70]

It seems to me that Howe for Newcastle is what Hughes was for us. If the owners want to push on, I can’t see him lasting until the end of the season

Howe is much better than Hughes ever was.

 

[Mr Blue Moon]

Howe is much better than Hughes ever was.

So do you think Howe will still be managing the Magpies in a year’s time?

 

[Vienna_70]

So do you think Howe will still be managing the Magpies in a year’s time?

I really don’t know, but he’s done a lot better than many on here thought he would, and he’s dealing with a crazy injury list that would test any coach..

 

[ninjamonkey]

Ive nothing personally against newcastle but It's very interesting to finally sit back and watch the penny drop for another fanbase.

It was fast tracked in as a direct attempt to stop us from becoming what we are today but it also ensured the gate was firmly sealed behind us and nobody else would be allowed to do what we did.

Every club outside the then big 4 that voted for ffp signed away their future and any hope of winning things that day. Newcastle fans are now seeing this, I hope all the other clubs in favour of ffp get billionaire investment and cannot spend it so they too can see what they voted for.

 

[deano ou812]

It seems to me that Howe for Newcastle is what Hughes was for us. If the owners want to push on, I can’t see him lasting until the end of the season

They’ll wait till end of season ..

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Perhaps this herbert might do some research and check up on the history behind all of this FFP guff.

He might find, for example, articles such as the one on the ESPN news page of 7 February 2013 (i.e. ELEVEN years ago) which included the following in its report:


"Premier League clubs have voted in favour of introducing a Financial Fair Play deal and restrictions on wages.

Representatives of the clubs first met in December to discuss proposals on a new system obliging teams to break even, as well as imposing some sort of cap on wages. The clubs agreed to reconvene on Thursday with 13 votes out of 20 needed to accept the proposals.

Chelsea, Arsenal, Manchester United, Tottenham, Liverpool, Everton and Newcastle were all expected to back the new plans, while Manchester City, Fulham, West Brom and Aston Villa were expected to vote against.

In actual fact, the vote for the financial regulations could hardly have been closer - as six were against with Reading abstaining. It meant that the 'yes' vote only narrowly achieved the necessary two-thirds majority of the 19 votes cast.

Clubs sources say Fulham, West Brom, Manchester City, Aston Villa, Swansea and Southampton all voted against.

Chelsea, who had initially been viewed as opponents of financial fair play regulations, voted in favour."


Said herbert might also research the pages of our own, beloved Bluemoon Forum to find reactions to the above Premier League vote which warned of the consequences of this development for English football, all in some considerable, prescient detail.

Oh and finally, the said herbert might usefully spend time reorganising the following to make a well known phrase and saying:

'For. Turkeys. Christmas. Voting.'

It’s astonishing how little some supporters appear to know about their own club’s recent history. Maybe it’s because it was more important to us, but I’d have guessed all of those votes correctly knowing, as I did, that Reading abstained.

How can any self respecting supporter not know how their club voted on FFP? Especially at the point your club becomes affected by it?