I ask cos I've just read The Mag and the normally very right Ian Cusack refers to Bobby being as popular as Keegan was until he bought Asprilla blah blah blah. I think it's a myth myself. WE bottled it. End of story. Anyone disagree?

-- Anonymous, October 04, 2000

Answers

Call it a coincidence....or call it Wor Messiah's absolute lack of tactical awareness...that he is still displaying to this day as it goes....but when Asprilla turned up you lot not only lost yer shape but a lot of games too.

"What a friend we have in Jesus........................."

-- Anonymous, October 04, 2000

I have always felt it was a contributory factor, but certainly not THE reason.
Introducing a maverick like Tino into the team at that critical stage was a huge gamble, and one that just didn't pay off. However, to be fair to KK, maybe he sensed that the tension in the camp was getting to the players and felt he had to do something positive to change things up and introduce a new creative spark to get things going again.
The lack of experience of being in that situation got to both the players and KK, and unfortunately they just couldn't handle it.
In truth, this was where our lack of defensive acumen hurt us very badly. What was really called for in that situation was for us to batten down the hatches in the run in and gut it out, forgetting the fancy attacking football and taking 0-0 draws if necessary to get the few points we needed - as Blackburn did when they hit the same buffers in their run in.
KK opted for the opposite and bolder strategy by bringing in Tino, and the rest as they say is history.
I was at Anfield for the famous 3-4, and am still convinced that was the result and the performance that cost us the title - you could see the confidence visibly going down the drain and we never recovered from that result.
Still a fantastic season, a wonderful team to watch, and one that gave it their all but came up a little short. Frankly, I still feel privileged to have watched it all.

-- Anonymous, October 04, 2000

There has always been a difference of opinion between the fans who watched those games and everyone else - ie the media and non- Newcastle fans.

People forget we didn't just buy Tino before the final run-in. We also bought Batty, who ousted Lee Clark from he holding midfield role. At around the same time Ginola was sent off against Arsenal for retaliating against Dixon and we saw what Cantona meant by his being 'weak in the head' - he sulked and was never the same player for us after that. Then Gillespie had an injury. So there were changes to a settled midfield. Keegan said it was the senior players who bottled it, although he did too, with the exception of Batty and Watson. Ferdinand started missing sitters and one-on-ones (although we've since found out he was playing with a broken toe), Hislop and Srnicek both dropped huge clangers, particularly Srnicek.

Buying Asprilla changed things for us, he was difficult to play with but he earned us points we wouldn't have got otherwise. Plus he didn't play in every game. No, to me Tino had very very little to do with blowing the title, he was just the scapegoat.

-- Anonymous, October 04, 2000

Tino came on against Bro on his debut when we were losing and changed the game, he probably did that in more games that season (I can't remember them that clearly), what cost us the title was ismple. Losing twice to Newton Heath, had we drawn either we'd have won.

-- Anonymous, October 04, 2000

Kegsy. Onew draw would not have been sufficient. One win would have been. I think we lost because Ferdinand and Beardsley lost their scoring touch, and the defence did not do its job when we did score.

-- Anonymous, October 04, 2000

Tino was an option,

Batty was a fixture in the team and it was he (along with Keegans inability to inspire the confidence in he team), not Tino, that caused us to throw away the championship.

-- Anonymous, October 04, 2000

We had no competition up front which meant when Big Les lost the knack we had no one to replace him (yeah we had Kitson but real options Im on about). Tino played instead of an injured Keith Gillespie.

Pav played 14 game sof which we lost 2 to Man U, and others away at West Ham, Arsenal and Liverpool.

The reason we lost was that Man U took 40 points out of the last 45. If we'd beaten them at home we'd have won it.

It was the same story in Scotland that year. Celtic were 4 points behind Rangers having lost only one game, at home to Rangers.

-- Anonymous, October 04, 2000

Just bad luck, I'm afraid. Who remembers Graeme Fenton and Batty's misjudged trap? Woan's 30 yarder? It happens.

I would like to say forget it, and that's what happens when you support the toon, somewhere down the line you feel all the better for it. You've been there, almost done that, we're still Geordies and nothing will keep us down.

-- Anonymous, October 04, 2000

I've lost my memory, by how many points did we lose the league by that seaon?

-- Anonymous, October 05, 2000

To be fair to Keegan, I think he saw that other teams had been doing their research on Newcastle and ,largely, were managing to contain us and nullify our strong points, punish our weaknesses. Asprilla's purchase was an attempt to mix things up a bit. I don't think his arrival was what lost us the title. It could be argued that he arrived too late.

-- Anonymous, October 05, 2000

Kegsy-san

We lost by 4 points but as we had an inferior goal difference to ManU we needed another couple of wins. I think that if we'd closed shop and hung on for victory at Blackburn we'd have had a real incentive to beat Spurs on the last day of the season. After Fenton's two wholly avoidable goals though we were effectively down and out. I've only ever REALLY believed that NUFC would win anything for those 20 or so minutes between Batty's goal and Fenton's first. Bastard!

-- Anonymous, October 05, 2000

Dread, you're Japanese is better than mine :-)
Okay so, if we'd drawn with Man U we'd have finished on points with them and lost by goal difference, BUT I think that result would have been the boost that we needed to take us over the top, I'm sure we'd have beaten Spurs on the last day if the title depended on it, but that's history.

-- Anonymous, October 05, 2000

A Northern Irish friend has just claimed it was Gillespie's exclusion that lost us the title...

-- Anonymous, October 05, 2000

Tino is innocent. Collective culpability. "Tino was a gunslinger" - sung to the tune of "Daddy was a bank robber". tino is innocent. Message ends.

-- Anonymous, October 06, 2000