According to Ronnie:

Toon chairman's message over transfers.

Newcastle United chairman Freddie Shepherd today revealed his "utter frustration" at being unable to compete for big-money buys as he refuses to become a Leeds gambler.

In an exclusive interview a candid Shepherd spoke for the first time of his reluctance to speculate in an uncertain market due to the impending decision of the European Union commissioner on the legality of transfer fees.

He admitted: "As a Geordie fan I'm utterly frustrated but when I put on my chairman's hat I realise I can't spend big money which belongs to our shareholders and fans in a market which is in danger of collapsing totally at any time."

Shepherd added significantly: "Bobby Robson understands my reason but is unhappy with it. I wouldn't expect anything else from a manager in charge of a football team."

Leeds United have ignored the red flashing lights, of course, to splash out an £18 million world record fee for a defender, Rio Ferdinand - a decision Newcastle's supremo described as "taking one helluva risk."

While Shepherd would probably agree to a modest £1 million outlay to ease Robson's current striker crisis he has repeatedly refused to become a big-time gambler and possibly a massive loser.

In a New Year address to the fans Freddie maintained: "I'm really two men - the Geordie fan desperate for success and the chairman with all the responsibility that brings.

"However, I'm totally frustrated, as our supporters must be, at the delay on a decision on transfer fees. Supposed deadlines have come and gone without any hard and fast ruling.

"My feeling - and I must stress that it's only mine - is that the EU commissioner will change the present system and replace transfer fees with compensation money.

"OK, Leeds have done what they've done but I consider it a helluva risk. I'm not criticising them. It's their business and theirs alone.

"However, I feel it would be wrong and imprudent to shell out huge money until the position is clarified. I know that's difficult for fans to understand, because I'm one of them at heart, but I have to be responsible."

Shepherd went on: "No one, I believe, can accuse this board of being skinflint. I've been a director for 10 years and in that period we've spent £200 million - how many clubs can say that?

"We've spent nearly £100 million on the stadium, making it one of the best in Europe if not the world, and £100 million on players. That means we've backed managers to the hilt and have certainly not lacked ambition. That ambition still burns brightly within St James's Park.

"Douglas and Sir John Hall's backing during all this time has never been less than 100 per cent. They've never wavered for a second.

"We've been in Europe for six seasons, we've produced huge excitement over the last 10 years, and despite an injury list which stretches to 10 first-team players, we're still seventh in the Premiership and have just beaten Leeds United."

On the job done by Bobby Robson under difficult circumstances, the Newcastle chairman added: "He's stabilised our position which was of primary importance. The board and myself are delighted that Bobby has sorted the whole job out.

"We've had a terrible injury list yet Bobby has soldiered on and still got us seventh in the Premiership. That's an excellent achievement."

Well, I suppose taking my supporter's hat off, I can see his point of view. However, with a bit more added to the squad, we are in with a chance of a UEFA place. Surely that has to be worth something on the balance sheet for next year??

-- Anonymous, December 29, 2000

Answers

What surprises me about this is the way this transfer nonsense is dragging on. You'd think that directors and investors would be spitting blood and demanding a resolution of such a crucial issue which is holding back their plans. The powers that be, whoever they be (FIFA? EUFA? faceless Eurocrats?) should be locked in a room without food, water or sanitation and told not to emerge until an agreement is reached.

I think that would concentrate the mind wonderfully and then we could get on with our game.

-- Anonymous, December 29, 2000

Got to agree Jonno - it's a bloody disgrace the way this important issue is dragging on & on & on. Unfortunately, this is the way these tossers sustain their jobs - why resolve something in one session when they can stretch it out to 25 sessions over 12 months?
Deeply, deeply irritating.

Incidentally, the Ronnie article is precisely the kind of clear communication we need from our Chairman to cut through Press 'interpretation' of the facts, and ensure the supporters understand his position with no possibility for misunderstanding or confusion.
We may not agree with him, but at least there is now no lack of clarity as to where he's coming from on this issue.

-- Anonymous, December 30, 2000

I'm sorry but that load of bilge water is harder to swallow than a whole stottie.

Not you clarky and Screacher!!

The as a "fan" and as a "busnessman" shite.

Is Ridsdale or any of the others who have bought, any less a businessman than our lot?

Has the value of their team plummetted because they bought players?

It is just a convenient smokescreen this uncertain situation re transfers.

Even if they change the system will it be retrospective or only apply to new contracts? There are as many questions to be answered as there are fans. If the player is happy at the club he will stay.

The new contracts with the players will be structured to favour the clubs anyway. Increases for playing x number of games, only being paid if you play, win and draw bonuses etc.

Whatever the reason we are not buying IS NOT BECAUSE OF THE TRANSFER SITUATION.

Sorry for the shouting.

-- Anonymous, December 30, 2000

No Gus it's not becuase of the transfer situation. It's becuase the club has feckin money. If you can't see why then ye blind. And the sad part is, the majority of Shepards argument is spot on, yet we all jump on his back.

Look at just how much the previous managers have spent as opposed to income generated on and from transfers. It's a huge defecit. And it's not like the on field performances and lack of geniune success has balanced the huge spending.

Then there's the stadium redevelopment. It was either redevelop the stadium or spend more money on the squad. You couldn't have it both. Yet I hear no one saying they wish SJP wasn't expanded in favour of bringing in more players.

Look at our squad, except for Lee, Shearer and Speed, most of the squad is made up of 25 & 26 year olds, or 19 to 22 year olds. Bobby has the players to maintain our present level, while hopefully bringing through the kids who take us to that elite level.

IMHO Bobby's do the job right.

-- Anonymous, December 30, 2000

Yup i reckon for the long term future of the club its better if NO signings are made. No point in having Luax2, Cordone, Amoebi, Coppinger if they dont at least get there chance to learn+improve when the opportunity arises. We cant get relegated so just make do and look forward to Cort and Shearer returning in the coming months. Dont forget Dyer is getting great practice in an attacking role, something hell benefit from forever. Of course the other side of the coin is the importance of getting into Europe but even 2 big signing wont guarantee that.

-- Anonymous, December 30, 2000

I don't think there's really a clamour for making big signings spud/tre, as it seems to me that most people appreciate the Club's weak financial position, and in any case would fundamentally prefer a longer-term approach to rebuilding the team based on solid foundations.

However, there are genine concerns that there are glaring weaknesses in certain positions that could cause us to get into freefall if we keep picking up injuries. With this in mind, I believe the general feeling is that we should make a couple of judicious additions to the squad as an insurance policy as much as anything - and also one that could just make the difference in propelling us into a UEFA Cup position.

Let's also not lose sight of the fact that UEFA qualification could generate significant additional revenue.
In my mind, both the protection of our PL place, and UEFA Cup qualification, are sound reasons for judicious investment in such an insurance policy - irrespective of the future of the transfer system. These are precisely the kind of risk judgements that have to be made in any business in situations where the facts are not always black and white, so to speak!.

-- Anonymous, December 31, 2000

Tre,

I suggest you take a deep breath and read what I wrote again.

What you argue is my point exactly. The management are saying that we are not buying because of the uncertainty of the transfer situation.

That is bollox. I was asking what was the real reason that is not being told to us.

As for the money, YBR said it was available for Keane. Therefore some funds are there for the right signing. So what if Dalgleish and Gullit and Keegan spent 200 million? That does not help the club now or in the future. Those things have to be forgotten, in the context of what was bought, not the process of a lesson though.

If we do not get a L side M/F or F/B and more central defence (if Goma and Marcellino are off) We will not or should I say struggle to hold our position. The last 2 games have shown how much better Hughes is working off an experienced CB. Even one as rusty as Marcellino. Let me again say I think he is a better C/B than Goma.

-- Anonymous, January 01, 2001