For the second year running what I'm sure was a well-intended break for the non-international players in Spain has gone badly wrong for the Toon. Why?

I feel the real problem is that the actual intention/objective of the trips has been ill-defined and not clearly thought through. These are extremely costly exercises, but why where they there, and more importantly did the players really understand the intended point of them being there?

It is easy to castigate the players and say that they should appreciate a break in the sun. However, this is simply not like you and I yearning for our annual two weeks on the beach. These are rich, young men who are pampered and run around after all through their careers. They are rich enough to take off for a few days of sun and relaxation whenever they get the opportunity - and to somewhere infinitely more exotic than Spain in November.

So, back to the main point - what exactly was the intention of these expensive and ill-fated trips? The chance to train in different surroundings, and better weather, can provide an excellent opportunity for team-building. However, to facilitate this all the players really need to be involved. With 7 or 8 senior players away on international duty, this could only have had limited success - neverthless, it could still have been set as an objective, and an opportunity to get some of the fringe players meaningfully involved and integrated. However, the minute you also allow other players - ie. Robert and Bernard - to simply 'go home', even the opportunity for a limited team-building exercise is further eroded.

So, given the internationals are unavailable, and a few others have been allowed to simply 'go home' for a few days - what message does this convey to the others? I suspect it leaves them rather confused, but probably tells them the trip is purely a boondoggle, a paid holiday - and imho a total waste of money.

It also raises the possibility, with no apparent professional objective for the trip, that some of them would have also have simply preferred to 'go home' - to Ipswich, or wherever - rather than hang around in a hotel, however luxurious - luxury is nothing unusual to them.

It seems to me that the absence of a clearly understood and communicated purpose for these trips lies at the root of the problems that have become apparent, and entirely in keeping with the lack of professionalism that pervades everything NUFC do.

-- Anonymous, November 11, 2001

Answers

Boondoggle??????????? Never heard that word before!

I agree with your post though.

-- Anonymous, November 11, 2001

Well, Clarky, almost all PL clubs have gone to Spain during this fortnight and we are the only ones to make the headlines so I have to conclude that you're right.

-- Anonymous, November 11, 2001

there are a few things to consider here.

First off, the French contingent, I think Bobby, as would most managers, understands that although it is necessary to promote a team togetherness, the French players have not proven to be irresponsible as unfortunately some of our English ones have been, and I really think he believes it would be just as theraputic to let them go home (as England is not really home) for that period of time. Knowing that Bobby has allowed them to do this makes them much more willing to give more to the team when they return. Certainly the rest of our squad, for the most part, live and work in England, and for the S. Americans it is too way too far to travel. Spain would be fun for them anyway. I don't see the squad chemistry sufferring in regards to this.

Secondly, I can't see the trip being a "boondoggle". Any effort to keep the team unit together, even with a few strays going home, can only be seen as profitable. NOW, the important thing here is that there is an agenda, and that agenda must be achieved. The fact that this has not gone well for the second year in a row is not due to any leniency, I believe, on YBR's part. These "children", and that's what they are, are completely irresponsible and must be shown the importance of such endeavors. There is a time for work and a time for play and that I'm sure was emphasized prior to the trip.

Finally, the Internationals... ok we may have been without 10 players...did Nobby go to Maradona's do anyway??? This can not be seen as detrimental either. Certainly the effect on the overall squad is diminished somewhat, but as professionals they have responsibilities, and the main point is to work together as a unit no matter what "obstacles" may crop up.

Surely, Bobby can't be expected to babysit these idiots. If we had been there for a tournament or a European game a certain code of conduct would be expected, and even though this was seen as more of a "leisure" trip, the same expectations must be held. When you travel with the team, you are a representative of that team and more importantly a representative of the City, and the football league. If rules have been broken, punishment must be administered.

-- Anonymous, November 11, 2001

No smoke without fire, its how you douse it is the secret and our lot are a wee bit Plumpton in that respect . Problem , discuss , arrive at decision , inform players of result , fine players but across the board and spell out the money involved , suggest £5,000 each.

Call press conference, quote -: As a result of 4 employees of Newcastle United Football Club being in breach of the Club`s code of conduct it has been decided with full agreement of those involved that 50% of their fine be used to take 12 underprivilged/handicapped kids from the North East to Spain for a week`s break . The other 50% will go into the proposed "Academy Fund". We now consider the matter closed , we will give you further information when the lucky kids have been chosen, thank`s for your attention, Goodnight,sleep well,journos

-- Anonymous, November 11, 2001

That approach is far too mature, Buff. It's as if the man management comes from a manual that none of them understands - they read it parrot fashion then follow the instructions without knowing why or of the possible implications.

-- Anonymous, November 11, 2001

I suspect my main point has been missed. For the reasons I've already outlined, I simply don't believe the raison d'etre for this trip, or the Club's expectations, was understood by the participants - hence the confusion that is quite clearly apparent from studying what has subsequently been said.
Another buggar's muddle, frankly.

-- Anonymous, November 11, 2001

If the reasons/objective/conditions of the trip had not been made clear to the `Footballing Four` that would have been suffice for the verdict to be `not guilty Shep`, on you go boy`s.

-- Anonymous, November 11, 2001