A bit of light relief after the Derby

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Unofficial Newcastle United Football Club BBS : One Thread

Just finished reading Stu Pearces autobiography. Usual about how the fans up here are the best by far and he loved it here. It was the bits about Gullit that got me interested and make me dislike Gullit even more. Various Quotes to follow.

Shearer on why Pearce had been dropped - 'What's the matter? Have you been going to bed with his missus or something?'

'Some days were worse than others at Newcastle. I tried hard to be the complete professional I had always been, but I have to admit that when Gullit joined in the training matches I would go out of my way to lump him. The one time I did catch him, he went clean over my back. He was quite good about it - got up and played on. The lads found it amusing and Rob Lee, who was on Ruuds side, offered to leave his pass short to give me another crack at him.'

Gullit and Pearce - 'Am I being released or are you giving me a new contract. Gullit shrugged his shoulders and refused to take responsibility saying it was a matter for the board. I asked him point blank if he wanted me and he replied that as far as he was concerned he didn't want me at the club.'

'It wasn't just me and the other players who disliked the man; it was the physios and even the boot man, Ray Thompson. That's hardly surprising when the manager would walk into the boot room, toss his shoes at him and say "Here, shine these!"

Also mentioned is that the reserves and youth were all disheartened at the sheer lack of interest shown to them by Ruud because he could go off and buy foreigners instead. One particular peice highlights this. He's on about him n digger getting stuck in to help a thoroughly abused Tommy Burns to prove Gullit wrong when he says this.

'There were others who didn't want to know at all. George Georgiadis, a Greek signed from Panathinaikos, was a shambles. He didn't want to be there and let everyone know it. He was regularly the worst player on the pitch. The kids would work their socks off to carry the passenger and then look on in despair when he was put back in the first teamsquad the following Saturday.' 'He was a standing joke among the reserves.'

Also makes comments about the Dutch in general seemingly blaming everyone but themselves and quotes World cups and Euro Championships as examples.

On the flip side he said that players were dissapointed to see the back of Dags as they had a good relationship and he was popular.

-- Anonymous, February 25, 2002

Answers

You don't read any significance into the fact that Pearce "would go out of my way to lump him" but only managed it "The one time"? Not much cop against a retired player whose legs had gone, was it? Can't think why Gullit took a dislike to 2 senior pros showing him such respect.

As one of the folk who used to see Gullit at the reserves every week I get heartily sick of people still banging on about him not being interested in them. Gullit gave every half-decent youngster in the reserves a go in the first team (the average age of the squads put out fell from 27+ to a little over 25). If he kept Georgiades in the shop window he was somehow a jerk whilst when SBR does it with Marcelino, Pistone and Bassedas it's somehow a work of genius.

If the reserves were dispirited about Gullit buying foreigners then we need to explain how 3 years on none of those same players have broken into the first team (McClen and the Caldwells stepped up under Gullit and Ameobi and Coppinger were too young and raw at the time) and 14 of those poor, unfortunate, overlooked Maradonnas were transfer listed and booted out by loveable Bobby. Did Bassedas, Acuna, Cordone, Gallacher, Cort, Jenas, Robert, Bellamy, Lua Lua and Distin come through the ranks?

I'm afraid that this is yet another example of the winners writing history and I think you need to be a tad more critical when reading it. Gullit was obviously an arsehole when it came to man-management, but the reason why the reserves failed to flourish is that they were a pile of utter sh*te bequeathed to us by dour Kenny whom only the players seemed to be sorry to see the back of. I know which manager's football was the more watchable and that's what I'm there for.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002


Keegan's?

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002

.... not with a bargepole!

Just out of interest - who on earth needs any 'light relief after the derby'? Certainly not me, and re- contemplating Gullit's reign certainly doesn't qualify as light relief in this household.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002


His man management was utter rubbish, yes. But he also constantly picked the wrong team imo based purely on his preferences. This is his perogative being the manager but when you have a series of injuries to numerous centre halves, instead of bringing Pearce in to cover he used Caldwell. I agree Caldwell did well enough but still think it was too early for him as an untested player. Pearce mentions at one point about talking to Gullits assistant and him saying that during the games they were lacking a leader, someone who would get in and win tackles. Like most managers Gullit bought some quality, but he also bought a lot of toss players to counter this. Everyone knew Lee, Pearce and Dabs were fit, and it is widely known that if he had had the guts he would have dumped Shearer as well.

Pearce's tackling incident only came about after he, Lee and Dabs were told to train with the juniors without being told why even though it was obviously personal (sorry keep missing out Barnes). When you do this to professional players and they get a chance to get a small piece of revenge you take it. Hell I would. The tackle was long after Pearce and others were dropped and not the reason for being dropped.

But that is the key to the entire problem. Respect in somebody. With the way he treated the players, Doctors (he sent Ferguson to see somenone else), Coaches (brought in some Dutch blokes without saying anything) and physios they all had no respect. The person in charge is a MANAGER and it's no coincidence that this is part of the word man MANAGEment. Players will not play to their capacity if they are unhappy. This is like any working environment. The Sunderland game just proved how much of a joke Gullit waswhen he said it's just like any other derby. Fair enough it mmay be that it is, but not to us. Think of the team that he could have put out if he had utilised all the players at his disposal. It may have been a different result altogether, then again it might not. With Gullit it was all about his ego and how good he thought he was.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002


Maybe 'executive' relief - after all, Gullit was a prize wa**er.

I don't doubt Softie's account of the reserve team situation, but Gullit simply did not understand how to manage a club like United. Maybe Chelsea's foreign legion were used to that kind of abruptness (ok, downright rudeness...no pun intended).

Gullit always struck me as a paradox (oooo!). On one hand he was obviously incapable of managing players who had problems with his style of management. On the other hand, we did improve our football on the pitch and signed talent like Dyer. Again, he made efforts with the community (I recall him going out of his way for some fans with learning disabilities at a strip launch), but he also shagged around with pizza waitresses. He kept Dunc and Alan on the bench against the makems in that swimming pool fiasco, subbed them on and then blamed them for losing the game. Finally he also said during world cup commentary that 'one thing you don't do is sign a big striker'. So who picked up Duncan Ferguson then???

Odd man. Lush wife, mind.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002



We should have kept Dalglish on for another year, at least we'd have got a 0-0 draw against the makems.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002

I picked the title to get some attention. Guess it worked.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002

Andy, I think he even said that the Tyne-Weary wasn't a proper derby because it wasn't intra-city like Milan or Rome. I don't think he ever really 'got' what United and the region was about.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002

The thing about Gullit is that we have never heard his version of events. Maybe when he resigned (was sacked?), he agreed to keep schtum about it but, crucially, he has barely said a word about it. There is this perception that he was hated by all the players but many players have actually praised him, lower profile players admittedly, like Speed and Barton, but important players at the time.

I'm not defending him. I was gutted when he became manager because I just couldn't see it working and for me, a cartoon showing him and Alan Shearer with "Just as well neither of them has a big head" underneath summarises it: in a million years, Alan Shearer and Ruud Gullit wouldn't have got on. That isn't a criticism of Shearer, BTW, just the fact that we had all our striking options in one basket and Shearer's name was basically pre-printed on the team-sheets. Gullit dropped Shearer and Lee without finding replacements which was just stupidity. Equally, when Shearer's form was minging, Gullit didn't give him the help that Robson gave him to get back on track.

I don't think he measurably improved the football. Admittedly I only saw 13 games that season but what I saw was pure cack IMHO and flattered by a final position of 13th.

In terms of purchases, apart from Maric and Marcelino, he bought decent enough players - he just didn't check out their personalities. Equally, you can't compare Ferguson to Cort because we knew about Ferguson's record before we bought him whereas Cort had never been injured in his life before we bought him.

However, the real blame has to lie with the club for what was a giddy "big name" appointment intended to keep a Keegan factor thing going. Hopefully we learned from that mistake.

As I say, though, we have never heard Gullit's version of events so perhaps we should temper our criticism a tad.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002


The only good thing about his leaving was the manner of it. His press conference was without any obvious bitterness or resentment, nor any parting shots. Like I said, the man is a mystery to me.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002


I have no malice towards Gullit or Dags. I just believe that Dags dismantled the team and brought in mediocrity. Gullit attempted to build this but only succeeded partially with two or three really good purchases. This was probably a case of not good enough to draw the bes players whether the clubs position or word had got round about Gullit. Certainly treatment of players was always an issue. A comparison must be drawn with Bobby. He didn't exactly change much of Gullits team at first but you could see the difference instantly. This has attracted better players to the club. I feel that although he tried to build the club back up, he actually destroyed the club mentally by demorallising it at most levels. The board will always be at fault in one way or another because they are the decision makers in the end. The one at the top can't avoid the flack cos he's last in line.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002

Thank you Andy for those final sentiments - something I've been saying on here for some considerable time, without much support.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002

I've long been an apologist for both Gullit and Dalglish on here. They both had serious shortcomings, not least in communication, but the pat way in which they're now portrayed as a two-headed monster who did nothing but waste the clubs millions seems a little facile to me. Gullit does seem like a bit of a cnut, and I wouldn't exactly fight to the last breath to defend his honour, but as far as I can work out he spent a net of around £5m. Personality wise I can't defend him, his man-management was patently non-existent and for that alone he had to go, but factor in the increase in Dyer's value and his transfer dealings don't look quite so rank, do they?

Dalglish spent a net of around £9m. He signed our two heroes on Sunday, Given and Dabizas, for a combined £2.5m. Where Robson/Wadsworth spent £7m on four poor South Americans, he spent £2.5m on Nobby Solano. Ah yes, Dan, but what about those shit strikers? It's ironic that Bellamy's signing was met with such vitriol, when Dalglish's signings of the top scorer in France, the top scorer in Holland and an AC Milan striker were all greeted with relative optimism. Hindsight's a wonderful thing. Guivarch, Tomasson and Andersson, by the way, were sold for a combined loss of less than £1m.

I do think Dalglish was treated unfairly and sacked at a ridiculous time, though I accept that neither he or Gullit may have brought success however long they were given. My point, I suppose, is that what they both wasted was not money, but time.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002

hey Dan, nice piece of argument like but, err... what's a cnut? Is that like a backin' Fustard?

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002

No, more like a cunt, really.

-- Anonymous, February 26, 2002


“His man management was utter rubbish, yes. But he also constantly picked the wrong team imo based purely on his preferences. This is his perogative being the manager but when you have a series of injuries to numerous centre halves, instead of bringing Pearce in to cover he used Caldwell. I agree Caldwell did well enough but still think it was too early for him as an untested player.”

Actually, the closest he came to doing this was placing Gary Caldwell on the bench 3 times – the first Caldwell to get a game was Steve Caldwell under Robson. Gullit picked Dabizas 38 out of his 51 games as manager, not dropping him altogether until an awful run of form pre-season. Pearce was put in the squad 16 times and didn’t drop away until Domi was bought to put some more pace in the back line. His preferred lineup was Charvet (quickest player at the club at that time), Dabizas, Howey and Domi. When injury took Howey out of the team (yet again) he opted for the pace of Hughes.

“Pearce mentions at one point about talking to Gullits assistant and him saying that during the games they were lacking a leader, someone who would get in and win tackles.”

He’s simply describing himself there, which you would expect from someone who feels he should have been kept on and was wrongly overlooked. Gullit had a serious down on Pearce’s throwing himself into tackles and taking himself out of games by ending up on his arse. He was on record frequently about how the game had changed and you needed players with pace who stay on their feet and make themselves available on the counter rather than throwing themselves in and giving away penalties and free-kicks around the box. He wasn’t at all impressed when Pearce gave away that penalty away at Villa for no reason at all costing us a point and dropped Serrant for doing the same against Everton. You may not agree with Gullit’s ideas on how football should be played (Pearce didn’t because it left him nowhere to go) but he was working to a pattern, not just taking personal offence.

“Everyone knew Lee, Pearce and Dabs were fit, and it is widely known that if he had had the guts he would have dumped Shearer as well.”

Sorry, but this is just a re-write of history. Lee and Dabizas were told to find other clubs to take the strain off the wage bill (that’s another part of management – having to balance the books) – Lee because he was too old and hadn’t scored for 2 years which is bollocks for a midfielder and Dabizas because his form was rubbish (read NUFC.com’s zero to hero for an honest appraisal on Dabz) and he kept making costly mistakes. Shearer was dropped once in a last ditch attempt to work out who the boss was; Russian Roulette and he lost.

“Pearce's tackling incident only came about after he, Lee and Dabs were told to train with the juniors without being told why even though it was obviously personal (sorry keep missing out Barnes). When you do this to professional players and they get a chance to get a small piece of revenge you take it. Hell I would. The tackle was long after Pearce and others were dropped and not the reason for being dropped.”

It’s odd that you forget Barnes – presumably because you recognise the age thing? Lee, Barnes and Pearce were past their sell-by date, period. They were training with the reserves in the belief that they needed match-fitness in case they were needed again, the fact that these players took this as an insult tells me a lot more about their level of arrogance than Gullit’s. Barton was put in the reserves and showed such commitment and good attitude that he got back in the side and stayed there – it’s all about how badly you want it. Pearce on the other hand was anything but professional about it: he never used to bother warming up before reserve games and was twice withdrawn through strains picked up as a result. If his idea of being a leader is to call the youngsters “knobheads” then he might be able to match Gullit’s man-management abilities given a chance.

“But that is the key to the entire problem. Respect in somebody. With the way he treated the players, Doctors (he sent Ferguson to see somenone else), “

Ans was applauded for identifying a specialist in the field who might have been able to get the results the regular team had never come near to – a bit like sending Shearer to see Steadman in the States, but that was a decision from a loveable Englishman rather than an arrogant foreigner so it’s alright.

“Coaches (brought in some Dutch blokes without saying anything)”

You’re right, kept it so quiet that I’ve never heard about it. Steve Clarke was brought in from Chelsea but I thought the rest remained unchanged. Who were these shadowy Dutchmen?”

“ and physios they all had no respect.”

You don’t think it’s just because Pearce spent an awful lot of time with the physios and that people were unlikely to challenge Pearce’s perceptions to his face?

Players will not play to their capacity if they are unhappy. This is like any working environment. The Sunderland game just proved how much of a joke Gullit waswhen he said it's just like any other derby. Fair enough it mmay be that it is, but not to us. Think of the team that he could have put out if he had utilised all the players at his disposal. It may have been a different result altogether, then again it might not. With Gullit it was all about his ego and how good he thought he was.

You don’t think there is any arrogance in thinking that a European Footballer of the Year has nothing he can teach you? The team against the mackems during the waterpolo match (I was one of the poor f***ers on the Leazes with no roof) was the one time where personalities and power-struggle took preference over football and that was about sorting it all out one way or another. Ferguson was injured and was quite rightly on the bench (he made 3 more appearances after this of 79, 73 and 15 minutes before going back on the sick). McClen was in instead of Lee who was transfer-listed for costing 30k a week for no discernible benefit to anyone else. Dabizas was in from the start through injuries to the others. Shearer was dropped for having a pet lip, drooping shoulders and a serious attitude problem – no point in picking somebody who had made it quite obvious that he didn’t want to play for him. Best not talk any more about the Shearer situation or Clarky and I will end up writing War and Peace on here again (unless it’s already too late!), but suffice to say that a few people at that time put personal preference above the good of the club and something had to give. It turned out to be Gullit, all well and good, but don’t go rewriting history because someone who didn’t like him gives you a skewed version of events. Gullit knew the football he wanted us to play and tried to swap the crap hand he was dealt for players who could carry it off. He failed. My argument would be that Pearce was dropped for footballing reasons and the only way that personality comes into it is that he took it personally.

Great thread, by the way, didn't realise how fresh all these wounds still are :-)

-- Anonymous, February 27, 2002


I thought Gullit gave Beharall his debut due to injury to several CB's, playing him several times?

-- Anonymous, February 27, 2002

He got 4 starts in games at the backend of the 1998-99 season and was brought on as a sub when Goma was crocked against Wimbledon and for Solano when we got beat at Old Trafford under Steve Clarke. I must remember to look for your disapproval every time a youngster is named as a substitute to give them a big match experience by Robson, it will evidently be the first indication of his decline into madness and the onset of arrogance.

-- Anonymous, February 27, 2002

If you can find any implicit criticism in my post Softie I'll willingly pen the sequel to War & Peace! ;o{]

-- Anonymous, February 27, 2002

The boss, the boss, the scotch boss and the dutch boss, the dutch boss and the scotch boss, scotch broth, too many cooks! Too many cooks, eh, what, eh? He told me, he told what, eh? Scotch broth. Too many cooks, yes, and on and on and on with the old ones. The scotch boss, the old ones. The Welsh one, yes, he told me, the old welsh one. Ye'll never hit the net, will ye? Come on then, come on. Getting dark now. The old ones, the mad one, left back. Left back. He should've been, he said. He should've been. The mad one, left back. Left back in the changies, he said, left back in the bath with a book. ha ha. Come on then, come on. The scotch one and the dutch one, the dutch one and the scotch one. The dutch one then, remember? Yes, yes. On and on. The hair and the airs, the airs and the hair. Come on then, come on. But he's done it all wrong? What you say? What? Wrong you say? What's wrong? Getting dark now. And the rain. The night and the rain. The rain and the rain. On and on and on. Are you there? Are you there? You're not there. Two of you, not there. Like it was before. Not there. He's only a lad in the dark and the rain. Put them on, put them on. You, you with the airs and the hair. Put them on, put them on. He's only a lad. Come on then, come on. Will you? Will you? In the dark and the rain. Too late. Too late.

-- Anonymous, February 27, 2002

Sorry clarky, I thought you were quite rightly inferring that Gullit threw Beharrall in at the deep end instead of using Dabizas. Clutching at straws I was attempting to defend it as giving youth a chance on the bench, but every time I hear Beharrall's name I just see him opting to let that up-and-under bounce against Wimbledon which led to their equalizer :-( Heinous day.

-- Anonymous, February 27, 2002

I feel left out of this discussion...Gullit's crimes were well punished. The Caldwell brothers were left out because they should have been Karamazov

-- Anonymous, February 27, 2002

That's about my only recollection of Beharall also Softie - a terrible but forgiveable error for such an inexperienced defender, and after having actually played remarkably well up until that point.

On the wider issue, you already know that I have a very low opinion of RG. However, your arguments against rewriting history to better fit our prejudices is remarkably cogent, and has caused me think twice about regurgitating my particular prejudices.

-- Anonymous, February 27, 2002


Moderation questions? read the FAQ