Hugh, He should never have got Keegan in the first place, I was horrified from the start and knew it would lead to big trouble. Then, to compound that by bringing in another egotistical little troublemaker almost immediately, throwing him into the same cock-pit, was insanity from a team building point of view.

===

It’s rare that we totally agree about something relating to the Ashley/Keegan subject, but I do agree 100% with that.

If Barcalona, R Madrid or Man City offered the agents more money for one of these youngsters they would take them there, they wouldn’t give NUFC a second thought, gentlemans agreement or not.

The gullibility of it all beggers belief!

Just one of numerous disasters he has overseen..

Maybe he should. Maybe Ashley should have compromised too, stopped the Nacho loan and then gone back to KK to discuss how they’d handle future ‘commercial signings’ or whatever. Maybe even Ashley shouldn’t have employed him in the first place. Maybe loads of things could have been different.

Things played out the way they did though and the tribunal was about whether – given the circumstances that transpired – Keegan was justified in walking out or not. It seems he was, so the person who really should have been doing things differently is Ashley.

No I am saying he was miserable and at that time on that one instance – Keegan reverted to type and stormed out. Oh of course he always has an excuse – every time he has an excuse – but BBM remind me – where else in the world of football have you a man who perpetually storms out on clubs. (and where that person is still respected)

Only Newcastle I guess.

The owners whole system was aimed at preventing the to-ing and fro-ing of players, to build a long steady future, to stop new manager after manger making wholesale changes. So when the owner wanted to spend 1.0m for the betterment of the club – to access the brightest young talent in South America – he should be able to do so.

Thereon it opens an argument all over again and it takes you back to the beginning of the whole tribunal.

Irrespective of the letters content – Kevin Keegan should have stayed, proved over time he had a better eye that anyone else – won Mike over by getting him to trust him, and strengthened his position.

Keegan didnt – he walked.

Keegan was just waiting for a legal loophole to get out of dodge!

That makes sense!

It’s contrary to the factual findings of the tribunal but definitely fits in with the agenda of disparaging Kev.

In essence they acknowledge though there were difficulties the only thing that made him walk was the signing. And it is this point alone that wins him the technical KO.

If he had walked for the other matters he would not have won – as I state – I still hold enough respect for the man to believe he couldn’t and wouldn’t have walked for the one signing

====

He didn’t walk for ‘one signing’. He walked because his contract was breached and he was not allowed the final say on transfers.

32. “We are satisfied that Mr Keegan left the Club (i.e. resigned) because the Club sought to impose upon him a player, namely Gonzalez, whom he did not want, in breach of the term in his Contract which we have found entitled and required him to have the final say.”

He tried to rectify the situation but negotiations between KK and Ashley broke down because Ashley would not give him the final say on transfers and having that say was an implicit clause in his contract.

40. “In any event, it is clear that the “final final straw” occurred on 4 September when the Club handed to him the letter to which we have referred above in which it made it clear that were he to remain at the Club he would still not have the final say.”

The Nacho thing certainly brought it to a head – which it says in the tribunal – but you also have to read point 40 to get the full context.

He left because he was denied – and was going to continue to be denied – the final say on transfers.

I am very sorry to use too many hyphens “-” I hope the few hours it took me to draft for the interest of debate were not wasted because of my appalling English.

Worky – I am sorry for using too many hyphens – I hope I haven’t lowered the tone of your fine blog