So in summary the only evidence that you have that Bruce appointed Jones is that Jones stated that he spoke with Bruce about Newcastle. So no evidence at all. Thank heaven he didn’t ask the tea lady otherwise she would be getting the credit for employing Bruce.
I have the actual words of the two actual people involved. You have nothing at all. Which side had the bigger weight of evidence? Simple question
Oh and in case you missed this earlier it doesn't actually matter that bruce employed Jones. It doesn't alter the question.
Yeah Jones lied in his interview the day he was employed and then Bruce thought that's a good idea ill say the same? You lads are on glue. Your hatred for bruce is fine, but this nonsense involving conspiracy theories is based on absolutely nothing other than your imagination
Finally this is the one I've been fishing for. You see if Bruce goes a new manager will bring his own staff and Jones will be no more. Jones isn't a manager! Just ask Luton. I would argue its far more likley that the ****e Ashley will almost certainly bring in to replace Bruce will NOT do better than the sides been performing over the last 19 games and most certainly not the last 11 in which we've been the 7th best side in the league. This is not the time unless we get the takeover and can get a top manager and coaching staff.... Plain and simple
Simple answer. No one. The words quoted by you do not touch on the issue and have as much relevance as Chippy not paying for rounds at the Earl has.
See you're wrong again. If Bruce goes Lee Charnley will promote Graeme Jones. No outlay and lesser pay.
You don't know that, so I'll ask the question again Given we've been the 10th best performing side in the league since Jones came in (half a season) and the 7th best side for the last 11, what is the problem with the set up?
If you think the answer to that was no one then you really might do well to go and eat a mouses brain in the hope you inherit its mind.
