Howaythelads

FFS is this the best contribution you can manage when you're not following people around the forum slagging them off? emot-yawn.gif

Good post apart from the daft bit in bold. The manager chooses the players, not Fred. He tries to bring to the club the players the manager asks for. When Robson asked for Woodgate Fred went out and did the deal. When gullitt wanted to sign 3 defenders Fred went out and did the deal. When Dalglish wanted to lash out what was then a lot of money on a young Pistone, Fred went out and did the deal. How many times do people have to be told this well known and bloody obvious business practice? If Roeder wants to sign defenders I'm sure Fred will back him up. Didn't Robson ask for Miguel and we got Carr? Bottomless pit of money obsession again. He also wanted Carr, and was given the money to buy Milner, Butt and pay the wages to Kluivert. Its called a budget. Macbeth and his monkey will explain the concept when he comes back as he surely will soon now the team has lost a couple of games, to tell you that we didn't even have the money for Carr never mind Miguel. The shite board spent millions before and after that summer. Damned if they spend, damned if they don't, as usual. Well thats a little different to how HTL described it isn't it? We were talking about the chairman not paying out for full backs but apparently its up to the manager to ask for the players he wants and then the chairman apparently goes out and gets them. Do you need everything explained to you down to the smallest detail? I'm certain everybody knows what I meant in that post. It's typical that as you have no answer that would form part of a constructive debate, you instead try to come across as a smartarse once again. Sad as fuck, tbh.

Which he isn't. What a pity.

Where is Parker?? Emre was absolutely S*** against Everton and his set pieces were awful As was Parkermate.. fact is since Scottys return we have looked poor again. I am not saying thats what its down to on the whole, but I think its somehting Roeder should be looking at. Butt must start then Roeder has to decide between Parker and Emre. And who do you think should play:Parker or Emre? It's a no brainer, the superior footballer, who also fits into the team and shape should be selected, so it has to be Emre.

Isn't he injury prone, like?

Good. Let's hope he strengthens the proper areas by bringing in the right players. The midfield can be strengthened without spending just by leaving out The Captain.

Good post apart from the daft bit in bold. The manager chooses the players, not Fred. He tries to bring to the club the players the manager asks for. When Robson asked for Woodgate Fred went out and did the deal. When gullitt wanted to sign 3 defenders the Board did the deal. When Dalglish wanted to lash out what was then a lot of money on a young Pistone, the Board did the deal. How many times do people have to be told this well known and bloody obvious business practice? If Roeder wants to sign defenders I'm sure Fred will back him up.

Agreed. That is the way to do it, the bulk of any transfer funds this Jan has to go on a proven striker, not on defenders despite the injury problems.

Wow!

Fair enough. YG. :winking:

You reckon? Seriously? The defenders will return from injury. What happens if Martins is injured? Serious question. Unfair to rely on Martins anyway, imo. I don't think he's a serial goalscorer*. We need defenders aswell as a striker in January. But we crave defenders - absolutely no doubt about it. Martins might score a goal every single game, but if we continue to concede two every game aswell, then we're screwed. We need quality defenders - because we're very, very short on them. I'd much rather we broke the bank in an attempt to improve the defense than the attack, which is something we simply do not need to do. *And before people jump on my back and say that i'm only stating that cos he missed a penalty today, i've actually been saying that all season. YG We shouldn't break the bank to do anything, but we definitely need another striker more than a defender. IMO.

It's because they've realised (finally) that the Parker/Emre thing doesn't work and they'd hate to see Parker leave.

You reckon? Seriously? The defenders will return from injury. What happens if Martins is injured? Serious question.

But surely he should use his skills to appoint a manager capable of picking the best team, instead of one that would rather change a winning formula? Aye, I agree. What criteria would you suggest he use to be sure of selecting this manager?

Sounds like Fred's fault to me. He appointed Roeder but picks the team himself, after all.

:roll:

It's not so much about giving Luque his chance as it is about having a balanced team without moving your form players all over the place. Emre and Butt have been our form midfielders lately and established a good partnership in Parker's absence. Their reward? Emre is shoved out wide and Butt is shoved in central defence. In recent matches Emre has been dropped, Dyer has played in three different positions, Edgar has made his debut, Butt has played at centre-back and the whole formation has been changed, all to accommodate Parker and avoid playing Luque. Absolute madness. Roeder must put the team first and if that means dropping Parker and/or playing Luque then so be it. To be fair, I think these changes have been 100% to do with accomodating Parker, not so much an effort to keep Luque out of the team.

Ahhh pity you didn't explain where I said you said we didn't need a striker though... I understand your position to be that you think new defenders is a priority, unless all this banging on and on and on you've been doing about fullbacks means you don't think we need to sign any. Correct me if that's wrong and in fact you want the shit Board to buy an entire new back four and new strikers. I have said a new striker is a priority, followed by a LB then another striker. I think that's pretty clear. I live in the real world, so I understand that the money is not unlimited and that a buying a quality striker may leave us short of funds to strengthen at the back. You don't appear to appreciate that if the club puts defenders first they may be unable to bring in any new strikers of the quality required, given that they generally cost more than defenders.

He's a lost cause. Tragic I have to refer to him as that, but I've given up all hope of Roeder ever managing him properly. FFS. You'll be a fully paid up member of the loony club once you make the leap to blaming Fred for Luque's shit attitude. You don't think Roeder could have helped sort out Luque's "shit attitude"? No, I don't. It's down to the individual. Do you expect someone to help you with your attitude toward life?

That was years ago. Summer 2005 wasn't it? Fine, it's over a year ago, certainly not excusing it. But on the same wavelength Craig Bellamy has done some twattish things in his life and I know a lot of people wouldn't mind having him back. throwing a chair = stubbing a cigar in someones eye? I don't even want him, and I don't think he'll ever come. But unlike some I'm more interested in what players can and can't do on the pitch as opposed to what they do off it. He's been punished for that and has seemingly matured a lot since. Again, NOT excusing such actions. Hmm, would be interesting to go back to any posts you made about Bowyer.

:roll: Whether you rate them or not, believe they will play or not, the fact is the staff list of Newcastle United PLC shows that the club employs plenty of defenders and not many strikers. I listed them earlier. We have injuries across the squad, but the defence is currently hit hardest in terms of numbers. It takes injuries to more defenders to give us a problem than it does to strikers. Michael Owen is the clubs only proven quality PL striker, Martins looks as though he will turn out to be a second, but those two are all we have. The main backup, Ameobi is also crocked long term. With just Owen being injured we have struggled for goals all season, if Martins is injured we will struggle even more to score goals. Teams that don't score goals get relegated. I will tell you again that it is easier to fill gaps at the back than it is to get someone to score goals. After saying that I do realise that the predicament in our defence today is extreme. We need a quality striker first, we also need a LB and then another striker imo. Depending now on the injury to Ramage and the recovery status of the injured defenders we may need a CB as well. The money is not unlimited but the Board will once again do their best at backing the manager, I'm sure. If we don't bring in strikers in January in favour of spending all of the money on defenders the club is gambling on the fitness of Martins for the rest of the season. This may be ok with you, but it's a gamble nevertheless and I don't like it. Don't slag the Board if they do this and then Martins is injured. We could always put Parker up front, eh. Despite what people may want to believe I rarely become annoyed by what I read on this forum, it's more of an amusement to me than an annoyance. With respect to you, I think your posts are normally funny but you're pissing me off now with this shit you're posting and I've got other things to do that are more important than try to explain the obvious to you. Again. You can have the last word because I'm off oot.

He's a lost cause. Tragic I have to refer to him as that, but I've given up all hope of Roeder ever managing him properly. FFS. You'll be a fully paid up member of the loony club once you make the leap to blaming Fred for Luque's shit attitude.

Aye because we really should have to score 4 goals to win a game :lol: :lol: Don't expect that one to register. No, he can see the bigger picture. The one where we win games 5-4 I explained the shape of the team. Keep possession first. I'm not surprised you don't understand. Oh right so our defence wasn't shit today and we dont need new defenders... lets see now, we were possibly the better team until the first goal went in, then missed a penalty ....... This sort of thing didn't happen when we had Shearer and Bellamy, still we have replaced them haven't we ? So we didn't concede 4 goals because of the defence? So you understand ( correctly, surprisingly ) that better fullbacks would give us a better attacking flow to our game which may result in us scoring more goals, yet you blame the conceding of goals purely on the defenders.... Good one, even for you, Jon. Well did our full backs (left back especially) give us an attacking flow or did we get raped down the left side? So is this a problem with defence? Yeah I thought so. We can't defence set pieces, attacker problem tbh! FFS Yes, we have problems in defence, we need better defenders, nobody has said we don't. But we need strikers more, we need to put more pressure on the opposition to stop THEM putting too much pressure on ours. It is EASIER to get someone to fill in at LB than it is to get someone to put the ball into their net. What is hard to understand about that? Teams that don't score goals end up getting relegated, scoring goals is the most difficult thing in the game.

So you ignored my point including Dyer et all but you will include Bernard who hasn't and isn't likely to play for us this season or ever again? What a joke! Eh? Ignored? WFT is the matter with you, man? Dyer is NOT a forward. Bernard IS a defender. You can argue against that all you like....... He is as much a forward as Huntington is a left back, Bernard will not ever play for us so how the hell can you include him in your list? I may aswell include Shearer as a striker, he has more chance of playing for us any time soon than Bernard Sigh Read the post above yours from XVentura.