Howaythelads

Hmm, I divvent knaa, tbh. Give him a month or so to fall out with everybody and Souness would struggle to take the World Champions to a victory over a women's team, imo.

So another, in your opinion, poor player signed for millions sanctioned by the board? Yup. Souness was crap, there's no doubt about it. Thompers, straight question for you, yes or no will do. Do you believe the Board should interfere with team affairs, making the decisions on who should join and who should leave? It depends who's manager at the time. what sort of response is that I hope I don't hear you criticising Fred for interfering with managers doing their jobs when you have just said you agree with it If I was chairman, I'd certainly not interfere with Robson, I'd trust him to do his thing, as a proven competent manager. With Souness, if I was chairman, I wouldn't appoint him in the first place, but if he actually was at the helm, I wouldn't trust him with £50m that's for sure. But of course, it comes down, again, to the poor manager selection thing. so, you agree that a chairman should tell his manager who to buy and sell ? NE5 & HTL - thought you should see this...it's a quote of the day from my Google homepage, but for some unknown reason when I read it earlier I instantly thought of you two: "A healthy male adult bore consumes each year one and a half times his own weight in other people's patience." - John Updike So do you agree that a Board should interfere in the decisions on which players join and leave or not? Or is it yet another.... WOOP! WOOP! EMPTY HEAD ALERT!!! bluebiggrin.gif bluebiggrin.gif bluebiggrin.gif

All 3 teams are above us, and we was lucky to beat Reading and that was it. F***ing hell, some fans are never happy.... Those teams are infront of us because we are piss poor! I'm not saying that we don't deserve to be were we are, we do. I am as delighted as anyone at the results, but not the performence, we have played this bad all season, the ONLY difference is we had Given who saved are ass in all those games (maybe not Portsmouth). Reading were by far the better team against us FACT, and 10 man Blackburn out played us! How can anyone be happy with that? If we had played the way we have in those games, and not won, we would be looking at this in a whole different view. the truth hurts!!! I honestly don't understand. We dominated Portsmouth, we dominated Reading apart from a mad 10 minutes, and we dominated the first half AWAY FROM HOME yesterday. Scoring 7 goals in three games in the premiership. Boil ya heed man. We dominated Portsmouth, but the rest is uncorrect. We played well against Reading in the first 20 min in the first half, and 10 min. in the 2 half, other then that, it was all Reading. And against Blackburn, they were just as good as us in the first half, only difference we scored twise, in the 2 half, the were all over us, remember they played with 10 man over half the game. Can you honestly say "we are a team on form"? 3 wins on the bounce in very tricky matches with more injured players than available. Aye, i'd say we're in form. Okay thats a fair point about injuries, but would you have change the team we have played? Personly I think thats our best team. Given Solano Tayler Ramage Baba Milner Emre Butt Zoggy Martins Sib (Dyer) We knew Owen was out for the season, Butt is playing better then Parker. Duff is simply not up to it. Sib is better then Ameobi Solano is better then Carr. Given is better then Harper and Krul. So in MY opinion I don't see how we can blame injuries as much as we are. but of course it would be nice if they were all fit. Given Nobby Ramage Taylor Baba Dyer Butt Emre Zog Martins Sib is the best we have for this season IMO Pretty much in agreement with the midfield and up front. I'd prefer Moore and Bramble though ahead of Taylor and Ramage.

All 3 teams are above us, and we was lucky to beat Reading and that was it. F***ing hell, some fans are never happy.... Those teams are infront of us because we are piss poor! I'm not saying that we don't deserve to be were we are, we do. I am as delighted as anyone at the results, but not the performence, we have played this bad all season, the ONLY difference is we had Given who saved are ass in all those games (maybe not Portsmouth). Reading were by far the better team against us FACT, and 10 man Blackburn out played us! How can anyone be happy with that? If we had played the way we have in those games, and not won, we would be looking at this in a whole different view. the truth hurts!!! I honestly don't understand. We dominated Portsmouth, we dominated Reading apart from a mad 10 minutes, and we dominated the first half AWAY FROM HOME yesterday. Scoring 7 goals in three games in the premiership. Boil ya heed man. We dominated Portsmouth, but the rest is uncorrect. We played well against Reading in the first 20 min in the first half, and 10 min. in the 2 half, other then that, it was all Reading. And against Blackburn, they were just as good as us in the first half, only difference we scored twise, in the 2 half, the were all over us, remember they played with 10 man over half the game. Can you honestly say "we are a team on form"? 3 wins on the bounce in very tricky matches with more injured players than available. Aye, i'd say we're in form. Okay thats a fair point about injuries, but would you have change the team we have played? Personly I think thats our best team. Given Solano Tayler Ramage Baba Milner Emre Butt Zoggy Martins Sib (Dyer) We knew Owen was out for the season, Butt is playing better then Parker. Duff is simply not up to it. Sib is better then Ameobi Solano is better then Carr. Given is better then Harper and Krul. So in MY opinion I don't see how we can blame injuries as much as we are. but of course it would be nice if they were all fit. Just that Solano, Emre and Sibiersky might be out for the Chelsea-game. Anyway, I'd stick Dyer in for Milner, Parker for Butt and Moore for Ramage, then that's our best team when Owen is out Jesus! With them all fit you would STILL use Parker and Emre despite all the evidence that they are a crap pairing?

Luque

We lost plenty when Given was in the team. It's a team game, Solano playing well at RB has made a big difference and shouldn't be overlooked. The overall creativity in the side has improved with Solano being at RB and by Parker being out of the team. Parker being out allows Emre to play his proper game because he's alongside a player who compliments his game better. It happened last season when Parker missed matches and it's happening again now. I just hope Roeder sees it and doesn't automatically put this bloke back in when he's fit. CM has been a problem since souness signed Parker and Emre, they just don't combine well. Why should anyone be surprised, given who signed them.

How? Parker is better in about every aspect of the game. Just about how he is used at Newcastle....as a footballer he is surely better than Butt. There isn't a single aspect of the game where Parker is better than Butt. Parker's passing is worse, his tackling his worse, his anticipation and reading of the game is worse. I would say Parker's tackling is probably better than butt's tbh. Parker needs to hold a position in the midfield rather than running all over the place. Well I just don't agree, mate. Parker throws himself around, dives into tackles etc. That doesn't make him better at tackling, it just means his anticipation and reading of the game isn't as good. Butt does the last ditch stuff as well, but seems to do it by interception rather than having to slide in. It's all about opinions. Mine is that Parker is vastly over-rated and that Butt is the better player by far. Butt is a natural at the holding role, Parker isn't, so to be fair to Parker it's really an unfair comparision, which I'm only making at all because there are claims that Parker is a better player.

How? Parker is better in about every aspect of the game. Just about how he is used at Newcastle....as a footballer he is surely better than Butt. There isn't a single aspect of the game where Parker is better than Butt. Parker's passing is worse, his tackling his worse, his anticipation and reading of the game is worse.

Butt is better than Parker. A lot better.

what are the others? Martins hitting a bit of form, Nobby being great at RB, Emre showing good form and Nicky Butt MOTM displays. Confidence plays it part aswell, We are full of confidence atm and playing some good stuff. Lets not forget the defence has been really good lately. Good post. The balance of the team is much better without Parker getting in the way of Emre all the time. I've always believed that Ameobi belongs on the beach.

Bloody hell! If some mug offered that I'd snap their hand off. I'd accept less, tbh.

I wasn't. Fact is, we play better when Parker is out of the team.

Thing is, it's a daft thing to do but then what do you expect from a shite manager. It doesn't matter how old someone is. If they're good enough they should be selected, simple as that.

It's not knee-jerk, I've been saying for ages he should be in our team because he's a bloody good player. If he keeps on as he is he'll deserve a recall to the England squad, far more deserved than Parker that's for sure. So it's good to see Butt is now in and doing well. It would be good to see some of idiots who ridiculed him now come on and admit they were wrong. It won't happen though, 'cos they still think 'scotty' is our 'best player' and that's important to some.

Do you believe a new Board will be better than the current Board rather than worse? If better, why do you believe that and what do you think they'll do that is better? What criteria do you believe a Board should use for the selection of a manager? Why do you believe a new Board has a greater chance of making a better choice of manager than those selected by the current Board? Thanks in advance Well, I am thinking about a Belgravia takeover now. The reason why a company like that would be looking to buy a company like newcastle would be for profit. In football, success = profit. I would therefore think that they would be looking to get setup to run the club to generate those two things. Since I think Newcastle is kind of badly run at the moment I think we could be seeing some results fast. This is more of a general I dont know, hunch more than anything. Other reasons are; Newcastle and Freddy seems to have lost some respect in the football world (missing out on woody and huth and so on) and new owners could mean a fresh start Supporters are also complaining a lot and a new start could do the whole feel about the club better again. About the other questions, criteria and stuff. I just dont know how to scout out a new manager and neither does freddy it seems. I would like for us to have taken a gamble on a new and up and coming manager, freddy seems to rather go for the big names. But that is just personal preference I guess. I really dont know how to find new Wengers and Mourinhos But I would like a young teambuilding manager. Why would a new board be more successful? Again, they might have a bigger chance of attracting top names, Freddy seems to have tried and failed and got stuck with Roeder. Also Freddy seems to have an ego problem, making him trying to do to much things on his own, though I know nothing about how the club goes about getting a manager. I hope that they would hire in professionals or something. To sum up, if things are looking like they are about to go to hell you are more willing to gamble and make changes. Now things are on the up again but we have seen enough false dawns to get our hopes up, atleast it is this way for me. Great result today though! Sorry like. To many guesses in there, mate. You simply don't know. You state that the Board doesn't know how to appoint a manager yet the only one they've appointed who didn't have a track record of note is Roeder. Even Souness had a decent track record. The bottom line is there is no reason to suppose another group will have any more luck in appointing a manager than the present Board does.

Do you believe a new Board will be better than the current Board rather than worse? If better, why do you believe that and what do you think they'll do that is better? What criteria do you believe a Board should use for the selection of a manager? Why do you believe a new Board has a greater chance of making a better choice of manager than those selected by the current Board? Thanks in advance Last 2 appointments. 1. Souness - had blackburn in relegation places. 2. Roeder - History of relegating teams. Therefore, the selection process should filter out managers with a history of relegation troubles. You'll notice that these two appointment were the turning point from us being a top 5 club and to where we are now. Souness - Had a track record that compares favourably with O'Neill, many people's idea of a good choice. Roeder - Hasn't failed yet Your last sentence is total bollocks. Souness was the appointment that was the turning point that us turn to cack, not Roeder. Roeder has the task of trying to turn it around, the same task Robson was faced with when he came in. It took Robson some time to get us into that top 5, it doesn't happen overnight. Both are shit, and both have had relegation troubles. We had top 5 finishes before these two history-of-relegation-trouble managers were appointed. Therefore, the solution when it comes to appointing managers is to first and foremost not appoint one that has his current club in the relegation zone, and then to not appoint one that has a history of relegating clubs. It's stating (painstakingly) the obvious, and I think 99% of any prospective buyers would grasp the basics of appointing a successful manager. Something our board constantly fails to do. So you agree that the appointments of Dalglish, Gullit and Robson were good ones and then say the Board constantly gets it wrong?

So another, in your opinion, poor player signed for millions sanctioned by the board? Yup. Souness was crap, there's no doubt about it. Thompers, straight question for you, yes or no will do. Do you believe the Board should interfere with team affairs, making the decisions on who should join and who should leave?

Do you believe a new Board will be better than the current Board rather than worse? If better, why do you believe that and what do you think they'll do that is better? What criteria do you believe a Board should use for the selection of a manager? Why do you believe a new Board has a greater chance of making a better choice of manager than those selected by the current Board? Thanks in advance Last 2 appointments. 1. Souness - had blackburn in relegation places. 2. Roeder - History of relegating teams. Therefore, the selection process should filter out managers with a history of relegation troubles. You'll notice that these two appointment were the turning point from us being a top 5 club and to where we are now. Souness - Had a track record that compares favourably with O'Neill, many people's idea of a good choice. Roeder - Hasn't failed yet Your last sentence is total bollocks. Souness was the appointment that was the turning point that saw us turn to cack, not Roeder. Roeder has the task of trying to turn it around, the same task Robson was faced with when he came in. It took Robson some time to get us into that top 5, it doesn't happen overnight.

slightly confused - surely Roeder has done better for us than Hughes has for B'Burn - or do you just have an agenda you're set on following? Blaming Roeder for winning! We won 3-1, moved up the table a bit more, above Blackburn and yet you still moan Hold on, we were 2-0 up against 10 men at half-time and we end up being under pressure the entire second half, with Blackburn pushing for an equaliser.. and Roeder is supposed to be praised for his performance? I've always thought we wouldn't be involved in a relegation fight long-term, if only for the strength of our individuals, but Roeder remains one of the weakest managers in the league, in my mind. 10 men often do well. Not sure how you missed that, as it's fairly common, tbh.

Once again, the hero is out and the team has a better shape, makes more chances and scores more goals. When will the light come on for some?

This is utter and total bollox as I've already posted. How does that quote square with the fat loudmouthed cock head bragging LIVE on Sky that he had bid for Rooney when Bobby was completely in the dark over the matter? So who was he the replacement for?

Do you believe a new Board will be better than the current Board rather than worse? If better, why do you believe that and what do you think they'll do that is better? What criteria do you believe a Board should use for the selection of a manager? Why do you believe a new Board has a greater chance of making a better choice of manager than those selected by the current Board? Thanks in advance

Jesus, give it a rest. Come back to me when Emre and Butt have done the business away from home against a proper team next Wednesday, eh? Truth hurts, don't it. Come back to me when Emre and Butt have done the business away from home against a proper team next Wednesday, eh? Come back to me when Parker does the business against any team, eh? He already has... Not sure if you noticed or not but at least he's contributed goals unlike your hero, Nicky Butt. WOOP! WOOP! BORING ALERT!!! bluelaugh.gif Good comeback Aye, it's hard work though trying to get to the standard of booboo and his friends.

Some still persist with Parker..... bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif

Actually, you're right, we shouldn't give him the slightest chance to increase his value before the transfer window opens - especially as we have two players performing so well in his position. I suppose you think Luque doesn't 'deserve' a start, as if it's some kind of punishment to pay him £50k a week without having to kick a ball.. Oh well, another £9m down the drain, eh? The person to blame for that £9m being a waste is Luque.