Howaythelads

Aye. I think anyone using the "F" word should be banned for at least 3 years, despite it being common as f***.

Crouch played his heart out for England and thoroughly deserved his warm welcome. To do otherwise is frankly laughable. pathetic. He might have played well for England but its no reason to applaud an opposing player. I've never done that in over 40 years and I don't know anybody who has. And no one is going to force you too, either. If thousands around you are of a different mind to you, then maybe you should just accept this is the way it is and it's you with the backward logic. Alternatively you could just stop whining like a woman. it isn't the way it is. I've not seen it in over 40 years. If you want to applaud ie encourage opposing players, thats up to you. We were facing a possible 5 or 6 goal thrashing and you advocate this ? Get a life. Get a life? I think you need to take a long hard look at yourself, because you're ranting about much of a nothingness. If I were you (god forbid) I would be thinking, OK, annoys me a bit but I guess most people are of a different opinion to me so I guess that's just the way it is. No one was encouraging or supporting the Liverpool players, you'd be an idiot to think this is what it was. It was simply a mark of respect. Did you say the same when Les Ferdinand done a lap of honour and the ground was on its feet? Surely we shouldn't have encouraged this Tottenham Hotspurs player, this would be outrageous, to you wouldn't it? This ENCOURAGEMENT of the opposition... you're comparing Les Ferdinand to that twisty faced c*** Gerrard? Muahahahaahahaahah! Erm, no. I'm comparing applauding opposition players. Bye. No, you're not, You're comparing applauding Ferdinand with applauding a liverpool player who has never been a legend for NUFC. But thanks for trying to justify your weak argument anyway, appreciate it. I wrote the post, I will tell you what the point is. Not the other way round. NE5 said you should not applaud opposition players, and has never seen it in 40 years. I pointed out that the WHOLE GROUND applauded Les Ferdinand, (and rightly so) as a mark of respect, which was only a few years ago. It's normal and it also shown him to be a hypocrite. Swallowed that? Now naff off, you little spastic. I can't be arsed with you son. Which means you missed the point entirely.

What a load of f****** s***, laughing at one of our players TRYING out of a squad of players not trying, you used a smiley called mackems, you should be f****** sitting with them every week in the SOL with that attitude. In fainress, I've laughed at Smith and foremerly Ameobi a number of times. It can soemtimes seem the only way to not go mad watching these pieces of s**** play for us. Exactly its called gallows humour. Sadly teens like NE5 are yet to grasp the concept and are still in super fan stage. Clutching at straws.

mackems.gif I think you've been sussed by more than just myself and NE5. Your stupid post above isn't going to change that much.

That's twice in recent times you've babbled on about people laughing at our own players. First Smith, now Martins. You must sit among some genuine mongs who definitely aren't supporters of the club, despite for some reason being at the match. Since you seem to think it's ok why do you bother going? http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=45922.msg1060853#msg1060853 Oh dear. Just got your nob out....?

That's twice in recent times you've babbled on about people laughing at our own players. First Smith, now Martins. You must sit among some genuine mongs who definitely aren't supporters of the club, despite for some reason being at the match. Since you seem to think it's ok why do you bother going? http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=45922.msg1060853#msg1060853

Someone said... "left to rot for so long." Some are clapping their hands at this being a good comment as though this makes the job especially difficult and is a reason to keep the manager. It isn't. This isn't a good enough reason to support the giving of time to another bumbling lunatic. A manager has to earn time and Allardyce is not doing that due to his own incompetence and fear. The job is too big for this bloke. The signs were clear very early on when Souness was dismantling the club for £50m that he wasn't upto it. I said at roughly this time during Souness's tenure that he shouldn't be given any money during January because he'd ultimately waste it and that's what happened. The same people who are saying give Allardyce time are quite probably the same people who wanted Souness to have millions to build his own team and to be given time. Not having had enough time to completely mess it up was their excuse for the pathetic performances, although back then we performed better than we are right now and how shocking is that? The signs are different but they exist nevertheless. The fact is there is no time. This is the PL and it's too competitive. I'm not talking about the time it may take for someone time to build a team that may challenge near the top, I'm talking about the time it should take for a manager to show he knows what he's doing. Make no mistake, we look like relegation material. The fool doesn't have a clue because the job is too big for him. He's like a frightened rabbit caught in the car headlights. He's too afraid of defeat and that's what will bring him down.

But surely so much (the medium to long term term future of the club) shouldn't hinge on so little (four fixtures, including two very challenging ones) I think you only have to look at the able though. If we do that poorly in our next 4 fixtures then I can see us being down to atleast 14th, 15th or 16th and after almost half the season you know your in trouble if you are that far down the league. the table doesn't matter. we could have had the results we've had and been OK with it. it's the manner in which those results have come about that is leading to the unrest Spot on, Madras

I think any manager who has a postive approach to winning football matches and puts that ahead of pissing themselves to death at the thought of losing matches (transmitting that negative approach to the players) will improve the performances without spending a single penny.

I didn't want him here in the first place, I've always said he's a small club man and the way he begged for the England job when he was at Bolton made me want to reach for the sick bag. When asked the question of whether or not he should be sacked I ask myself, "if I was Ashley and it was my money, would I trust this over cautious plank to spend it well" and the answer is NO. So I'd boot him out.

The club and job is simply too big for him. The answer to the question is definitely no.

Aye, ive got some arguements mixed up here, youre correct there. Although may I point out, would you use the same standards for Babayaro for example, who likewise left Chelsea for first team football and therefore according to your arguements isnt a mercenary since he wasnt happy to sit on the bench for them, or do they only apply to players you like? As for the positivity/negativity aspect, what have you based that on? Surely I have the right to call a player overrated and over the hill without being accused of negativity? I call things as I see them. Sometimes im wrong, sometimes im right, and so far with Duff, there hasnt been a single sign of him looking like the top player he once was, whilst arguements trying to back the notion that hes still a top player are pretty poor ones (Only poor due to poor Newcastle team, Mourinho didnt want to sell, etc etc). Hes almost like Ged from the Earthsea Quartet - the magic has vanished from inside him, and hes a different man as a result, but plenty of people still see him as the great wizard. It just gets better and better...

Mute, Moot, whats the differdence? Another hit for google.

Mute point? mackems.gif mackems.gif

And the ROI. Eh? The Home International championship is England, Scotland, N.Ireland and Wales. Both Irelands, Wales, and Scotland were in the process of organising a 'Celtic nations' tournament. The revised Home International would simply be us tacked onto that proposed competition. From what I understand. "Celtic nations" tournament? That sounds like some kind of religious based tournament to me and if that's the case I'd sooner England didn't bother getting involved in such rubbish, mate. Anyway, the bloke asked what the Home International Championship is ( or was, really ) and for a century it involved England, Scotland, N.Ireland and Wales, so traditionally that is the composition of the tournament. If a competition is formed that doesn't have that group of nations then the Home Internationals has been brought back, a new competition will have been formed that needs a new name. This isn't being pedantic either. It's about tradition and there is a tradition to the competition that goes back decades. Include foreigners like the Republic of Ireland if that's what people want, but it then needs another name. Just my opinion. Yeah, sorry for the confusion I thought he was talking about the one that might be played next summer. Before the creation of N.Ireland, I believe the Home Internationals were played with Ireland anyway, so it's not true to say their inclusion would be completely against the spirit of the competition even though they are a independent nation now. Aye, it was, but N.Ireland exists and any move to include the foreign country (non-British) that is the Republic of Ireland means it's not the Home International Championships. The "Home" bit is meant to denote "nations that make up Britain."

And the ROI. Eh? The Home International championship is England, Scotland, N.Ireland and Wales. Both Irelands, Wales, and Scotland were in the process of organising a 'Celtic nations' tournament. The revised Home International would simply be us tacked onto that proposed competition. From what I understand. "Celtic nations" tournament? That sounds like some kind of religious based tournament to me and if that's the case I'd sooner England didn't bother getting involved in such rubbish, mate. Anyway, the bloke asked what the Home International Championship is ( or was, really ) and for a century it involved England, Scotland, N.Ireland and Wales, so traditionally that is the composition of the tournament. If a competition is formed that doesn't have that group of nations then the Home Internationals hasn't been brought back, a new competition will have been formed that needs a new name. This isn't being pedantic either. It's about tradition and there is a tradition to the competition that goes back decades. Include foreigners like the Republic of Ireland if that's what people want, but it then needs another name. Just my opinion.

And the ROI. Eh? The Home International championship is England, Scotland, N.Ireland and Wales.

What level of research is that you're on about? One board out and one new owner in, going for his own man.

I think they'd just see it as a continuation of the almost ridiculous lack of patience at Newcastle, but there you go. What ridiculous lack of patience are you on about? They should have shown less patience with Souness, if they'd shown more like you imply in your post we'd have ended up bankrupt following a relegation. You can't just talk about patience and only include certain managers. The implication of your comment is that you think they should be given quite a long time, that would include Souness who definitely would have taken us down as far as I'm concerned. Patience is nowt to do with it, it's to do with performance in their job. Robson had 5 years 'cos he was doing ok until he lost the dressing room. You could say that's his fault for signing players with a poor temperament, ultimately leading to his departure. All of the managers who went were booted out for valid reasons....their own incompetence.

Fine in principle but you honestly don't think binning a new manager after approximately one month in charge and having played no games (or now, with 12 games played) would have an effect on any prospective managers and players you may wish to attract? Under the circumstances, no.

I'd have brought back the Home Internationals ages ago. Gordon Brown is still a prick.

Do you think he'd do well? And who would you get in at Newcastle? No. Don't know. Visionary! Mourinho? The man has an ego, the thought of bringing success to Newcastle (a bigger club than Chelsea, that's for sure) might well appeal to him but he'd have to be confident of the ambition and backing of the new owner. It would be a chance of a statement of intent by Ashley. Why not? http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=47052.msg1079607#msg1079607 Tbh Dave, if it was my money and Mourinho was available I'd have appointed him the day I took over the club. If the club sacked FS and appointed Mourinho I'd be quite happy. So long as they then back him. Depends if he (or indeed anyone) would take the job after another sudden sacking, and possibly the most ludicrous one yet. Not going to argue but there hasn't been any ludicrous sackings at Newcastle, although there have been ludicrous moments when we've lost good managers by their own resignation. Arthur Cox and Gordon Lee spring immediately to mind. If you're in charge of the club and you think the team manager isn't the right man the correct thing to do is to push him out the door and get someone in you believe will meet your own ambitions. I don't care when that might be and I don't actually give a toss what people would think either.

Do you think he'd do well? And who would you get in at Newcastle? No. Don't know. Visionary! Mourinho? The man has an ego, the thought of bringing success to Newcastle (a bigger club than Chelsea, that's for sure) might well appeal to him but he'd have to be confident of the ambition and backing of the new owner. It would be a chance of a statement of intent by Ashley. Why not? http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=47052.msg1079607#msg1079607 Tbh Dave, if it was my money and Mourinho was available I'd have appointed him the day I took over the club. If the club sacked FS and appointed Mourinho I'd be quite happy. So long as they then back him.

Do you think he'd do well? And who would you get in at Newcastle? No. Don't know. Visionary! Mourinho? The man has an ego, the thought of bringing success to Newcastle (a bigger club than Chelsea, that's for sure) might well appeal to him but he'd have to be confident of the ambition and backing of the new owner. It would be a chance of a statement of intent by Ashley. Why not?

Do you think he'd do well? And who would you get in at Newcastle? No. Don't know.