Howaythelads

Last few posts look odd to me, some "individual" types are suddenly making posts along the lines of the "team". Most odd, as I say, considering the normal stuff.

Obviously Keefaz has it right in this thread, but then he understands football in the context of the team, rather than the individual. It's daft that anybody is directly comparing Bellamy with Martins, tbh. They're a completely different type of player. Martins is a out and out goalscorer who has a lot to learn about team play, the other is not an out and out goalscorer but is a support striker, whose main strength is his team play and ability to bring others into the game. Martins could learn a lot from Bellamy about how to use his pace and how to improve his movement off the ball for the benefit of the team.

omg Parker & Emre mackems.gif When the f*** will some people learn? No doubt at all, just like Jenas, when Parka eventually pisses off all of those who would select him week in, week out will claim they always knew he was s****. It absolutely beats me that someone who can have a decent season like Butt has had can continually be touted for the bench by the usual suspects. God, I reckon these lot would crawl through 3 miles of broken glass to get a sniff of where Parka's s*** comes from. Honestly, anybody still going for a CM of Parker/Emre needs a brain transplant.

Some know-nowt souness apologists gathering for a wankfest I see.

I hope you're right. No chance, its personal. Even before he turned us down he'd talk about us with spite, same as Le Tiss does on Soccer Saturday. Don't know what we did to him, maybe its just unexplainable like how much i hate the spuds, everyone has a team they cant rationally explain why they hate so much and Big Sam's is us. He's a tosser. Belongs at shit, little clubs anyway.

I hope you're right.

Not being funny, but it's a THREAD. As far as I'm concerned, these people banging on about bringing in Allardyce are in the main the same people who every day claim the Board is s*** for appointing crap managers. My point is that all of those managers bar Roeder has a better track record than Allardyce, yet these people want him appointed. What do they expect from the Board because it seems to me they expect them to be able to see into the future. I have no doubt at all that should Allardyce be appointed and fail these same people who want him appointed will forget what they themselves see as positive reason to appoint him, they will yet again be claiming the Board has made a pigs ear of an appointment. All I'm after here is a bit of common sense. Nobody can see into the future. Not even Fat "pie eater" Fred, despite how much money he may earn. The bit in bold is some assumption, and in my personal case totally wrong anyhow. How can you expect to be able to discuss something sensibly if you make bold assumptions like that and expect people to follow your line of reasoning based on them..? Oh, and you have heard of Johan Cruijff before, haven't you? Aye, seen him play as a matter of fact. However, I don't recognise him from his arse. The point I was making was obvious as f***, tbh. You failed to spot the orange shirt with number 14 on but did think Cruijff's arse looked suspiciously like Dirk Kuyt? Can I take you with me when I will tour the mental institutions for children throughout the UK, or will they not allow you to leave? Yes, comedy is clearly not your strong point, assuming you have one. If you read my post you'll see I said I didn't knaa. Interesting though that you have a clog in your avatar and your login is also the name of a clog who doesn't play for Newcastle. Seems to me you didn't understand the meaning behind my post and can't admit it. Goodo. Unless you start posting some sense I can't be bothered with you really. Cheerio. 1) Maybe the fact that I am Dutch myself has something to do with it. As for my login being Kuyt, he was one of my favourite players of my hometown team Feyenoord and I was hoping he would come to Newcastle when we were supposedly interested. And before you ask, I have lived in Newcastle for most of the past three years and have had a season ticket for all that time. 2) You are right. I didn't understand your question and still don't? I have asked you to clarify it several times and you have proven to be less than helpful. If you don't want people to understand what you mean why do you even bother posting? 1) I wasn't going to ask. I don't give a stuff. 2) My point will have been obvious to those it was aimed toward. I'm not bothered whether you understand it or not.

And if we lose all 5, play s**** and look to be totally disorganised with players bickering with the manager he'd be right to sack him. my money is on roeder to be first sacked manager next season to be honest; if he has a good start he'll see out the season, anything less than say 6-9 points from the first 12 and he's gone.... As I said earlier, if the financial clout is there to support the expectations of a top manager I'd go for it, but I don't think the cash is available. As for Allardyce, he's been manager there for bloody years and yet they've still only managed to scored 44 goals this season and they've conceded more than we have. They haven't broken the 50 goals scored barrier since they came up and that's gash imo. He says as Bolton are sitting 5th place in the league... Gash! See what I mean. You're too thick to understand anything posted by anybody.

The irony being that the real reason I thought so much of KaKa's post was because it was intelligent, well-reasoned and detached of emotional hyperbole. Certainly if I had posted what I think of Bellamy then HTL might have been within his rights to make his puerile response... Interesting to note he chose not to debate Kaka but rather go for the easy mark You don't get it, do you? I don't give a flying f*** what you or "kaka" (have you any idea what "kaka" is to a Geordie) think about Bellamy. Just asked one, he said its a Brazilian who plays for AC Milan. Perhaps he's not a real geordie, or the "k" has confused him. Ask him if he wants a "cakka", or if he needs to go for "cakky". He might remember.........if not, ask an adult.

And if we lose all 5, play s**** and look to be totally disorganised with players bickering with the manager he'd be right to sack him. my money is on roeder to be first sacked manager next season to be honest; if he has a good start he'll see out the season, anything less than say 6-9 points from the first 12 and he's gone.... As I said earlier, if the financial clout is there to support the expectations of a top manager I'd go for it, but I don't think the cash is available. As for Allardyce, he's been manager there for bloody years and yet they've still only managed to scored 44 goals this season and they've conceded more than we have. They haven't broken the 50 goals scored barrier since they came up and that's gash imo.

And if we lose all 5, play shite and look to be totally disorganised with players bickering with the manager he'd be right to sack him.

Not being funny, but it's a THREAD. As far as I'm concerned, these people banging on about bringing in Allardyce are in the main the same people who every day claim the Board is s*** for appointing crap managers. My point is that all of those managers bar Roeder has a better track record than Allardyce, yet these people want him appointed. What do they expect from the Board because it seems to me they expect them to be able to see into the future. I have no doubt at all that should Allardyce be appointed and fail these same people who want him appointed will forget what they themselves see as positive reason to appoint him, they will yet again be claiming the Board has made a pigs ear of an appointment. All I'm after here is a bit of common sense. Nobody can see into the future. Not even Fat "pie eater" Fred, despite how much money he may earn. The bit in bold is some assumption, and in my personal case totally wrong anyhow. How can you expect to be able to discuss something sensibly if you make bold assumptions like that and expect people to follow your line of reasoning based on them..? Oh, and you have heard of Johan Cruijff before, haven't you? Aye, seen him play as a matter of fact. However, I don't recognise him from his arse. The point I was making was obvious as f***, tbh. You failed to spot the orange shirt with number 14 on but did think Cruijff's arse looked suspiciously like Dirk Kuyt? Can I take you with me when I will tour the mental institutions for children throughout the UK, or will they not allow you to leave? Yes, comedy is clearly not your strong point, assuming you have one. If you read my post you'll see I said I didn't knaa. Interesting though that you have a clog in your avatar and your login is also the name of a clog who doesn't play for Newcastle. Seems to me you didn't understand the meaning behind my post and can't admit it. Goodo. Unless you start posting some sense I can't be bothered with you really. Cheerio.

The irony being that the real reason I thought so much of KaKa's post was because it was intelligent, well-reasoned and detached of emotional hyperbole. Certainly if I had posted what I think of Bellamy then HTL might have been within his rights to make his puerile response... Interesting to note he chose not to debate Kaka but rather go for the easy mark You don't get it, do you? I don't give a flying fuck what you or "kaka" (have you any idea what "kaka" is to a Geordie) think about Bellamy.

Not being funny, but it's a THREAD. As far as I'm concerned, these people banging on about bringing in Allardyce are in the main the same people who every day claim the Board is s*** for appointing crap managers. My point is that all of those managers bar Roeder has a better track record than Allardyce, yet these people want him appointed. What do they expect from the Board because it seems to me they expect them to be able to see into the future. I have no doubt at all that should Allardyce be appointed and fail these same people who want him appointed will forget what they themselves see as positive reason to appoint him, they will yet again be claiming the Board has made a pigs ear of an appointment. All I'm after here is a bit of common sense. Nobody can see into the future. Not even Fat "pie eater" Fred, despite how much money he may earn. The bit in bold is some assumption, and in my personal case totally wrong anyhow. How can you expect to be able to discuss something sensibly if you make bold assumptions like that and expect people to follow your line of reasoning based on them..? Oh, and you have heard of Johan Cruijff before, haven't you? To be fair they are very similar Agreed. :mops brow in surprise:

Not being funny, but it's a THREAD. As far as I'm concerned, these people banging on about bringing in Allardyce are in the main the same people who every day claim the Board is s*** for appointing crap managers. My point is that all of those managers bar Roeder has a better track record than Allardyce, yet these people want him appointed. What do they expect from the Board because it seems to me they expect them to be able to see into the future. I have no doubt at all that should Allardyce be appointed and fail these same people who want him appointed will forget what they themselves see as positive reason to appoint him, they will yet again be claiming the Board has made a pigs ear of an appointment. All I'm after here is a bit of common sense. Nobody can see into the future. Not even Fat "pie eater" Fred, despite how much money he may earn. The bit in bold is some assumption, and in my personal case totally wrong anyhow. How can you expect to be able to discuss something sensibly if you make bold assumptions like that and expect people to follow your line of reasoning based on them..? Oh, and you have heard of Johan Cruijff before, haven't you? Aye, seen him play as a matter of fact. However, I don't recognise him from his arse. The point I was making was obvious as fuck, tbh.

Didn't know you cared. I care about all my fellow humans. There are a few on here I doubt qualify.

Didn't know you cared.

Not being funny, but it's a THREAD. As far as I'm concerned, these people banging on about bringing in Allardyce are in the main the same people who every day claim the Board is shit for appointing crap managers. My point is that all of those managers bar Roeder has a better track record than Allardyce, yet these people want him appointed. What do they expect from the Board because it seems to me they expect them to be able to see into the future. I have no doubt at all that should Allardyce be appointed and fail these same people who want him appointed will forget what they themselves see as positive reason to appoint him, they will yet again be claiming the Board has made a pigs ear of an appointment. All I'm after here is a bit of common sense. Nobody can see into the future. Not even Fat "pie eater" Fred, despite how much money he may earn.

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred? Could we not ask the same hypothetical question if we appointed Hiddink or Hitzfeld? Errr.....why not? The answer is obvious, of course you can so I'm not sure why you asked. Allright then.. Answer this and you will have answered your own question: "So if Hiddink replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?" Wtf are you on about? Why don't you just post your point and be done with it? OK, if it's too difficult to engage your own brain: "Hindsight is a beautiful thing. Asking rhetorical questions about a possible future hindsight just doesn't fly as an argument." Still don't get it, sonny. So if Hiddink replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred? mackems.gif wtf is your point of repeating my question but with a different manager in there? What a f****** clown. I'm glad you find it funny too.. It was your question, not mine.. It's YOU and the s**** you post that's funny. Obviously you don't have any understanding of the question or the point behind it. IQ <50. It's good to know that if my current career ever slows down I can always find employment as a comedian for intellectually challenged children.. Explain it to me in your own words then poor l'il boy: what was the point behind your crazy question? Here's another for you, since the other one (that wasn't to you anyway) was too difficult. Why do you have a clog who plays for liverpool in your avatar? Assuming that's him, like. Divvent knaa, meself.

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred? Could we not ask the same hypothetical question if we appointed Hiddink or Hitzfeld? Errr.....why not? The answer is obvious, of course you can so I'm not sure why you asked. Yup the answer is obvious. Whoever they hire, the board are ultimately held to account by how that appointment does in his time here. If Alladyce were to be appointed and did well then the board can share the glory, otherwise they will share the failure. If he does fail though, the board might get a little more sypathy in their decision (as they get with Dalgleish and Gullit to an extent) than when they appoint recognisable dross like Souness or managers with records like Roeder. I think that's fair comment. In the world of football it actually is not a fair comment at all. I actually think it's a bit short-sighted tbh. The only thing a Board can do is appoint a manager they believe and hope will bring success and then give that person the resources to bring that success. In football that means backing the manager in his dealings for players coming in and going out. If the manager doesn't deliver despite having this level of support it is not the fault of the Board. Here is an example. During the 3 seasons Robson's team finished 4th, 3rd and 5th I'd argue that a team capable of performing to that level was good enough to win something, perhaps the FA Cup or the League cup. It is not down to the board that Robson elected to put out a weakened team for a home tie in the League Cup against WBA, for example. It is not the fault of the Board that we twice got to FA Cup finals but both times, not only did the players fail to turn up and do themselves any kind of justice, both times we also played the team that turned out to be the best team in the country that season. Some of that is down to the players bottling the situation and also not getting that bit of luck that you need along the way. There is only so much a Board can do and also only so much a manager can do in reality. Fair enough, having a shit Board in the past doesn't mean the present Board is great, but when you've lived through decades of selling your best players and only buying when relegation is a possibility you get to realise that it's vital the Board backs the manager. That's their main role and is all they can do in reality. The Board doesn't pick the team, doesn't set out the tactics and they don't take part in the training. To suggest they will take the flak for failure and the glory for success is nonsense really. The realiity in football is that when you win nobody gives a second thought to the Board, it's the manager and players who take all of the credit. As long as the manager is backed the Board is doing their part, after that it's down to the manager and the players.

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred? Could we not ask the same hypothetical question if we appointed Hiddink or Hitzfeld? Errr.....why not? The answer is obvious, of course you can so I'm not sure why you asked. Allright then.. Answer this and you will have answered your own question: "So if Hiddink replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?" Wtf are you on about? Why don't you just post your point and be done with it? OK, if it's too difficult to engage your own brain: "Hindsight is a beautiful thing. Asking rhetorical questions about a possible future hindsight just doesn't fly as an argument." Still don't get it, sonny. So if Hiddink replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred? mackems.gif wtf is your point of repeating my question but with a different manager in there? What a f****** clown. I'm glad you find it funny too.. It was your question, not mine.. It's YOU and the shite you post that's funny. Obviously you don't have any understanding of the question or the point behind it. IQ <50.

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred? Could we not ask the same hypothetical question if we appointed Hiddink or Hitzfeld? Errr.....why not? The answer is obvious, of course you can so I'm not sure why you asked. Allright then.. Answer this and you will have answered your own question: "So if Hiddink replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?" Wtf are you on about? Why don't you just post your point and be done with it? OK, if it's too difficult to engage your own brain: "Hindsight is a beautiful thing. Asking rhetorical questions about a possible future hindsight just doesn't fly as an argument." Still don't get it, sonny. So if Hiddink replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred? mackems.gif wtf is your point of repeating my question but with a different manager in there? What a fucking clown.

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred? Of course not. The other managers (apart from Roeder) appointed by Fat "pie eater" Fred have had superior track records to Allardyce. Why were they s*** appointments? You have been looking for an argument since you got on, not going to give you one today I am afraid. Bollocks, tbh. It's a valid question in the context of what we're talking about. Fred gets slated as s***, it's been more than insinuated in this thread that the problem is really at Board level so i want to know what you and others who want Allardyce will think of the Board if this man is appointed. Especially if he is backed and fails. BTW I'd sooner you "gave one" to one of your "chums". I'm accounted for. Souness was a poor signing which was plain for all to see. He was on his way done at Blackburn and they must have thanked whatever god they pray to when we stepped in and paid them for something that was likely going to cost them in time (getting rid of him). Roeder was a lazy appointment, he did well enough that the fans wouldn't be in uproar to sign him, was cheap and very thankful for the opportunity. Why don't you try answering the bit you quoted, instead of whatever it is you think you've answered here?

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred? Could we not ask the same hypothetical question if we appointed Hiddink or Hitzfeld? Errr.....why not? The answer is obvious, of course you can so I'm not sure why you asked. Allright then.. Answer this and you will have answered your own question: "So if Hiddink replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?" Wtf are you on about? Why don't you just post your point and be done with it? OK, if it's too difficult to engage your own brain: "Hindsight is a beautiful thing. Asking rhetorical questions about a possible future hindsight just doesn't fly as an argument." Still don't get it, sonny.