BottledDog

Yeah, I'm sure he's delighted he can't get his star striker to sign a new contract, and end up losing him for considerably less than it might cost for a replacement.

Alan - Newcastle United Training Session Bricking it.

Wistful want-away eyes.

Either way, the correct answer to any question put to Pardew is "I will not discuss the details of any player's contracts." I thought he'd been trained for interviews. Yeah, anyone in the game's already been told a thousand times by Dembas agent, but when asked about it, lets keep the supporters of the club in the dark on where things stand too . Tbh, I can't imagine blanking the press would dampen the speculation during every window anyway until he signed a new contract. The only possible argument you could make for us to keep quiet on the subject would be so as to not potentially affect his performances while he remains at the club. Think that concern can be laid to rest as well considering his decent form.

The clause came out during an interview with the BBC, it wasn't a written press interview and it was before the Maritimo game. You sure? Same quotes in the Mail would suggest it came during the Q and A in the pre match press conference. Either way an 'interview' involves questions and answers regardless of when it was Well, aye.

The clause came out during an interview with the BBC, it wasn't a written press interview and it was before the Maritimo game. You sure? Same quotes in the Mail would suggest it came during the Q and A in the pre match press conference.

You make Edwards sound like some scheming spin doctor on a mission. Fair play to him if he has somehow also managed to manipulate Demba into his latest interview, but I think that Ba and his camp being the 'brains' behind the constant drip feed of non committal want-away hints is the more likely angle. /Hope the kidda stays mind, we need him.

Only people who can add up.

No.

Another drain on our squad.

Fuck, keep forgetting Redknapp's back in a job. Sod the training ground, we need to fence this bloke off from our fax machine.

It really is quite bizarre, but basically come down to the point where if enough people use a name in a negative way, then the name itself becomes a term of abuse. Paki being the easiest way to refer to Pakistanis (and ultimately any south asian person), was used more in a derogatory manner and in hate speech rather than perfectly innocent ways (due in large part to increased immigration into the country), so became connected with racists, casual or otherwise. Hell even personal names can get tarred. I wonder if Joey is becoming an acceptable baby name again?

Ah, you may well be right. ...but may I refer you to the venerable Wiki. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chink A number of dictionaries have provided different suggestions as to the origin of chink. Some of these suggestions are that it originated from the Chinese courtesy ching-ching,[3] or that it evolved from the word China,[4] or that it was an alteration of Qing,[5] as in the Qing Dynasty (Ch'ing Dynasty), or that the word evolved from the other meaning of chink, which is a small crevice, crack, gap or a narrow opening, being a simile for small or slanted eyes. (Sometimes, the word is indeed employed as an adjective, as in chink-eyed.)[6] The most obvious etymology is chink evolved from the Indo-Iranian word for China, that word now having similar pronunciations in various European languages, such as Persian.[7] And that the Indo-Iranian and hence European name for China is an alteration of the Chinese name Qin, which has recurred in Chinese history a number of times, including the name of the western kingdom, which took over the rest to form the first Empire. This was the first time the name had been seen, and now it is a very common family name in China and Vietnam (Cheng, Trinh, and similar). Because it is a very common family name, it is impossible to trace it back to any specific time place or person, and the lack of evidence for the coining of the term in English (or any other European language) is therefore not unusual. It is possible that word was imported into Indo-European as the name of the Qin state. Not that Wiki means much, I grant you.

I agree; Some clearly don't see certain terms as quite as offensive as others do, though it's a hazy line in many ways. Paki, Jap, and going to the chinkies etc were only fairly recently dropped from what was classed as acceptable. Though they're in essence just country names, somehow the negative connotations have removed them from what is widely classed as acceptable. Spaz, mong, and flid are still terms used widely in banter, but I really struggle with them, and I'm not sure why really. Taff? Jock? Acceptable or not?

Aye, thats why i said being a bit flexible with it. Scary just how daft they are thinking that 11 is enough. They didn't. It was 8 plus Anita iirc.* To be fair, I think what Pardew had to say in the Chronicle gives some hope now that when faced with the club 'not being able to afford more purples', or 'the club can't afford to not invest in more purples', they'll opt for the latter more often than in the past. * "Where we are now is that we have, in effect, 11 purples if you count Anita - he can play midfield, right-back, left-back. You can't have two purples per position because the club can't afford it. You have to be realistic."

http://footballerswithbeards.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/cork.jpg http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Alan-Cork-Sheffield-United-173-Topps-1992-Stadium-Club-Football-Card-/00/s/MTA2MFg3NDk=/$(KGrHqN,!p0E9eEB!cl5BPcyhb17tw~~60_12.JPG

Of course. But having never worked under Pardew or know the players minds, that means diddly squat. Back to Demba. Yes, it would be sorely disappointing to see him go, but like most players we have been able to capture (not just in recent years), he came here with something to prove. Now that he has done that (both his fitness and his quality), without any ties to the club, he'll try and push for a bigger club or more money - And fair enough up to a point (tho he'll not get the reception he maybe deserves on a return if he carries on in the press to lack even so much as a thin veneer of loyalty). I'd like to think he'd stay and sign a new contract if we were doing better, but him failing to do so before the summer would suggest otherwise.

Then you shouldn't have fucking signed for Pardew.

Good to hear his side, especially in regards to the last window and Jonas.

True enough.

Give over. You seem very easily embarrassed.

The one from King Shola says "33 crosses away from home and 7 shots on target usually equates to 2 or 3 goals", yours says "34 crosses and 7 shots on target away from home should get you close to a victory."? Are these quotes from the same sentence but being reported differently, or is he repeating himself and getting his stats wrong?

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/Smileys/Newcastle-Online/dowie.png The fact that only last month he suggested statistics were misleading aside, it is quite concerning that he seems to have such a simplistic view of attacking play, and thinks that more crosses = more goals. How would you quantify chances or getting in positions to potentially create chances then, if asked? That's not the question he was asked. That's not an answer to my question.

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/Smileys/Newcastle-Online/dowie.png The fact that only last month he suggested statistics were misleading aside, it is quite concerning that he seems to have such a simplistic view of attacking play, and thinks that more crosses = more goals. How would you quantify chances or getting in positions to potentially create chances then, if asked?