James

1-0 West Ham Noble

Faubert hits the crossbar.

No discussion of streams whatsoever please.

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=52251.new#new Match Thread now open lads.

COME ON!

Most of the Chelsea players are very dislikeable people. I would love to beat them next Monday and see the smiles wiped off their faces, especially Terry's and Ashley Cole's.

What an exaggeration. We needed a player as cover for the strikers. We had nowt to spend so needed to get someone on loan. Rossi was a decent prospect. Just cos he came from Man Utd doesn't mean he was a feeder player; if he was then he would have actually played, which he never happened. I'm glad you think blooding Man Utd youngsters isn't embarrassing Yorkie, some of us have higher standards for this club though. It was hardly blooding a Manchester united youngster as he's gone on to be a top player at two other clubs. if we'd given him games, he'd have done well for us, gone back to Manyoo, and then get immediately sold back to us if we had wanted him.

More embarassing that Roeder wouldn't play him over Sibierski tbh.

WHUFC: Green; McCartney, Tompkins, Neill, Pantsil; Ljungberg, Noble, Parker, Faubert; Zamora, Ashton. Subs: Walker, Mullins, Solano, Boa Morte, Cole. NUFC: Harper; Enrique, Edgar, Taylor, Beye; Barton, Butt, Geremi; Owen, Martins, Viduka. Subs: Forster, Diatta, Duff, Smith, Carroll. Referee: Uriah Rennie Post match reaction can be found from here: http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=52251.msg1299715#msg1299715 PLEASE DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES REQUEST OR PROVIDE LINKS TO ILLEGAL MATCH STREAMS. IF YOU DO, YOU WILL BE BANNED* *See http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=19161.0 for more information

All this talk about not paying too much for an unproven non-British youngster, you'd think that it would be a good opportunity to see if some of these youngsters were worth splashing out on.....

Are just saying that or do you know that to be the case? What I really meant was that they were expected to pick from a smaller pool, and in Charlton's case got Sorondo, whereas we'd be given a more flexible choice given that we had access (and exclusive scouting priveliges) to their significant pool of youngsters.

It's unambitious. 10 years ago we were pretty much even with Man Utd; at least challenging them for the title. 10 years later and they're arguably as big a club (or bigger) than Barcelona. Who's to say that 10 years from now we won't be challening in that echelon? To be a feeder club is a short-termist view for a club looking to get back into the Champions League in a few years. We're not some 2nd division club with no money. These agreements don't have to last for ever. I'd expect such a deal to end as soon as we became competitive with Barca. In the meantime, it could help us bring players to the club that we couldn't otherwise sign. Such as? Granero, on loan at Getafe having spent a few years stuck in reserve sides. He'd cost £10m, and could be a quality PL player, only having him on loan would have allowed us to have a look to make sure.

The main weaknesses with previous deals is that management and scouts didn't know what they were getting. Real and Barcelona have huge reserve squads compiled of youngsters, and a handful of these despite being nowhere near the first team will become quality first team players at other clubs. By scouting this pool thoroughly, we could pick up the elite youngsters whom Barcelona would want millions for despite not having the intentions to play these players.

It's unambitious. 10 years ago we were pretty much even with Man Utd; at least challenging them for the title. 10 years later and they're arguably as big a club (or bigger) than Barcelona. Who's to say that 10 years from now we won't be challening in that echelon? To be a feeder club is a short-termist view for a club looking to get back into the Champions League in a few years. We're not some 2nd division club with no money. These agreements don't have to last for ever. I'd expect such a deal to end as soon as we became competitive with Barca. In the meantime, it could help us bring players to the club that we couldn't otherwise sign.

I assume you mean a player we've bought or developed ourselves? In that case Barca would have to pay through the nose for him, as their only entitlement is to be at the front of the negotiations queue. Would stop the player going to Manyoo or Arsenal.

Foolish pride. Think of some of those castoffs who can't get a game ahead of Messi despite their potential. Check them out on loan for a year and get a sort of emotional grip on the player. At the end of the loan, the player realises that they need to leave Barca to progress and so is happy to sign for us permanently.

Can those who voted no please explain why, as I can't see much wrong with having some prospects in our team for a season with a chance of signing them permanently further down the line.

Enic (?) iirc. The guy at the very top of the chain Joe Lewis is approximately 4 times richer than Ashley, although he is less hands on.

Would people on here be agreeable to the idea of the following deal with the likes of Real Madrid or Barcelona?: We get 1 or 2 of their U23's on a season long loan. The club gives us a shortlist of players available, and we take our pick. We can swap the players in January if they flop. We have to have the players in our 18-man squad when fit. We get first option on all of their U23's if any come up for sale. They get £1m a season. They get first option on all of our players.

Thats what I think. It'd be criminal for negotiations to proceed all the way through to a contract being signed without the manager trying to sell the club to the player - something Keegan can do (even if its making up s****! Rob Lee, anyone?) If I was Keegan I'd say to Mort I want to be involved, to find out about the player I'd be managing, ask what his ambitions are in the game, and if I was the player I'd be wanting to meet Keegan, to find out his ambitions and goals for the club. Domestically and with other English speakers yes, but it would make little difference with international players, especially with personnel from some of the Eastern European/South American clubs where the transfer choices do not belong to the player. I'd be wary of making those kind of signings tbh. Well Modric was one of these, although once he left Dinamo, I suspect he would get an English agent such as Peter Harrisson instead.

Well IcemanBlue was right about Croatian officials in London, while Elan has got some stuff right in the past, so no complaints here.

Thats what I think. It'd be criminal for negotiations to proceed all the way through to a contract being signed without the manager trying to sell the club to the player - something Keegan can do (even if its making up shite! Rob Lee, anyone?) If I was Keegan I'd say to Mort I want to be involved, to find out about the player I'd be managing, ask what his ambitions are in the game, and if I was the player I'd be wanting to meet Keegan, to find out his ambitions and goals for the club. Domestically and with other English speakers yes, but it would make little difference with international players, especially with personnel from some of the Eastern European/South American clubs where the transfer choices do not belong to the player.

Fair do's. I'll sort it.

Right, I'm now very keen to beat Spurs in the League table this season. Lets show the league table to players thinking of joining Spurs this summer.

At least there is some closure on this one one way or the other.