James

Bet this article I was a response I made to the comments on this article: http://www.newcastle-online.com/2006/11/04/sack-the-board-shepherdout/#comments

I really dont think we should be looking to blame everyone, not at all productive, we need to look at constructive criticisms, and then consider how we could possibly improve the situation. Right now, our problems stem from bad management - the fault of our abysmal chairman's inabilty to recognise a good manager even if it performed a striptease in a brothel for him. To improve the situation, we need to press for the departure of both Roeder and Shepherd, and get behind the eleven players who are selected to play each game.

From the impression I've got of you, anything Parker said in your general direction would have been vindicated.

Please can all you brainless gorillas stop fighting amongst yourselves and aim your frustrations at the real villains ie Shepherd and Roeder.

The main point for me is that Gallagher pointed time and time again examples of bad management within the club. Fact is that Roeder is a bad manager. Good coach, good caretaker, good person, but a bad manager. Obviously Shepherd must take the blame for yet another bad appointment, but Roeder must also go.

November 6th 1986, almost 20 years ago, Sir Alex Ferguson was appointe Manchester United manager. On that day, we were bottom of the table, with 9 points in 13 games. We stayed up. We've done it before, we can do it again. Keep the faith.

Oh, also, we had no obvious leaders on the pitch or the dugout until Emre came on according to Gallagher.

I cant really comment on the match, as I only listened to FiveLiveExtra, but I thought that given the uninterrupted nature of the channel, some of the indepth punditry by Gallagher was excellent (lead commentator was being a twat though at times). So here are a collections of things he noticed, and some good points he made: Many would criticise our defence for their poor distribution during the match, but you dont get many good passing defenders in the Premiership, and the manager and coaching staff should be organising the midfield and strikers in a way that makes up for this passing inability. Parker and Butt needed to provide a short option, while the strikers and wingers should anticipate the long ball, especially when defenders find themselves under pressure. Players should be made aware in training of the approximate zone a defender will attempt to play a long ball when under pressure, and when they anticipate a long ball, they should start to run into this zone BEFORE the ball has been kicked so they can have a good chance of beating the defender to it. This will put the opposition under pressure and pin them back, giving the midfield and strikeforce more room to operate. Gallagher mentions that Bellamy was very adept at this. Gallagher felt it was obvious that we were mentally unprepared. He felt that we were OK physically, but not mentally. He questioned what Parker, Duff, Babayaro and Carr have been doing all week, while criticising Roeder for taking the likes of Rossi - who couldnt play to the match, as his time would have been better spent learning about the forthcoming match and the opposition. He questioned the likes of leaving Taylor and Ramage out when they had done a good defensive job against Palermo. The only player often in the box when we were in an advanced position was Nicky Butt, and Gallagher describes him as covering everyone else bar Milner, and then questions who was covering the subsequently stranded Nicky Butt And finally, just before Luque was brought on (score the goals, play the games says Gallagher) he noticed Lee Clark arguing with Glenn Roeder and Luque was pulled back for a minute and Ramage was told to warm up. McDermott joined this argument (having been previously issuing instructions to Luque), and Ramage was sent back to the bench and Luque was brought on. It had taken four minutes for this argument to be resolved. In my opinion, its no wonder that the players cant perform or organise themselves with the backroom at odds with each other. Anyway, I hope I get to hear him cover more matches in the future.

He had a bad game, and he doesn't seem to be a great leader right now, but he is a good player and will recover his form. After some of his performances for us in the past, where he put more in than even Shearer did, he doesn't deserve to be booed, at least not yet. He seems to be carrying a few knocks right now, I'd rest him for a couple of weeks.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/gossip_and_transfers/6115996.stm Worryingly, another player is talking about the possibility of the club getting relegated, and seems to suggest that certain individuals at the club are tight when it comes to money. Still doesn't stop the annual dividend being paid out, and lets face it, our poor league form is hardly the fault of those who work at the canteen.

Partly due to the fact that we have to play in the League Cup on Tuesday, and partly because we cant afford to postpone the match as it would cost us £350,000.

I cant see him staying at Chelsea, not with Mourinho's best mate Hilario retaining his place in the starting XI. Gone in January I reckon.

Is now eligible to play for England. Two years ago, when he was starting for Chelsea, he said he would play for England if the Italian call did not come. Should he be selected?

I'm delighted for the lad. Now it will be an interesting test to see whether he can cope with everyone in the city recognising him. No more catching the bus methinks....

I wouldn't start Luque tommorrow - two games in 48 hours for someone not matchfit. is not really a good idea. He definitely deserves a few more starting opportunities though.

Brian of Nazareth wept http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/90/Chapman_as_Brian.jpg/300px-Chapman_as_Brian.jpg

Glenn Roeder realised that there was one way to guarantee a clean sheet.

Martin Jol, is that you?

75 points 8)

By the way, hope you beat Fiorentina today, but also I hope you tire yourselves out in the process with Thursday in mind.

Why do all the other managers get their full stats, and Roeder only gets this season? Saying "permanent" is an obtuse and dim-witted caveat to skew the facts. Because unlike the other managers, Roeder went through a period where he was unable to make any changes to anything except team lineups, whereas other managers got to do whatever they wanted right from the start. During this period, shepherd made sure he had Tommy Craig and Alan Shearer sticking pretty close to him. Now Roeder is there on his own, things have got much, much worse.

OK, now read the statistics for wins in the Premier League as PERMANENT manager. It is a very similar story...

Yeah. That's not the only competition we're in though, and it wasn't for any previous managers. Looks like you are contradicting your own statistics... Not at all. I'm quoting the our most recent managers overall records, those having been managers in the premier league era. OK, I'll forgive the ambiguity, give me a minute to find some PL statistics...

Yeah, that's just semantics. Not statistics. Not facts. Semantics paint a better picture than statistics though. Perhaps you would like to read the statistics in my sig... That's another thing you've got wrong, since being named permanent he's won 43% of his games. That is from the date of Newcastle announcing that they were going to request that the PL approved his appointment. Since the PL approved his appointment, and we have been able to confirm him officially, we have won 20% of our league matches. You're perpetuating your stupidity. Why is your sig only includiong premier league for Roeder but all games for anyone else? You state in your own sig that you are using Premier League statistics.

Yeah. That's not the only competition we're in though, and it wasn't for any previous managers. Looks like you are contradicting your own statistics...