80

Horrible to think Hughton might get sacked one day. I mean, like the way most managers get sacked. Would be Bobbyesque.

Chris Hughton's a football genius.

Why stop at just his legs? http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/1838/sledgehammerz.jpg It's for your own good son.

That quote and something else I recall him saying (but helpfully can't remember what) make me definitely think there are political machinations going on at the moment. It's just not the sort of thing he'd ordinarily say, partly because he wouldn't need to say it - he doesn't really say things if they don't serve a purpose. So I'm inclined to think he's said that to try and block an internal appointment, make it harder for something to happen against his will. Big leap of logic some will say I know... but fuck it, that's my suspicion.

Maybe includes his Jimmy Hill fees?

Piss off you drag act. Woolnough, that is.

What was really needed was a private briefing to the effect of 'stop being bloody stupid, of course we're not going to sack him'. Such statements are far more effective as more can be said off the record and journalists believe them more than stilted missives like this. They're done all the time at other clubs and the Board knows it seeing as Llambias has regularly enjoyed being an 'inside source' in the past. It clearly hasn't happened, though. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/newcastle-united/8097948/Newcastles-rumour-mill-threatened-to-thwart-Chris-Hughtons-quiet-revolution.html That's more like it.

What was really needed was a private briefing to the effect of 'stop being bloody stupid, of course we're not going to sack him'. Such statements are far more effective as more can be said off the record and journalists believe them more than stilted missives like this. They're done all the time at other clubs and the Board knows it seeing as Llambias has regularly enjoyed being an 'inside source' in the past. It clearly hasn't happened, though.

Thought he was brainless and timid tonight (got involved, but there was always a hesitancy in every aspect of his play - lacked full-bloodedness). Huddersfield - Division Three meaning tough but easy enough to score and build confidence in? Check. Northern and boring? Check. Attacking? Check. Tyneside sympathies? Check. Decent coaches? Better than most apparently, hopefully check.

I know. But... the only thing is, wise heads said the same thing the before Keegan's constructive dismissal. Louise Taylor was right, the Board were shite.

It's those 'apart from todays' that can be the distinction between the good and the great though. Haven't seen today's match, which is a massive caveat, but it's disappointing to hear he's had a bad one in the biggest game of his season so far. Not that Krul hasn't had his fair share of balls ups in the past, mind. Would be fascinated to know whether being kept as second behind Harper was a positive or negative sign for Krul. Personally, I'd have sent the most promising youngster out on loan with a view to them gaining the experience he (and hence, we) would need in the future - with the assumption being that Harper wouldn't miss too much of the season, of course. Seems like most are under the impression it meant Krul is being given the nod by the coaches at this point, though. Was quoted earlier in the season as saying that the only reason he stayed at the club over the summer (mooted transfers) was that he had a one-to-one conversation with Harps, who told him that he expected Krul to start seeing more playing time as the season progressed. Aye, true, saw that - but thought it could've just been complete bollocks on Harper's/the club's behalf to make him stay just long enough to Forster to be ripe to take over. Pretty tough business, really... clearly one or the other is gonna be chucked within 18 months at most, maybe 6.

It's those 'apart from todays' that can be the distinction between the good and the great though. Haven't seen today's match, which is a massive caveat, but it's disappointing to hear he's had a bad one in the biggest game of his season so far. Not that Krul hasn't had his fair share of balls ups in the past, mind. Would be fascinated to know whether being kept as second behind Harper was a positive or negative sign for Krul. Personally, I'd have sent the most promising youngster out on loan with a view to them gaining the experience he (and hence, we) would need in the future - with the assumption being that Harper wouldn't miss too much of the season, of course. Seems like most are under the impression it meant Krul is being given the nod by the coaches at this point, though.

Agreed. I don't think so. Would be surprised and disappointed if so, so long as Krul remains/keeps gaining assuredness.

Guess it's reasonable to infer that he is from his employment history... also it's a like for like with Calderwood - stern Scottish ex-defender so it'll be like nothing changed... But yeah, it's funny how sometimes people sound like they have really firm opinions on who should be brought in.

On the upside, he might rattle Ashley's daughter, which would be funny. Or Carroll's latest, which would also quickly become funny.

Thought it was Boy George for a minute In all seriousness tbh hitting a woman in any circumstances is totally wrong and unforgivable unless you are being attacked yourself and in self defence fair enough ,this lad has a rap sheet as long as Bartons but not the same level of violence so would you say lets give him another chance or get rid ,all Bartons problems by the look of things have been drink related by all accounts so he gave up the drink and has been a good boy and well done to him and imho Carroll is doing the same thing and @ his age it will be harder too stay on the straight and narrow so in my opinion stay off the Drink for starters but by all accounts his temper causes trouble too so he needs experts to sort his life out . Jesus, punctuate man. Far as I know, which isn't too far, it doesn't seem to be a drink thing with Carroll, not least seeing as he had his run-ins with Taylor and N'Zogbia at the training ground. Actually, the Taylor thing seemed to push him on last season so given how things have been going, maybe he's done this for the good of the club... You say "punctuate man" and come up with a statement "maybe he's done this for the good of the club" is that sarcasm or just a stupid comment please elaborate Run with your sarcasm idea. Maybe surrealism. Yours was a 147 word sentence

Spot on Jonny. Seems it doesn't work like that though. What if you take the view that most of the club is set up for failure and anything better which seems to stem from him which is better than that can be considered virtually supererogatory? This 'balanced, sensible' view that some people seem to have that victory should bring praise and defeat should bring criticism and pressure is dumb to reality. It doesn't take into account the context of any of the events under analysis and it doesn't help achieve what we presumably actually want which is ultimate success. I think it's more that people at one end of the scale think he shouldn't be criticised or held accountable at all tbh. Who? Anyone saying he shouldn't be under pressure tbh, of which there are quite a few. The nature of the job he is paid for means if things aren't going well, he should be under pressure. At home we've had three very poor results on the bounce against three of the poorest sides in the division, that definately deserves criticism. He therefore deserves to be under pressure. Not to the extent of wanting him sacked mind. What sort of pressure and why? What do you think the pressure will achieve for us? Do you think he'll do a better job if everyone knows he'll be out if the next four games don't go in his favour? Being held accountable and being pressurised are two different things, by the way. Related but not indivisible. Having major reasons for a defeat attributed to things that are in your power and fairly clearly should have been different is being reasonably held accountable, having people raising the pitch, getting hysterical and talking about 'consequences' if things don't change, with only all the negative ifs and buts regarding your future decisions being focused upon is being pressurised. I don't even agree with the premise that it's the nature of a team manager's job that if things aren't going well he should be under pressure. He isn't fully the master of his own destiny. He isn't the policy setter. All football managers are managed - by their board. Some things he does control, and if he controls them badly then he should be held accountable. But badness doesn't necessarily equal a failing football manager, the buck really doesn't stop with him. I take the point that major scrutiny is required given our recent home results - I've said so elsewhere previously, they're pretty concerning. All the same, it's probably worth us all remembering the other results these teams and other supposedly shit teams have been getting this season. Us, WBA, Stoke, Wigan and Blackpool have got unexpectedly good results against Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea (not us, by the way), Tottenham (twice), Villa (twice), Man City (twice), Everton and Liverpool. You can even throw in results between themselves (Wigan 0 Blackpool 4, nevermind our upsets etc...). It's a strange season, inconsistent in nature.

Interesting point.

Spot on Jonny. Seems it doesn't work like that though. What if you take the view that most of the club is set up for failure and anything better which seems to stem from him which is better than that can be considered virtually supererogatory? This 'balanced, sensible' view that some people seem to have that victory should bring praise and defeat should bring criticism and pressure is dumb to reality. It doesn't take into account the context of any of the events under analysis and it doesn't help achieve what we presumably actually want which is ultimate success.

Thought it was Boy George for a minute In all seriousness tbh hitting a woman in any circumstances is totally wrong and unforgivable unless you are being attacked yourself and in self defence fair enough ,this lad has a rap sheet as long as Bartons but not the same level of violence so would you say lets give him another chance or get rid ,all Bartons problems by the look of things have been drink related by all accounts so he gave up the drink and has been a good boy and well done to him and imho Carroll is doing the same thing and @ his age it will be harder too stay on the straight and narrow so in my opinion stay off the Drink for starters but by all accounts his temper causes trouble too so he needs experts to sort his life out . Jesus, punctuate man. Far as I know, which isn't too far, it doesn't seem to be a drink thing with Carroll, not least seeing as he had his run-ins with Taylor and N'Zogbia at the training ground. Actually, the Taylor thing seemed to push him on last season so given how things have been going, maybe he's done this for the good of the club...

Again, I see your point but snarling's a lot better a sign than hiding and excusing.

:lol: Prima facie that's fucking funny. I can see your reasoning though - might think that deciding to come here would show something really was wrong with his head. That said, I don't agree - think he had more balls as a toddler than Owen ever has and wouldn't just do what he did, so I'd be happy to have him here as unlikely as that is. Reckon if we have anything going for us at all (admittedly in doubt...), he'd come good - or good enough for us at least.

That's the big thing for me, as soon as he was signed expectations went up a notch or two and they have stayed there despite him being out for potentially the whole season. Yes... People shouldn't forget how shit we were at breaking down teams last season in the second division. Attack has been our weakest action for years, and we've only really made one big signing on that score and, as you say, he's fucked. Tried to get others, but on a groundbreakingly low transfer budget we didn't succeed.

:mackems: