Rich

You're serious, aren't you?? For "what did he do for the team", see the games when he was injured and couldn't play, and it became all too apparent how much we were going to miss him when he was gone. See the current team and the way every time the ball goes down field, we immediately relinquish possession and suffer another wave of attacks. Shearer was massive for us, I can't believe you're trying to suggest he contributed nothing but goals and knockdowns. examples then? feel free to prove me wrong but post 98 shearer was very slow. he contributed his goals, and we knew that once he would gone we would need someone to replace his goals, but its not like his pace ripped teams apart. he also provided someone to aim for, to knock the ball down or hold it up to create other chances, but what else? Examples of what? Of him playing a big part in our performances from 1998 onwards? Are you really serious? No offence mate, but I'm absolutely incredulous at the suggestion that someone needs examples of Shearer contributing something other than goals or knockdowns from 1998 onwards. I mean were you watching NUFC at all during that period? avidly, much more than today, it was when i was completely addicted to the toon when i actually (stupidly) thought we were going somewhere. anyway, your all right, i'm wrong, i don't really care about this stupid irrelivent debate anyway, and i wish i hadn't brought it up. Aye, me too. I practically had to sit on my hands to prevent an assault on your intelligence after having read it.

Re: Oliver singling Martins out ahead of the other dross... Not all of them cost £10m, have shown themselves to be awesome at times and have massive sections of the fanbase positively wooden in their kecks, though. I think with Martins it's more peoples' disappointment at how bad he often is, after he has shown such glimpses of utter brilliance. To me, there are definite current parallels with people's attitudes towards Robert during his time here: i.e. sometime he is virtually unplayable and he scores some of the best goals ever seen, but the vast majority of the time he offers very, very little from open play and is incredibly frustrating. People generally accept when a player is shite and never rises above average, but when you have someone who has the occasional barnstormer/brilliant moment and is a passenger for the vast majority of the rest of the time it becomes extremely hard to stomach. Right or wrong, that's how it looks to me and it's how I feel about Martins. I do hope he stays and proves me wrong, but like others have said: there are a lot of aspects to his game that he needs to take responsibility for and at 22, not 17/18/19 like you would think he is the way some go on about him, he's going to need to improve them fairly quickly if he is going to succeed here. Rooney is apparently "vastly overrated" at 21, but at a year older, Martins needs "time to improve". There's something not quite right there. I don't think there are many - even Oliver - saying Martins is a poor player, and he is daft for wanting him sold after less than a season here, but surely the frustrations are understandable and mostly reasonable?

But surely having an extra 8,000 or more seats in the ground is a way of providing continuous revenue to the club, rather than just receiving a quick influx of money for the current manager to waste? I agree that we need a good squad and good results to fill 52,000 seats these days, let alone 60,000, but there will surely be plenty of money available in the summer for the squad anyway and certainly enough to get the vast majority of the players we "need". In a time where the club are criticised heavily for not building towards the future, I'm personally impressed by the proposals on hand, although I do think the timing of the announcement is nothing more than an appeasement. I wouldn't be surprised if none of it happened or if the ground expansion plans were rejected, but I certainly couldn't fault NUFC/Shepherd if there is substantial belief/truth behind all of it. If it does go ahead then it's encouraging to see us continuing to move forward on the business side of things and into realms where our annual income should only increase because of the sheer number and quality of developments/businesses located in and around the stadium. Of course, keeping Premiership football is absolutely essential to keeping the ground full and if we want to fill an extra chunk of seats we will need to improve on our current plight - before the stand is fully extended, at least (probably gives us about 3-4 years, I'd assume). Also, having a ground of 60,000+ offers far more than just money to the club, when you think about it. It makes more sense to me than getting a one-off injection of cash that has no gaurantee of being spent correctly in the first place.

The idiots who are getting sucked in by the PR surrounding Michael Owen's return sum-up the current state of affairs absolutely perfectly and also sum-up a good number of the current fanbase. People are allowing themselves to be deluded by the media/club into thinking Michael Owen will return, work wonderfully with Martins and we'll magically start playing brilliant football and winning matches again. I cannot see a huge improvement coming about because of him, not at all. Has Michael Owen ever really worked without a top-class partner alongside him? As the sensible ones have been saying already - has he ever been a striker to hold the ball up effectively and link play? He's not as bad at those aspects of the game as some will say, certainly not, but he's not the answer to a "massive chunk" of our problems, he'll improve us a bit. Aye, it will be nice to get him back in the team, but it's not going to stop us playing shite football, having poor quality players in all other areas of the park and it's certainly not going to make Martins any brighter/control a football any better/improve his God-awful passing "ability". It also won't stop Roeder making piss-poor team selections, leaving out the players who are the easiest to drop and making absolutely useless substitutions, either. There are also people who think that under Roeder we will be able to play an on-the-deck attractive sort of football and so do not want to see the likes of Zigic, Crouch, Ashton or anyone of that nature brought to the club, because it will encourage the "long ball". Well fuck me sideways - do people genuinely think that Given will stop lumping it forwards? That Stephen Carr will stop whacking it up the touchline whenever he gets pressurised at all? Direct football is an essential route of Premiership football, people will cite Arsenal as an example of "another way", but even they still play with a fair number of long punts up the field for the forwards to contest, not every single game for them is won by playing attractive football - and it certainly has been found-out away from home since their amazing run, anyway. This squad does need Owen back, that is a no-brainer, but it also needs a quality partner for him who is an option in the air and decent on the deck (i.e. not Martins, based on what I've seen, but we'll see) and it needs two new full-backs, at least one centre-half and quite probably an attacking central midfielder who can pass and move. If we're being greedy, I'll have a decent defensive midfielder with a bit of aerial presence about him an' all and I'd quite happily never see Parker and Butt paired together in the midfield again. But all of that is about as realistic as expecting Michael Owen - returning from an incredibly serious injury - being the solution to most of our onfield problems, isn't it?

The Sunderland squad are all on a cruise somewhere (probably off the shore of Ireland) and Roy Keane is aghast, while sitting in the jacuzzi with Triggs (his dog), to find a massive wedge of shite rolling across the floor towards him at great pace. Fearing getting browned in the face, he jumps quickly from the pool and yells furiously towards his players, "SOMEONE'S FUCKING SHIT ON THE DECK!" Just then, Sunderland chairman Niall Quinn pops his head around the corner and hollers back, "OIYE! BUT I'M ALROIGHT IN THE AIR, THOUGH!" BA-DUM-DUM-TISCH!

He was fairly decent against Italy at the weekend, too, was well-impressed with him in comparison to the other defenders that played at various times. Played some beauties on the diagonal and generally was very composed against some good Italian attackers. Didn't exactly stand-out a mile but he does look to have a lot of potential. I can't see outside of Bale, Baines or Bridge for people who we will make our top targets for that position and I would be delighted with one of the latter two, but neither will come cheap. Heinze would be delightful as well, although probably a fair bit more unrealistic. Whoever doesn't go to Spurs/Man Utd may well end up here, out of the first three I mentioned, I'd expect.

I'm from Wallsend, like, and so I demand access to that elite list of brilliant Geordies - although I did live in North Shields/Tynemouth for a good dozen years. How the ferk are people from North Shields not Geordie, by the way? Are people from Cullercoats/Tynemouth/Whitley not, either? What about Blyth?

Interesting that he hasn't mentioned Brown in that, which leads me to optimistically believe we must have an interest in him (bit injury prone in the past, mind). I agree with the people who say Distin would be decent on a free: he's hardly a world-beater and I personally think Richard Dunne is better than him, but he's got a lot about him and is a massive step-up from Moore/Bramble. Also, as Hindu Times said: doesn't seem like we're in the market for a striker this summer - which is a shame, really, if we suffer with injuries again next season. Have to say that Owen, Martins, Ameobi, Sibierski, Dyer and Carroll *should* be a lot better than what we've had to select from this season, but it's still far from top-class.

Story Huzzah! In the bigger picture: by Saturday we might only have two injured players and by Monday, both of them could be back in full training.

It's not about results now, though, is it? It's about playing good football and preparing players for the Premiership... apparently. A good philosophy for kids, no doubt, but perhaps not for professional players on big wages who are supposed to be playing competitively with a view to getting some first-team games.

Utter rank from top to bottom, massively disappointing after the run of pretty good first-kits we've had since 98/99.

As I've said in a few others where you've posted that: I completely agree - certainly while the money needs to go elsewhere. The only way I'd switch from your philosophy was if it came out that Martins/Owen were leaving/got injured again, etc.

Do you think Forlan could be a success in the Premiership? I'm not convinced tbh. No particular reason for saying that other than he always seemed to be a bit rushed in the premiership and much more composed in La Liga. Maybe the little less pace and more skill that La Liga offers suits his game better. I'm not disputing that he is a talented footballer but not ideally suited to the premiership imo. I was being a bit facetious with that post, mate. I'm not sure he'd be half as effective over here, mainly because of the reason that you've already mentioned - and the fact he'd have nobody supplying him with Riquleme-shaped bullets, either.

Invicta, If you have a chance, can you answer these please: who are you showing up? Who has said Martins is "much better" than Crouch? Have you been using Wikipedia for your stats? Are we now basing this argument on league goals at the highest level, rather than the numbers you initially posted, then? Were Aston Villa "good" (in comparison to Liverpool, now/Inter with Martins) when Crouch was there, or have I missed something? Furthermore, where did I actually say Martins' goals for Inter outweighed Crouch's in the Premiership? The word "just" wasn't used from my end when talking about the PL, either. Harking back to your second post for a moment, does everyone with an "ounce of sense" not think it's harder to score goals in the Champions League than in the Premiership/Serie A/La Liga? Your point was about someone scoring against Blackpool, or whoever, completely discounting goals that Crouch/Owen/Martins have scored on the biggest stage in European football. Not that sensible, in my book. Goals on the biggest stage are arguably a better measure of how good a striker is/has been, if you're taking that route. Do you now agree that your initial post failed to prove/offer anything worthwhile in regards to the subject at hand? It was my initial point, after all. The way you're skirting around it and making excuses would lead me to believe that you do. It would have been far easier for you to simply admit that when I pulled you up on it, instead of throwing a hissy-fit and stamping your feet. The exasperated use of "FFS" to finish yet another garbage entry is best reserved for people who have actually been talking sense and getting idiocy in reply and not the other way around, surely? blueyes.gif Finally, to answer your question: yes, I do understand what average means and I think "average goals" is an utterly wank way of trying to compare three completely different strikers, without looking at how/where/when they were scored, etc. Are you now going to claim all of this as a "bite" from my end? I'd love that, personally.

http://www.true-faith.co.uk/html/Features/myfavouriteshirt.htm

Not really, like, on the "fucking my argument" side of things. As you've addressed one point of about six I made alongside it. For that particular point, then definitely a bit, but not to the point of it it being totally "fucked". It's still an unfair way to judge players because Owen has played at a higher level than both for a much longer amount of time and Martins played for Inter from being a "bairn", almost. It's more impressive to sustain goalscoring for a longer spell, obviously. Re: your "cup run" point - no mention of the fact that Martins has scored a fair few goals in the Champions League, as has Owen, etc. So it's not all about playing teams like "Blackpool", at all. That's why I said it works both ways, not just against Crouch/against Martins, etc. You used the league goals because you used Wikipedia, is my guess. Also, I haven't seen anyone in this particular thread (or elsewhere) specifically say Martins is "much better than Crouch", either. Who, exactly, are you showing up? Poor attempt at back-tracking, like. Must try harder.

I thought Rocker's point that he shouldn't have been released because he's got fit sisters?

Completely agree. I agree with Vic's sentiment that Crouch probably shouldn't be bought (if that's what he was attempting to show), for the reasons that you state. I would like to see us try something new and with a better striker than Crouch, it's all about movement these days - something that we're sorely lacking and something that buying someone like Crouch probably won't help all that much.

Not to mention it's only league goals included, probably because Vic couldn't be arsed to look anywhere other than Wikipedia.

Diego Forlan has 0.38 goals per game, that's .05 better than Martins. Sign him now.

About 10 people on the previous page certainly saw it.

Fairly useless post, Vic, all things considered. Not just concerning Crouch, either. what fucking things? goals per game when comparing strikers? aye fucking useless... It's such a flawed method of argument, man. I thought you were more sensible than that. "I don't want Crouch here, so I'll post the goal ratios of him, Martins and Owen" - never mind how many times they were substitute, or how many games they've actually played, or for what team in what competition, or how many goals they've created, or how well they've played aside from scoring... it's such a superficial way of judging a player it's unreal. Exactly the type of thing you chastise the majority of other posters on here for. Crouch has played for some bloody shite teams and in lower divisions, while Martins/Owen have been at the top of the footballing world from almost the word go in their professional careers, it's a dud comparison and it always has been. It's the sort of mediocre post on here that you're usually very much against. I could post goal records of a dozen strikers like that and use it as a claim that we should sign them, with nothing else along with it and if I did that, or someone else did that, you'd be the first one to call it "shite" if it didn't go along with your personal viewpoint. There was no comment on it, nothing, it was just utter garbage man. Shall I just go and get their total appearances from somewhere and use that to say whether they are injury prone or not and then just stick it up here without any backstory or any comment?

Story Looks like someone has told Carr how much he is generally loathed and he/the club are beginning a media campaign to keep him here, because I certainly don't recall him coming across this well in an interview before... I cannot see him leaving the summer, seriously. Which is a great, great shame.

Berbatov has been fairly decent in other areas, though, mate. Not everything is based on goal records/ratios, is it?