Rich

As this was a thread to see if anyone would give Berbatov credit, I might as well appease Kingdawson. Out of that list the two strikers I'd most like at Newcastle are Martins and Berbatov, what a fucking partnership that would be. Berbatov looks class whenever he plays and has done well to score 14 goals in such an average team, much like Martins for us, and both are two of the youngest out of the list suggested. You have to wonder how well they'd do with settled partners beside them and a creative midfield in to boot. Berbatov doesn't have many PL goals at all, mind, which is a worry. But as I've said previously, Spurs are pretty average. How the feck have they scored 4 less goals than us? (In one less game, mind.) Kanu and McCarthy don't have much left in their careers and so surely can't be considered great investments, like these two. I would say that Martins and Berbatov also have the highest chance of succeeding at the highest level from this point onwards.

Roeder was getting an awful lot of praise on that late-night Channel 5 show, from Daily Mail writer and a former Arsenal/Coventry player. Was nice to actually see him getting recognition in the national media about the job he's done... and they showed mega-extended highlights of the Toon game AND did a full piece on how well Solano did at RB and how badly Emerton did for Blackburn in the same position, so all-in-all it made for fairly good viewing late on a Thursday night. Then I watched MOTD a bit last night and was eager to see more of the red-card in the Watford/Ipswich game... and the cunts didn't even discuss it post-match. I was surprised and how much better the C5 show was for actual analysis and discussion, especially where we were related. Granted, they don't exactly have big names on, but at least they do things semi-properly. But aye, Glenn has done extremely well with the players he has had available. Who's to say we won't make a good crack at the UEFA, as well? Especially if the likes of N'Zogbia, Emre and Owen play some part in the later rounds.

C5 is decent for football, but even better for the NFL... I think they're steadily improving and seem to mix zany with sensible quite well. I'd take it over ITV/BBC1 any day of the week, but I still prefer the Sky stuff for actual matches.

Rooney Henry Drogba Would be my top three without a shadow of a doubt, I'd conga nude around the town to have one of them playing for us... it gets a lot more difficult to name the other seven, though: Owen Anelka Shevchenko Tevez Martins Berbatov van Persie Bloody hell, that was hard... I only left Larsson out because of his age. Others that crossed my mind were Darren Bent, Craig Bellamy, Dirk Kuyt, Louis Saha, John Carew, Dean Ashton, Benni McCarthy and Andy Johnson. I assume we're talking purely hypothetically here, because if injuries/current form/PL history were taken into account then I'm not sure if I could justify picking Owen, Shevchenko and Tevez. I'd replace them with Larsson, Bent and Bellamy. I just picked the ten players I'd most like to have in my team based on history/reputation/form/bias and all that jazz.

I'd be a nutter and play super-attacking at SJP with this line-up: Given Solano Taylor Onyewu Duff Milner Dyer Emre N'Zogbia Owen Martins Subs: Krul, Bramble, Butt, Parker, Ameobi. Such a dull bench would allow us to play a lot more defensively towards the end of the game, if necessary . Away from home would look more counter-attacking, with a narrower set-up for defending in two banks of four and pace up front/out-wide for the breaks: Given Solano Taylor Onyewu Babayaro Dyer Parker Butt Emre Owen Martins Subs: Krul, Duff, Milner, N'Zogbia, Ameobi. (Who needs defensive cover?)

Aye, I'm sure merely changing the manager would achieve that!

I'll wager at 8th, based on our run-in and the final games of our direct competitors. We absolutely have to take something from the JJB, even just solitary points away from home are massively valuable if you can win your home games, which are: 'Boro Man City Arsenal Chelsea Blackburn 10 points from these? The away games are all games that we should win, but traditionally don't: Wigan Charlton Sheff Utd Portsmouth Reading Watford 8 points from these? (Would hope for more, obviously.) 10 points, 8 points... that would have been lovely

The amount of times we've "papered over the cracks" this season is unreal... surely couldn't be anything to do with the fact that in reality there aren't that many cracks in the first place? (For a team supposedly challenging for a top-six place, I mean.) Obviously there are a few key areas we need to strengthen in transfer-wise and a few style adjustments we need to make, but howay, after every single win there are people who call it "papering over the cracks". It's laughably brilliant. Do people genuinely think we are utter dogshit or something? Have these people seen the other teams in this division? I know everyone wants us to play like Man Utd or Barcelona every week, but that is a little bit of a stretch in our current plight, or ever really as we don't come anywhere near to these teams financially. People need to lower their expectations if they want to be happy following this club, at least in the short-term, instead of picking apart everything that Roeder/Shepherd/Player "X" does. 1) Admittedly I was a bit peeved by Roeder's team selection on Saturday, but we won 2-1, so he was proven correct. 2) I thought exactly the same before the game but Nobby was outstanding and Taylor didn't do half-bad at RB, either. 3) Utter dogshit. I've been waiting for his return for weeks now and I thought he put in a very solid performance in very tricky conditions against a good right-winger. It wasn't his fault for the first goal because his back-pass was perfectly weighted to be smacked by Harper, who simply didn't oblige. I know the brother situation is an easy get-out for him, but much like most of the other times I've seen him at SJP this season I thought he looked our best bet in that position. I do still hope we buy a good quality LB in the summer, though. 4) Again, you would have had a point here if we'd lost or if Milner had been atrocious, as I was a bit puzzled by this from the outset - but he played well, gave Finnan a torrid time and constantly had Pennant pinned-back defending as him and Babayaro attacked down that flank. Most of our play came down the right, where Solano excelled. He played on the left against Man Utd, didn't he? And scored that peach of a goal? Think Glenn might have been looking for more of the same. People need to get the blinkers off and sharpish, I thought we played some cracking stuff on Saturday in pig-bad conditions and although we did get a little bit lucky, it's not like we were completely outplayed. Carragher and Agger were bricking themselves whenever Martins or Dyer got the ball in what is becoming a fantastic partnership for this club up-front, I'd love to know how many goals-per-game they've scored when playing together as I bet it's a close call to being one in every match.

I was waiting for you or Gemmill to arrive with that counter-argument, in fairness you two are the only ones with enough brain to be able to realise it and then raise it. Could well be the case, although I was hoping to get away with it for longer than I did...

Interesting to note that a bloke who was directly involved in Bellamy's line of fire on more than one occasion speaks so highly of him, though, eh? Even went to his wedding in the summer. Someone who would actually know the goings-on inside of the club far better than any of us on here... and somebody who probably knows more about top-flight coaching than most, as well. Madness. Are you talking about someone else now. You reckon the majority of this forum know more about coaching in the Premiership than John Carver?

I was saying exactly the same during the game. It was winding me right up.

Interesting to note that a bloke who was directly involved in Bellamy's line of fire on more than one occasion speaks so highly of him, though, eh? Even went to his wedding in the summer. Someone who would actually know the goings-on inside of the club far better than any of us on here... and somebody who probably knows more about top-flight coaching than most, as well. Madness.

I know that people sometimes can't be arsed clicking links, so here are the 3 Carver stories, propaganda'd by yours truly.

A lot of stuff in the Chronicle today about Bellamy from Carver, Shearer and McDermott... http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/newcastleunited/chroniclesport/ Carver, in particular, talks a hell of a lot of sense... especially for someone who had a chair thrown at them by the subject matter.

Spurs' assistant manager was on SSN yesterday complaining about the amount of games they've played as well, suppose he'll be happy now. "We only played 40 games in total last season... this season we've played 39 already..." We've played 41, by my count, with far more injuries than Tottenham have had, to far more important players. So boo hoo. The only reason I can possibly see that is good for Spurs to stay in it is the chance that we'll draw them and knock them out, but the likelihood of us getting to the last 8 isn't exactly massive and then getting the required draw on top of that. I think all fans of both clubs would relish a UEFA Cup showdown, though. It would be fantastic viewing. Tottenham are there for the taking without King in the defence and with Robinson on such abysmal form, I reckon Feyenoord would have dumped them out, shame really.

For all of them that are injured, I'd only be arsed about seeing Babayaro, Emre, Given, N'Zogbia and Owen back in the starting eleven (still half a bloody team, like.) I'd prefer to see Ameobi in the squad than Sibierski, but Carr, Moore and Ramage shouldn't get into a 16-strong matchday squad in my eyes and Krul isn't a major factor yet, although it's not ideal that such a hot-prospect is struggling with injuries so much. I'd take Babayaro at LB over Carr, Edgar, Huntington and Taylor any day of the week, or I'd move Duff back there.

Those games are what makes football a worthwhile pursuit, you're exactly right. Seeing Tottenham getting beaten ranks high up there for me as well, like.

This.

Bridge is injured.

They're not doing badly with Carrick, like.

No, thats true. Butt is not "inept", he's just "mediocre at his very best". And Parker is "decent int he main". BRAMBLE is inept. Completely agree on Nicky Butt. More like his usual self against Fulham and has been awfully bad on numerous occasions this season. His winner against Spurs was fantastic and some performances have been good, but in the main his passing is inaccurate, he's far too slow, he's not strong enough in the air and for a defensive midfielder he doesn't win the ball nearly enough in one-on-ones. Decent player for someone like Sheffield United, but not what we should consider first team at NUFC. I still maintain that if Scott Parker was asked to play the role that Butt does, as he was a lot last season, then he would excel. Parker simply doesn't have the creative spark/passing/shooting ability to be considered a playmaking midfielder, but I feel his attributes/performances have exceeded Butt's by a long way when played in the same role. It's plainly obvious to me that Parker, even when with Emre, was being asked to be a box-to-box midfielder, instead of a holding player. I don't know how anyone can dispute that, given Roeder's comments about him last season and in the pre-season. Granted the lad has scored goals, but I'd rather see Dyer or Emre in the advanced role alongside him. If Mourinho classed Parker as an anchorman, then that's good enough for me, I don't know what Roeder is playing at trying to suggest otherwise. Parker/Butt together is cringeworthy and reminiscent of the Faye/Clark dynamic duo from last season in terms of an utter lack of creativity. Parker loses the ball far less than Butt and is a far better passer of the ball as well. Couldn't disagree more, tbh. I know I'm not allowed to use stats to defend my points (and I fully understand that stats do NOT tell the whole story), but Parker is miles ahead of Butt both in terms of number of passes made and percentage of passes completed, as well as tackles made and percentage of successful tackles. Let me expand on this a bit before you completely dismiss it... Now obviously that doesn't tell us that Parker is indefinitely better than Butt, because Parker could be passing it back to Bramble 99% of the time (small risk-small gain), while Butt could be looking to release Martins or Dyer with a long-ball an awful lot(high risk-high gain)... so there's no need to call me up on that. However, I do feel that when you watch both play there's certainly very little variation in the TYPE of passes that both make, which suggests that Parker does complete more passes. In your opinion from watching them this season/last season, does Nicky Butt play a lot more "risky" passes than Parker does (causing his completion percentage to drop)? Or is the ratio fairly similar for each? (Meaning that Parker is probably a better passer of the ball.) There's a few layers to that and we're heading into complicated grounds in regards to types of passing, speed of passes, quickness to release the ball, etc. But I know you'll be keeping up with it, which makes a nice change on here From what I remember from previous threads your main issues with Parker are that he dives in all-too-often and holds onto the ball for far too long, please correct me there if I'm wrong. I do agree that you have good arguments with these, but when the lad is winning "76.6%" of the tackles, then surely it's not THAT much of a problem? (Again, a crude way of defending him, but you get my gist - I'm trying to move away from just "I think he's better 'cos he's he captain" s****.) I'd argue that Nicky Butt is far too slow to react to situations and doesn't win the ball enough when he gets into tackling situations, plus he misplaces far more "easy" passes than Parker and he still has the "Cardiff performance" hanging over him, which was utterly disgusting at the time. I do openly admit that I could be biased here because of Nicky Butt's past, but as you likely know it's difficult to get past initial biases in order to make fair judgements on players, so maybe that's why our opinions differ? I know we're never likely to agree on this one, and we've probably both seen every home game this season as well as a massive majority of the away games (being there/ART Sport/internet streaming/etc.) - or at least extended highlights of every away game, so it's not much other than personal feelings on team styles/what we expect from a defensive midfielder/personal bias that seems to be separating us. We'll have to agree to disagree, as you have my points against Parker sorted out in your post. I'll post my thoughts on him one last time though as a reply to your comment. I believe Parker dives into challenges far too often, which can look impressive due to the commitment level and all that, but nevertheless, he dives in because he doesn't anticipate well enough, his reading of the game is very poor. He tends to chase the ball around the pitch like a young schoolboy tbh. Contrast that with Butt, who goes about his work quietly, which is often what you find with defensive midfielders, not noticing them that much generally means they're doing a good job. He plays a more controlled game, relying on anticipation and reading of the game more than Parker. The effect each of these players has on the players around them is important imo. People can argue about Parker's individual ability but most now seem to be of the view that the partnership with Emre is a poor one. Emre is a good player imo and he plays better alongside Butt than he does alongside Parker, the whole team generally plays better without Parker in the side imo, such is the negative effect of his poor quality of passing. I don't go in for the idea some have of telling Parker to play DM and hey presto, problem sorted. It's a specialist role, I don't think his passing is good enough for that role, he just can't do it. Where Butt often lays the ball off to a team-mate without even controlling it first, his first touch is often a pass, Parker dwells for too long. Butt is often aware of the pass before he's even received the ball, which is what gives him the ability to lay it off without taking a first touch to control it, Parker rarely manages to do that, he just doesn't seem to know what's is 'on' around him. Parker also offers very little attacking threat, so I see no role for him there either. His creativity is pretty much zero. I mentioned it above but the damage done to the way we play by the length of time Parker holds onto the ball can't be overstated, it's a massive weakness in his game because it's very important for a player in that role to move the ball on quickly when there are players up front with pace. The needless diving into challenges and the poor quality of passing are what irritate me the most about Parker. Players with pace need the ball released early otherwise they're going to be caught offside more often than not. I think this will become even more apparent with the return of Owen. Imagine if we ever end up with Zog on the left and Dyer on the right as well, for example. Regarding stats. Yes, Parker may have a higher success rate for passes but I'd imagine Butt isn't far behind, factor in that Butt's passing has a far more positive impact on the way we play and to me it means he's a far, far better player than Parker. I do see where you're coming from and you make some excellent points, I just hope either Butt proves me wrong, or Parker proves you wrong... or that we sign a "proper" defensive midfielder who has pace and an aerial threat about him, as well as all these other attributes we keep mentioning as being essential for someone who plays that position. What I'd give for us to discover the next Gilberto. I personally don't think either of them are good enough to play that "specialist" role for a club who should be challenging the top four, but I'm not the manager, or the chairman - let's just hope what we've got is a lot better than we're giving them credit for.

How many games have Woodgate/Huth played together? Same goes for Taylor/Bramble, actually. What a wank basis for an argument.

It's becoming harder and harder to disagree with the "Bramble out" brigade on here because the lad quite simply does not seem like getting over his affliction for making incredible mistakes at terrible times. On Saturday there were at least two major occasions were he made major bloopers, one of which should have resulted in a straight red card. If we have any serious ambition and are planning to make a realistic run for top-six every season, then we cannot afford to have players with such terminal defects in our starting line-up. A "big club" would not have persevered with Titus Bramble for as long as we have as his problem seems to be one that quite simply CANNOT be coached out of him. You cannot teach players to read the game well or to judge the flight of a ball, these are natural footballing instincts that Bramble seems to unfortunately lack to a suitable level. I do agree that no player is perfect and that a LOT of players make constant mistakes, but Titus is really the king of the "lapse" or the "error" and I'm not sure whether the stigma will ever leave him. Having his name on the team-sheet is bad enough for me, personally, because it usually is a gaurantee that we will see at least ONE error in the following game. A lot of times it's something that doesn't get punished - his constant air-kicks/high-slices/losing his man on a set-play), but also there is a dangerously high number of occasions where we DO get punished because of his shortcomings. It's not even as if he's fantastic when he isn't making mistakes, either. He rarely dominates in the air, his passing is erratic (to say the least) and he certainly doesn't seem to lead or to organise his team-mates. He can sometimes have very good games where he does the basics of defending very well but I can genuinely say that I can never see us winning something as long as Titus Bramble is getting a regular game here. It's amazing that 3 managers have now persevered with Titus Bramble, when the likes of Robert, Bellamy, Luque, Viana and others have fallen foul of them because of various issues. It's not even like he's a model pro, either, the stories about the lad's off-field antics are there for all to hear and have been since he joined. Not to mention that he's incredibly injury-prone, as well.

No, thats true. Butt is not "inept", he's just "mediocre at his very best". And Parker is "decent int he main". BRAMBLE is inept. Completely agree on Nicky Butt. More like his usual self against Fulham and has been awfully bad on numerous occasions this season. His winner against Spurs was fantastic and some performances have been good, but in the main his passing is inaccurate, he's far too slow, he's not strong enough in the air and for a defensive midfielder he doesn't win the ball nearly enough in one-on-ones. Decent player for someone like Sheffield United, but not what we should consider first team at NUFC. I still maintain that if Scott Parker was asked to play the role that Butt does, as he was a lot last season, then he would excel. Parker simply doesn't have the creative spark/passing/shooting ability to be considered a playmaking midfielder, but I feel his attributes/performances have exceeded Butt's by a long way when played in the same role. It's plainly obvious to me that Parker, even when with Emre, was being asked to be a box-to-box midfielder, instead of a holding player. I don't know how anyone can dispute that, given Roeder's comments about him last season and in the pre-season. Granted the lad has scored goals, but I'd rather see Dyer or Emre in the advanced role alongside him. If Mourinho classed Parker as an anchorman, then that's good enough for me, I don't know what Roeder is playing at trying to suggest otherwise. Parker/Butt together is cringeworthy and reminiscent of the Faye/Clark dynamic duo from last season in terms of an utter lack of creativity. Parker loses the ball far less than Butt and is a far better passer of the ball as well. Couldn't disagree more, tbh. I know I'm not allowed to use stats to defend my points (and I fully understand that stats do NOT tell the whole story), but Parker is miles ahead of Butt both in terms of number of passes made and percentage of passes completed, as well as tackles made and percentage of successful tackles. Let me expand on this a bit before you completely dismiss it... Now obviously that doesn't tell us that Parker is indefinitely better than Butt, because Parker could be passing it back to Bramble 99% of the time (small risk-small gain), while Butt could be looking to release Martins or Dyer with a long-ball an awful lot(high risk-high gain)... so there's no need to call me up on that. However, I do feel that when you watch both play there's certainly very little variation in the TYPE of passes that both make, which suggests that Parker does complete more passes. In your opinion from watching them this season/last season, does Nicky Butt play a lot more "risky" passes than Parker does (causing his completion percentage to drop)? Or is the ratio fairly similar for each? (Meaning that Parker is probably a better passer of the ball.) There's a few layers to that and we're heading into complicated grounds in regards to types of passing, speed of passes, quickness to release the ball, etc. But I know you'll be keeping up with it, which makes a nice change on here From what I remember from previous threads your main issues with Parker are that he dives in all-too-often and holds onto the ball for far too long, please correct me there if I'm wrong. I do agree that you have good arguments with these, but when the lad is winning "76.6%" of the tackles, then surely it's not THAT much of a problem? (Again, a crude way of defending him, but you get my gist - I'm trying to move away from just "I think he's better 'cos he's he captain" shite.) I'd argue that Nicky Butt is far too slow to react to situations and doesn't win the ball enough when he gets into tackling situations, plus he misplaces far more "easy" passes than Parker and he still has the "Cardiff performance" hanging over him, which was utterly disgusting at the time. I do openly admit that I could be biased here because of Nicky Butt's past, but as you likely know it's difficult to get past initial biases in order to make fair judgements on players, so maybe that's why our opinions differ? I know we're never likely to agree on this one, and we've probably both seen every home game this season as well as a massive majority of the away games (being there/ART Sport/internet streaming/etc.) - or at least extended highlights of every away game, so it's not much other than personal feelings on team styles/what we expect from a defensive midfielder/personal bias that seems to be separating us.

Two year extension? I'd prefer it if we just let him go in the summer. Reckon this means no more strikers are incoming?