Theregulars

You were saying?

I think it’s partly human nature, especially nowadays when so much of the rest of life is unpleasant and difficult. Football, when your team is good, gives you happiness and other great feelings and thus becomes addictive and one forms an over-reliance on it for happiness. It’s not a Newcastle fanbase problem, it’s everywhere I’d say. You’d just hope the board don’t go the same way really. Your second point depends what “up to it” means. He’s not yet at top tier level but he could very well get there soon, we’ll find out a lot more this year.

I just really hope we turn up in all the fixtures and give a genuinely decent account of ourselves. Slight fear that we won’t and the occasion will be too big, but just want each team twice to think “fuck, playing them is horrible”

Surprised Dyche at broke Everton didn’t take him on a free. Then again, maybe I’m not.

And that’s why you’ll remain on that side of the decision fence.

Why? Is it any different from grown men wearing replica shirts or other clubwear?

I think it's really interesting because I don't think it's beyond reasonable imagination that we can beat any of those teams.

I think we can beat any of those teams.

I completely agree with this. He isn't there but he so can get there.

You’d imagine we’d rotate as well.

Essentially I think we're good to go, but that includes an assumption that we're going to deprioritise the domestic cups. I think we're 1-2 good players shy of being truly competitive on all fronts. And that isn't a complaint or an insult or blasphemy or treachery before anyone calls me entitled; it's just an opinion as to where we are and I think "sacrificing" the domestic cups is completely reasonable. I think there's a reality where we drop into the uefa cup and compete for it.

Seconded - if you can't enjoy this then I feel bad for you.

TBF at this point I'll take down to 3 competitions.

I don’t particularly rate Ten Hag. I’m not sure if it’s him or just Manchester United - I believe what Van Gaal says about it being a commercial operation, not a football club. I don’t think the cup final was too big in and of itself, I think the fact he’d never been there before and probably didn’t truly expect to get there was evident and the team looked a bit lacklustre as a result. Just an opinion.

I'm not sure it's moving the goalposts - I still do worry about his record against top managers and in big pressure games, because now we are in that conversation. That's not like lack of recognition of being in the shit recently, it's just that we are in the position we're in now, so isn't it fair to look at things from that perspective as well? Essentially can one not simultaneously believe that (i) he has some improvement to make before he becomes elite and (ii) he is comparatively handicapped by a weaker squad? To some degree I think the weaker squad argument is being overplayed this season (not last). There's literally a TV series on right now where our owners repeatedly say that their ambition is that we become the best team in Europe. I know it's fluff and bollocks, but if we want to be a top tits team (and I really want us to both be a top tits team and be considered a top tits team), then we have to play like a top tits team when the time requires us to. I accept we can't do that all the time, but I maintain that there are some signs which suggest that he isn't elite. I can see how it would have helped if I said he isn't elite yet, but I'm not sure the situation required me to state that he has a weaker squad in order for the argument to be valid. Is it not enough that it got pointed out and when I got round to reading people's messages the next day I then responded saying yes, that's true? I just don't accept that it invalidates my argument. Anyway, doesn't matter a jot.

It's not remotely absurd - he does not yet have the achievements in the bank to be elite. I'm really confident he'd say the same himself. I don't follow your point about acknowledgment of weakness of team: is it that by not explicitly stating the same when I made my original point that it somehow renders my argument invalid and precludes me from holding both views at the same time? I have tried multiple times to say I agree, the squad isn't as comparatively good - literally I am recognising your argument and I am saying it's completely valid and true. This isn't the behaviour of a wilfully obtuse person, it's the behaviour of someone engaging you in a conversation about a mutual topic of interest. Why does it strike a nerve in you so much that I criticise Eddie Howe? Genuine question.

I completely and fundamentally agree that he has so much credit in the bank. I do not in any way want a change. I love Eddie Howe. I just think he's not as good as some other coaches yet and it showed at the weekend. I don't think you can say he's an elite manager yet, the evidence doesn't back it up. He has the potential to be one. I don't think there is a massive disagreement in what he and I said though - we're both saying that he has done magnificently but fucked up quite badly on Sunday. I then went further and said my view is that he isn't elite. If you can't see that this is not wilfully obtuse, then you don't understand what the words mean.

Drugs are bad, mmmmkay?

OK - I'm going to try once more. As I have acknowledged multiple times - he does not have a squad as good as the other teams yet. That does not automatically exempt him from criticism when it's evident that he has contributed somehow to a negative outcome. Maybe people keep expressing their freedom to disagree because you keep ramming shit arguments down their throat without any space allowed for disagreement with you? A sign that it's not a weak argument is the amount of people in this thread saying that he got it badly wrong on Sunday. And I don't think I'm coming across like ChatGPT - my arguments are set out and explained in a logical, sequential and analytical way. ChatGPT can't do that. It's absolutely OK to have your views challenged - try not to get so upset about it.

So @Vinny Green Ballslikes this point but not mine? Seems inconsistent.

No, and at no point have I advocated for that (i.e. repeat the formula against Aston Villa). Yet again, it's a conclusion you've drawn on my behalf to try and suit a flimsy and over-generalised argument. I'll try and explain again - essentially, I have two questions / criticisms: If we have seen visual evidence that we are able to impose ourselves on and overwhelm bigger teams in some matches, why have we not been able to do the same, or do to so to the same extent, in other matches? Leading on from question 1, might it be a flaw in how the manager approaches those games? The answer to the second question may very well be your answer: the better teams negated us on the day, worked us out etc. I just think, in all the circumstances, it's reasonable to ask whether there is room for improvement when it comes to his strategy / attitude etc against bigger teams and on playing in big occasions? In my view, there is now a big enough sample size (it's still a small sample size) to ask that question. Why does that entitle you to dismiss that opinion as legitimate or entitled? In my view you dismiss it because you are, for whatever reason, unable or reluctant to engage in the topic with any real nuance or detail. It comes across that everything must be A or B, black or white etc, for you (which, again, is childlike). I haven't lost sight of where we are: we overachieved last year and don't have a top 4 squad on paper (and certainly didn't last year). Nonetheless, we have overachieved, and the product of said overachievement is that we are now in our present circumstances with a new context, or at least a developed context. Against that background, I ask again: might the manager have approached those games differently? Might he have been overawed by the occasion? My opinion is that, yes, there is a plausible argument in favour of both ideas.

Genuinely - are you? It would explain so, so much.

This x a million.

You have no idea what my expectations are - you've never asked me about them and we've never had a conversation about them! You've literally decided what they are after extrapolating them from one comment or opinion. It's actually - sincerely, genuinely - how children view the world. My expectations for that game in the situation were that we would see a lead out with 15 minutes against 10 men. I don't see anything unreasonable in there.

I am calm and have been reasoned and polite in the whole debate. In my opinion the hubris and lack of self-awareness on your behalf in continually telling people what they think and how they feel is genuinely staggering.