alpal78

Why is he not? Most talented player in his squad just like Carlitos was at West Ham. Not saying Pardew doesnt like good players, he jusv doesnt know how to get the best out of them. Hes a classic english manager who knows and loves his graft and committed players. (which amazes me since he gives Obertan playing time). He clearly believes Ben Arfa has no part to play this season or will get his chances as soon as tiote and cabaye are back. Like I Said, Tevez/Mascherano and Ben Arfa have absolutely nothing in common style-wise other than the fact that they're good players. If you're going to claim that Pardew is biased against Ben Arfa because he doesn't like certain kinds of players, there has to be some sort of criteria. Like I said "good player" obviously isn't it, given that he's perfectly fine with playing other good players. You offer two potential answers to this question; a. He doesn't like foreign players. Given that Krul gets in ahead of Forster and Tiote/Cabaye gets in ahead of Guthrie, and Ba/Cisse gets in ahead of Shola, this doesn't seem to be the case. Why is Ben Arfa the only foreign player being discriminated against? b. He doesn't like players who don't graft. This explanation can't really apply to Tevez, given that he grafts the f*** out of every game when he's bothered and Mascherano who also tends to run around like a rabid greyhound. So if your argument is that Pardew has some sort of preconceived bias against a certain type of player that is leading him to treat all of Tevez, Mascherano, and Ben Arfa unfairly, again, you're going to have to tell me what this criteria is because I can't really figure it out. In the absence of that sort of distinction, maybe the question we should be asking is not "what's wrong with Pardew?" but "what's wrong with Ben Arfa?" At the end of the day, I don't really care about this whole song and dance. The desired end state is "win games" not "play Hatem Ben Arfa." I'm sure he has the potential to be good, probably even great, but so do a lot of players. It would be nice if he could make it work here, but If we're achieving the former a reasonable amount of times I'm not really bothered about how we're doing with the latter. So you tell us what's wrong with HBA and don't go down this work rate tosh coz he works harder than Obertan (at least based on the last game) and dam well harder than Shola. I'll tell you what's wrong with Pardew, he is an extremely negative manager whose first thoughts are always how do we not concede a goal. He clearly does not believe in the idea that attack is the best defence and that by putting pressure on the opponent's defence, they are far less likely to commit men forward and over run us. To a certain extent this defense policy has worked for us in that the defending side of our game is usually quite dependable. But to go to the next level and certainly against better teams we need to take chances and attack them, make them worry about us too. This is especially so against teams with attack minded fullbacks (Bale, Cole...etc) as these full backs are either forced to stay back and defend or move up as a second winger which cause all sorts of havoc to us. Against Spurs when we were down 0-2 after 10 minutes, Pardew wasn't thinking of how we can get back into the game, instead he just stood by and hope something magical would happen. By half time, he had basically given up the game, instead of strengthening our attack and try and get us some respect back which logically would have seen HBA thrown in for some attacking impetus, he brought in Ferguson and shifted Jonas to the right to support Simpson. This was a move to strengthen both flanks defensively but for what, we were already losing 0-4? But Pardew was more worried about conceding more goals than trying to get back a few goals hence the substitutions made. Of course the Arsenal magical comeback game would sort of negate my argument, but if we are honest the fightback was more a result of the sending off and us exploiting the numerical advantage than Pardew changing tactics to be more offensive. With this mindset, HBA is going to see very few games because although he works just as hard as the rest, he is exceptional attacking wise and is the type of player that makes something happen. This is not Pardew's priority at all, he'd rather play a percentage game, get crosses in and hope one of our strikers scores whilst all the while maintaining our defensive shape. HBA said this himself in the interview that he prefers to play pass and move whereas Pardew prefers him to put crosses into the box (which he said he is willing to adapt to...but for him to change his whole style of play, surprise surprise he will need games) . With Pardew's philosophy our progress will always have a glass ceiling and I doubt we'll be able to push much further than where we are now. What are the similarities between the two Manchester clubs, Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs and to a lesser extent Liverpool? They not only get points but they play good football based on fluid and quick passing. I'm not saying we're Stoke, but we are far away from playing a fluid passing game like these other teams even though it could well be argued that, we do have the players to play such a game. The difference between us and the other teams is the manager managing the respective teams.

We'll lose which is to be expected but I'm worried that someone's gonna take out Colo and that will be the end of our European ambition

Surely that works both ways though. To say that he can't be objective on HBA because he supports HBA would also mean you can't be objective in your assessment of NUFC because you support NUFC? If you don't want to debate the point, fair enough, no need to be accusatory

Gosh don't know what's wrong with you today. That was tongue in cheek referring to Shola's vodoo powers and the coincidence that we bring Cisse in (which logically pushes Shola down the pecking order) but then suddenly Best is out for the season and Shola moves back up to third choice. Must everything be explained to you in detail???

Must have missed this official announcement? Ok so who do you think is third choice then after Best is out? When did we sell Best? err you must have missed the part that Best is out for the season. It's all over the net man

Must have missed this official announcement? Ok so who do you think is third choice then after Best is out?

So Shola is now third choice! I swear the guy has some voodoo connection, we bring in Cisse and he takes out Best!

Same here, if goofy gets the job, won't be arsed to support England.

The one thing Capello did well was win qualification games. Not a tough ask, tbh. We've failed to qualify plenty of times before. The manager before him did. Yeah, and it was a farce. Just because teams have failed to qualify in the past doesn't mean it's not an easy achievement with the players England have. Ok so if qualification was piss easy and some of the other managers failed there, then surely it still means that Capello was relativey better than them. All England managers have easy game and difficult games. It's not like Capello was managing against the US Coast Guards whilst KK was managing against Brazil all the time. Sure the whole team and Capello's philosophy didn't work in S.Africa (which could be attributed to several factors like Rooney being so shit), but I don't see the need to make it out like he was poorer than the rest.

No chance we can win this with such a soft center midfield. With Ba and Cisse, we will score but we will concede even more. Will be 1-3 against us but it is to be expected. Drawing even if we play defensive football will be a huge achievement.

Let me respond on behalf of Reefatoon, "get a grip, Pardew is doing great, we're just one point off a champion league spot"

Yes Pardew, get a grip!! You have taken this team to within 1 point of a champions league spot, but you are not playing our show pony all the time, doesn't matter that the team is doing great things without him, we demand he plays!! FFS man up will you. Going by your quite frankly pathetic logic, let's not buy players in the summer, let's not eliminate our mistakes, let's not improve the way we play...hell let's not improve the team in anyway at all hey because we are just one point off 4th. that's not my pathetic logic mate, that's your pathetic attempt at twisting my words to make yourself look right. Well that's all you've been saying for the last few pages. Anytime anyone suggest that Pardew is wrong and should consider how to make the best use of a player that you yourself consider very talented, you come out with the same boring response "oh we're just 1 point off the champ league spot". The implication is clear, you're saying that just because we've done well, we shouldn't try to improve.

Yes Pardew, get a grip!! You have taken this team to within 1 point of a champions league spot, but you are not playing our show pony all the time, doesn't matter that the team is doing great things without him, we demand he plays!! FFS man up will you. Going by your quite frankly pathetic logic, let's not buy players in the summer, let's not eliminate our mistakes, let's not improve the way we play...hell let's not improve the team in anyway at all hey because we are just one point off 4th.

The only part that makes me slightly uncomfortable is that others can't really join in coz it's seen as somewhat religious?

I used to despise him especially when he was getting raped all over the place at LB, but I do think he is important to us now at least to provide some cover to our already thin squad. I hope he recovers soon (a few weeks, not months of even worse season over injury) even if it means that there will be times Pardew will play him ahead of HBA.

Think we'll lose 1-2 especially if we play a high line and get caught on the counter.

Zidane was just magical, his first touch and ball control was out of this world, even better than Messi

What's tired is the same old tedious straw man of arguing that anyone who'd criticize Ben Arfa in the slightest is somebody who'd like to see us start with Shola and Obertan every game. He's obviously a good player but he had abysmally bad games against Brighton and Blackburn that highlighted his weaknesses. I don't think that's an unreasonable statement to make. Well done, deal with an alleged strawman with a strawman of your own. Whose saying you can't criticize him? What's the point though if it's not in the context of how we should line up against Villa? I guess if you just like to moan, then by all means go ahead If that's a straw man, what exactly is the main point of Wullie's argument then? Because I never said he should be dropped, I never said he wast terrible, I merely criticized his recent performances and that is apparently grounds for ridicule. How is that qualitatively different from "you can't criticize him?" Again, your argument seems to boil down to "if you're criticizing him you must argue for dropping him or else you're just moaning." Where's the straw man then? We're going around in circles. You can criticize HBA (or any other player for that matter), no one is saying you can't. It's just pointless if you're not relating to a) our potential future line up and the b) the alternatives we have. So others (myself) included are well justified to say that you're just moaning. Do you expect everyone to just nod in agreement with you? We are going in circles because you're argument is unreasonable. I'm "moaning" if I say "he played badly and that highlighted his weaknesses"? I don't expect people to nod in agreement but I expect people to be civil and speak intelligently as opposed to just misrepresenting and belittling anyone they don't agree with. "You think Obertan should start? " doesn't count as intelligent discussion. Nice! So others should not belittle your argument and you start your first sentence by already saying that my argument is unreasonable...good example right there! The whole point of the Obertan point is just to put the argument in context i.e. despite HBA's weaknesses he is still the best we have for that particular position because relative to the other options we have, he is still the best we have. I'm sorry you don't find that as intelligent discussion. The best I can say is that we are just arguing from two different angles. You just want to highlight his weaknesses (and perhaps strengths) whereas others and myself are looking at the debate from the context of how the team should line up going forward. Is accusing me of doing whatever I say you're doing your "thing"? There's a clear difference between "I think you're being unreasonable" and "Obertan/Shola lover LOLZ" If you only care about how the team is going to line up then why do you feel the need to attack me for mentioning his weaknesses? It's not like I disagree that he should start ahead of Obertan in the first place? I'm being attacked on the internets!! Ouch!

What's tired is the same old tedious straw man of arguing that anyone who'd criticize Ben Arfa in the slightest is somebody who'd like to see us start with Shola and Obertan every game. He's obviously a good player but he had abysmally bad games against Brighton and Blackburn that highlighted his weaknesses. I don't think that's an unreasonable statement to make. Well done, deal with an alleged strawman with a strawman of your own. Whose saying you can't criticize him? What's the point though if it's not in the context of how we should line up against Villa? I guess if you just like to moan, then by all means go ahead If that's a straw man, what exactly is the main point of Wullie's argument then? Because I never said he should be dropped, I never said he wast terrible, I merely criticized his recent performances and that is apparently grounds for ridicule. How is that qualitatively different from "you can't criticize him?" Again, your argument seems to boil down to "if you're criticizing him you must argue for dropping him or else you're just moaning." Where's the straw man then? We're going around in circles. You can criticize HBA (or any other player for that matter), no one is saying you can't. It's just pointless if you're not relating to a) our potential future line up and the b) the alternatives we have. So others (myself) included are well justified to say that you're just moaning. Do you expect everyone to just nod in agreement with you? We are going in circles because you're argument is unreasonable. I'm "moaning" if I say "he played badly and that highlighted his weaknesses"? I don't expect people to nod in agreement but I expect people to be civil and speak intelligently as opposed to just misrepresenting and belittling anyone they don't agree with. "You think Obertan should start? " doesn't count as intelligent discussion. Nice! So others should not belittle your argument and you start your first sentence by already saying that my argument is unreasonable...good example right there! The whole point of the Obertan point is just to put the argument in context i.e. despite HBA's weaknesses he is still the best we have for that particular position because relative to the other options we have, he is still the best we have. I'm sorry you don't find that as intelligent discussion. The best I can say is that we are just arguing from two different angles. You just want to highlight his weaknesses (and perhaps strengths) whereas others and myself are looking at the debate from the context of how the team should line up going forward. Is accusing me of doing whatever I say you're doing your "thing"? There's a clear difference between "I think you're being unreasonable" and "Obertan/Shola lover LOLZ" If you only care about how the team is going to line up then why do you feel the need to attack me for mentioning his weaknesses? It's not like I disagree that he should start ahead of Obertan in the first place? I'm being attacked on the internets!! What's tired is the same old tedious straw man of arguing that anyone who'd criticize Ben Arfa in the slightest is somebody who'd like to see us start with Shola and Obertan every game. He's obviously a good player but he had abysmally bad games against Brighton and Blackburn that highlighted his weaknesses. I don't think that's an unreasonable statement to make. Well done, deal with an alleged strawman with a strawman of your own. Whose saying you can't criticize him? What's the point though if it's not in the context of how we should line up against Villa? I guess if you just like to moan, then by all means go ahead If that's a straw man, what exactly is the main point of Wullie's argument then? Because I never said he should be dropped, I never said he wast terrible, I merely criticized his recent performances and that is apparently grounds for ridicule. How is that qualitatively different from "you can't criticize him?" Again, your argument seems to boil down to "if you're criticizing him you must argue for dropping him or else you're just moaning." Where's the straw man then? We're going around in circles. You can criticize HBA (or any other player for that matter), no one is saying you can't. It's just pointless if you're not relating to a) our potential future line up and the b) the alternatives we have. So others (myself) included are well justified to say that you're just moaning. Do you expect everyone to just nod in agreement with you? We are going in circles because you're argument is unreasonable. I'm "moaning" if I say "he played badly and that highlighted his weaknesses"? I don't expect people to nod in agreement but I expect people to be civil and speak intelligently as opposed to just misrepresenting and belittling anyone they don't agree with. "You think Obertan should start? " doesn't count as intelligent discussion. Nice! So others should not belittle your argument and you start your first sentence by already saying that my argument is unreasonable...good example right there! The whole point of the Obertan point is just to put the argument in context i.e. despite HBA's weaknesses he is still the best we have for that particular position because relative to the other options we have, he is still the best we have. I'm sorry you don't find that as intelligent discussion. The best I can say is that we are just arguing from two different angles. You just want to highlight his weaknesses (and perhaps strengths) whereas others and myself are looking at the debate from the context of how the team should line up going forward. Is accusing me of doing whatever I say you're doing your "thing"? There's a clear difference between "I think you're being unreasonable" and "Obertan/Shola lover LOLZ" If you only care about how the team is going to line up then why do you feel the need to attack me for mentioning his weaknesses? It's not like I disagree that he should start ahead of Obertan in the first place? Who is accusing you of being an "Obertan/Sola lover LOLZ" So you want to have an intellectual debate but then say you are being "attacked" by statements that nobody made...never mind, I'll pass

Why can't we acknowledge both i.e. that there were political undertones and the fact that many fans who went to the stadium to watch football just ended up not coming back to their families? Are these two mutually exclusive? That if we understand the political motivation, we somehow can't mourn the death of the football fans?

What's tired is the same old tedious straw man of arguing that anyone who'd criticize Ben Arfa in the slightest is somebody who'd like to see us start with Shola and Obertan every game. He's obviously a good player but he had abysmally bad games against Brighton and Blackburn that highlighted his weaknesses. I don't think that's an unreasonable statement to make. Well done, deal with an alleged strawman with a strawman of your own. Whose saying you can't criticize him? What's the point though if it's not in the context of how we should line up against Villa? I guess if you just like to moan, then by all means go ahead If that's a straw man, what exactly is the main point of Wullie's argument then? Because I never said he should be dropped, I never said he wast terrible, I merely criticized his recent performances and that is apparently grounds for ridicule. How is that qualitatively different from "you can't criticize him?" Again, your argument seems to boil down to "if you're criticizing him you must argue for dropping him or else you're just moaning." Where's the straw man then? We're going around in circles. You can criticize HBA (or any other player for that matter), no one is saying you can't. It's just pointless if you're not relating to a) our potential future line up and the b) the alternatives we have. So others (myself) included are well justified to say that you're just moaning. Do you expect everyone to just nod in agreement with you? We are going in circles because you're argument is unreasonable. I'm "moaning" if I say "he played badly and that highlighted his weaknesses"? I don't expect people to nod in agreement but I expect people to be civil and speak intelligently as opposed to just misrepresenting and belittling anyone they don't agree with. "You think Obertan should start? " doesn't count as intelligent discussion. Nice! So others should not belittle your argument and you start your first sentence by already saying that my argument is unreasonable...good example right there! The whole point of the Obertan point is just to put the argument in context i.e. despite HBA's weaknesses he is still the best we have for that particular position because relative to the other options we have, he is still the best we have. I'm sorry you don't find that as intelligent discussion. The best I can say is that we are just arguing from two different angles. You just want to highlight his weaknesses (and perhaps strengths) whereas others and myself are looking at the debate from the context of how the team should line up going forward.

What's tired is the same old tedious straw man of arguing that anyone who'd criticize Ben Arfa in the slightest is somebody who'd like to see us start with Shola and Obertan every game. He's obviously a good player but he had abysmally bad games against Brighton and Blackburn that highlighted his weaknesses. I don't think that's an unreasonable statement to make. Well done, deal with an alleged strawman with a strawman of your own. Whose saying you can't criticize him? What's the point though if it's not in the context of how we should line up against Villa? I guess if you just like to moan, then by all means go ahead If that's a straw man, what exactly is the main point of Wullie's argument then? Because I never said he should be dropped, I never said he wast terrible, I merely criticized his recent performances and that is apparently grounds for ridicule. How is that qualitatively different from "you can't criticize him?" Again, your argument seems to boil down to "if you're criticizing him you must argue for dropping him or else you're just moaning." Where's the straw man then? We're going around in circles. You can criticize HBA (or any other player for that matter), no one is saying you can't. It's just pointless if you're not relating to a) our potential future line up and the b) the alternatives we have. So others (myself) included are well justified to say that you're just moaning. Do you expect everyone to just nod in agreement with you?

Question on Suarez, I thought he was banned for 8 games? But checking the team sheet, he only missed the games against us, Man City, Stoke, Bolton and Wolves which makes 5. What happened to the other 3 games? FA Cup and league cup?

Exactly, it's getting silly now and a lot seems to be based solely on the defence of one player. I like Ben Arfa a hell of a lot, he can be an absolute genius and has the natural ability far beyond a player we could (normally) realistically attract but it's also not difficult to see why he would cause a manager concern at times. It is a genuine shame that the issue is stopping some from enjoying a fantastic season. You can guarantee the same group will moan before every game that he won't start, moan if he doesn't start (usually with a comment like "well that's cost us the game!") or if he does start moan that others on the pitch didn't give him enough chances to show what he can do. He has the attention Barton could only dream of He has done brilliantly in the limited chances he has been given but there have also been clear signs why a manager who has based our eye opening success this season on team work has had to hold him back at times. I don't understand these obvious concerns a manager in Pardew's position would have about playing Ben Arfa. Care to enlighten me? As brilliant as he is he gives the ball away a fair bit when we seem to be in control and have players pushing forward, leaving us exposed to a counter attack. We have got lucky a few times. Personally I would have the lad in the side every week but it's not hard to see why he would give a manager something to think about. He does, but contrary to what some people on here would have you believe, he also works very hard to get it back. I remember at least two incidents this season where this happened and we scored from him winning back possession, lastly this past weekend our first goal vs Blackburn. As for the other players moving forward, this is a matter of tactics. When a player goes on a run the striker(s) and wingers should move forward, along with maybe one of the central midfielders, not both. If everybody pushes forward and we are caught out on the break that is not so much a problem with the person losing the ball (which is always a possibility), but also how the other players react to it. Another thing is we lose a lot of possession in other ways, be it by long punts that bounce off our forwards or go straight to the opposition or by wayward passes from the back or midfield. I would argue we lose the ball a lot more in these ways than we do by Ben Arfa losing it when he's trying to make something happen in the opposition half. The problem is, it's very noticeable when it happens when you're on the edge of your seat waiting for something exciting to happen, because he is that type of player, whereas when it's Krul or the defence kicking it long you almost expect us to lose the ball most of the time and it's a pleasant surprise if one of the strikers actually manages to make it stick. Percentage wise I don't think Ben Arfa loses more possession than many other players, but it gets noticed a lot more. The flip side is that whenever he does not lose the ball, he is much more likely to make something positive happen. For that reason it is imperative that we stick with him. Top post