magorific

Not praising KK for Howey's conversion is pathetic, frankly. Or is it universal practice to just give crap centre-forwards a go at the back? He also brought the youngsters - particularly Lee Clark - on leaps and bounds after their confidence was all but shattered by being thrown in together at once by Ossie (God love him). To suggest Ashley's policy is to follow the Arsenal way is equally laughable - or spectacularly gullible - or both. Just because that's the policy the club say they are pursuing doesn't make it so, ffs. Or does Wenger have players sold against his wishes and others signed for him by other people (via Youtube)? Jesus wept.

Same old s***. Criticising Keegan = Loving Ashley. A bit rich accusing others of spouting the same old s*** when you roll out the "spat the dummy out" argument repeatedly in the face of evidence compelling enough to convince an independent Premier League panel that KK had been, in effect, forced out. http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,75153.msg2841019.html#msg2841019

What ARE you banging on about? You're not seriously blaming relegation on KK...

I don't remember many - any - complaints about how we finished the 2007-08 season with this "dinosaur" in charge, or our initial performances in 2008-09. But never mind. Talking about players coming through the ranks, which of our managers during that general era did that? I remember Keegan turning an utterly crap centre-forward into an international centre-back once. I also remember him giving regular football to homegrown players. Do you? As for the idea of being "petulant" and "dummy-spitting", I repeat: an independent tribunal decided he had been anything but.

Yes, it is...isn't it. Oh sorry, I guess you must have meant the Ashley party line, rather than the Keegan one. Yes, the Keegan party line - and the independent Premier League panel party line.

Re: players KK dicovered: Bassong. A player who made Ashley several times more than what KK's settlement cost. Next.

A judgement that confirmed what people suspected of Ashley and co, but also meant that Keegan's decision for the club that 'means so much to him' was to leave it in the lurch and solely in the hands of those people. And stuff his self-respect into the bargain eh? Seriously, how the f**k could he continue working with people who had lied to him, and left him looking like a lame duck re the sale of Milner? How the f**k could he continue working for them, knowing there was zero prospect of them selling up and shipping out but EVERY prospect of leaving him looking like an idiot time and time and time again? Get real.

f*** knows, ask the thread starter. We've established KK has said nowt out of turn, yet the same people keep trotting out the same anti-KK crap, despite the damning evidence against Ashley and co heard by an independent panel - and that independent panel's damning judgement against Ashley and co in KK's favour. Lock this thread.

If he goes - and ends up leaving for good in the summer - I hope some of those who have destroyed him on here in recent weeks/months acknowledge the work he did in getting us up. He's done a decent job for us all in all.

Isn't a goal threat. Apart from when he scores. Or goes bloody close (as he did yesterday). Give. Head. A. Shake.

Nonsense. Who finished fourth last year? Who was their left-back?

Fantastic game. Had it on video for years. Can still remember Brian Moore's commentary now: "They've fought so hard and they've played so well. Bottom of the league? You must be joking."

love these posts. as if ashley is bothered about anything except money. Sorry, I'll try harder to make my opinions conform to yours in future. Have to say it's bizarre that anyone would trust Ashley to act sensibly.

You don't, really.

This. if we use that 35M wisely including investing in a top striker (there are quite a few around who is actually better than Carroll), then I don't give a tosh if the one banging in the goals for us is Geordie or not. Those are just emotional niceties which has no bearing on the club's performance. if we use that 35M wisely including investing in a top striker (there are quite a few around who is actually better than Carroll), then I don't give a tosh if the one banging in the goals for us is Geordie or not. Those are just emotional niceties which has no bearing on the club's performance. I agree the fact he is a Geordie is neither here nor there, but Carroll's potential value to us went way, way beyond what Liverpool paid for him. I'm assuming you are suggesting we could attract one of these "better" strikers you mention. I'd be interested to know who you're talking about. On your second question, too many if you are willing to look outside the Premier league. On your first question, I don't know whether or not we can attract these better players, if we don't get in someone at least as good as Carroll in the summer, then we would have done poorly but like I said that's because we didn't replace him not because we sold a striker whose had half a good season of premiership for 35M Sorry, but how can you call Carroll's sale good business if it hinges on what you acknowledge is a likely inability to attract a better striker? I'd still like to know the identity of these better strikers. Better in terms of stats and experience, perhaps. But a better bet in this league than Carroll? I guess you'd have nominated Dzeko before he went to City...

This. if we use that 35M wisely including investing in a top striker (there are quite a few around who is actually better than Carroll), then I don't give a tosh if the one banging in the goals for us is Geordie or not. Those are just emotional niceties which has no bearing on the club's performance. if we use that 35M wisely including investing in a top striker (there are quite a few around who is actually better than Carroll), then I don't give a tosh if the one banging in the goals for us is Geordie or not. Those are just emotional niceties which has no bearing on the club's performance. I agree the fact he is a Geordie is neither here nor there, but Carroll's potential value to us went way, way beyond what Liverpool paid for him. I'm assuming you are suggesting we could attract one of these "better" strikers you mention. I'd be interested to know who you're talking about.

Williamson could have done better on that occasion?? WTF? He produced an utterly p*ss weak attempt at what should have been a regulation tackle. You just emphasise the point that Williamson is excused his howlers whereas Taylor - partly because some have swallowed the club line that he's nothing but a mercenary - is given no leeway. As for Harper talking up Williamson, what do you expect him to say if asked about him? How often do you hear players doing anything but praise a team-mate when asked? If you use teammates' public opinions to judge a player, we've had nothing but world-beaters. It's trite and pathetic to suggest that just because Harper praises him, Williamson is top class. Beyond absurd.

Probably says a lot more than a 100 pages of forum discussion. http://www.shieldsgazette.com/sport/football/newcastle-united/black-white/harper_hails_iron_mike_1_3101734 That's exactly what I've tried to point out. Williamson is crucial against physical teams and areal attackers like Zigic. No way Taylor would have won the same amount of headers as Williamson did against Bham. Were you at Bolton, or at the home game against Blackburn?

So you're denying that there was significant dissent on this forum towards Taylor while the contract thing dragged on? You're denying that coloured people's opinions of him, despite him barely putting a foot wrong when fit last season? Yep, heard it all now... Got to be said, Taylor's had 6 seasons in the PL. The fact you're pointing to half a season in The Championship as proof of his quality says it all. Ultimately, both Taylor and Williamson are lower-end PL defenders. The players around them on the pitch have lots of quality and consistency, so replacing one or both is not a major priority at this moment. Says a man who insisted not so long ago that Taylor would and should come in for Williamson when fit.

So you're denying that there was significant dissent on this forum towards Taylor while the contract thing dragged on? You're denying that coloured people's opinions of him, despite him barely putting a foot wrong when fit last season? Yep, heard it all now... Got to be said, Taylor's had 6 seasons in the PL. The fact you're pointing to half a season in The Championship as proof of his quality says it all. Ultimately, both Taylor and Williamson are lower-end PL defenders. The players around them on the pitch have lots of quality and consistency, so replacing one or both is not a major priority at this moment. So you're denying that there was significant dissent on this forum towards Taylor while the contract thing dragged on? You're denying that coloured people's opinions of him, despite him barely putting a foot wrong when fit last season? Yep, heard it all now... I'm not denying that at all Nor am I denying that it coloured people's opinions of him. But many see Williamson as the safer and simpler defender. It's got nothing to do with what he what he demanded in his contract. So people's opinion of Taylor is coloured, but their opinion of him has nothing to do with what he demanded in his contract. Mmm... Again, I'm not saying Taylor is as good as Colo, just that I can't see why people should see Williamson as in any way "safe" after mistakes in the numerous games mentioned. Mistakes which, to my mind, were worse than I've seen Taylor make. As for the argument re Taylor only performing in the Championship, I don't remember him being particularly to blame for us getting relegated. In fact, I remember him as one of our better performers.

I don't see Williamson throwing himself to the ground when he gets caught out of position, repeatedly. No, but he's been left literally on his arse enough times in recent months. Not to mention the wrestling at every free kick/corner.

So you're denying that there was significant dissent on this forum towards Taylor while the contract thing dragged on? You're denying that coloured people's opinions of him, despite him barely putting a foot wrong when fit last season? Yep, heard it all now...

No agenda with me, just addressing the simple argument - which was started by other people on here - about whether Williamson or Taylor are the better player. As you should well know, as an administrator, if there is an agenda concerning this subject on this foum, it's against Taylor, at least in part because so many have chosen to swallow the club's side of his contract "saga". That's the club run by liars. I've made my point re Colo many times (check if you want): he's a fantastic talent - as good a footballing defender as I've seen anywhere - but can be found wanting when met with serious pace and power. Is he our No 1 centre-half? Undoubtedly, and Taylor would be well off realising he will never be half the footballer Colo is. But, sorry, I won't turn a blind eye to Williamson's frailties, which have cost us goals and points against several teams other than Bolton, and - in my opinion - are more glaring than Taylor's. Mine's an opinion - an opinion voiced in a thread entitled Mike Williamson. If it was an agenda, I'd start off a whole new thread. Good post. Apologies for lumping you in with other posters who chime in with their rehashed restated boilerplate convictions irrespective of individual performances or, more egregiously, a series of individual performances. My bad though, seriously - this thread is particularly weighed down by such posters, but I was wrong to assume you were one of them. That said, I still can't agree with you about Williamson's shortcomings being more glaring than Taylor's. With so little evidence of Taylor's performance to go on from this season, I can see such a discussion becoming cyclical very quickly - but in the five full games Taylor played this season we conceded 10 goals. [i'm willing to accept that was his "come back" after a long time out, and much of it was paired alongside Sol Campbell against pretty decent opposition.] As my parting shot though, I will say that Taylor at centre-back makes me nervous - he's a hothead, often cheats and doesn't look as an intelligent a player as Williamson - who I think is learning from Colo and showing progress. Perhaps by virtue of all his injuries/time out, Taylor doesn't look to have matured significantly as a defender in his time here. So, without trying to forcibly change your opinion, for these reasons and those stated above for me I'd definitely rank Williamson over Colo - and I'd rate him high enough (relative to a club of our standing) not to bring in another first-choice centre back this summer either. The real world isn't fantasy football (Man City, Chelski etc aside) and realistically, even with a possible £35m war chest this summer - I'd much rather have the three or four signings we bring in be: LB cover CM 1st team CM cover CF 1st team Prior to the last couple of months, I'd have happily seen Taylor come back in at right-back, as I think he's a solid bet there. But Simpson has more than earned his place now. Personally, I'd love to see us buy a top-class centre-back. Gary Cahill or Hangeland would be great, but that's fantasy stuff.

No agenda with me, just addressing the simple argument - which was started by other people on here - about whether Williamson or Taylor are the better player. As you should well know, as an administrator, if there is an agenda concerning this subject on this foum, it's against Taylor, at least in part because so many have chosen to swallow the club's side of his contract "saga". That's the club run by liars. I've made my point re Colo many times (check if you want): he's a fantastic talent - as good a footballing defender as I've seen anywhere - but can be found wanting when met with serious pace and power. Is he our No 1 centre-half? Undoubtedly, and Taylor would be well off realising he will never be half the footballer Colo is. But, sorry, I won't turn a blind eye to Williamson's frailties, which have cost us goals and points against several teams other than Bolton, and - in my opinion - are more glaring than Taylor's. Mine's an opinion - an opinion voiced in a thread entitled Mike Williamson. If it was an agenda, I'd start off a whole new thread.

Aye, right. I didn't even mention Bolton away. Think Taylor would have been forgiven by the sheep-like hate mob on here if he'd been party to that debacle?