TRon

Pretty ironic saying people need to let it go when you sound pretty bitter there. What's bitter about it? It seems to be far more based on reason than championing Barton's value based on his now legendary twitter crap.

Shola, Lovenkrands and Best are among our four current best strikers. How can our B targets not be better options than them?

I must admit, despite liking some of Bendtner's attributes I could never convince myself enough about them to actually post here recommending we sign him when we had the chance. He's always seemed like a shit finisher to me and I hate that in a striker. Even now if you pushed me would I rather have him or Ba, I'd still plump for Ba tbh.

Which is one of the major reasons I was happy to see us sell Nolan, as though he did well as an individual, as a team we could never move forward while he was in our midfield because of the football we would end up playing to accommodate him. Carroll is a good striker but not for a team which is built around a passing game.

I agree our attempts were rubbish, but even more worryingly I think we were serious. It seems pretty obvious that the transfer market is a difficult place to do business. There are differering agendas from players, their agents and the clubs themselves and they all have to be dealt with. We seem to be ok at identifying and closing in on release clauses and free transfers. We can also pick out a bargain. But to me we have demonstrated that there is a lack of the right sort of negotiating expertise in our structure. There are times when a bit of flexibility is required. One of the journos (Edwards?) said we are always looking for the perfect deal when, at times, you have to bite the bullet and pay a full price for a player you really need - and I think that view is right. Couldn't agree more. What annoys me, and I suspect a lot of other people, is that "the perfect deal" is sometimes paying a bit more to get a component you need rather than look at it in isolation. If we had to spend an extra £2m on signing a striker it would probably have been worth at least that just in finishing several places higher in the league table, generating excitement and therefore higher gates and so on. I just don't understand our mentality sometimes. By all means work within a budget, but when you've banked so much money from sales why not invest a bit more in the players who will take you on a level? It makes business sense to do so for most people. I'm not entirely sure it was a case of just offering a higher price, but more worryingly that extra nous is needed when the target player's club do not want to sell. Lets face it any idiot can transact a deal when the club wants to sell but we seem to lack someone with the the ability to make it happen when they don't. During the last days of the transfer window the only forwards who moved were discards and if we are aiming higher than that then we need someone involved who is capable of making it happen. Ruiz is the one I can't get my head around. If there were no players of the right quality available then fair enough, but why wait all summer then bid for Ruiz at the last minute? Because we were hoping to sign Mobidu Maiga despite Socheaux telling us repeatedly that they weren't going to sell without getting a replacement? What utter s***. Did we bid for him ? I think Sky need to keep some kind of frenzy going on the last night to maintain audience figures. They could have probably said early on that no one was going to be signed but that doesn't keep the large Newcastle interest going, so the mad presenters spout a load of guff and the punters keep viewing. Jim White strings the audience along building up their hopes and keeps them watching the adverts. Considering his name had never been mentioned until the last day and no one from the club has mentioned him at all I wonder if there was ever anything in the Ruiz story apart from Sky feeding internet sites and vice versa. Cue hysteria and much wailing but nothing of any substance. If Sky made up that crap about us having a helicopter waiting to whisk Ruiz to Newcastle then I'm surprised our board didn't call them on it and deny it outright. It would have totally blown Sky's credibility out of the water to make up such a lie, so the fact that no one from the club has denied it means: a) it was true b) Llambias was happy for the story to run even if it was complete bollocks either way the board don't come out of it very well do they?

I agree our attempts were rubbish, but even more worryingly I think we were serious. It seems pretty obvious that the transfer market is a difficult place to do business. There are differering agendas from players, their agents and the clubs themselves and they all have to be dealt with. We seem to be ok at identifying and closing in on release clauses and free transfers. We can also pick out a bargain. But to me we have demonstrated that there is a lack of the right sort of negotiating expertise in our structure. There are times when a bit of flexibility is required. One of the journos (Edwards?) said we are always looking for the perfect deal when, at times, you have to bite the bullet and pay a full price for a player you really need - and I think that view is right. Couldn't agree more. What annoys me, and I suspect a lot of other people, is that "the perfect deal" is sometimes paying a bit more to get a component you need rather than look at it in isolation. If we had to spend an extra £2m on signing a striker it would probably have been worth at least that just in finishing several places higher in the league table, generating excitement and therefore higher gates and so on. I just don't understand our mentality sometimes. By all means work within a budget, but when you've banked so much money from sales why not invest a bit more in the players who will take you on a level? It makes business sense to do so for most people. I'm not entirely sure it was a case of just offering a higher price, but more worryingly that extra nous is needed when the target player's club do not want to sell. Lets face it any idiot can transact a deal when the club wants to sell but we seem to lack someone with the the ability to make it happen when they don't. During the last days of the transfer window the only forwards who moved were discards and if we are aiming higher than that then we need someone involved who is capable of making it happen. Ruiz is the one I can't get my head around. If there were no players of the right quality available then fair enough, but why wait all summer then bid for Ruiz at the last minute? Because we were hoping to sign Mobidu Maiga despite Socheaux telling us repeatedly that they weren't going to sell without getting a replacement? What utter shit.

You think? No one wanted him on a free transfer, why do you think he's going to go to a better club when he's a year older and you've got to pay a transfer fee if you want him? Fair point but I don't see him lasting at QPR for a variety of reasons and think he'll be attractive to more people next year when other clubs who had already spent their budget this window may find the funds or see a gap that needs plugging that they didn't see this month. Wouldn't even surprise me to see him go abroad. So when he's a year older, on higher wages, suddenly clubs will become more interested in signing Barton? Seriously, Barton fanboys need to get past their delusions that he is as highly rated by other clubs as he is by them. He's had his best season for 4 years and still there were no takers from any established top flight club even on a free. He might be a hoot on twitter but on the pitch it's a pretty expensive package for a midfielder who struggles in his natural position these days.

I agree our attempts were rubbish, but even more worryingly I think we were serious. It seems pretty obvious that the transfer market is a difficult place to do business. There are differering agendas from players, their agents and the clubs themselves and they all have to be dealt with. We seem to be ok at identifying and closing in on release clauses and free transfers. We can also pick out a bargain. But to me we have demonstrated that there is a lack of the right sort of negotiating expertise in our structure. There are times when a bit of flexibility is required. One of the journos (Edwards?) said we are always looking for the perfect deal when, at times, you have to bite the bullet and pay a full price for a player you really need - and I think that view is right. Couldn't agree more. What annoys me, and I suspect a lot of other people, is that "the perfect deal" is sometimes paying a bit more to get a component you need rather than look at it in isolation. If we had to spend an extra £2m on signing a striker it would probably have been worth at least that just in finishing several places higher in the league table, generating excitement and therefore higher gates and so on. I just don't understand our mentality sometimes. By all means work within a budget, but when you've banked so much money from sales why not invest a bit more in the players who will take you on a level? It makes business sense to do so for most people.

The questions are all valid but it's a bit pointless even attempting to answer them IMO. When you have had 7 months to replace your main striker but failed in several attempts due mostly to not wanting to spend the money to persuade clubs to sell, or wasting too much time on targets who had no interest in coming, then there really isn't any justification which would satisfy fans. Action speaks louder than words and our rubbish attempts to bring in the much needed striker said everything about how serious we were.

If he's played at left back for Mourinho at Inter Milan and won praise from the special one, then he can obviously do a job there. Ideally we'll buy a genuine left back at some point and he can move across to the right. Or maybe Shane Ferguson will push for the left back spot. Santon will add a lot going forward in any case, and he seems to have the Enrique knack of matching opposing wingers stride for stride then dispossessing them.

Hopefully he's just as averse to leaving Newcastle as Shola. In which case the board can offer him a £100/week rise and he'll gladly take it. knocking back a 150k a week offer from King Kunny Dalglish.

That would vindicate the board's policy of not communicating with the fans then. They could turn round and say there is no point seeing as the fans already know the answers.

Has a spine? is s*** in midfield is an alternative view. Aye, because Guthrie is f***ing awesome.... no he isn't I agree. But at least he hasn't built a midfield rep based on popping up in the opposition area and scoring a goal now and then. Michael Owen did that under Keegan when he was considered to slow to be a forward and he looked 10 x the player Gosling is. Michael Owen Think I'll refer you to this, and go to bed It seems ridiculous now doesn't it? Yet if we cast our minds back just a few years...

Has a spine? is s*** in midfield is an alternative view. Aye, because Guthrie is fucking awesome.... no he isn't I agree. But at least he hasn't built a midfield rep based on popping up in the opposition area and scoring a goal now and then. Michael Owen did that under Keegan when he was considered to slow to be a forward and he looked 10 x the player Gosling is.

Has a spine? is shit in midfield is an alternative view.

Well it works both ways I suppose. If Keegan was right about Pardew not getting the money, it would have more impact if some other club had hired Keegan endorsing his view that NUFC were the only club with clueless owners. Keegan certainly wanted work in management after his walk out at Newcastle.

That's quite a short term view surely? At the end of the day if using NUFC as a giant advertising board is the sole aim, then it would be counter productive to be associated with a mediocre club I would have thought. I think it's more likely Ashley just wants to cut his losses and will sell at the first decent offer.

Fair enough but I doubt playing a few extra games will magically add the qualities he is missing. I'd be interested to hear if the Everton fans who post here view it differently.

From what I've seen Guthrie's a far better player technically. Guthrie's problem has always been his tendency to hide, so tbf, Gosling is better in that regard.

I don't think he doesn't like foreigners, I just don't know whether he actually knows how to use them yet. Watching us try to battle with Scunthorpe didn't inspire confidence tbh. It was noticeable that once we introduced flair players like Sameobi and Vukic they couldn't live with us.

Gosling looks quite ordinary from what I've seen. Limited technically but has a good eye for goal. Pretty much a younger version of Nolan. He needs to improve the actual midfield part of his game, ball retention, passing, bringing the ball out etc. No doubt he'll stick a few in the net otherwise though, given enough games.

I don't think so really. The signings these days are mostly from the continent so I would imagine the next manager would also be foreign. I said so a long way back in this thread even before the season started. Pardew's preference of Shola over Ba and inclusion of Barton while he was here also suggests he is more comfortable with British players he knows. It's too early to say though, but our early games have been a bit long ball based so far. Pardew has to be more like Keegan in getting his message across about passing football. Or it means that Ba wasn't fit while Shola was and Marveaux wasn't fit while Barton was. That might be all it was. I just read in one of our local papers that Pardew leaned towards British based strikers this transfer window, remembered how he left out Mascherano and Tevez from his West Ham teams and witnessed the long ball tactics in the first three games this season. It might just be a bedding in period and hopefully the football will come with more games. I'm just throwing it out there that Tim Krul blasting the ball into the sky towards Shola and Best isn't likely to get the best out of Cabaye and Marveaux over the course of the season.

I don't think so really. The signings these days are mostly from the continent so I would imagine the next manager would also be foreign. I said so a long way back in this thread even before the season started. Pardew's preference of Shola over Ba and inclusion of Barton while he was here also suggests he is more comfortable with British players he knows. It's too early to say though, but our early games have been a bit long ball based so far. Pardew has to be more like Keegan in getting his message across about passing football.

How many proven strikers will you get for £8m and 40k a week?

He won't go anywhere unless he's been offered a job somewhere else.