TRon

With Best out and Nolan next week, anyone who even looks like he might get a goal is going to start against Villa. Loven is one of those (and there aren't many).

That won't be so bad. Barton will have to look to get in goal scoring positions in Nolan's absence, and hopefully we'll get the same level of performance from Shola in the absence of Best.

Midfield has gone awol

Says everything that we seem to have a firmer date for HBA's comeback game than Ireland's.

He's the fittest player at the club according to those stats so no doubt he'll dominate the midfield and run his opposite from Wolves into the ground like happened at Stevenage.

I expect we'll lose. Neither side has much quality but I have a feeling they'll have more desire and work rate.

Assuming that Nolan does the "easy passing" well, if he ends up getting the same amount of goals as a more creative AM gets assists, isn't he essentially doing the same thing? (In a much less pretty way, of course) Maybe yeah, it's pretty hard to tell. My personal view is that the team would function better without him in the long-run, but we're not at the point where we should be leaving him out yet. He's basically a relatively tidy but immobile central midfield player who has a knack of getting into the box at the right time because he reads the game well. I wouldn't even call him an attacking midfielder in the sense we're discussing. There could be an argument that a goal poaching forward could do a similar job, as Michael Owen did under Keegan, except he was more mobile. It's a moot point as we don't have one but if we did....

My verdict on Pardew will be made this summer depending on the players he signs and which ones he retains. He might not be able to prevent one or two players leaving for more successful clubs, but if he hands out new contracts to mediocre players who will prevent us moving forward it will show which way the club is headed.

Despite the flak he's taking on here his point is a good one. Also the photo of Nolan in his earlier career indisputably proves the fact that the version which is playing for us is a lard arse.

It must have been doctored. Nah, he's only 11 there. He's just big boned.

It must have been doctored.

Nolan is on an estimated 50k a year, giving him a new contract is far from cheap. He won't be offered 50k a year, he'll probably be offered 25-30k. Nolan is the perfect player for a club with no ambition because no decent club will want him, and we can play a long ball game in the hope he will score enough goals to keep us up. This will also mean we can spend less on other players as the long ball game can be played with relatively cheap shite players who won't rock the boat like Leon Best and we won't need to sign genuine quality footballers all over the pitch. So when you look at it that way, re-signing Fatty Nolan would be cheap even at 50k a week and no doubt that will be factored in to the decision to offer him a new contract.

Bolton were a shit club who over-achieved due to long ball tactics exploited by Fat Sam with a much fitter Nolan as a key part of his set piece percentage game. Since we have bought Nolan from them which club has moved forward despite having far less resources?

Yes the football was great for a while, we had mobility in the right places. Signing Duff fucked up N'Zogbia and respect for Roeder nose-dived in the following season.

Giving Nolan a new contract is the biggest indicator you could wish for that Ashley wants to build a cheap club which will do just enough to avoid relegation every season. He might not contribute to bettering the style and flow of the team but his goals will probably get us enough points to keep us up while at the same time ensuring we can never be a team aiming for the top echelons. Because no decent ball playing side will ever buy Nolan. Ever.

So what happened? Well we were bought out by new visionary owners in John Hall and Shepherd. They went public and got shareholders to fund their spending spree and when it stopped working they sold up and took their cash plus massive profits and dividends out of the club. Now Ashley is being accused of trying to do the same. Nothing much changes really.

For me it just comes down to whether Barton is a player who can still command big wages. There are only a few in our squad who if they didn't get them here could walk away and get a better offer elsewhere. Enrique is one, Tiote is another. Barton has done well for us out wide this season but he's not pulled up any trees since Carroll left. If Barton was able to do his stuff in central midfield I think he'd be worth a lot more, because while Nolan's in there we are going to remain limited. There might be a debate at the moment whether to give Barton a new contract or spend that money on a younger, quicker player with potential.

I think there are 14 (maybe 15, Spurs is questionable) Premiership sides that would be very willing to employ Mr. Barton. He'll not match his current wage at any club, though. So basically you are agreeing that he's over-valuing his own worth. No decent club will be in for him.

So you'd rather we hadn't signed him in the first place then? Alternatively we could have not signed him then given the money saved to Keegan who may have spent it on offering a mega contract to Michael Owen.

For a player who is too slow to be in demand at any top club I'm surprised Barton is holding out for a bigger pay packet while at the same time saying he won't be forced out of Newcastle. Where will he go then?

He's more than good enough for us. In defense yes, in attack no. But hopefully he will improve. He's worth more to us for his attitude alone than any money we might make on selling him for a supposed slight deficiency in attacking pedigree. The type of club who would buy him wouldn't pay the sort of money required to make us even contemplate it.

That's the key for me. I would rather be without crucial players against the likes of Man U than relegation rivals. Stoke are shit but we got turned over 4-0 because without certain players we are shit. Wolves isn't a guaranteed win by a long shot with no strikers up front.

maybe after asking him and examining him they thought he was fit enough ? Well they were proved spectacularly wrong. Again. many players carry knocks and niggles into games......should we only play those 100% fit ? we'd need a squad of more than the regulation 25. i don't know what his injury was like going into today (well yesterday) do you ? I know Graeme Souness used to rush players back before they were fully fit to save his own hide. Steve Taylor is one who comes to mind when he was coming back from a dislocated shoulder. Shola playing in a mask is another if we come back to current times. I said this in the Ben Arfa thread earlier this week that I am glad he is in France otherwise he would probably have been out there today alongside Ireland and Gosling. All crocked to the max as things stand today. is there a difference between taylor coming back from a dislocated shoulder and doing it again and vianas doing it under SBR ? other than the lightning quick, fast passing athleticism and end product which led to Champions league football, no.

Didn't see Shola going up for many headers in his mask. Understandable really. And? why do you need an "and" to that statement?

Didn't see Shola going up for many headers in his mask. Understandable really.