tmonkey

Looked a decent player, worth a shot and would be a good Emre replacement as hes more naturally inclined to get forward.

The same Sir Alex who backed Steve McClaren as a manager who has fantastic potential? Itd be crazy to sack Big Sam right now. Unless a top coach, or somoene we really wanted, was lined up. Big Sam might still turn out to be a good manager for us, especially if he gets players that will suit his ugly system and mentality of playing, but if we can land the man who's real future is with us, someone who would suit us and can be seen as a man capable of bringing us trophies, then its better to be ruthless rather than waiting around with a man who doesnt truly have the board/fan's faith.

I dont care what tactics he plays, who he plays in whatever position, who he drops, and what rotation policy he uses. All I want is for us to either play decent football, or if not, a structured, disciplined style of playing, where we are organised, systematic, and efficient. And what I expect us not to do is to take up relegation-esque, Wimbledon-style tactics - all out defence with no inclination to attack, long ball as our only effective method of attacking, flooding the box and hoping for rebounds and loose balls, etc. And most importantly, play for a win, especially against mediocre opposition.

Shearer manager, Big Sam DoF.

So, noone is allowed to judge Smith based on what theyve seen (which includes a fair few games up front) throughout his career? Hes a good player and anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot and biased against him? I think someone is a bit of a Smith fanboy. I can't understand why you're quoting me unless you're confusing me with someone who gives a toss about your opinion. Ive quoted you because im one of the "idiots" you took a stab at, someone who didnt want us to sign either Duff or Smith, and for good reasons too outside of your paranoid, delusional "negative bias" bollocks. You take cheap shots left, right and centre, start mocking when you cant debate with :idiot2: and mackems.gif mackems.gif icons, and now resort to angry attacks because you dont like the same kind of treatment. Very nice of you. In future, dont post bollocks if you dont want people replying to it. And just one thing. Who says im quoting you for your attention? Its more a case of pointing out the ridiculous flaws in logic and basic common sense in your posts. Which you obviously dont like, irrespective of whether you value someone's opinion or not. mackems.gif Angry? You're also s**** at judging the mood of people when they make their posts. Your nonsense makes me laugh mate, you really shouldn't make out your posts are at all important. Fine, you weren't angry. Since you clearly dont know, the internet is pretty infamous for being a communication medium which can easily lead to misinterpreted intents. Trust you to pick out on one word and ignore the rest of the post. It still doesnt hide the fact that you take cheap shots at people with a different opinion to you, and clearly dislike a similar form of treatment, otherwise why the big man "excuse me mate, noone gives a shit about your opinion" on an internet forum based around opinions?

Its the manager's job to motivate the players. I dont think anyone would argue that Derby or Wigan have an equal first team on paper, let alone a better one. We have far superior and more talented players - so why are we so shit? If its the players who arent pulling their weight, why arent they, and who's job is it to ensure that they are? All roads lead to the manager imo.

So, noone is allowed to judge Smith based on what theyve seen (which includes a fair few games up front) throughout his career? Hes a good player and anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot and biased against him? I think someone is a bit of a Smith fanboy. I can't understand why you're quoting me unless you're confusing me with someone who gives a toss about your opinion. Ive quoted you because im one of the "idiots" you took a stab at, someone who didnt want us to sign either Duff or Smith, and for good reasons too outside of your paranoid, delusional "negative bias" bollocks. You take cheap shots left, right and centre, start mocking when you cant debate with :idiot2: and mackems.gif mackems.gif icons, and now resort to angry attacks because you dont like the same kind of treatment. Very nice of you. In future, dont post bollocks if you dont want people replying to it. And just one thing. Who says im quoting you for your attention? Its more a case of pointing out the ridiculous flaws in logic and basic common sense in your posts. Which you obviously dont like, irrespective of whether you value someone's opinion or not.

Damn women always faking rapes whenever a Premiership footballer stays in the same hotel. Hes innocent, I can guarantee it. Shes lying.

So, noone is allowed to judge Smith based on what theyve seen (which includes a fair few games up front) throughout his career? Hes a good player and anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot and biased against him? I think someone is a bit of a Smith fanboy.

Scolari has already announced that hes going to be leaving after Euro 2008. Might be a good replacement if its needed.

Joe Kinnear with statistics and double the number of coaches Like a good car salesman, he great at selling, and imo HTT thats what youve bought, the pitch, but when you get home and start using the car you realise how shit it is. Take it back, and the salesman will deny all the faults, laugh off his responsibility with a giant grin, point at the paperwork, and after that all youre left with is a confident and cocky salesman who is great at selling shit and you regretting you ever walked into the place. I can see now why Gartside made those comments about Big Sam after he had left.

Just because we fans cant come up with a perfect tailor made suggestion doesnt mean its not out there. Had you heard of Wenger before he became Arsenal's boss? Had you heard of or seen Pato, AC Milan's 15mill teenage forward from Brazil? What about Bernd Schuster, Capello's replacement at Madrid - im pretty sure very few of us on here had any idea who he was, yet hes stepped up to a mammoth club and has them playing good, attacking football. Football is far bigger than England + top CL sides + big international tournaments, and realistically thats what most of our fans' knowledge base will be limited to. It doesnt mean anything if we as fans cant put forward a good name - the expectation is that the board should have far more scope in its footballing knowledge. Youve pointed out the very reason why itd be worth sacking Big Sam - time and money. At the end of this season, he'll still need as much time and money as a better manager would need to turn things around. If at the end of this season Big Sam needs 3 more seasons and £60mill more to spend, then why stick with him if hes clearly not the tactical mastermind we were led to believe he is, and he'll be having us playing ugly, long ball football with dogfighting/defensive tactics - why give time and money to that when the young equivalent of Wenger, or someone far more experienced and successful than Allardyce, managing somewhere out in France, Portugal, Japan, wherever, could be given that same time span and same funding, but would be much more likely to succeed given that the brand of football would actually wash with the supporters, which is not a small thing to be overlooked.

Van Gaal.

For a player who people think is fearless and brave it's surprising how gutless he is with the ball at his feet in front of goal. To be fair to Smith, that was the first real game where hes looked timid when given the opportunity to shoot. At the start of the season in particular, he was happy to shoot on sight, and did so whenever it was on. The trouble is, most of thse shots ended up in row Z. Whether those few select diehard fans of his think hes being unfairly picked on or not, hes not doing himself any favours by looking so poor in front of goal. Needs to get his act together.

The result wouldnt matter if our only tactic wasnt just to launch the ball down the middle and tussling in the box hoping for rebounds or scruffy half chances. This is the biggest drawback with Big Sam. He was given the job because he was meant to be this tactically advanced super coach, someone who could whip his team into a disciplined system and style of play. Not this non league amateurish bullshit. The fact that he now needs to spend big money on top players to actually get us playing good football is a baffling situation - any manager could do that (well, apart from Souness), so why stick with Big Sam?

Thought he looked dashing. When Martins laid off a poor pass that resulting in the ball going out of play, Duff turned his head sharply to look at him, then turned back - his hair was like a a hula skirt the way it moved a second or so later, really impressive. Reminded me of Baloo the Bear dancing with the monkeys. http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org/images/baloo-kaa.jpg

Stand by for numerous people who said we didn't need him to do a u turn. He was always signed as a player of a good age, for a good fee, with his best years in front of him. Injury permitting. Best years in front of him? And we didnt need to sign him at the time. We needed players for other positions, as Huntington at left back and Sibierski/Rossi up front proved. Well, I hope you don't harp on about the club lacking "planning" if that is what you think. Nice to have him on the books to replace Nobby though, hopefully, now that he's gone, and he was knocking on 30 at the time we bought Duff. That new left back that we needed has done very well hasn't he, along with the other defenders we needed as well. Are you advocating instead of signing Sibierski and Rossi, we should have spent more money and gone more into debt by any chance ? Or do you think we would have got a top quality goalscorer for the 5m we paid for Duff, because I would be curious to know who exactly you had in mind at a price like that ? McCarthy for £6mill maybe? Who I think we should have signed is irrelevent. I dont know who was available or not. That doesnt mean we should have spent 1/3rd of the transfer budget on a third left winger. You know, we had NZogbia, Milner, Dyer, and Solano at the time. Why add another winger to that set, when the defensive squad was Ramage, Babayaro, Huntington, Boumsong, Taylor, Carr, Bernard, etc, and up front for that season we had Martins, Sibierski, Rossi, Ameobi? I appreciate that Duff used to be a top player, but he was rubbish for Chelsea by the time we signed him, and he was exactly the same for us. Maybe he'll do better under Big Sam, and I hope he does, but dont try and rubbish completely legitimate, and in fact correct, views about that particular signing at that time - as 14th place, poor performances and regularly being injured proved, did it not?

As for your comment about debt and transfer money, I dont think you understand my stance. My problem isnt with the fact that we were in debt, nor the fact that we were attempting to get out of the hole we had dug ourselves into (awful team on the pitch) by spending lavishly on players. The problem I had is that firstly, Shepherd signed his own targets by refusing to fund the managers' preferred ones (not wise for a man who thinks Souness is a good manager), and secondly, that he thought Souness was the man worthy of gambling the club's finances. Only an utter idiot of a chairman would have given Sounses the job in the first place, but then to give him the keys to the treasury, let him be the one who spends big despite the debts? Madness, idiotic, but that was Shepherd - out of touch. Woodgate was signed AFTER we qualified for the second phase of the CL, ie the second group stage, which was worth an added £10mill. When we signed Woodgate, that was specifically mentioned. The players we signed earlier on in the summer were from the summer's transfer budget. Dont try to confuse the issue here - we had extra income from the 2nd group stage, we spent it on Woodgate, we then spent nothing in the following season, and I know why. Shepherd thought we had a good squad that had just been improved by the addition of an "England international midfielder", which is how he described Bowyer. He thought he could get away with penny pinching, but as per usual, his decision backfired massively. Had we signed a good player or two that summer, especially with Woodgate, Dyer and Bellamy being our key players yet pretty injury prone, we could well have gone through against Partizan Belgrade, but we didnt. Anyway, even if im wrong, thats only one aspect of Shepher'd manamagent when it comes to not backing his manager. Care to explain why he refused to meet the valuation for Souness' preferred target, Anelka, yet didnt think twice about double that supposed valuation for Micheal Owen? Im not going to berate Shepherd for having ambition, however he shouldnt have been making footballing decisions ahead of what his manager wanted.

Ignoring the agenda driven opinions, this is correct. The whole balance of the team is wrong, I've been saying so for over 12 months, the sale of Solano and Dire - even though he disappeared down a big hole for many matches - has made it worse. Somebody at the club decided not to replace Solano, and Dire with someone who actually plays. Was it Allardyce's decision, if so he wants shot. Or was it a financial decision by the club ? If it was, to balance the books, and if this is going to be their approach, stand by for real mediocrity. Those who prefer balancing the books will then have nothing to complain about. This is a fairly basic point and it would be nice to know the answer. Solano and Dire both wanted to go mate, for different reasons, but they did. One I was happy to see the back of, the other not so. I've no agenda my friend - you're not a bit paranoid by any chance Theres that "negative bias" crap again. If anyone thinks Smith had a poor game or is an overrated/average player, then theyre being negatively biased, brainwashed by an agenda. You couldnt make this up. I guess this same "negative bias" is the reason for everyone absolutely hating Woodgate when he was up here... you read it wrong too, however there are a hell of a lot of whingers moaning on about playing in europe regularly over the past decade. Unless it's just because the fat b****** didn't leave you any his pies. I expect that after today, you'll be happy if we don't spend money in january to keep the books straight then ? If so, don't whinge on when you see real mediocrity, or the current performance carries on either. See my post in the Mort thread. Dont know where youve pulled this fat pie eating bastard rubbish from, but its pathetic to be making things up when you have no reply to give. As for what we'll spend in January, ive no problem with Allardyce buying players. I do have a problem with Souness being given 40mill to spend whilst we are also in large debt with a poor squad that requires an overhall and European qualification to sustain its financial position. You realise dont you that because of that gamble failing, the Halls were desperate to get out and sell their shares to just about anyone who was offering? Surely something ticks in your head and you realise the risk Shepherd took with that - hmm, large debts, Souness lots to spend, failed, bad team, owners are desperate to sell. Its a damning indication of the position we were in that Ashley had to pay off a huge chunk of the debt from his own personal money (already a better chairman than Shepherd, who only ever took from the club).

No, I dont dislike Shepherd because hes fat and eats pies - please stop making up arguements because you have nothing to reply with. I dislike him because he was clearly incompetent at running the club - you say a football club isnt like a high street store (clearly youre no expert on business), likewise its not a scrap metal business either. Yes, we did have some successful times under Shepherd, and kudos to him for that, but like any business, its possible for an organisation to do well even with an incompetent manager in charge. Im sure you dont think about that when you moan about the government or prime minister in this country, ignoring the fact that overall the UK is in a good position financially and in terms of its standard of living compared to the majority of other countries in the world. Same logic, fundamentally flawed of course, since you dont compare the UK to Somalia to judge the performance of the government as the resources are completely different. But hey, your logic is fine in your own little world. Shepherd was an embarassment, and clearly out of touch with football. The type of chairman whod come out with comments like "HEHEHE where are Robert and Bellamy now?", when Bellamy later went on to playing for Liverpool in the CL whilst we were getting hammered by Birmingham in the FA Cup. The type of chairman who would speak before he would think, the type of chairman who constantly lied throughout his time here - pleasant suprise, having to appoint a good manager after Souness because by his own words it was his last chance, etc. The type of chairman who would call an attempt by fans to promote a good manager to him as a gambling scam. Irrespective of arguements before Sir Bobby's dismissal, you cant deny that Shepherd lost the plot completely at that stage, making idiotic decision after idiotic decision. Declaring Robson was a dead man walking, sacking him early into a new season with noone lined up then looking at the likes of Bruce and Venables whilst our competition at the time had already signed one of the best managers from Spain, then backing Souness with money despite the club's debts, sacking him a day after the transfer window closed despite Souness clearly needing the sack long before then, appointing Roeder after lying to us about getting a top manager in this time, etc. Theres a lot of reasons to dislike Shepherd's chairmanship. As for your comment about debt and transfer money, I dont think you understand my stance. My problem isnt with the fact that we were in debt, nor the fact that we were attempting to get out of the hole we had dug ourselves into (awful team on the pitch) by spending lavishly on players. The problem I had is that firstly, Shepherd signed his own targets by refusing to fund the managers' preferred ones (not wise for a man who thinks Souness is a good manager), and secondly, that he thought Souness was the man worthy of gambling the club's finances. Only an utter idiot of a chairman would have given Sounses the job in the first place, but then to give him the keys to the treasury, let him be the one who spends big despite the debts? Madness, idiotic, but that was Shepherd - out of touch. And as for the small minority of people who thought Souness deserved a chance, thats just you sidestepping the issue again. Who's talking about them here? The point is that nearly everyone knew Souness was a shit manager, except for Shepherd - those who backed him only did so because he was already in the job, and thats what fans are meant to do. Everyone knew how it would end, Blackburn fans were falling over themselves and laughing for pete's sake, yet Shepherd appointed him then tasked him with spending big. Again, dont side step the issue, the man was an idiot for making that appointment and all the decisions that went with it. A non-idiotic board was scouring the globe looking for a good manager, ours was holding interviews with Venables and Bruce. Jesus wept.

Ignoring the agenda driven opinions, this is correct. The whole balance of the team is wrong, I've been saying so for over 12 months, the sale of Solano and Dire - even though he disappeared down a big hole for many matches - has made it worse. Somebody at the club decided not to replace Solano, and Dire with someone who actually plays. Was it Allardyce's decision, if so he wants shot. Or was it a financial decision by the club ? If it was, to balance the books, and if this is going to be their approach, stand by for real mediocrity. Those who prefer balancing the books will then have nothing to complain about. This is a fairly basic point and it would be nice to know the answer. Solano and Dire both wanted to go mate, for different reasons, but they did. One I was happy to see the back of, the other not so. I've no agenda my friend - you're not a bit paranoid by any chance Theres that "negative bias" crap again. If anyone thinks Smith had a poor game or is an overrated/average player, then theyre being negatively biased, brainwashed by an agenda. You couldnt make this up. I guess this same "negative bias" is the reason for everyone absolutely hating Woodgate when he was up here...

Stand by for numerous people who said we didn't need him to do a u turn. He was always signed as a player of a good age, for a good fee, with his best years in front of him. Injury permitting. Best years in front of him? And we didnt need to sign him at the time. We needed players for other positions, as Huntington at left back and Sibierski/Rossi up front proved.

Iniesta is absolutely immense, but he needs to cut out the diving.

Its not even that. Hes a crock, and the best way to deal with a more attacking crock is to bench them regularly and only have them starting the odd game - when theyre not starting, opposition midfielders and defenders dont get instructions like "take him out of the game, rough him up, hes fragile". Thats why Madrid got a whole season out of Owen. Regularly benched, coming on when the opposition were tired and had no gameplan from the off to deal with him (ie rough him up), starting the odd game, it was a good way to reduce the possibility of injury and keeping him at a prime fitness level. I think both of them would be good players to have on the bench. Whether theyd be happy with that is another matter.

Thank God im not the only one who sees it. Hes been like that for years. Hate his type of player, must be a fucking cunt to play against.