tmonkey

Drogba has scored 30 this season though "only" 18 in the league. He has a massive part in that Chelsea are still in the race for the title IMO Hes a striker though, goals tallies only truly apply to them. In terms of form, Scholes and Giggs have been better than him. There was a point when Drogba was on top form and scoring every game, but in recent months Chelsea have had to rely more on Shevchenko and others to get the important goals, whilst Drogba himself hasnt been playing anything like as well as he was near the start of the season. Whereas Scholes and Giggs have been awesome all season.

Ronaldo Scholes Giggs IMO Drogba will come second not because his form has been better than Scholes/Giggs (hasnt for me), but because noone will want 3 ManUre players in the top 3.

Waster. Get rid and tell Zog to sit the fuck down because hes not going anywhere.

What sort of guarantee do you have that Tevez, Huntelaar or Gudjohnsson would be injury free if they signed for us? No guarantees, but compare their injury record to that of Owen's.

Shiite player, overrated when he hit his purple patch and was never a "fantastic" player in a million years. A player with low ability but high work rate, good at getting in the right attacking positions, even better at showing dreadful technique and application when it came to things like shooting or passing. Could count the number of good games he had for us in his 3 years here on one hand, one finger per good game. Couldnt count the number of utter shiite games he had for us during this period, too numerous. Glad the waster has gone elsewhere. Just out of interest, does anyone remember "the curse of Lee Bowyer"? A West Ham fan came on this board soon after we signed him, saying that he was a cursed player. Ie, relegated with Leeds, relegated with West Ham, and would take us to relegation too. Bit of a coincidence that we were a top 4 side when we signed him, and nearly got caught in a relegation dogfight in his final season here. And now hes at West Ham, theyre serious contenders for the drop again. Obviously its bollocks, but I find it a bit funny. Although, maybe there is something in there - some players are acknowledged to be so good that they raise the playing level of everyone around them. Bowyer, after his purple patch, may be so shiite that he lowers the level of everyone around him.

Sell if theres any truth. Hell go on to be a success no doubt, but were not in a position to afford the luxury of an injury prone 15mill striker when the rest of the squad isnt up to scratch, worryingly thin, and shorn of quality. If were going to have such a striker in the team, at least make sure hes not a crock. Splash it all on Tevez or Huntelaar I say, or offer Barca their money back on Gudjohen, id bet theyd snap our hands off as hes a bit part player for them and hasnt really slotted in to Barca's playing style as well as expected. All players who might not be in the same class as Owen in terms of goalscoring, but would be more reliable for us to build around.

Its fair enough to say that there were good reasons to appoint Dalglish and Gullitt - a blind look at their CVs would suggest that they were good managers at the time we appointed them. Of course, different people have different opinions about the ability level of those managers at the time we appointed them, eg Ive always wanted a manager with a successful continental CV, ie success both domestically and in European competitions, building a side that you can visibly see has the markings of a good manager (eg Fergusons team all have movement, Wenger's technical ability, Rafa and Mourinho defensive organisation and drilling, etc etc) but thats a different arguement. So, for the sake of agreement, lets just say that Shepherd had done a decent job up to and including the appointment of Sir Bobby. He appointed managers with strong CVs, secured a higher amount of income by carrying out the stadium expansion plans from the previous board/chairman, backed his managers in some seasons with cash, eventually took us to a top 4 spot after two failed managerial appointments and finally landing a good manager. What you cant ignore though is the downward spiral of the club under Shepherd's stewardship a few years into Sir Bobby's reign. 11th, 11th - first 2 seasons, then 4th, 3rd and 5th suggests differently. Keep making things up though if it makes you happy. Ref my post to you somewhere else about you harping on about "trophy players", have you told us who they are yet ? Ive said a few years INTO Sir Bobby's reign. Learn to read. It means weve gone downwards since the initial few successful seasons. Ie, from 3rd onwards - as 5th, 14th, 7th, and probably 9th-11th, would suggest. Trophy players - Owen, Duff. I agree, we should always change our manager at the same time as Liverpool. In fact, everybody should, then everybody would be as successful as they have been. We should always choose trophy winning managers too, just like Liverpool, and everybody else should do the same too. Oh, wait - we HAVE appointed trophy winning managers. Souness was one, Liverpool appointed him. Dalglish too, we appointed him after he won cups at Liverpool. You agree with who? Your imaginary friend? Where have I said we should change managers whenever Liverpool do so? The point that youve clearly missed is that we were in a rot and it was quite clear that Sir Bobby should have been moved on. The exact same was the case with Liverpool. Both teams were shiite under Houllier/Robson respectively that season, and both managers' recent signings had turned out to be poor ones for the most part. Liverpool's board saw this problem and took steps to alleviate those problems as soon as it was the right time to do so. Our board sat around twiddling its thumbs, telling the world that the manager was already out (despite there being plenty of examples of where this had lead to dire seasons from the players), and failed to act. If Shepherd saw fit to undermine Sir Bobby, which he did, then he should have let him go. Unforunately, our chairman is also a softie when it comes to public opinion, scared to "shoot bambi". how do you know someobdy wasn't lined up who changed their mind about joining the club after agreeing to do so ? I dont know for a fact, im merely assuming it based on the fact that the chairman has regularly acted this way. For example, after sacking Sir Bobby, his search for a replacement THEN started. Youd think hed have spoken to a few managers first before making the sacking. But no, thats not Shepherd. I am in agreement about the appointment of Souness. However, the great Liverpool appointed Evans, with no managerial experience whatsover. Oh, wait, that can't be right, we are the only club who make such appointments, and the great Liverpool wouldn't dream of doing such a thing. In fact, neither would the great steve Gibson, who numerous people have said runs his club brilliantly and makes good decisions. The fact is, Roeder could have worked. His situations at West Ham and Watford were totally different to the situation at Newcastle, and the Watford fans don't blame him for being relegated. The West ham fans may do, bless their little cockney socks, but I don't give a stuff about them and it was also the time when he was, or became, a very ill man. Ref your remarks about the appointments of Dalglish, Gullit, Robson etc....I have posted here before excerpts from Keegans book saying quite clearly that it was Shepherd, Hall Jnr and Fletcher who persuaded and chose him to become manager of Newcastle, not sir john Hall. Now. About these "trophy" players. Who are they, and who exactly would you prefer the club to have signed instead of them ? Take your time. And consider the fact that while you are moaning on about the club signing "trophy" players, that the teams you think we should be catching are also brimming with them. Liverpool appointed Evans in the early 90s. The game has moved on since then, the top clubs scour the globe for the top managers - do you think Liverpool would appoint him now? Middlesboro are a small, mid table club. If youre happy to reference them as justification of Roeder's appointment, then its an indication of what your expectations are. Unacceptably low. As for your trophy players - Owen and Duff, as mentioned before. And in case you dont know, im not one who believes we shouldnt sign trophy players. Ive recently said I would want us to sacrifice the needs of the squad if we could land the likes of Rooney or Tevez, and I genuinely think Shepherd should be clapped for his efforts to bring Rooney here - it was a bold move that failed. But im not happy with us using such funds to sign players who are either crocks, or past it. To spend so much on Owen would have been fine if the guy had an injury record to match the likes of Eto'o, but he hasnt, he has pretty much the opposite bar one season on the bench at Real, and prior to the signing, a few of us on here showed these concerns that we were putting all our eggs in one basket. Suprise suprise, look at how things have turned out - predictable. Whether the injuries were unlucky or not, it was always nuts to sign him for 17mill - but then, hes an England international, and Shepherd was under pressure to deliver much needed signings, hence the "trophy" signing. As for Duff, ive had the "we didnt need to spend 5mill and 70k per week on a backup left winger" arguement plenty of times with HTL, and everything that needs to be said has been said. Anyway, responding to you is like talking to a brick wall, so you can have the last word if you want, its just a waste of my time trying to "discuss" anything with you. Youve already used your red herring tactics in this thread, for no reason going on about trophy signings, so I expect youll do the same. After all, I think its clear that youre recieving some sort of benefit from the club's, who have decided to dumb down fans' criticism through the back pocketing of the local media, .com, and now have representations defending the board on various messageboards.

I remember that happening. It just goes to show how our club is ran. Cowboy club run by cowboys, with jobs for the boys. I wonder if ManU, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, even Bolton, would put the diet of their players in the hands of a housewife with no qualifications or experience at all. Do you also think theyre the type of club that would have one of their players banned for 6 European games, then forget to register that player for those games, and ultimately having that player banned for a total of 12 games as a result of an "administrative mistake"?

I cant find any links, but does anyone remember us appointing a fake dietician at the club? I remember, for a fact, that Freddy took her to court, and that she was convicted of fraud. From what I remember, she was a housewife or something, who faked a CV when applying for the vacancy at the club. She had absolutely no qualifications or experience, yet she ended up deciding the diet of the players. I remember a few quotes from her after she was found guilty by the courts, one being that Alan Shearer's favourite pre-match meal was Spaghetti Bolognese which he ate two to three hours before some games, and the other that she was sorry for what she did but she did so because it was her "dream job". Point being, at the time, my thought was "only at Newcastle". Only at our club could you get a fucking housewife with no clue about anything deciding what the players ate, which is about as important as you can get because it decides their fitness, stamina, energy levels, etc, as Wenger will tell you (do a quick search on his methods).

Its fair enough to say that there were good reasons to appoint Dalglish and Gullitt - a blind look at their CVs would suggest that they were good managers at the time we appointed them. Of course, different people have different opinions about the ability level of those managers at the time we appointed them, eg Ive always wanted a manager with a successful continental CV, ie success both domestically and in European competitions, building a side that you can visibly see has the markings of a good manager (eg Fergusons team all have movement, Wenger's technical ability, Rafa and Mourinho defensive organisation and drilling, etc etc) but thats a different arguement. So, for the sake of agreement, lets just say that Shepherd had done a decent job up to and including the appointment of Sir Bobby. He appointed managers with strong CVs, secured a higher amount of income by carrying out the stadium expansion plans from the previous board/chairman, backed his managers in some seasons with cash, eventually took us to a top 4 spot after two failed managerial appointments and finally landing a good manager. What you cant ignore though is the downward spiral of the club under Shepherd's stewardship a few years into Sir Bobby's reign. Undermining his manager, then failing to replace him when everything went stale and even our competitors at the time, Liverpool, went about replacing theirs despite finishing above us and having a very similar season under a manager who won plenty of trophies with them. The sale of Woodgate behind his manager's back without any replacement lined resulting in a terrible start to the season, the dismissal of Sir Bobby without any replacement lined up at a silly time of the season to sack the manager, the appointment of Souness, a manager who was a national laughing stock with every set of fans thinking him shiite, yet Shepherd decided hed be a good appointment, the backing of Souness with huge amounts of cash, the signing of an injury-prone centreforward for a huge amount of money despite having a weak squad, the refusal to sack Souness whilst the transfer window was still open, the statement of intent when talking about going abroad in looking for a top manager and admitting this was his last chance, the appointment of Roeder, a man with a track record of mediocrity. Since 2003, the club have gone backwards and backwards under Shepherd as hes made poor decision after poor decision. Clearly, the man is an idiot if he thought Souness to be a good manager, and only an idiot would have thought Souness to be a good appointment (can guarantee you that rules out 99.9% of our fans, all of whom probably felt sick when the appointment was announced). And what on earth makes Shepherd think Roeder can coach or build a CL side, which surely is our goal? Maybe some wise heads have left the board since those early years when he made the appointments of Dalglish, Gullitt and Sir Bobby, and as Shepherd's influence has grown without anyone there to give some decent perspective to him, the decision making has gone downhill spectacularly. Or maybe hes undermined one too many a manager, and noone with an ounce of credibility wants to work for him. Either way, hes failing badly to do what hes supposed to, and its unfair that he gets the wield the axe on others, managers or players, yet theres noone there to oust him.

Wouldnt take Mourinho in a million years. Hes just spent 20mill on a left back. Top managers dont spend money on fullbacks because they dont win you trophies, which indicates that Mourinho hasnt got what it takes to manage one of the world's 8 biggest clubs, ie us.

Same with our home game against Villa. When we were 2-1 up, Carew scored a perfectly legitimate goal that was ruled out. If it was 2-2, we deinfately would not have scored the 3rd we eventually did in the 90th or so minute, since we only did so because Villa went all out for an equialiser and pushed players forward, which they wouldnt have done if it was 2-2.

Glad you agree it was a total f*ck up then, for a minute I thought you were defending the purchase of Duff over buying available defenders. I agree we needed another striker on top of Martins, it was the highest priority after getting a defender, which without any doubt was the urgent priority by that time. Even after Martins, Rossi and Sibierski were brought in out of desperation but still nobody for the defence. I don't think that £5m would have got us much in the way of strikers. As you point out defenders are cheaper and we could have made greater improvements to our squad there. Make it up, mate. He didnt have to. Youve just admitted that Roeder failed in the transfer market to get the priority players in other positions before signing a left winger.

Aye, its not often that we have any sort of initiative when our fullbacks are kicking the ball straight out of play half the time or producing shiite passes. Ala Ramage, Huntington, Carr, right footed shiite defenders who have had to play an entire season at left back between them. And as said before, youve been PROVED wrong. 5mill on Duff has done fuck all for us, whether its creativity, goals, or keeping the ball. 5mill on defenders, on the other hand, could well have seen us higher up the league. Eg Sorin, Sol Campbell, etc. But anyway, youre full of shiite, so dont let any sort of common sense stop your pro-Shepherd crusade.

I remember NTL buying shares in our club, the papers reported that they were only allowed 10% maximum (ie they bought 9.99%) because of PL rules since they already had a similar amount in another PL club (cant remember who) as well as Celtic. Villa? Might be right there. It was another mid table club certainly.

I remember NTL buying shares in our club, the papers reported that they were only allowed 10% maximum (ie they bought 9.99%) because of PL rules since they already had a similar amount in another PL club (cant remember who) as well as Celtic.

Milan vs Liverpool. I want to see Milan get revenge.

Overall, youd expect the manager to be responsible for: - the coaching methods - the backroom staff - the fitness training - the tactics and style of play - the mentality of the team - the organisation, movement, drilling of the team (ie coaching) - motivation of the team as a whole, team talks, etc - handling problem players - handling the media - buying/selling/retaining players So quite clearly, the manager can be held responsible for pretty much everything. The only thing I thing he cant be blamed for are dips in form, personal problems of players affecting their performance, etc. Everything else - from players who simply arent good enough (ie manager's reponsibility to get rid and replace), to the way the team play, the mentality and tactics, the team talks, player instructions and roles (eg sit back, attack) - everything can be pointed towards him.

Kaka is absolutely awesome too. Not sure who is the better player out of the two.

Reckon hed walk as soon as he won it.

Hoping Milan win it.

1 + 1 = 3. Nice of you to be so original, ParrotE5. Oddly, there is only one person here who parrots the vast majority of the other posters. Can you not think of a comeback that doesnt involve repeating what ive said? Or is that because youve lost the ability to think since your paid-for-by-Shepherd defend-the-wobbly-one online crusade has eaten into your brain? I would prefer them to buy quality players in the positions we need quality players in, ones who arent has-beens or crocks, ie arent trophy signings. What are you on about? Crazy ambiguous rants arent my forte. You are happy with your opinion because it is factually biased. Every regular on this board knows this.

ManU vs Roma, ITV1 Expecting to see ManU either pace themselves throughout the game and lose, or go all out attack and still lose. Valencia vs Chelsea, ITV4 Expecting to see lots of diving and fouls, and also lots of camera shots of the crowd with the producers hoping that therell be some trouble for them to ponder over.

Thats an ideal scenario. Fact is that we have no top players in any position when it comes to defence. The nearest thing we have is "potential" in Steven Taylor, but thats it. Thats 4 entire positions in the first team, and several positions in the backup or squad slots. And the only striker weve had playing for us for 95% of the season who is even remotely Premiership calibre is Martins. Thats one out of two first team positions. But hey, we needed a second left winger, because Milner has proven hes incapable of playing on that flank - according to some. His performances and goal against the likes of ManU, Liverpool, etc, have proven this. Im all for strengthening the squad, but it was madness to blow a sizeable transfer fee and massive wages to replace arguably our best player last season when the rest of the squad had such massive gaping holes. But then, look at the results to see who is in the right here. Weve crashed out of the main cup competitions in humiliating fashion against sides we should have beaten easily (5-1 utter humiliation at home to a bloody championship side, thats 5-1, and a 2-0 spineless defeat against a Dutch side built with pennies, with the nation watching and eventually laughing at us). Weve done worse this year than we did last year in the league, with plenty of shiite results and shiite performances, even in games weve won. So, for those of us who said we should have signed a defender or a forward instead of a backup left winger at the time the signing was made - surely weve been proven correct? Or rather, as certain individuals on this board with specific agendas would have us believe, its just crazy talk to think that our defence would be better with better individual defenders than Bramble and Ramage, or that wed have scored more goals if we had better individual forwards than the likes of Sibierski, Duff and Dyer. Anything to back the board, eh? Your s**** knows no limit. Stop. Youre making me blush.

http://www.cyprus44.com/photos/large/fishing.jpg