tmonkey

1 + 1 = 3. Nice of you to be so original, ParrotE5.

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?

Not sure who is a better defender with regards to Dunne vs Distin, but Distin is absolutely ideal for us. Hes fast, he has leadership abilities, hes a good distributor of the ball as well as being comfortable on it, and hes both very experienced in the Premiership, as well as a good professional - which is surely why hes captain at Man City. But most importantly, he rarely seems to pick up an injury. Hed make a good partner for Taylor because of all of these attributes, its like he has everything that Taylor lacks and everything Taylor needs in a solid partner, and to top it all off, hes left footed - how perfect is that to partner a right footed centreback? Its obviously not something that will make a difference overall as its not a necessity for a good centreback pairing, but its something that does help in certain situations.

Indeed. Woodgate and Distin in the summer.

Taylor can be extremely good if hes paired with someone who is currently considerably better and more experienced. Im sure Toure, Woodgate and Rio Ferdinand playing alongside the likes of Campbell, Radebe, etc, helped them considerably. And it wasnt too long ago that John Terry was playing second fiddle to Marcel Desailly and William Gallas. Learning from that calibre of player, its no suprise that hes progressed into arguably the Premiership's best.

If I think a player is shiite or even good but not needed, and the club signs him whilst players who I think are good who play in positions that I think need to be filled, yet are overlooked and cast aside, then of course I think its a poor signing. Its stating the obvious, its my opinion. And likewise, anyone who thinks its a good signing, or one that was needed, is just expressing their opinion, same as me. The only difference is that the opinion of the manager and chairman counts, unlike mine. But if they get it wrong, then I have the right to say that their opinion was/is shiite and that it was a mistake, as was overlooking the players we could have done with who have gone on to play well elsewhere. If they get these decisions/opinions wrong consistently, then I have the right to question their judgement and ability to do their job. If I think we should have signed Campbell, and Roeder doesnt, and we then struggle in defence for an entire season with utter shiite playing at the back for us, whilst Campbell becomes a rock for Pompey, then of course I'll think that the club made the wrong decision. So, what is the point you are trying to make? That I cant criticise the transfer dealings of Roeder because you say so? Who are you again? Thats right, a nobody on an internet forum, just like the rest of us. What you say or think means f*** all mate, so yes, I can criticise the manager or chairman for his decisions in the transfer market. Deal with it. That you should pack in the use of words like "idiot" and "retard" when you don't agree with somebody. Thought it was obvious, tbh. Criticism is ok and can stimulate debate, total s**** like the majority of your posts just makes me laugh. So your point of "It's a shame you're so arrogant that you believe the club signing anyone other than players YOU think they should sign makes it a poor signing" is actually "please dont call anyone a retard or an idiot". Hard to call you anything else when you display that sort of logic behind your posts. Although I still wont. And please point out where I called anyone a retard or an idiot. If you mean the previous post, then clearly you missed the sarcasm, because the point of it was that I was mimicing you.

Referee spoilt the game.

If I think a player is shiite or even good but not needed, and the club signs him whilst players who I think are good who play in positions that I think need to be filled, yet are overlooked and cast aside, then of course I think its a poor signing. Its stating the obvious, its my opinion. And likewise, anyone who thinks its a good signing, or one that was needed, is just expressing their opinion, same as me. The only difference is that the opinion of the manager and chairman counts, unlike mine. But if they get it wrong, then I have the right to say that their opinion was/is shiite and that it was a mistake, as was overlooking the players we could have done with who have gone on to play well elsewhere. If they get these decisions/opinions wrong consistently, then I have the right to question their judgement and ability to do their job. If I think we should have signed Campbell, and Roeder doesnt, and we then struggle in defence for an entire season with utter shiite playing at the back for us, whilst Campbell becomes a rock for Pompey, then of course I'll think that the club made the wrong decision. So, what is the point you are trying to make? That I cant criticise the transfer dealings of Roeder because you say so? Who are you again? Thats right, a nobody on an internet forum, just like the rest of us. What you say or think means fuck all mate, so yes, I can criticise the manager or chairman for his decisions in the transfer market. Deal with it.

Yet we have NO good left backs and (at a stretch) ONE quality centre back. Yeah left wing is certainly what we needed. In regards to players fitting in, Dyer and Milner play a hell of a lot better on the left wing than any of our defenders play at left back. We DID need someone for the left and a player became available. Nowhere near as much as we DID need a centre back or a left back and players became available. Sadly Jon, it appears you still think a defender would prevent us from being dominted by teams such as Wigan, Smoggies, Charlton, Fulham, and Man City as has happened lately. If you can't dictate the game against teams like this, then you are in trouble and only better quality footballers who can pass and move in forward areas change this. Left backs don't pass and move the ball forward? I suppose you think left back wasn't one of the main reasons we lost to AZ aswell? We tend to have f*** all going down the left wing because there isn't anyone good enough to support Duff, do you not see why this could be part of our issue when it comes to retaining possesion in the oppositions half? Aye, it was great seeing Duff destroy AZ, whilst Huntington pocketed the AZ right winger and Antoine Sibierski came off the bench to show his class and grab a brace. Only an idiot would think that signing Duff was a mistake, and youd have to be retarded to think that we needed a left back or another forward more than we did Duff. We're on the verge of UEFA Cup glory and qualifying for an automatic UEFA spot because the squad we built has been more thang good enough, clearly some people need to get some perspective.

Milner is good enough as backup for the left wing - hes played better there in a few games than Duff has this whole season, looking far more of a threat. We didnt need to spend 5mill and 70k per week plus on another left winger to cover for Zog when weve just struggled through the entire season with shiite like Sibierski up front and academy kids out of position in defence.

blueyes.gif blueyes.gif blueyes.gif

Was personally dead against his signing before it was made because of his shiite form for Chelsea, but it was hard to think of it as anything but a bargain when it went through, hence why some us changed our tunes. I think that had something to do with the fact that we were supposedly going to pay £11mill for him when first Spurs and thus us were linked, a fee which would reasonably be expected for a player purchased for 17mill only 3 and a half seasons ago and who was still only 27, so when it turned out to be 5mill everyone was suprised at the low fee and most of us who were against his signing thought "ah, 5mill, not really too much, thats a bargain". I remember there being a thread about the "bargain", in which a few of us stated that its only a bargain if we also sort out the dire needs of the first team/squad by signing several other required players, ie some quality defenders and at least two forwards, ie that its a good signing if and only if it wasnt a trophy signing to cover for the inability to bring in the required personnel. Unfortunately, thats what it turned out to be - so far anyway, maybe Duff will still come good? Cant find the thread using the search engine though, maybe that thread has been deleted. And TBH, plenty of us on this board were worried about the Duff signing with regards to both the player himself as well as Zog's position in the team, eg: http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=21490.msg398426#msg398426 I agree with that, seems a poor imitation of himself these days, in his first season at Chelsea and at the start of their first title season, he was immense. I think he lacks motivation and not playing regularly has effected his confidence and sharpness, on his day though there aren't many better. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=25689.msg475269#msg475269 But those fears were swept under the rug temporarily as we made the signing because of the low fee combined with the hope of Duff returning to old form.

Definately remember it being the other way round, to an extent. His Lazio side had already crashed out of the CL group stages playing shiite against shiite opposition, they were struggling in Serie A, 6th iirc and way off the front pack, before Crozier and co signed him up. He was supposed to stay on until the end of the season, but results became even worse - hence his resignation mid way through the season and taking the England job earlier than planned. Maybe he was tapped up early on long before the announcement was made, but I certainly remember alot of reports at the time, eg Football Italia, stating that he took the job because his future looked so uncertain with Lazio. Our FA were desperate for a continental manager with a long CV to take the job, Svenn was the only one who wanted it as no manager at a top domestic club in Serie A/Premiership/La Liga would take the job - unless they were about to be sacked.

Ranieri was a good manager for Chelsea, took his Chelsea side to the same level as Sir Bobby took us, yet when he was given unlimited funds, he looked clueless and out of his depth, despite Chelsea finishing 2nd in the Premiership. He made poor signings in key positions (Mutu, Crespo), didnt know what his best team was, didnt know what system to play, and most of all, couldnt handle the pressure/expectancy that came with that level of funding. Mourinho, on the other hand, is for all we know one of the few managers capable of handling that pressure and expectancy because of his self belief and arrogance, on top of being able to build a side to a system he wants to play, and knowing what his best team is, ie making the right decisions for the most part (expensive flops happen with every manager, its the main signings they get right). Hes had them winning titles back to back, something which is probably alot harder than it seems on paper. Look at Sven Goran at Lazio, having spent over 100mill to win Serie A, spending more the following summer, then watching his expensively assembled side crash and burn in all competitions and being on the verge of getting axed before our FA came knocking at his door. Combine this ability to win with big funding, which clearly not all managers can do, as well as his success with Porto, and its hard to paint a picture of anything other than a top class manager.

Looks like a cannibal who has been tortured for his crimes and driven out of his village.

In theory, hed be a great addition as a rotated striker, ie an alternative to Martins and Owen, but you just know under Glenn hell be our first choice forward because we'll be resorting to nothing but long balls, especially if you take Emre and Nobby out of the side which could well be the case next season. Hes also a similar forward to Ameobi imo, of course a significantly better footballer, but still were talking about a big target man who plays mostly with his back to goal, and for that reason, im not so sure we need him unless Ameobi is getting shipped out or will remain crocked (neither of which will be the case, knowing our luck). We need a playmaking forward to add to that squad, as Dyer is shiite up front and is never a forward. But since Glenn is desperate on adding a player who will help cover the fact that he cant coach a group of pretty talented players into passing and moving on the deck, Viduka on a reasonable contract (2 years? hes 32) would be a good signing. It also needs to be said that imo hes a slightly better forward than Ashton, who plenty of people would be more than happy for us to spunk 12mill or something silly on.

Hes been undermined this season. Abramovich, Arnesen, whoever - hes not a happy chappy, a few key decisions were forced upon him (probably Shevchenko, already stated the sale of Gallas and Huth, etc), and it seems like the side he currently has is not entirely "his" team like it was in previous seasons, more of one hes having to work with. Point being, despite the money and players hes had at his disposal, its understandable that his team are underperforming for the resources hes spent - if hes not able to build the team acording to his own plans, then it cant be a suprise if hes not achieving the targets expected of him. Thats why most top managers will walk if theyre undermined (eg Benitez and Valencia). Hes a top manager, but a coach who produces defensive teams, teams that look to win the game without any concern as to entertainment value. His teams will happily destroy a game of football if it means winning, his Porto side were like that and his Chelsea team play that way. In that sense, hes not a great manager because hes doing whats easier - boring, defensive football. That is why his Chelsea side are nowhere near as good as what they should be given the money theyve spent and the attacking players at their disposal, and why theyve had no joy in the CL because theyve come up against teams as good defensively as them but with more attacking abilities/instincts. But as mentioned, its the results that matter the most, and hes clearly top class when it comes to that for the most part.

Ashton? Shiite. Klose? Shiite. Bent? Bent. Luque shits on all of them from a height.

Steve Bruce. A true Geordie, he would bleed for the club unlike most other managers, especially the foreign ones.

All of those players are shiite. Would much rather give Luque a run in the team than any of them.

Well probably beat Sheff Utd, avoid relegation comfortably, and Roeder will be hailed as having done another "good job" in his last 7 games. No doubt well hear more of "Without Glenn, wed have been relegated".

Its not over till the fat lady sings.

Anyone actually agree with this? Some may call it retaining possession, yes, but most others will call it needlessly slowing down the game just to find an easy and utterly useless pass. And I dont remember Rob Lee pirouetting anything like as much as Parker - since when did Rob Lee turn on the ball 3 or 4 times on the spot as a result of his own hesitancy to play a pass? Making shiite up to defend one of their favourites.

Parker out for 5-6mill, Sidwell in on a free, makes sense to me. Like for like, but lower wages and without the confused "am I a Makelele or a Gerrerd?" problems. Sidwell in, Emre out would be adding a second Parker to the team and removing our only midfielder with technical ability. But that is what is more likely to happen.

Previously, no - worried about him being a long ball merchant, a more modern version of Joe Kinnear, same philosophy, better methods behind the scene. But now - change of tune, f*** yes, times 100. He knows about tactics and organisation, his squad are as well drilled as any in the league, most people will agree on this. But what has mainly changed my opinion of him in recent months is the signing of Anelka, as well as his attempt to bring Sorin in. It indicates hes not purely a long ball merchant, he doesnt only want grafters and big lumps up front (otherwise hed never have gone for Anelka), or long ball merchants at the back (wouldnt want Sorin if he did), he wants technically gifted players who are great at playing on the deck, and its only recently that hes had the chance - funding and ability - to attract them. Hed do that far more often up here given our resources.