tmonkey

Opted not to sign for us permanently. Shame really, he was a good centreback.

Blaming the players yet again, even though it was his decision making, selection, tactics, substitutions, coaching, motivational abilities, that were the main reason for our defeat against Alkmaar. He bottled it, but guess what, he gets to stay. And who was it who spent 5mill on the most invisible player that night in Alkmaar, a player who needed to be replaced after 55 or so mins? Who failed to sign the players required to achieve our goals this season? For sure, its all the players' fault. Two or three of them have no bottle, thats why we lost against Alkmaar. Absolutely nowt wrong on Glenn's part. Were not going to get anywhere with this fool.

Just dont get why Roeder would rule Distin out. Granted hes not a top calibre centreback, but hes in between "decent" and "good" for me, and on a free would be absolutely perfect for us, because it gives us alot of freedom when signing other defenders. We could bring Woodgate back, a world class defender who it seems the top teams dont want to take a risk on. We arent going to get anywhere near as good a centreback as Woodgate, we also have an utter shiite defence, and Taylor has the potential to be a star but needs to be playing alongside someone he can learn from, and hence theres every reason for us to take a gamble on Woodgate. The risk of him becoming a perma-crock again could be offset by bringing Distin in on a free. Those two signings alone would transform our defence and give us so many options - Woodgate Distin in the centre, Taylor Distin if Woody is injured, Taylor Woody with Distin at left back if we needed it. Hence, we could look to spend less on the left back position, a non-household name who has potential could become an option, because if they flopped, wed always have Distin to provide strong defensive cover in that area of the pitch. Hes fast, comfortable on the ball with adequate distribution, experienced, a leader, relatively solid defensively, and probably a good professional if hes captain at City. Everything our defence could do with. Makes sense on all levels, except of course his personal demands. Wouldnt be suprised to see him going to Portsmouth or Villa on inflated wages. But that doesnt mean we still shouldnt be interested, especially since we can offer him the chance to play with arguably bigger names (Owen, Martins, Shay, Duff, Emre, Dyer etc).

Geri when she lost weight and had short blonde hair > all of them.

Probably did the same with Bernard. "You want 30k per week? Fook off, we can get Babayaro for only 5k per week more, ya fat wanka Olly."

What do we need from our next manager, and what can Shearer provide? For me, we need a manager with plenty of knowledge, contacts, links, etc, in foreign countries where good players can be purchased for cheap - not another man with little knowledge outside these isles where player values are hugely inflated. We also need the manager to be capable of bringing his own backroom staff with him, as well as having the ability and vision to improve the framework of the club in terms of fitness, training, coaching, tactics, drilling - essentially, the basics plus an "identity". For example, Arsenal play short, slick football, ManU play with great movement, Liverpool with organisation and discipline (similar for Chelsea and Bolton) - all traits of the respective manager and the style, coaching methods, philosophies, etc, that the manager implements. Bringing in another nothing manager, with no real vision other than to "get good players in all positions and go from there", isnt going to stand up to the competition and get us where we want/need to be. Can Shearer provide any of this? Doubtful. Maybe hed be as influential as Keegan, who knows, but why should we take the risk? Its not like we are a tiny Division One club with nothing to lose like we were when we appointed Keegan, a man with alot more passion and charisma than Big Al. Can Big Al even manage a team? We dont even know that. His role as assistant manager, by his own admission, was merely a case of Roeder running a few decisions by him and asking for his opinion on what we have no idea about. The team had a few early bright performances when Souness left, but we went pretty quickly on a poor run where we looked exactly the same as we have done this season. Remember the Charlton defeat? After that, there was a decent result against Spurs - who were awful on the day, especially without King, and dominated the second half despite playing with 10 men - and a handful of decent results against some piss poor opposition, despite the actual performances being pretty poor themselves. Eg, losing 1-0 at half time to Sunderland after looking even poorer than the worst team to have graced the Premiership in ages, playing a Wigan side who had 2 fullbacks at centreback due to injures and then had further injuries in defence during the game, scrappy win against Chelsea who we beat regularly at St James' when the season is over and they have nowt to play for (which we also did under Souness), blowing the opportunity to get to 6th after some extremely negative tactics against an extremely shiite Brum side, etc etc. The point being, last season's team under the caretaker Roeder was essentially just as s*** as this one, with the difference being an easier run-in. The passing and movement was as non-existent as it is now, the tactics nothing but basic and poor, no drilling or organisation. Not sure how anyone can be judged to be a potentially good manager based on that period.

"There aint anyone in any way, any manager, who could have kept Newcastle in the top six this year," he told The People. Moron. He got the job because he was supposed to have done a great job last season, and was set to continue that, since it "wasnt a fluke", and he was going to do as well, if not better, since hed sign more of "his" own players. Quite clearly, it was a fluke and hes failed to do that which he was appointed for.

Doesnt seem like theres going to be much of an overhaul. Just an attempt to get a man on board who has lots of "contacts" - ie, a quick fix that papers over the cracks. Why appoint 7-8 more scouts when we can just get one guy in who can ask a mate about this player or that? Meh, but I guess I cant complain, because at least were trying to recitfy the problem. Of course, its natural for one of the worlds 8 bestest clubs to have virtually no scouting network in place. Our recent domestic and European successes, as well as the numerous successes in the transfer market, have proven that we dont need one. So its unreasonable to expect more, especially since its not the job of the chairman at all to ensure or demand that a good scouting network is in place. Hes got other things to do, its not his responsibility.

....I could say look at Lyon a mid-table nothiing side only a few years ago (then 2/3 rollover seasons in the CL)...Now with a total stranglehold primarily down to CL money. The CL and especially the doing away with the knock out stage has destroyed the romanticism and a lot of the nail biting attractiveness...Are you seriously saying middle sized clubs like Forest or Derby (look now at Spurs or Bolton) could ever compete again for the top prize. It is nothing more now than a manufactured competition which has all but eliminated chance so the fat cats can continue feeding unchallenged. Lyon havent dominated in France because of CL revenue. Its because of the scouting and youth development systems set up by the likes of Santini and Le Guen. Theyve dominated in France because of the players theyve developed - Diarra, Essien, Juninho, Malouda, Govou, etc. Of course, as a result of doing well, theyve managed to secure their position at the top by signing good players, but theyre obviously a well run club and thats the biggest factor behind them being a major force in Europe now. And likewise, where are for example Monaco, or PSG? Clubs that used to regularly be in the CL, and sometimes still are - why did a mid table club like Lyon managed to completely eclipse them when by your logic, there was no hope for them due to the gap in finances? Hence, why ive mentioned the clubs in Spain. Barca, Madrid, Deportivo and Valencia were the regular 4 teams in the CL a while ago, all 4 were going far in domestic and European competitions, yet in recent years weve had Villarreal and Sevilla come out of nowhere, without spending large amounts of money, and have knocked a few clubs off their seats at the top. Where is the gap that you talk about, because its not like CL revenue is any different for Spanish clubs? Someone from the top 4 will always have a slippery season imo, and its up to the clubs below them to take advantage. If noone does, its not entirely down to the disparity in income from CL revenue as well as the inability to attract players. Again, those are factors, but imo the biggest ones are poor planning, poor managers, and poor decision making in the transfer market. Are the likes of Glenn Roeder, Stuart Pearce and David Moyes really good enough to build sides that will challenge consistently for a top 4 spot? I dont think so, and thats first and foremost why their clubs wont be getting anywhere near challenging the "big 4", not because of some financial gap. In reality, those outside the top 4 need to raise their standards. Scouting, youth development, coaching, training/fitness, personnel and staff - those are what can be improved upon. I just dont see the sense in ignoring all of these factors and blaming others for being more successful, when it seems like these clubs hardly excel in these categories - we're unable to string a few passes together in many games for example, thats nowt down to the gap between us and the big 4, but rather poor coaching as well as poor decision making in the transfer market resulting in having to field vastly inferior players.

PS As a sidenote, look at La Liga as an example. Prime example of CL money not being the deciding factor - Sevilla, Valencia, Villarreal briefly. All it takes is the buidling of one good team with a good manager and teams can challenge/win titles despite having been mid table fodder previously.

Just dont buy these sorts of arguements. What next after CL money? Barcelona, Madrid and AC Milan have too grand a history, meaning the best players in the world only want to play for them - does that mean we should demolish their museums and trophy cabinets, burn all the history books, and forget everything theyve won and the players that have played for them, just to even things out? Maybe London clubs will start complaining that Newcastle are a one-club city, and that there should be more large football clubs in the city to give everyone a level footing? What about Bolton fans moaning that they cant match the finances of other clubs because theyre a small club in a small city? Maybe we should limit the capacities/attendances of all bigger clubs just so that others can have a chance? Ridiculous imo, and logic youd expect to find in a special needs class where "everybody gets a chance". If a team isnt good enough to win, if they dont have the finances, the structure, the planning, the personnel, the resources, the fanbase, to win things, then thats their problem. And I just cant help but think its bollocks to say NOONE can get into the top four again. The same people saying this no doubt were the ones saying NOONE will win the Premiership again other than Chelsea because they were simply buying the title, but that looks far from the case this season. All it takes is some good planning, coaching, and team building, and a good season from the players, and it would be pretty easy to challenge for the top 4. Everton got in there the season before last then blew it, Spurs could and should have got in there last season but blew it - top 4 is far from impossible, but so far these teams have blown their chances because of their own failures, their own inabilities. If a small club like Bolton can challenge for it, a club that spends once every 4 seasons what we spend every summer, then clearly its not impossible for others with significantly bigger budgets to do similar. The reason we arent up there challenging for a top 4 spot is far more down to do our own problems then it is to do with any external competition or monopoly. We cant appoint s*** managers with s*** records, who make s*** decisions on the pitch and in the transfer market, and then point at the top 4 and say "youre the reason why were struggling".

England arent going to win anything unless there is an increase in technically competent players coming through. Its great having effort, work rate, commitment, even end product, in the mix, but put that up against an entire team that can control the ball with ability and theyll get dominated. This (technically good team) will never happen when you have a team full of Beckhams, Lampards and Gerrards. Having Rooney makes no difference when the team as a whole arent able to keep the ball, all that happens is that he gets isolated and cut out of the game as the rest of the team struggle to string a few passes together and just get ever more defensive, with his only hope being to do some individual magic and dribble past a few players. I feel sorry for Svenn in a way, because it was always a no win situation for him. If he drops the Lampards, Gerrards and Beckhams for players with more technical ability, players better at the simpler things, then he gets crucified if England lose, and those players probably arent good enough to be playing at that level in the first place. If he doesnt drop them, his only hope is to get the team to defend strongly as a whole, and hope that the end product of these star players wins them the game - attacking against teams like Portugal, Brazil, France, etc, would just result in losses anyway, as theyll still dominate the possession and have more chances to score as a result. Unforunately, all of England's stars go missing in the really big games, so all we see is defensive tactics and poor performances. Maybe were simply not good enough to win anything at international level with the current crop of players.

Pretty much has eight games to save his NUFC career. Giving him a contract based on the next 8 games - not sure what hes hoping for. Bramble has consistently ended a season strongly, mainly because hes a better defender when we have nothing to play for (as well as the opposition having nothing to play for). If he does so again, well merely be setting ourselves up for more frustration. Its time for Bramble to go, hes had far too many chances, giving him one more is just silly when weve seen during the course of the season that Bramble is not capable of consistency.

Offer Nesta 250k per week to play for us.

Yup, and if he doesn't end up there, his price will be inflated beyond all sanity because of it. I'd bet you any money, Southampton will try and squeeze as much money as they can out of Man Utd - knowing that wealthy clubs like Arsenal and Newcastle are also after him (even though we'd be wasting our time). It wouldn't surprise me at all if he went for something totally daft like £16m. Let the big boys have their fun with Bale while we sneakily get Baines in for half the cash, yet double the proven quality. Baines all the way. my mates a derby fan so went to the s.of s**** to watch and baines was awesome when he came on ,not seen him any other time but he looked s*** hot for them yes please You not on about Giles Barnes fella? baines from derby as mentioned by yorkie geordie Leighton Baines, Wigan. Baines has to be a priority. Hes a smart defender capable of distributing the ball well, positionally sound, and has strong shooting for a full back. 21 still I think, and proven in the Premiership. Would be a good long term investment, might not be a future world class attacking fullback like Bale seems to be from his reputation, but wed kill off that long standing left back problem once and for all.

Wasnt he at centreback in that game?

That AZ left back looked handy, De Clare or something. Good defending, good distribution, decent agility, seemed a bit of an experienced head too.

No. Doesnt have the legs, stamina, etc, for central midfield. Also, his distribution seems to have gone downhill in recent months. Hes on the wane, sad to say, and central midfield is no place for a winger to be when hes in this state.

Should get Jonny Wilkinson in goal to drop kick it upfield. He failed his medical. We also gave a trial to Steve Harmison because we heard hes a Geordie who could throw a good long ball. Thats the main reason why he was training with us. Harmison unfortunately starred for England in the cricket team pretty soon after, so turned us own.

Makes sense. Roeder cant build a team that plays on the ground, he cant coach that into his players, so his only solution is to bring in a big lump of a forward so that we can continue pumping the ball long. Zigic will just be Sibierski's replacement in the team, and well probably be looking at an initial experimental stage with Owen + Martins being the pair, and if that doesnt work, Zigic coming into the side to play alongside whoever is in form, and if it does work, Zigic being an "alternative". What will really happen is that because the team cant play decent football and keep pumping it long, Zigic will become the main forward and Owen/Martins will just be wasted when theyre chasing crappy knock downs all day long.

Fair point, although still not convinced with Gooch as a player. Hard to judge him, he plays quite conservative for a centreback and doesnt get involved much at all, hence does very little "good" in a game. At the same time hes not exactly great at the other aspects of defending, eg reading, positioning, etc, so its not as though hes able to compensate. Overall, theres just something about the way he defends and plays the game that spells out to me "uncomfortable", as though hes playing ever so slightly out of his depth. Maybe its just getting used to the Premiership, but still, considering he doesnt look anything special at all....

Hes not what we need, and hasnt looked the part in terms of what we need. Surely the aim of signing the next centreback is to do our best to correct our problems, rather than just signing another player who "needs to be playing alongside someone better"? We know from Woodgate's time here that a good centreback can make a big difference if hes able to lead well, and if Gooch isnt that, then why sign him?

Don't see the fuss on Sidwell, personally, but I'll admit to not being the expert on Reading. However, in the previous three Reading games I've seen in their entirety I've watched him closely and he has looked average, at best (two were against Man Utd, though!) He has constantly surrendered posession, doesn't seem to have any outstanding physical attributes other than stamina and he has never looked like scoring a goal. That's all I can base it on, though, because I don't remember paying particular attention to the lad before he started getting linked with us. Certainly don't see him as being much better than what we already have. What, exactly, is so good about him? He's being a proper little runt with Reading as well and to me seems to be one of those "Jenas" players who is neither here-nor-there in regards to being an attacking or defensive midfielder. Certainly cannot imagine him being exciting alongside Butt or Parker and he's only got 4 goals in 32 appearances this season ('Boro, Tottenham & Villa x2). Good engine on him, undoubtedly, but hardly going to elevate us onto the next level, is he? 6 assists, too, but 2 were in the 6-0 over West Ham, 2 came at home to Sheffield United, 1 away to Man City and 1 at home to Charlton. He's surely not an improvement on Emre? Is this another baseless bandwagon we've started here? One person rates him and then numerous others, who've barely seen him, follow suit. Not accusing you of this Stozo, or others like tmonkey who I've seen rate him, but there are a fair few sheep around these days. Dont think Sidwell is anything special at all, but hes going on a free and Butt will be 33 next season. IMO he plays the game better than Parker/Butt, in that hes better at passing forwards, and does so more often. He therefore has more presence on the ball in central midfield, despite being a similar type of player (ie workhorse with low technical ability) - its not the fact that hes got more ability when it comes to passing forwards, its just that he does so more often and with more confidence. We need to build up a squad as opposed to a first team only, and although central midfield isnt a vital area that badly needs reinforcements, a free transfer for a decent player would only be a good thing. Sidwell has indeed been overhyped because of the Wenger praise, and his form at the start of the season was pretty impressive, but like Seol (who was stunningly good at the start), as the season has progressed, neither have managed to maintain their form. Hence, the hype. But agian, for a free and for someone who is more positive, I wouldnt say no. Also needs to be noted that imo, wed do some very good business if we were to ship out Parker for 6mill and bring in Sidwell on a free. Not much between both players in terms of ability and theyre pretty similar style players, but Sidwell afaik hasnt been messed around positionally so doesnt play as though hes confused about his role, and wed also talking about a pretty sizeable chunk which we could invest elsewhere. At the same time, in no way is Sidwell a replacement for Emre, in the way a second Scotty Parker would not be a good replacement for Emre.

Since when has Emre looked awful? Hes consistently been one of our better players in his time here, and hes often put in good performances when the rest of the team arent playing well. Hes like Dyer in that hes one of the few players who can force a shit side into playing decent football. Probably our most important outfield player after Owen, itll be nothing but a step backwards if we sell him as the only replacements well get will be workhorses who will probably just be slightly better versions of Parker/Butt at best.

Hes not a decent squad player. Decent squad players dont break down team moves practically everytime they get the ball. Sibierski is like the really shit kid you play with on the playground. Tries his best, everyone encourages him when he gets the ball and will say "good pass" or "well played" when he does something advanced like pass 5 yards to an open teamate, but hell always be shit.