tmonkey

All players should be allowed to play for their country, or not at all. If anything, someone like Owen should be banned from playing for England because of his injury prone nature - one game for England could mean disaster for us since its one more game, that has absolutely no bearing for us, that he could pick up an injury in. Martins missing a few weeks for us, or a month max, is nothing in comparison considering how fit and rarely injured he is. I remember when this arguement cropped up a year ago when we were linked to Meite, and turned him down because he wanted to play in the ANC. A fair few on here were saying it was a disgrace for African players to go off for a month mid season, yet were arguing at the same time that its OK for the likes of Owen to represent England in competitive games or friendlies, and tournaments like the WC. As proved, that was a bollocks arguement and simply a case of one rule for one set of players, another rule for another set of players. As stated, it should be no internationals for all players, or internationals for all and let the African players play in their major continental tournament, mid season or not.

Still think we signed him to stop ManU getting him, rather than actually wanting him, despite what Keegan or SJH or others may say publicly. Shearer wouldve been the final piece in ManU's puzzle, everyone knows it. But at the same time, we only needed a Woody calibre player in our backline and a good enough keeper to finish ours - fear of what ManU might become with Shearer is what caused us to overlook that and make the wrong decisions. Yes, Shearer kept us up to an extent by scoring goals, but the fact that we were down the other end of the table within a few years of his arrival speaks volumes. Not his fault directly at all, but it needs to be remembered that the summer after he was signed, the squad was ripped apart because Dalglish had no money to spend, and had to work with a "sell before you buy" policy. So that 15mill spent the summer before no doubt strangled our finances - most likely that was 2 summers' worth of excess money spent on one player, hence why the squad was ripped apart when Dalglish wanted to sign his own players the following summer. I think it was a bad, bad decision looking back at it. I wasnt happy at the time because I was wanking over the rumours of Maldini and Torrecelli and whatever other top defenders we were linked to at the time, thats all we needed to seriously challenge, so its not being said in hindsight.

with that thinking we'd never have bought andy cole cos we had kelly and peacock and quinn,we'd never have bought ginola as we had sellars etc The difference between signing Duff and the players you've mentioned is that he isn't better than the left winger we already had, where as Cole and Ginola were a step up in class. after watching duff for chelsea and blackburn there was more reason for seeing him as an improvment than the relativly unknown cole when we already had the best strike partnership and back up in the league and sellars was playing very well before ginola,who most had only heard of for getting the blame for france not qualifying for a major tournament,came in........aye hindsight is a wonderful thing. IIRC when we signed Cole, and Ginola, we didnt have the gaping holes in the first team that the current side has with respect to being good enough for the standard required in this league. Thats a good time to improve on what you have. Sellars imo was average, Kelly was good but Cole had natural pace that suited Beardo well. Duff may turn out to be a good signing, but the gaps we have in the current side are costing us dearly, and its a signing that should not have been made considering that on top of these gaps, were talking about a player who has been off the boil long before we got round to signing him, and on top of that has always been one to pick up niggly injuries - similar to Emre. Even if Duff regains his form of old, which isnt impossible but still unlikely imo, by the time he does so we may well have absolutely nothing to play for, with no Europe next season. What then? What will stop the likes of Martins or Given wanting out if they get significantly better offers? Im all for upgrading players when the time is right or if an exceptional opportunity comes along, I still think it was great for Shephard to make the Rooney bid despite us needing defenders because sacrificing the squad for that calibre of special player is worthwhile if the team really needs it (which we did, and still do). But its shows a real lack of foresight when the players for whom the needs of the squad are being sacrificed are either very injury prone or long past their best.

Another winger > Only seen him come off the bench a few times, lively player but extremely raw.

Thats your opinion, youre most likely only saying that in an effort to justify the Duff signing. Dyer can fill in there, hes proved a few times hes capapble of playing left wing, certainly remember him coming on against WBA and tearing them apart down that flank. Milner has played there plenty of times too, and this season the few times hes played there hes been decent - scored that cracker against ManU. But I guess because you say so, he hasnt played there at all. Nice one Anyway, I think youre supporting the wrong club. This is Newcastle United, not Chelsea. We dont have a sugar daddy to finance 2 good players in every position, which IS what youre arguing. Its absolutely daft for us to sign ANOTHER left winger for 5mill and 70k per week in case the current one, who was our best player last season, gets injured. Especially when you have a squad littered with shiite defenders and injured/shiite forwards. But then, "daft" is what has to be expected from the same people who thought Souness would be a great idea.

As stated in another thread, of course it was a mistake in terms of us building on the team of 95/96 and looking to win titles. Think about it. Why buy a world class striker? Just to have one? Just so you can say "look, weve got him, hes one of the best, na na you havent got one"? No. Top teams want world class strikers because they win you titles, pure and simple. Did we need that to win a title, a world class striker? Definately not. We had the firepower up front, and the firepower on the bench. We were scoring goals left, right and centre. The midfield was slick, it had as much width as it had ability, and it was firing on all cylinders. All we needed was a defence capable of defending well. And a right winger as a secondary priority, since Gillespie's injury had unblanaced the side. We were definately unlucky in that the 97 injury robbed us of the real Shearer. Since then, despite the goals hes scored, hes been a shadow of what he was, nowhere near as good. But regardless, it was a signing that wasnt necessary to us achieving our goals, whether short term or long term, and in fact counter productive because we had to accomodate him in team that was supremely successful because it was built around one target man, not two. We should have planned to win titles by first building on the squad we already had, then later on we could look at changing things round and building around new signings once the need for it actually arose. Had we strengthened in defence (including keeper, lets not forget that Hislop and Srnicek were shiite compared to the top keepers) and the right wing, wed have won titles with Keegan's side, im certain of that. Keegan is naturally blamed for us blowing the 9-12 point lead, but we had a defence capable of blowing that sort of lead during the entire time. Put a world class defender in there, or a world class keeper (Schmeical won ManU that title - we didnt have a Schmeical, we had a bog standard keeper with at best average defenders) and it becomes alot harder to drop points so easily. Weve seen ourselves what a defender of Woodgate's playing level can do for an entire average defence - we were in the position to sign a centreback of that calibre back then, we had the money, but we used it wrongly.

Of course we should have cover, however I'd prefer us to have quality in our starting 11 positions rather than good back up in one and nobody of any quality at all in another. Don't you agree? You can only sign players who are available and Duff was available. I wanted the club to sign at least one more quality striker with even another striker as further backup, but it didn't happen for whatever reason. The fact we need strikers doesn't make Duff a shite signing. "You can only sign players who are available and Duff was available." So because Duff was available, we HAD to sign him, despite having one good first team left winger and several good attacking players capable of filling in in that position, whilst also having severe weaknesses in various other positions on the pitch? And of course you can only sign players who are available. Sorin, a solid international fullback, was available and considered going to Bolton, turning them down because he wanted 35k per week, but were we interested? No, we were too busy snapping up Duff and scouting Kuyt in pre-seaon friendlies. Weve badly needed a decent left back, and weve suffered without one. But hey, all those leaked goals and terrible performances down the left flank mean nowt, because weve signed Duff. Benni McCarthy could have been signed for 4-5 mill. Hes scored 10 in the Prem, 15 overall so far, and will most likely hit 20, possibly 25, by the season is finished. Weve had to put up with dross like Sibierski, Duff and Rossi up front, so could really have done with a decent goalscorer like McCarthy. Who cares about that though, weve got Duff. Plenty of good players were available, players who would have been major improvements for us simply because they played in positions that we desperately needed reinforcements for, but our board/manager went for the easy big name crowd pleaser because its easy to throw money at a big name like Duff, and at the same time our directors and managers lack the foresight or footballing knowledge to do what is hard - scouting, planning, strategy, etc. You know, the same lot who thought Graeme Souness would be a spankingly good idea, when everyone else with an ounce of footballing knowledge either laughed their tits off at that decision (non-toon fans), or threw up (toon fans).

Baros has gone to Lyon, with Carew joining Villa, and Tomasson has gone on loan to Villarreal, yet we still cant get anyone. Arsenal, Chelsea and Bolton are the only clubs that havent brought someone in. I guess we dont need to when were pushing for a CL spot like they are.

I think the Parker Butt partnership has looked woeful the few times its been played now. On paper, its like a brick wall, extremely strong tackling. But on the pitch, they seem to provide poor cover when together. Probably a case of two different style players who like to play in the same position getting in each others' way, with both not being able to play their game. The opposite of the Lampard Gerrard partnership so to speak - on paper, youd think one great goalscoring midfielder plus another one would equal double the attacking threat, but in reality its ends up negating both players' game. I think we definately need to sign another centre mid, without breaking the bank for him since we need to invest heavily in other areas. Duscher on a free next summer would do nicely.

For 2.5 mill, it would be hard to go wrong. Like Amdy Faye, even if he flops, wed most likely make most of that back. Far from an ideal partner for Taylor though. Means Taylor will be our leader at the back and we're not looking to sign one.

If we had any sort of depth in the other positions, the likes of Milner and Dyer could comfortably fill in on the left wing whilst Zog is injured. Because we lack strikers and defenders and havent replaced Jenas, Dyer is having to play up front or centre mid and Nobby is having to play at right back, meaning Milner has to play right wing. Its funny how Duff was supposedly a necessary signing because right now we have noone to play on the left. The reason we have noone to play on the left is because we have noone to play in several other positions, and all those who can play on the left are having to fill in elsewhere.

Can you blame him after the way he was treated by the club? The chairman and players humiliated him, after all he did for us a bunch of cretins with no success at all in their careers stabbed him in the back. Shephard also tried to force him to keep quiet by refusing to give him his compensation, iirc meaning many months of legal proceedings. Cant blame him for being bitter at all.

10 in the Prem, will most likely end up with 15 at least in the Prem and probably nearing 25 by the end of the season overall. Wouldve been a solid player alongside Martins. But Duff's a bigger name, cost Chelsea 17mill, used to be great and was awesome in World Cup 2002. Better to get him than someone who the squad could badly do with.

Yeah, because hes done a huge amount in keeping our necks above water. Yeah thats right Owen delibrately injured himself FFS. I agree the amount spent on the aforementioned is ridiculous. A fit owen will provide more than the others put together 10 mill for Luque, 8 for Viana, 8 for Boumsong, 7 for Cort. Who said hes deliberately injuring himself? Fact is that Owen's injuries has cost us big time during the past 2 seasons. Had we signed 3 decent to good players for that amount (5mill, 5mill, 7mill for example), wed have been so much better off. We basically sacrificed the squad to sign him, and were currently paying the price for it, with academy kids and players who shouldnt be at near the first team (eg Shearer last season, Sibierski) getting games regularly. Do you think we did the right thing when we signed Shearer? No. We had Ferdinand, Beardo, Asprilla, and Kitson as backup (and Darren Huckerby as well iirc). The money shouldve been spent on bringing top defenders in, thats all that was needed to win us titles and our only weakness. Ive heard alot of rubbish about how we bought Shearer to build around him for the future, how signing him was the first step to us hauling in the trophies later on - its rubbish because we had the chance to do all that, but only if we didnt blow our entire budget on one forward at a time when we had 3 top class ones and good backup forwards, whilst having a lower mid table defence at best. If Shearer wasnt a Geordie, if he wasnt English, we wouldnt have made that signing at such a big cost (remember that Dalglish had no money the following season, and had to sell to buy, tearing the squad apart). So why did we? Oh yeah, because hes Geordie and England's best goalscorer. 10 years later, we still make the same mistake. "Squad? Who needs one when we can use all the money to buy Englands best goalscorer? And you say hes injury prone? Hadaway n shite man, he plays for England. Thats E-N-G-L-A-N-D. Get it?"

Yeah, because hes done a huge amount in keeping our necks above water. Yeah thats right Owen delibrately injured himself FFS. I agree the amount spent on the aforementioned is ridiculous. A fit owen will provide more than the others put together 10 mill for Luque, 8 for Viana, 8 for Boumsong, 7 for Cort. Who said hes deliberately injuring himself? Fact is that Owen's injuries has cost us big time during the past 2 seasons. Had we signed 3 decent to good players for that amount (5mill, 5mill, 7mill for example), wed have been so much better off. We basically sacrificed the squad to sign him, and were currently paying the price for it, with academy kids and players who shouldnt be at near the first team (eg Shearer last season, Sibierski) getting games regularly.

Yeah, because hes done a huge amount in keeping our necks above water.

Who else would purchase an injury prone forward, who didnt want to sign for us in the first place, for a club record 17mill, when at the same time the squad needed major rebuilding, with at least 3-4 first teamers being brought in and several backup players? Threadbare squad with injured players + 17mill injury prone forward = SUCCESS !! Utterly bad decision making, its common sense not to blow it all on one crock when you badly need numbers. Is it any suprise that since weve made this signing, weve regularly had to look over our shoulders and see how many points we are away from relegation? But what else can you expect from the same lot that thought the man who everyone with an ounce of footballing knoweldge knew was shit, Graeme Souness, was the one to take us to success? I mean, how ignorant, idiotic, out of touch with football, and downright stupid must you be to make that decision? Where is the planning? the foresight? the strategy?

Thats exactly what ive found. Same goes for Peter Ramage if you play him every game and boost his stats in the off season.

Disagree with this. If you let the top 4 teams in the league from the previous season, then the current CL competition will almost certainly have the league champions from the current season competing. Hence, its the Champion's League - it will almost certainly have at least one team from each country that will win their respective domestic league title in the same season. Otherwise, it would be pointless if one season a team wins the Premiership or La Liga or the Portugese/German/Dutch league for example, sells a few players or picks up injuries, then turns out to be shiite the following season - yet theyd be in the CL solely representing their country if it were the old format. Likewise, if a team finished 4th, then considerably strengthens the team to the extent that theyre going to be serious title challengers, and end up winning the title, its alot better if theyre in the CL for that season too. Take ManU this season for example - last year they looked like they were slipping, far from a top side, yet this campaign they look like champions, and they probably will be if they maintain their form. Its only fitting that theyre in the CL at same time, in the same season that theyre hitting top form. I think this way is alot better, and its still a competition for champions, just that its gone from past champions to including potential champions and hence current champions for that season.

I wouldve taken Ronaldo, always would have at any stage of his career, but to be fair, a move to Milan doesnt mean those who are writing him off were wrong to do so. Similar thing happened with Vieri - linked heavily with us, which resulted in many fans turning their stomachs at the thought of getting him, calling him fat and past it, then out of the blue he moved to Milan, with plenty of "Vieri past it? Not good enough for us? Hah" posts. Vieri of course went on to fail miserably.

Would take him at that price. If hes a problem, ship him out next summer. Even if he isnt a problem, even if hes a success over the next 4-5 months, still ship him out, since realistically hes not a top 4 first team striker and that should be our aim. In the mean time, I would rather we had him up front regularly in the Premiership than someone like Sibierski. We need to "use" players for once too. Everyone knows Mido is a problem, but its pretty obvious were crying out for another striker with different attributes to Martins, and at the same time everyone knows we need to sign defenders - ie, funds are limited. Owen is coming back towards the end of the season, Ameobi will be back next season, more strikers will be available next summer (no WC) - this is the type of "small money" signing where we could use and then discard a player that we need without making much of a loss, or even a profit if things go well. And given our current paper thin squad and the fact that hes at least a decent or average forward, I seriously doubt theres going to be any problems with regards to him getting games from now till the end of the season. And if Martins gets injured, we're screwed, imagine if he picks one up that sees him out for the whole season - itd be less of a blow if we got someone decent in, and Mido at 3mill might be one of the few going. For 3 mill, its a worthy gamble with the chips stacked on our side. Cant see Roeder wanting this at all, but we definately need to sign someone.

http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hlid=443669&CPID=23&clid=169&lid=&title=VILLARREAL+TARGET+TOMASSON Given our problems up front, where are we with regards to him? Villarreal are in a similar position to us and are a smaller club that almost certainly pays smaller wages, so its not like the competition is out of our depth. Hes a good player who has stated hed love to return here and prove what hes capable of, as last time he was here he was just a youngster being played out of position in a dire team, and since then hes gone on to develop into a good forward at the top levels. Certainly alot better than loaning someone like Rossi. That seems to be acceptable, but moving for an experienced Danish international isnt. Would make a good foil for Martins imo, and a good short term signing. Much better than bringing noone in, and its got to be better than playing the likes of Duff or Sibierski up front, which weve had to do many a time in the Prem this season.

Yep 2 good players (Ben Haim is quality!) one can play left back or centre back, the other all the way across the defence and both out of contract at the end of the season. Would improve our defence massively and would cost a fair bit less than Bale! Distin is just about above average imo, but regardless, he would be a pretty good partner for Taylor. Distin has pace for covering, is apparently a good leader/organiser, good passer of the ball for a centreback, left footed so you would assume would slot in naturally alongside a right footed centreback, and is experienced. Everything we need right now in a decent partner for Taylor. Unfortunately, Roeder has already ruled him out. Have to hope that Roeder knows what hes doing and has someone else lined up, but from the evidence of last summer, he most likely doesnt (or will fail to pull a deal off).

Emre has been good for us though, we are clearly a better side with him in CM. name 1 away match that he has performed in? Off the top of my head: Old Trafford, stood out amongst a shower of shiite. Blackburn, running the show before the umpteenth tackle aimed at him caused injury. West Ham, pulled the strings in central midfield.

Could be a number of possibilities at this point in time. The racism charge, or it could be that the Hargreaves deal will go through this week, meaning if theres any truth in the Emre to Bayern rumours then hes keeping himself fit to ensure it goes through. Or it could be that hes actually injured. I would be sad to see Emre go because weve not looked to get the best out of a talented player. He was looking a quality player alongside Butt, a partnership with two good players who specialise in compensating for each others' weaknesses - Emre poor defensively, Butt strong in that department, Butt poor on the ball, Emre strong in that department. Its a similar scenario to the Kluivert-Bellamy partnership - a player with a bigger reputation, the club captain, unfortunately comes first before what looks to be a better unit altogether.