Mick

It's a wig. bluebiggrin.gif

I would play all of the kids and create some interest, I'd probably play Luque to try to give him a lift or at least put him in the shop window as he's going and we need to get as much back as possible, assuming someone will pay his almost certain inflated wages. I wouldn't let Carr anywhere near the stadium never mind the team, he's a waste of space and we have nothing to gain by playing him.

Who is Nobby Roeder?

I would agree with that, a good player when fit but a liability when injured or making the wrong headlines for what he does away from the game. I'll also give him credit for getting through his last injury nighmare by keeping out of the front pages. I doubt he'd have been able to do that a couple of years ago. Maybe we are seeing a more mature Dyer, I hope so. I can forgive him his injuries but the other stuff has been within his control and he's made plenty of mistakes which he will probably live to regret.

Nobby hoesn't have to be brilliant in the air, that's the job of Taylor and Bramble when they're in the middle. His reading of the game when at right back has been faultless so far and his link up play has also been excellent. When he's match fit he's an asset to the team, even more so when he's got somebody to hit with a pass as we don't give up posession when breaking out of defence. His short passing sometimes lets him down as he runs forward and is out of position and unable to get back, if he can avoid than then he should be able to defend against almost anybody.

I might be wrong but we seem to play better when we have fewer players for Roeder to chose from, his limited input seems to improve us as a team.

Bump, too late.

Do all those who didn't want Nobby to get another contract want to go and edit posts before somebody bumps the thread?

Not a good footballer but has scored a few, no better than I thought he would be as a footballer but I didn't expect the number of goals that he's scored, you can't fault him for effort.

I'll tell you what Shepherd will say now, I appointed Glenn Roeder because the fans wanted him appointed, Shepherd made his excuse the day Roeder was appointed.

Regular european qualification in the last decade, suggests we have appointed the "right man" more than most of our rivals. I don't expect you to understand that. Then you're judging us with clubs not winning anything (and some do - which we most damnably DO NOT) rather than those of a similar standiong of crowd, finances etc - why ? We should be measured against the likes of those winning regularly. Only man City are of a similar size who have a record almost as bad as us for winning trophies. And they STILL have won more than us !!!!! What would you rather have ? A trophy or a (brief) run in the Champs League ? I damn well know what I'd prefer. NE5 uses league position as the holy grail then playing in a cup as a defence for Shepherd, a cup that we've qualified through the back door as many times as through league position. We've qualified through league position 3 times, the rest through the back door.

I'm sure all of those clubs were looking for managers while Roeder was out of work and yes, I knew he was at West Ham, he got them relegated, that's why I said "I'll give you a clue, use 1 finger."

Well you're true in some respects... only i remember the only other game he played out wide® for us, which turned out to be the game that he got injured, and he put in a couple of sublime crosses that day aswell, very early in the game. He got injured but he was appalling in that game! It's the quickest ive ever thought "oops, we mayve made a mistake here" Owen and Shearer should have both scored goals against Fulham from Luque crosses, he put them on a plate and they both screwed up.

He did miss the third option, he forgot he was talking about Shepherd, if he'd remembered then he would have added the third option, the one that just about sums up Shepherd. Appointing a manager who has failed at every club he's managed and just another pointer, those clubs you mentioned. How many tried to appoint Roeder? I'll give you a clue, use 1 finger. Simple fact is, and I will keep it simple for somebody who thinks a fall of 15 league places is an achievement, Shepherd has taken us backwards, I can't remember any chairman at our club taking us down so many league places and turning such a legacy into a financial nightmare, can you? What makes you think Hitzfeld has a big ego? Can you give us some proof of that?

Still think we'll do better with your man Souness in charge and Craig Bellamy gone ? Shepherd did. Strangely, so did the bloke [mackem WUM] that you also clipped. And even funnier, is you now actually agree with him 2 people with no knowledge of the club between them .............. Strangely I still disagree with the opinion Ozzie had about giving Souness time, his opinion had nothing to do with us appointing Souness or keeping him for as long as we did, or, for Souness spending close to £50 million. If it was the other way round and Ozzie was responsible for the above and Shepherd had no other part in it than to think it was a good idea then I'd not be having a go at Shepherd, I'd be having a go at Ozzie. Fact is, Shepherd made those decisions, not Ozzie, as hard as that is for you to swallow, it doesn't change who is responsible anywhere other than in your head.

I screwed the quotes up, I've edited the original so you can now reply to it without having to think too hard.

That'll get him a tick for Premiership experience then.

This is one thing I can never understand about your arguments though, on one hand you applaud Shepherd for backing Souness while slagging off anyone who at the time said we should also back him. You cant have it both ways. Both yourself and HTL state that you knew Souness was a shite appointment yet when backing Shepherd have argued he has consistently selected managers with good track records. The post above both slags off Souness's purchases yet at the same time goes on about how Shepherd shows ambition by bringing in Englands best striker. So basically, the manager (when its Sourness) gets slagged off for poor buys but the chairman gets the credit for good ones. You argue that the chairman should trust the managers judgement and allow him to spend the cash they supply how he sees fit which means that Shepherd would have handed Souness that same 17million regardless of who he decided to buy. you misunderstand PP. I have said this before - personally, I would not have appointed Souness, ever. I would also have sacked him when he assaulted Bellamy on the training ground. I would also have sacked him for subbing him at Charlton, because it was obvious to all from that point on that he was going to put his ego before the best interests of the club. But I know this, or thought it would happen, because I noticed what he was like at Rangers, when I was working in jockland at the time. However, the board appointed him, and backed him. That is their responsibility, to back him - or sack him. For as long as they employ him they have to back him and allow him to manage. Just because I didn't want him doesn't change this. Wrong people getting promoted, and appointed, happens everywhere in life, but once they are in they must be supported, until or unless their position becomes untenable. I have never gave a chairman the credit for choosing any player the club buys, because that is, or should be, always the decision of the manager. The chairman can of course exercise a financial veto if he chooses which is a grey area and one where any chairman can in effect "interfere". We don't know the financial position if a manager wants a player do we ? You can only measure the amount of backing they actually get and all of ours have had plenty, more than enough in fact to have won trophies with, so the blame for not doing that rests completely with the players, and managers IMO. Especially considering the amount of times they have bottled situations even when we had a team that was playing in the CL, which is obviously good enough to have won the League Cup at least, and the managers for playing scratch sides in League Cup games where we lost to lower league opposition. Jesus wept, you would have a manager sacked for substituting Bellamy, crazy. Do you know that the manager with the most, no, only success under Shepherd was the least financially backed by him? I don’t see how a chairman exercising a financial veto is a grey area at all, it’s his job to ensure the financial stability of the club above all else, Ridsdale is proof of that. The chairman not doing so is an act of incompetence and a failure of his duty to the club. You describing it as a grey area is your attempt to remove his responsibility for where we are now and it’s so easy to see through.

Still think we'll do better with your man Souness in charge and Craig Bellamy gone ? Shepherd did.

So we diclined under Souness only, what are the sequence of league finished under Shepherd? I guess that they must all be top half apart from 1 year, is that right?

Interesting comments about Keegan, where did I say the board ran the football team? What about the rest of the post? Is your lack of comment an acceptance of the post as being true?

I'm sure Freddy Fletcher was given the lions share of brownie points for bringing Keegan to the club as manager during the SOS fiasco when he was getting stick from the fans for his part in that, I can't prove it as it's just my memory. As for the board taking us forward since 1992, that was under the guidance of Sir John Hall, we've gone a long way backwards under Shepherd. We've gone from 2nd in the Premiership to where we are now, 17th and on the same number of points as Sheffield United who are in a relegation position. As for a manager like Keegan instantly putting things right, that's probably true, the thing is, Shepherd thinks that Souness and Roeder are the men to do that. Souness was the man to improve on 5th in the league and Roeder was the man to improve on 14th which he did for one half season but is so far failing to do this season, he could possibly fail to beat what Souness did in his one and only full season. Also, think about this, shitty Ellis spent less than us and still finished above us in the league, more times than we finished above them with Shepherd steering the ship. Spending money is useless and just turns a potential profit into a loss without any gain for the club if the club can't appoint a manager who can spend the money wisely, Factamundo. Spending is useless when you go backwards while doing it, spending is only of use when it improves you as a club and as a team, we've got nothing for the money spent so we've failed as a club, again, Factamundo.

If this is anywhere close to the truth then Roeder is even thicker that I thought, I'll wait and see.

Glenn Roeder gets credit for a lot of things that he hasn't done, the academy is just another.