Mick

They were both within months of signing a contract, one was offered a new one the other wasn't. A double standard is the unjust application of different sets of principles for similar situations. The concept implies that a single set of principles encompassing all situations (a "single standard") is the desirable ideal. Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/double-standard#ixzz1I1NoEsdt

It's double standards, they'd both signed contracts with the club within months.

It's still double standards.

I think Tiote did get a pay rise when he signed his original contract only a few months earlier.

One was to potentially keep a player who was our best forward at the club, the other probably wasn't to keep Tiote here.

What has that to do with Pardew telling him to hand in a transfer request? You've missed out "And it wasn't just about Andy Carroll [on Monday]. If we did a deal with him where does that leave everyone else at the club? If he scores another five goals does he get another contract? We gave Tiote an improved contract in roughly the same time frame as Carroll was after one, what's the difference?

No idea, I'm just quoting Pardew who had nothing at all to gain from lying on this matter.

Pardew told the BBC that it was him.

"He mentioned he wanted a new deal, otherwise he wanted out and to talk to Liverpool. I told him he had to put that in writing and he did," stated Pardew.

He didn't allow him to hand in a transfer request, he told him to hand it in.

I thought that he came across well and admitted making a few mistakes, let's see if he repeats any of them.

I'm sure that Pardew has just said in his interview that he had final say on transfers. I can't quote exact words but that's what he seemed to be getting at.

He's been here 3 months which has included a transfer window and he's had both league and cup games. When will you start to judge him and what has he to do which he hasn't been able to do yet? He hasn't had a summer with the players and I haven't seen anything yet to suggest that a pre-season under him will provide any benefit.

Fair enough.

People compared it when Pardew had a better record so does it only work one way? Did you question the purpose then?

Souness had plenty of experience in the transfer market and was given a fortune to spend, spending didn't do him any good or make him any better as a manager. I haven't checked, I would think the early record of Souness with another managers players was better than after he'd spent money. Our main advantage now is that we seem to have a reasonably good scouting network who will have watched any player who comes in.

The main point is that he doesn't have 2 games left to make up two points as you can work out points per game. Adding cup games could be controversial but they are games played and part of our season. It could be argued that Hughton had easy games in the cup, so did Pardew. In all games Hughton has the better record of the two if you award points for draws and wins as you would in the league.

In league and cup games his record is worse, that can change with every game but as Dave said, he's supposed to do better.

Experience in the transfer market is probably moot due to us having a team of people who scout the players these days. At one time the manager would do most of that on his own. It seems that the manager just picks from a list of names which has been put together by others.

He looks to be the last man though, he should be the one pushing out.

It's not irrelevant, he's the current manager and you seem unable to cope with any criticism of him.

Is Perdew's record in league and cup better or worse than that of the previous manager during this season?

It's not unbelievable that we've only got 2 games in a month, that's what happens when you go out of the cup to Stevenage.