Toon Amy

Geremi is much more culpable than Butt in our terrible form this season, imo.

He's been played all over the place though, not settling in any one position, and although he has not lived up to his pre season form, he loses possession far less often than Butt, and at key moments where we concede a goal you will find that Nicky Butt is often there at the heart of it.

Saw the final two minutes of the game. There was this one little instance where Barton picked the ball up on the left, ran at Babel and totally skinned him. Looked good, quick.

Yet for their 3rd goal, Babel totally skinned Nicky Butt, who is far too overated by most and a key factor in what is going wrong. Reliance on cloggers like him is a recipe for disaster!

 

Why single Butt out? He's not a KEY factor in what is going wrong at all. I'd much rather have him in the team than Emre, Smith or Geremi at the moment.

Simple. Because he loses possession far too often, picks up a yellow card and risks the red card too easily.

I do not want Smith in the team either btw, but Geremi and Emre at least can pass the ball.

Saw the final two minutes of the game. There was this one little instance where Barton picked the ball up on the left, ran at Babel and totally skinned him. Looked good, quick.

Yet for their 3rd goal, Babel totally skinned Nicky Butt, who is far too overated by most and a key factor in what is going wrong. Reliance on cloggers like him is a recipe for disaster!

Brazil's Dunga. Won the Copa America in his first year as Coach. No previous experience except as a player.

+ Van Basten + Klinsmann + Croatia's Bilic. All ex players with no coaching experience who have done well as National manager.

I could easily see Shearer succeeding. He has the right mentality for it. He would just need to get the right staff alongside. Thats important.

As for managing Newcastle I would rather he worked up as a coach, because of the transfers, but I see no reason to doubt he is capable of succeeding at whatever he does.

And another thing: why the fuck did we sit back after equalising??? Home advantage, back from the dead, we should have been on cloud nine and fucking annihilated them.

 

No, let's stop playing, go for a draw AGAIN with a back four that's been all over the place for 70 minutes and with Paul Robinson's shit cousin in goal.

We played like the away team the whole match, Wullie.  tictacs by Baldwin

SGE was crap. Mclaren is worse. Factamundo.

Two spazzoids don't make a king... etc....

Slightly convenient that he now doesn't have to play against his beloved Liverpool.

 

Also slightly depressing that he can get injured kicking a ball, that is what he trains to do day in day out...........

 

The game had been held up for 5 minutes due to an injury to the goalkeeper. It is freezing conditions. The game restarts, England make a good move and Owen stretches to make the shot. It is not beyond the realms of logic that injuries like that can happen to anyone. The muscles had been relaxed and frozen and then they are suddenly stretched. But don't let facts get in the way will you now?

 

he didn't stretch at all he just kicked it....

ok, whatever. He just stood there and calmly kicked it. Never exerted his muscles at all. As you wish.

 

didn't mean it like that, but he didn't over-stretch as you suggested

What I meant was that the muscles were stretched, he had to accelerate and make the shot (which he fired off quickly, again stretching the muscles) after being standing still in freezing conditions. Thigh strains can easily happen to anyone in those kind of conditions after the muscles were relaxed for 5 minutes.

 

I just wish that McLaren hadn't organized the stupid pointless friendly but I don't think its Owens fault, or that he has picked it up because he is injury prone. He probably is more than most, (or at least has been for us) but not as much as Dyer, and its a bit dissapointing to see people thinking that somehow its his fault.

 

i've never said it was his fault, but hopefully your talking about other people and what you have said is fair enough

I was, it wasn't aimed directly at you. Sorry if it came across that way.

Slightly convenient that he now doesn't have to play against his beloved Liverpool.

 

Also slightly depressing that he can get injured kicking a ball, that is what he trains to do day in day out...........

 

The game had been held up for 5 minutes due to an injury to the goalkeeper. It is freezing conditions. The game restarts, England make a good move and Owen stretches to make the shot. It is not beyond the realms of logic that injuries like that can happen to anyone. The muscles had been relaxed and frozen and then they are suddenly stretched. But don't let facts get in the way will you now?

 

he didn't stretch at all he just kicked it....

ok, whatever. He just stood there and calmly kicked it. Never exerted his muscles at all. As you wish.

 

didn't mean it like that, but he didn't over-stretch as you suggested

What I meant was that the muscles were stretched, he had to accelerate and make the shot (which he fired off quickly, again stretching the muscles) after being standing still in freezing conditions. Thigh strains can easily happen to anyone in those kind of conditions after the muscles were relaxed for 5 minutes.

I just wish that McLaren hadn't organized the stupid pointless friendly but I don't think its Owens fault, or that he has picked it up because he is injury prone. He probably is more than most, (or at least has been for us) but not as much as Dyer, and its a bit dissapointing to see people thinking that somehow its his fault.

Slightly convenient that he now doesn't have to play against his beloved Liverpool.

 

Also slightly depressing that he can get injured kicking a ball, that is what he trains to do day in day out...........

 

The game had been held up for 5 minutes due to an injury to the goalkeeper. It is freezing conditions. The game restarts, England make a good move and Owen stretches to make the shot. It is not beyond the realms of logic that injuries like that can happen to anyone. The muscles had been relaxed and frozen and then they are suddenly stretched. But don't let facts get in the way will you now?

 

he didn't stretch at all he just kicked it....

ok, whatever. He just stood there and calmly kicked it. Never exerted his muscles at all. As you wish.

Slightly convenient that he now doesn't have to play against his beloved Liverpool.

 

Also slightly depressing that he can get injured kicking a ball, that is what he trains to do day in day out...........

The game had been held up for 5 minutes due to an injury to the goalkeeper. It is freezing conditions. The game restarts, England make a good move and Owen stretches to make the shot. It is not beyond the realms of logic that injuries like that can happen to anyone. The muscles had been relaxed and frozen and then they are suddenly stretched. But don't let facts get in the way will you now?

Well lets just hope Martins doesn't get an injury in the next few games, because (a) then he will also be a "wanker" and (b) we will be more stuffed than we already are.

 

I knew it'd get loads.

I knew you did it on purpose, to provoke a bigger response. 

Not sure why I always let myself get dragged into these kind of threads though!  I should just let them die a natural death after all the "fun comments" have been posted.

A separate competition for women only is sexist and as such should not be endorsed or subsidised by the FA in any way. Women should be able to compete with male footballers for places in the full England squad.

 

Equality for all.

 

The thing is though, FIFA won't allow women in mens squads.

 

They can say it's because women are not as physically strong enough, but personally I think it's because the men in suits are scared in case a few are actually good enough to get in. They want to keep the delusion of grandeur.

 

good enough to get in??? Jebus. Amady Faye would get a game for a girls team, THATS how bad they are.

 

No-one really gives a fuck about womens football, for good reason - they're shit.

When you say no one, what you actually mean is YOU don't give a fuck about it, but yet you felt the need to make the same point more than once.

 

Newsflash - There are billions of people in the world, outside of N-O and they don't all think like you.

 

Lots of people do give a fuck about it, and maybe that scares you because it threatens your small minded view of the world.

 

 

To be fair TA, i wouldn't mind woman playing if they were actually good enough.. sadly though they aren't

 

to be fair though, that's your opinion. While your entitled to your opinion, it makes no difference in the great scheme of things, because women don't need your permission to play.

 

 

Also to be fair, an opinion is not a fact.

 

 

Its not just my oppinion, its the general consensus; which does indeed affect the great scheme of things.

Maybe its still early going, but woman don't seem to be anywhere near the standard of the Premier league.

The general consensus of who?

Newsflash 2. Newcastle Online is not the world.

.... America is not the World (a song by Morrisey) just threw it in there for some reason...

I did not say they were at the standard of the Premier League and I also do not think it is relevant. Not really sure what your point really is but if it is that you think Women's football is crap, then good for you I think you've made it already. If your point is that you think everyone else out there thinks like you, then sorry but you're wrong.

There are enough people who don't to sustain the sport and they are growing in number.

Not sure what it adds to the discussion about 'whether the England squad should have been compensated for loss of earnings' mind, because as I have already pointed out several times:

the FA did have enough money,

the commercial side of it is more than it was before,

Womens Sport deserves funding whether YOU or anyone else on here likes it personally,

and basically if you can't agree or disagree with those premises then I think you should read the OP again.

I think they should all get a pay rise apart from the goalkeepers who should be put down.

Anyway, I think the thing holding back the women's game the most is the standard of keeping, it's fucking pathetic. I watched us beat the argies and couldn't believe some of the goals that went in, no joke I would have fancied my chances stopping them. Same goes for Charlton's keeper in the FA cup final against Arsenal last year, it was just embarassing. I think it's very hard to take the sport seriously when so many goals seem so soft.

Fair enough comments.

Not exactly sure what is going on with the goalkeeping.

There is a height disadvantage though, and perhaps there is also a fear factor when going for crosses, that perhaps head protection (like Cech wears) might improve that. Unsure, just floating ideas.

Also the fact that going in goal is not usually the popular thing, which gives you a smaller pool of talent, but obviously yes the standard does need to improve in the goalkeeping.

I can't agree. Going by the few matches I saw at the lasses World Cup, I don't think they'd even get in the league.

Does that really matter though? Even though there is no way of proving it rightly or wrongly, what difference does it actually make?

If people enjoy it, and if it is still developing because it has been held back for a century what's the problem?

People will turn out to watch AFC Wimbledon, they're not in the league, and if they were representing the country people would watch it and support them. (For example)

As I said before I really don't think it's relevant, it just pleases some people to be able to place it somewhere.

A separate competition for women only is sexist and as such should not be endorsed or subsidised by the FA in any way. Women should be able to compete with male footballers for places in the full England squad.

 

Equality for all.

 

The thing is though, FIFA won't allow women in mens squads.

 

They can say it's because women are not as physically strong enough, but personally I think it's because the men in suits are scared in case a few are actually good enough to get in. They want to keep the delusion of grandeur.

 

So do you think the best solution would be to allow women to play in the men's game then?

Nope. It was a flippant comment in reply to a flippant comment.

 

The point was, that some people keep saying "womens football is shit" yet even if women footballers wanted to prove themselves they would not be allowed to, so the myth will always remain.

 

Where, in your opinion, would be the England women team's stable position in the Football League if they were to enter a team? Conference? Championship?

It's kind of a trick question, because obviously it can never be verified and I'm sure that several people just can't wait to jump in and answer it by saying "Pub league" or something like that, but honestly I think League 1 or Lower Championship, and I think the German team of few years ago would be in the higher Championship, pushing for promotion. Now they are older I think mid Championship.

Maybe I'm being optimistic, it's really hard to tell for sure and I don't think it's all that relevant anyway, but definately not lower than League 1.

Some might think that is not good enough to be a watchable game, but considering they do hold down jobs as well, considering it is still developing and considering people turn out week in week out to watch League 1 games I think it is and I think with more support it will improve.

A separate competition for women only is sexist and as such should not be endorsed or subsidised by the FA in any way. Women should be able to compete with male footballers for places in the full England squad.

 

Equality for all.

 

The thing is though, FIFA won't allow women in mens squads.

 

They can say it's because women are not as physically strong enough, but personally I think it's because the men in suits are scared in case a few are actually good enough to get in. They want to keep the delusion of grandeur.

 

So do you think the best solution would be to allow women to play in the men's game then?

Nope. It was a flippant comment in reply to a flippant comment.

The point was, that some people keep saying "womens football is shit" yet even if women footballers wanted to prove themselves they would not be allowed to, so the myth will always remain.

Personally no I don't think it's even relevant how they compare to men.

I've no problem with the women being compensated for playing, but we've got to remember the level the women's game is at currently.

 

At the moment there's not enough interest in the women's game at club level to make it possible for women to become full-time professional footballers in this country. If there was, then they would be. If they were, then they wouldn't be complaining about losing 2 weeks pay from their regular jobs while heading off to the World Cup.

 

If there's not enough interest from the public to make it worthwhile for teams to go professional, then that's because the standard of the product offered does not, in the opinion of the consumer, warrant it. Therefore the women players (Like most male players, myself included in my Sunday league team!) remain amateur. We, like they, play for fun.

 

The FA turning round and saying that they'll give the women a couple of thousand extra for 5 weeks every 4 years is not going to change the reality of this situation. Women aren't staying at home instead of representing England at the World Cup because they can't afford to.

 

To add one further point, the Women's World Cup has been on the sporting calendar for years now. It coming round shoulnd't be a surprise to any aspiring female footballers. Surely all employers give paid holidays these years? Did the ladies not have the foresight to book these couple of weeks well in advance? OK, perhaps they don't get 5 weeks holiday allocation but 2-3 weeks paid plus the rest unpaid and then 5 weeks worth of pay from the FA should make up the shortfall for the other couple of weeks, even if it's below your normal rate of pay.

 

I mean, surely if you're planning on possibly going to these events this is the sort of thing you consider, right? Hell, I booked most of the men's World Cup off and I was only watching it in the pub!

The point is, and always has been that they are not arguing for proffessional wages. They are arguing for better loss of earnings compensation. They have been given it in the past (Euro 2005) and there is MORE money in the game now.

As for booking holidays, they would have already used up any paid leave before the world cup, in the qualifying away matches and training camps.

In any case this is a waste of time, because even the brighter ones on here don't seem to want to get it.

All I see is "la la la I'm not listening, womens football is shit blah blah blah, not commercially viable, blah blah blah" funny joke, blah blah, shake a willy, ha ha ha ...

Heard it all seen it all before but it makes no difference at all even if any of that where true or funny, the point is that there is more money in the womens game than ever before, but the players have been compensated LESS than they were before?

Surely people can understand that?

If they wanted to they could, but I can only conclude that there is a reason why those GCSE/Alevel results keep telling the same story.

A separate competition for women only is sexist and as such should not be endorsed or subsidised by the FA in any way. Women should be able to compete with male footballers for places in the full England squad.

 

Equality for all.

 

The thing is though, FIFA won't allow women in mens squads.

They can say it's because women are not as physically strong enough, but personally I think it's because the men in suits are scared in case a few are actually good enough to get in. They want to keep the delusion of grandeur.

 

good enough to get in??? Jebus. Amady Faye would get a game for a girls team, THATS how bad they are.

 

No-one really gives a fuck about womens football, for good reason - they're shit.

When you say no one, what you actually mean is YOU don't give a fuck about it, but yet you felt the need to make the same point more than once.

 

Newsflash - There are billions of people in the world, outside of N-O and they don't all think like you.

 

Lots of people do give a fuck about it, and maybe that scares you because it threatens your small minded view of the world.

 

No, i can honestly say, hand-on-heart, that I am not in any way "threatened" by the (incorrect) idea that womens football is some kind of mass populist sport.

 

There are indeed several billion people in the world. And there are millions of people who woudl exploit a large audience for womens football if indeed it existed. But they haven't, because it doesn't.

 

It's shit. They're not very good at football, in comparison to a game that IS genuinely popular.

I think you are, because that's why you keep feeling the need to reassure yourself, repeat the same tired old points and make illogical comparisons as if they really mean something.

A separate competition for women only is sexist and as such should not be endorsed or subsidised by the FA in any way. Women should be able to compete with male footballers for places in the full England squad.

 

Equality for all.

 

The thing is though, FIFA won't allow women in mens squads.

 

They can say it's because women are not as physically strong enough, but personally I think it's because the men in suits are scared in case a few are actually good enough to get in. They want to keep the delusion of grandeur.

 

good enough to get in??? Jebus. Amady Faye would get a game for a girls team, THATS how bad they are.

 

No-one really gives a fuck about womens football, for good reason - they're shit.

When you say no one, what you actually mean is YOU don't give a fuck about it, but yet you felt the need to make the same point more than once.

 

Newsflash - There are billions of people in the world, outside of N-O and they don't all think like you.

 

Lots of people do give a fuck about it, and maybe that scares you because it threatens your small minded view of the world.

 

 

To be fair TA, i wouldn't mind woman playing if they were actually good enough.. sadly though they aren't

to be fair though, that's your opinion. While your entitled to your opinion, it makes no difference in the great scheme of things, because women don't need your permission to play.

Also to be fair, an opinion is not a fact.

A separate competition for women only is sexist and as such should not be endorsed or subsidised by the FA in any way. Women should be able to compete with male footballers for places in the full England squad.

 

Equality for all.

 

The thing is though, FIFA won't allow women in mens squads.

 

They can say it's because women are not as physically strong enough, but personally I think it's because the men in suits are scared in case a few are actually good enough to get in. They want to keep the delusion of grandeur.

 

good enough to get in??? Jebus. Amady Faye would get a game for a girls team, THATS how bad they are.

 

No-one really gives a fuck about womens football, for good reason - they're shit.

When you say no one, what you actually mean is YOU don't give a fuck about it, but yet you felt the need to make the same point more than once.

Newsflash - There are billions of people in the world, outside of N-O and they don't all think like you.

Lots of people do give a fuck about it, and maybe that scares you because it threatens your small minded view of the world.

A separate competition for women only is sexist and as such should not be endorsed or subsidised by the FA in any way. Women should be able to compete with male footballers for places in the full England squad.

 

Equality for all.

The thing is though, FIFA won't allow women in mens squads.

They can say it's because women are not as physically strong enough, but personally I think it's because the men in suits are scared in case a few are actually good enough to get in. They want to keep the delusion of grandeur.

They're not actually asking for wages, but compensation for loss of earnings. Yes they are asking for more.

Not sure why I bother, because very few people actually intend to rise above the schoolyard...

The money they have been given is approx. the minimum wage, which in most cases means losing money they would have otherwise earnt and makes it difficult when paying a mortgage, etc. (Despite what daft people will say, a lot of women pay their own way in this world)

They got paid more compensation, for the European Championships 2 years ago, which had less TV money for it. The budget that is already covered by the FA for the womens game could easily afford a more realistic increase to cover any loss of earnings.

The fact that there is now more TV money in the womens game means that this budget should be increased in any case. (Although not necessary to make a more reasonable offer) They do not need to take any of the slice of the pie of the mens game to do this. Allegedly the reason is because they are having a "strategic review."

However, the FA is the Football Association, not the mens football association, so even if it was necessary (which it isn't) it would not be unreasonable to increase the budget for Womens football, when you consider that it could easily be covered by just equalling the money spent on McLarens recent trip to LA to see Beckham.

Think someones already done that one. 

They were nominated for the best new comedy awards.

They'd deserve more if there was a huge worldwide interest in women's football.

 

There isn't and they don't.

Aye, that's why over a million tickets were sold at the recent world cup.

 

To be fair, people don't spend money on Sky subscriptions to watch the women's world cup, they spend it to watch the EPL, La Liga and Champions League.  If there was as many sqillions of £$£$£$£$£$£ floating around the women's game as there is in the men's game then I could understand them deserving a bigger slice of the cake, but there blatantly isn't and anybody who says there is is kidding themselves.

If all males were as reluctant to get it as you are, then no wonder lads are doing so poorly in their GCSE's and A Levels.

 

It's not about comparison to the men's game, it's about comparitive compensation (for the wages they lost) with Sweden and the USA, who are of an approximate standing (including financially) in WOMEN's football.

 

There's one paragraph in the article about that.

 

There's another paragraph about the women's game being 100yrs behind the men's game.  There's further paragraphs about broadcasting/sponsorship money issues.

all it says about the mens game is that

the men's game has had a 100-year start on women's football

which it would not have had, if things had been left to run their natural course by the way. Women were playing football at the start, until the FA banned them.

 

All it says about sponsorship issues is that they are looking for more sponsorship, and get more broadcasting. No where does it say that they want a slice of any pie that men want to gorge on.

 

The point i'm making is that there isn't a market to fund high wages in British women's football.  There is in the USA because it's more popular and there obviously is in the mens game for the same reason.  Am I right or am I wrong?

Wrong. lol.

They aren't asking for high wages, but the minimum wage they have been given, which is approximately what £40 a day is, is insulting and in most cases will not cover any wages lost by being there. Hardly a way to inspire future players is it?

There is enough money in the women's game to fund higher compensation for a one off competition like the world cup.