Unbelievable

You'll soon give up supporting Barca for us..

I know it's early in the year, but you have the prize for shittiest retort for 2010 nicely sawn up there.. Strangely, subconsciously you were probably aware of your gaffe when you made it, considering this is what you said

Well, well, Ronaldo is not having a great day is he?

Dear oh dear..

Good man Carroll

this is going to be painful..

Bugger..

By 1 goal, one of those v Pompey, Fulham, Villa was all we needed. Strange point to make. We conceded 59 in the Prem last season, in 38 matches. We were abysmal, both attacking and defensively. We have lost arguably our three best players from that back 5. What makes you think we will look much better next season, providing we go up, except for the blind hope that we will somehow massively improve elsewhere on the pitch (defensive midfielders who provide real cover, attackers who can hold up the ball effectively and release pressure), which we more than likely won't while Mike Ashley is around? Why do people argue the back 5 is good enough while also arguing that it's not about the back 5, but about the entire team defending and not putting too much pressure on the defense. If defending is not just about the back 5 (which is true), and there is no reason to assume our team defending will be any better (with no investment forthcoming), how can our "defence" (in the broad sense of the word, i.e. not just the back 5) be considered of Premier League standard? I would argue that without significant investment (unlikely) we run a serious risk of doing worse in terms of goal difference next season than we did last season (-19). Please point to the part of my post which has any relevance to what you are saying? Pot.. Kettle.. What was the relevance of your point exactly..? Did you not understand it? Ok well if we had scored 1 goal against Pompey we would have stayed up due to a 1-0 win. If we scored 1 goal against Fulham we would have stayed up due to a 1-1 draw. If we had scored 1 goal at Villa on the last day we would have stayed up thanks to a 1-1 draw. Not scoring in 6 of our last 8 games is extremely relevant wouldnt you say? I understood your point but it makes you look like you are in denial about the root causes of our relegation and wasn't particular relevant to the discussion about the strength of our defence/back 5, was it? the root cause was we were poor as a team even if some of the individual parts may have been up to it. So, have we improved to the point you could reasonably say "the defence is now of Premier League standard"..? Thought not.. i think that back 4 could survive in the prem if placed in the majority of prem league teams. have we improved....no, but then i didn't think the back 4 was the major problem last season. As you are one of the main advocates of this "defending as a team" notion, have we addressed the overall problem that was the root cause of our relegation. In terms of quality of personnel we have gone down; have we made up for that by being much more organised tactically? I certainly don't believe this is the case. It's just strikers miss complete sitters in this league like there is no tomorrow. Talking about a much improved defense is a case of papering over the cracks if you ask me. As soon as we are back in the Prem we will be back out of our depth unless we have made very significant improvements to the squad and as a team tactically...

By 1 goal, one of those v Pompey, Fulham, Villa was all we needed. Strange point to make. We conceded 59 in the Prem last season, in 38 matches. We were abysmal, both attacking and defensively. We have lost arguably our three best players from that back 5. What makes you think we will look much better next season, providing we go up, except for the blind hope that we will somehow massively improve elsewhere on the pitch (defensive midfielders who provide real cover, attackers who can hold up the ball effectively and release pressure), which we more than likely won't while Mike Ashley is around? Why do people argue the back 5 is good enough while also arguing that it's not about the back 5, but about the entire team defending and not putting too much pressure on the defense. If defending is not just about the back 5 (which is true), and there is no reason to assume our team defending will be any better (with no investment forthcoming), how can our "defence" (in the broad sense of the word, i.e. not just the back 5) be considered of Premier League standard? I would argue that without significant investment (unlikely) we run a serious risk of doing worse in terms of goal difference next season than we did last season (-19). Please point to the part of my post which has any relevance to what you are saying? Pot.. Kettle.. What was the relevance of your point exactly..? Did you not understand it? Ok well if we had scored 1 goal against Pompey we would have stayed up due to a 1-0 win. If we scored 1 goal against Fulham we would have stayed up due to a 1-1 draw. If we had scored 1 goal at Villa on the last day we would have stayed up thanks to a 1-1 draw. Not scoring in 6 of our last 8 games is extremely relevant wouldnt you say? I understood your point but it makes you look like you are in denial about the root causes of our relegation and wasn't particular relevant to the discussion about the strength of our defence/back 5, was it? the root cause was we were poor as a team even if some of the individual parts may have been up to it. So, have we improved to the point you could reasonably say "the defence is now of Premier League standard"..? Thought not..

By 1 goal, one of those v Pompey, Fulham, Villa was all we needed. Strange point to make. We conceded 59 in the Prem last season, in 38 matches. We were abysmal, both attacking and defensively. We have lost arguably our three best players from that back 5. What makes you think we will look much better next season, providing we go up, except for the blind hope that we will somehow massively improve elsewhere on the pitch (defensive midfielders who provide real cover, attackers who can hold up the ball effectively and release pressure), which we more than likely won't while Mike Ashley is around? Why do people argue the back 5 is good enough while also arguing that it's not about the back 5, but about the entire team defending and not putting too much pressure on the defense. If defending is not just about the back 5 (which is true), and there is no reason to assume our team defending will be any better (with no investment forthcoming), how can our "defence" (in the broad sense of the word, i.e. not just the back 5) be considered of Premier League standard? I would argue that without significant investment (unlikely) we run a serious risk of doing worse in terms of goal difference next season than we did last season (-19). Please point to the part of my post which has any relevance to what you are saying? Pot.. Kettle.. What was the relevance of your point exactly..? Did you not understand it? Ok well if we had scored 1 goal against Pompey we would have stayed up due to a 1-0 win. If we scored 1 goal against Fulham we would have stayed up due to a 1-1 draw. If we had scored 1 goal at Villa on the last day we would have stayed up thanks to a 1-1 draw. Not scoring in 6 of our last 8 games is extremely relevant wouldnt you say? I understood your point but it makes you look like you are in denial about the root causes of our relegation and wasn't particularly relevant to the discussion about the strength of our defence/back 5, was it?

By 1 goal, one of those v Pompey, Fulham, Villa was all we needed. Strange point to make. We conceded 59 in the Prem last season, in 38 matches. We were abysmal, both attacking and defensively. We have lost arguably our three best players from that back 5. What makes you think we will look much better next season, providing we go up, except for the blind hope that we will somehow massively improve elsewhere on the pitch (defensive midfielders who provide real cover, attackers who can hold up the ball effectively and release pressure), which we more than likely won't while Mike Ashley is around? Why do people argue the back 5 is good enough while also arguing that it's not about the back 5, but about the entire team defending and not putting too much pressure on the defense. If defending is not just about the back 5 (which is true), and there is no reason to assume our team defending will be any better (with no investment forthcoming), how can our "defence" (in the broad sense of the word, i.e. not just the back 5) be considered of Premier League standard? I would argue that without significant investment (unlikely) we run a serious risk of doing worse in terms of goal difference next season than we did last season (-19). Please point to the part of my post which has any relevance to what you are saying? Pot.. Kettle.. What was the relevance of your point exactly..?

By 1 goal, one of those v Pompey, Fulham, Villa was all we needed. Strange point to make. We conceded 59 in the Prem last season, in 38 matches. We were abysmal, both attacking and defensively. We have lost arguably our three best players from that back 5. What makes you think we will look much better next season, providing we go up, except for the blind hope that we will somehow massively improve elsewhere on the pitch (defensive midfielders who provide real cover, attackers who can hold up the ball effectively and release pressure), which we more than likely won't while Mike Ashley is around? Why do people argue the back 5 is good enough while also arguing that it's not about the back 5, but about the entire team defending and not putting too much pressure on the defense. If defending is not just about the back 5 (which is true), and there is no reason to assume our team defending will be any better (with no investment forthcoming), how can our "defence" (in the broad sense of the word, i.e. not just the back 5) be considered of Premier League standard? I would argue that without significant investment (unlikely) we run a serious risk of doing worse in terms of goal difference next season than we did last season (-19).

Given > Harper Beye > Simpson Bassong > Kadar Yet we got relegated I therefore wouldn't have thought so.. I appreciate defending is about more than the back five, but the quality of the back five has not improved and whether they will get better protection next season (if we go up) remains very much up in the air (I wouldn't bet on it). It seems to me people are underestimating (if that is even possible) the difference in quality of the opposition midfielders and attackers between the Championship and the Prem..

Heh?

This is a complete mystery to me. He has bulked up so much over the years you would think he would be a terrific athlete with fantastic strength and thunderous pace. In reality he is weak as piss. When I think of Shola I think about how we as a club are slowly being dragged down to his level as a sort of penalty for not replacing him by somebody decent earlier and still having to rely on him (thanks for giving him a new 3 year contract Joe) - a sort of voodoo spell, bad mojo or whatever... Based on his performance tonight it looks like we have some way to go yet in our fall from grace..

You wish.. At fault for their second. I agree but if you watch it back, Nolan dosnt track the guy with the ball, he ends up doing nothing. Colo's marking was poor but Nolan is more at fault, if he'd have bust a gut (albeit a sizeable one) he would have nullified the situation Oh, the cross should have been kept out, no doubt about that, but his marking air was absolutely ridiculous..

You wish.. At fault for their second.

Well, this match confirms again what we knew already: we need a new owner, a new manager and a new squad if we don't want to become the biggest embarrassment ever in the Prem next season, if we continue to fluke our way to decentish results in our promotion bid...

Happy with the point!

Nolan you idiot..

Ooooh, close..

Free kick.. Come on, Carroll for the winner..

Jose loves to run doesn't he?

Not offside FOR FUCKS SAKE!!!

Thanks for everything Danny. Good luck at Man U!