Unbelievable

you're confusing right to success, with actual performance achieved given the money spent Oh right.. Now correct me if I'm wrong but this "right to success" bollocks is something YOU came up with and was never actually used by any of us.. All people have said is that a club like Newcastle spending the amount of money we do should be higher up the league table than we currently are. It's not something we deserve or have a divine right to, but it's something we should realistically aim for, hence the disappointment if we continually fail to meet those targets. To me, that is exactly what you imply by saying "actual performance achieved given the money spent" which you use to make your 'point' regarding Eriksson. How come other people are apparently f***, s*** t** or w*** (you do like your swearing) for using the exact same argument you do, yet you are not? You twist and turn an awful lot to always be controversial, but you should have known that all this twisting and turning in your own penalty box would eventually lead to you losing control of the ball and it bobbling over the goal line for an own goal.. so a belief that if you spend X amount of money you realisitically believe you should achieve a standard Y is different from, we spent X so we deserve Y you're just twisting words tbh It very obviously is (it's the word "deserve" that you brought to the table yourself that you now claim is behind our mindset of realistically expecting a certain return for the money invested by the club), I'm not twisting words (if you can't see the difference between "expecting" and "deserving" even though you yourself came up with the league table based on financial power concept to ridicule others you're less clever than I gave you credit for) and I find that very funny coming from you of all people.. there is no f****** difference between someone at the start of the season saying we have spent X so we deserve a 5th place, and at the end of the season someone saying we spent X so we have failed on our expectations to achieve 5th Yes there is. The first is ridiculous, as you yourself argued very well yesterday (http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=38429.msg776285#msg776285), the second is only natural and should be done at regular intervals anyway, i.e. determine whether the club has been underachieving, and if so correct the situation. You seem to think this logic applies to England/Eriksson, but not Newcastle/Roeder..? You honestly think Roeder has spent a huge amount of money to justify 'expectations'? I had no expectations of Roeder apart from be better than Souness i.e. not to get us relegated Well yes. He did inherit a fairly good squad you know, plus he has been given 15 million (and probably more based on media reports of us being linked to all sorts of players this January without spending a penny) and three (!) transfer windows to make any imrpovement he saw fit.. Your expectations have been met by the looks of things, so how do you explain your grumpyness on this board. You should be dancing in the streets.. Excuse us for setting our sights a bit higher, will you?

you're confusing right to success, with actual performance achieved given the money spent Oh right.. Now correct me if I'm wrong but this "right to success" bollocks is something YOU came up with and was never actually used by any of us.. All people have said is that a club like Newcastle spending the amount of money we do should be higher up the league table than we currently are. It's not something we deserve or have a divine right to, but it's something we should realistically aim for, hence the disappointment if we continually fail to meet those targets. To me, that is exactly what you imply by saying "actual performance achieved given the money spent" which you use to make your 'point' regarding Eriksson. How come other people are apparently f***, s*** t** or w*** (you do like your swearing) for using the exact same argument you do, yet you are not? You twist and turn an awful lot to always be controversial, but you should have known that all this twisting and turning in your own penalty box would eventually lead to you losing control of the ball and it bobbling over the goal line for an own goal.. so a belief that if you spend X amount of money you realisitically believe you should achieve a standard Y is different from, we spent X so we deserve Y you're just twisting words tbh It very obviously is (it's the word "deserve" that you brought to the table yourself that you now claim is behind our mindset of realistically expecting a certain return for the money invested by the club), I'm not twisting words (if you can't see the difference between "expecting" and "deserving" even though you yourself came up with the league table based on financial power concept to ridicule others you're less clever than I gave you credit for) and I find that very funny coming from you of all people.. there is no f****** difference between someone at the start of the season saying we have spent X so we deserve a 5th place, and at the end of the season someone saying we spent X so we have failed on our expectations to achieve 5th Yes there is. The first is ridiculous, as you yourself argued very well yesterday (http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=38429.msg776285#msg776285), the second is only natural and should be done at regular intervals anyway, i.e. determine whether the club has been underachieving, and if so correct the situation. You seem to think this logic applies to England/Eriksson, but not Newcastle/Roeder..?

you're confusing right to success, with actual performance achieved given the money spent Oh right.. Now correct me if I'm wrong but this "right to success" bollocks is something YOU came up with and was never actually used by any of us.. All people have said is that a club like Newcastle spending the amount of money we do should be higher up the league table than we currently are. It's not something we deserve or have a divine right to, but it's something we should realistically aim for, hence the disappointment if we continually fail to meet those targets. To me, that is exactly what you imply by saying "actual performance achieved given the money spent" which you use to make your 'point' regarding Eriksson. How come other people are apparently f***, s*** t** or w*** (you do like your swearing) for using the exact same argument you do, yet you are not? You twist and turn an awful lot to always be controversial, but you should have known that all this twisting and turning in your own penalty box would eventually lead to you losing control of the ball and it bobbling over the goal line for an own goal.. so a belief that if you spend X amount of money you realisitically believe you should achieve a standard Y is different from, we spent X so we deserve Y you're just twisting words tbh It very obviously is (it's the word "deserve" that you brought to the table yourself that you now claim is behind our mindset of realistically expecting a certain return for the money invested by the club), I'm not twisting words (if you can't see the difference between "expecting" and "deserving" even though you yourself came up with the league table based on financial power concept to ridicule others you're less clever than I gave you credit for) and I find that very funny coming from you of all people..

you're confusing right to success, with actual performance achieved given the money spent Oh right.. Now correct me if I'm wrong but this "right to success" bollocks is something YOU came up with and was never actually used by any of us.. All people have said is that a club like Newcastle spending the amount of money we do should be higher up the league table than we currently are. It's not something we deserve or have a divine right to, but it's something we should realistically aim for, hence the disappointment if we continually fail to meet those targets. To me, that is exactly what you imply by saying "actual performance achieved given the money spent" which you use to make your 'point' regarding Eriksson. How come other people are apparently f***, s*** t** or w*** (you do like your swearing) for using the exact same argument you do, yet you are not? You twist and turn an awful lot to always be controversial, but you should have known that all this twisting and turning in your own penalty box would eventually lead to you losing control of the ball and it bobbling over the goal line for an own goal..

The ball has crossed the line, no doubt about it.. "Do you honeslty believe that was worth the money that was spent." to "There are people on here who think more money = more right to success, I'm not one of them" just doesn't compute..

You also remember that England reach any quarter final under Hoddle? f****** ridiculous good point. we spent millions and went what? 1 match further. Still did better then didn't he? f*** me how obtuse can you get? Do you honeslty believe that was worth the money that was spent. Do you honestly think that was his stated goal when he interviewed for the job? Do you honestly think the FA were pleased with their return? Do you think paying him that much should have guarenteed England winning the World Cup? Unless I've missed your point - what was it again? that he's s****? I believe his stated aim was to win the world cup. I know that all he actually achieved was to beat a top 10 side twice, while losing 4 times. There are people on here who think more money = more right to success, I'm not one of them So, do you think his England salary is relevant or not? That's a bit mean of you Alex, to be rubbing it in after Vix has jus scored an own goal..

Big Sam... How we could "probably" attract Guus Hiddink escapes me completely. If we discard him as a possibillity, Allardyce currently has over 50% of the votes..

CoachHTT it's not long ago you wrote a long piece about Van Gaal being a far better tactician than Roeder, but instead of being minutes away from not qualifying for the 2002 WC yet pulling it off, Louis Van Gaal maanged to actually screw it up and not qualify with a team which would normally be considered outsiders for winning it.. I don't see how you can keep saying that because a manager hasn't set the world alight as an international manager, he may not be a very good club manager..

Only time I felt a bit akward was at the Mackems' in their home end last season when we came back from 1-0 down to beat them 4-1 and it was difficult to constrain myself while Mackems were understandably frustrated by the way their team gave away the lead and our Supporters taking the mickey out of them..

I don't think many people if any have said or suggested he is shit tbh. Many have looked at his record and concluded he is probably not up to much. I don't see how anybody could come to any other conclusion.. It's the club that deserves to be criticised if their search for a new left back has not yielded more promising results than 32 year old never-has-beens. As harmless as getting a player that will probably not cut the mustard on trial may seem, it is very bad PR towards the fans at a time where there already aren't many reasons to rejoice..

Surely for a 32 year old with no major accomplishments in his footballing career (except winning the Turkish league over a decade ago) that's reverse logic? It's not like we're saying some unknown 18 year old is the next Pele based on his profile in a computer game. This is real life "accomplishments" we're talking about, and they're rather underwhelming to say the least..

no, considering it's the middle of the season I didn't know there was no football being played in the middle of the season like.. Figures then.. wtf are you on about you tool? you wanna go and ask any club if they'll let us trial their left back? go right ahead numpty Ah, I see... It's because we NEED to trial a left back in the middle of the season..? It all makes sense now.. Thanks for clearing that up..

no, considering it's the middle of the season I didn't know there was no football being played in the middle of the season like.. Figures then..

Is anybody surprised this is the best option for left back our 'scouts' have come up with?

For what reason did you omit Hatem Trabelsi?

He's nowhere near good enough, but the biggest blame should go to Roeder for not getting a decent left sided full back two transfer windows running..

Taylor was worse..... You must be selectively blind then. Taylor elbow was bad, yes he coud have been sent off, plus he lost his man once which could have proved costly but he managed to block. Bramble was at fault for BOTH goals (first one he played them onside, second one he lost his man for the header) nearly gave away a debated penalty, his tackle he was yellow carded for was horrofic and worse than Taylors elbow. His passing was abysmal as usual and he lost his man countless times. How on earth was he worse than Taylor? Bramble should have been booted out years ago. Selective blindness is running in you too...The WHOLE defence was crap crap craaaaapppppppppp...Solano kept lossing the ball, Bramble and Taylor were shocking, Huntingdale is just a kid playing in the wrong playground... I was impressed though with Alkmaar's defender who was wearing the number 2 top...Who is he ? Kew Jaliens... Dutch international..

How has he not said that? He didn't confine his statement to just England did he? If that's what he meant I am inclined to agree, although you never know if other talents will come in in the next few years to claim the honour of being the best of this generation..

Rooney is nowhere near the level you suggest. I would have him as one of the top 10 players in the world in his age group, but he's a long way from being the undisputed best of this era in football.

5th goalkeeper this season for them actually..

I wouldn't even have him here for 2.5 million let alone that much! Everybody was convinced he was nothing special before the world cup. A few good performances haven't made me change my mind. It's happened before where somebody played out of their skin in a big tournament (Butt being Pele's player of the tournament in 2002 anyone?), and the players who normally shine and have had a full season are too tired to make an impression.. If we are looking in Germany for a creative centre midfielder (which Hargreaves is by no means) I would much rather have Van der Vaart or Diego..

You don't seriously think that Sol Campbell would have been expecting 100k/week to play for us now, do you? I'm with Gemmill on this one. In our situation, taking a small chance on some proven quality available for free (Campbell, Hasselbaink) had common sense written all over it. Woodgate is another story. Now, if we were all slating Roeder for not getting Woody I would agree that hindsight got in the way as the risk would have been too big to blow our wages on him. Of course, now we regret not going for him, but that sometimes happens.. What shouldn't happen however is missing out on a couple of excellent stop gaps (if nothing more long term is available) and ending up with nothing or inferior stop gaps as we did..

If you insist on excluding Kluivert, it appears so..

Interesting point. I know of a story where a couple were sentenced to several years in jail for kissing each other in a sacred square in the Middle East. Is it normal to kiss somebody in public, or is it normal to sentence somebody to several years imprisonment for it? Is normal different depending on location? I agree with you that he should have known better, but you can't expect a visitor to the UK to know of all the cultural delicacies straight away. If you think otherwise, it would be interesting to see you abroad, interfacing with the locals when you are on a holiday. How often will you unknowingly have "insulted" somebody because of a lack of knowledge of their culture?

if Newcastle lose tonight we will have some egg on our face mind.. Dave, can you make sure all of this gets deleted in the case of such an eventuality..