Yorkie

I have to say that i was getting frustrated that Dyer wasn't being withdrawn. Not only because we need him, but he was clearly fucked. First half he was good, second half we was knackered. How McClaren couldn't spot that is crazy, and yet another reason why he's a shit cunt.

1. At the start of the season what were your expectations, and are things going as you expected? I initially expected a similar turn-out to last season, brinking on the Top 6 if not being there. But then, that was before the summer transfer window shambles. With the 'squad' that Roeder had 'built', i was expecting nothing more than mid-table mediocrity, so yes - things are going as expected. 2. Who's been your best performer this season? I'd go for James Milner. He has been the most consistent and has possibly been the most improved as the season has progressed. He is really on top form at the moment, now that he is scoring goals aswell as providing them. Dyer, since he has returned, has been great for the team and great for Martins. Oba is scoring goals a plenty and Nobby has been a relevtaion at right-back, but Milner for me. 3. And your worst/most disappointing? Damien Duff, simply because so much was expected of him to start with. He has simply looked like a has-been at his very worst, whenever he has played for us. He has played one decent game for us, and that was with him at left-back. Duff's been utterly useless in the Premier League for us this season. Bramble has been disappointing aswell after the promise, false of course - as usual, that he showed at the end of last season. Duff for definite, though. 4. You had a quiet January transfer window, if you were the manager, who would you have tried to sign? There wasn't a lot out there in our price region. Everyone wanted a left-back but there was simply no one on the market. A striker would have been handy, and i would have liked an Andy Cole or a Robbie Fowler or a Lomana Lua Lua on loan until the end of the season. A player like that, Cole preferably, who wouldn't be spectacular but would do a job. Cole is simply a natural goalscorer and i was disappointed to hear that we had rejected him. 5. What are your best and worst memories of our previous meetings? The latter of the 4-3s being my worst memory, although i wasn't really old enough to experience it properly. I hear explanations of the treacherous experience from the likes of my dad and my grandads. Again, using the same method of experience, the Cole hattrick in the 3-0 win early nineties was great. When we beat you 1-0 in the 02/03 season, that really signalled that we really were one of the big four, so that was nice. 6. Do you have any favourite/best chants (and perhaps any that require an explanation)?, and 7. What's the banter like between Newcastle and Liverpool fans at St James, would you say that the 2 sets of fans get on? Pass. 8. In the summer, Liverpool and Newcastle are told to swap 3 first team regulars, who would you send to Liverpool, and who would you like from us? I'd get rid of Carr, Bramble and Sibierski. Bringing in Carragher, Agger and Crouch. 9. Liverpool have become the lastest club to gain new owners, Newcastle have been mentioned as well as a likely candiate for a takeover. How do you feel about these take-overs by foreign owners, and would you like to see it happen at Newcastle? Get Freddy out, to sum up. 10. Care to predict Mr Roeder’s starting line up for the game? Harper Solano --- Onyewu --- Bramble --- Taylor Milner --- Parker --- Butt --- Duff Martins --- Dyer 11. And finally, let’s have your score predictions for the game: Newcastle 0-2 Liverpool

Charlton/Fulham weren't the Souness levels. Birmingham, aye, i'd give you that - and worse. And besides, Souness ALSO drew at home to Charlton and he ALSO lost at home to Fulham, 4-1.

I'd rather have Ameobi in the side than Sibierski, which is why i'd probably agree with Lloydie. I'm not Shola's biggest fan, but he'd be a big bonus to our squad considering the amount of games we're having to play. For the European campaign especially, he'd be a big bonus. Unfortunately, there's a good argument for someone who'd suggest that the team would score less goals if Shola was in of the team, in spite of how many goals he would be scoring. I like Shola, i think he's a decent player overall, with good technical ability and the brain of a predatory striker. I also think that he could have forged a good partnership with Martins. However, and i'm about to exacerbate one of Roeder's weaknesses here (so i'm not drifting that far off-topic), whenever Shola or Sibierski is in the team, the manager feels it necassary to pump long balls forward simply because there's a big man in the side. This is probably the best explanation for why we score less goals as a team with Ameobi in the side. It's cos we're shit at long ball and it doesn't work, not because Shola is this abysmal player. Ameobi's got good footwork once he's navigated his way around his first touch, so if we were to play the ball on the floor as we do with Dyer, there's no reason why Shola and Martins shouldn't have made a decent partnership. All goes back to Roeder's starting line-up problems and/or initial tactics at the start of a game. The Ventspils away game springs to mind instantly, even though there are other and probably better examples, Ameobi was a lone striker and he got no joy. He's not good at holding the ball up and he's not brilliant with his head. But he's got strength and he's a good finisher in the box, including when having his back to goal. He got absolutely no joy that game and we were hopeless from an attacking point of view. Finally though, Shola's missed his big chance at becoming the week-in week-out, main striker at this club, because he's got a season-long injury. Something else that is arguably not his fault, because he should have been operated on far earlier. And when he comes back, so will Owen, and another(s) striker will come in. But he definitely could have done it, with the correct tactician. The tactics were different under Bobby and Souness, yes, but he was only playing with Shearer then, which just didn't work.

Don't stress, i was just kidding. TECHNICALLY, and very very technically, and with perfect grammar, it's 'England was'. Only in sports language would you saw 'England were'. Which is why i put a comical '[/pedant]' at the end of my post. Wish i hadn't said anything.

were Grammatically, England was poor yesterday, is actually the correct version. 'England' is not a plural. To say, England were poor yesterday, you would have to say 'the England players'. [/pedant] England (national team) is plural. England (as a country) is singular. England were struggling to hit the ball off the square... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/6287095.stm The disappointing thing was that England were absolutely cruising until Holland... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/6152906.stm England were booed off at full-time... ....etc etc etc Put 'England was' into Word.

Aye, and the Sheffield United game was one match. Under Souness, it was match after match.

were Grammatically, England was poor yesterday, is actually the correct version. 'England' is not a plural. To say, England were poor yesterday, you would have to say 'the England players'. [/pedant]

Has anyone got a youtube clip of that? I still ain't seen it and can't seem to search effectively on the site...

Dances and prances and poncey little things like that on celebrations can be pulled off if it's quick and subtle. Like Martins against Spurs at home. God i love that guy.

Would be great! Although, it's supposed to be a home game for Milan, and if it takes place at St James' Park, it probably swings Celtic's way.

Youy fucking joking? NO ONE in the midfield had a clue what they were doing or where they were playing.

That won't get rid of McClaren. Wish Spain had scored a LOT more.

Steve McClaren - worse than Mike Bassett.

'Play' for Chelsea.

This is just awful.

This team has absolutely no formation, and no one has a clue where they are supposed to be. Something that appears to be the case with every single game since McClaren's become coach. There's simply EVERYTHING going on in midfield - everybody is everwhere. Not a clue. Lampard? Where the hell is he supposed to be? He's been crap but i can sympathise with him because, well, he simply has not been given a position. And if he has, its a stupid decision - a la Scholes in Euro 2004 - you're putting a centre-midfielder on the left wing. All this simply to accomodate Steven Gerrard, who is just as disappointing, regularly, in an England shirt. It's all about fitting those two in. McClaren has never played a game with two wingers, simply because one of Gerrard or Lampard has been out there. What the hell is Michael Carrick actually doing? What is he actually there for? Gerrard - erratic as usual. As is Shaun Wright-Phillips, whose international career is simply diminished unless he moves. Dyer's playing well though - but he's playing in midfield, rendering Crouch's role inferior. Crap game, crap set-up, crap manager.

Chelsea.

Absolutely no idea. Five midfielders on the pitch, including Dyer who is playing well but no way playing upfront, and only one of them is a winger.

Wey! Morientes never did it in England.

Phil Neville is left with the entire left hand side to deal with at the moment. Where is Lampard playing?

England started very well. Lamaprd/Gerrard erratic as usual though in the early stages.

Dyer number 9.

Is that dance/French music supposed to get the pulses racing or something?