Dr Venkman

I CANT FUCKNG WAIT TO SEE THAT

aaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha!!

no

He'll play tomorrow

Ashley Young

Go there and do what we do well and we have every chance. Rigid and hoof and we'll be beaten without much effort on their part.

DOMINATED

Actually very pleasant in person apparently.

The only part of last nights game I saw was between 41 and 43 mins. He gave the ball away 4 times.

He won't play on Monday, Pardew is a safety first manager and it'll be much easier to just play Jonas.

So we played 4-4-2?

I hope he has a good game, scores himself a goal and gets a feel for it. We could do with another reliable striker.

Don't want him back for football reasons, we can do better.

Injured Cabaye

Plays with his head up, makes all the difference.

Because ever since Martin O'Neill claimed to be a boyhood SunLun fan however many years ago, they have clamoured for him to be their manager, and now he is, even though its no better than under Bruce, they still won't blame or criticise him. The only difference between the two is that Bruce is a mag kernt, if O'Neil had been from Newcastle he probably wouldn't be still in the job by now If Tiote hadn't been sent off in the derby they'd have hounded him out by now.

Interview in The Independent coming soon.

I was joking Sorry.

Is the correct answer, and exactly what we've been saying for months.

The discussion isn't about the differences between a 4-3-3 and a 4-2-3-1, as much as you'd like it to be. We're done here.

The word "variation" is getting a good run out this morning... Haha, right o, that's the best you've got to offer

That's not a tactic then? You might have something to say if we'd stayed 4-4-2 in the last two games and seen an improvement. As it is we've gone 4-3-3 and seen an emphasis on passing and moving because its more achievable in that formation with these players. We didn't play 4-3-3. We obviously didn't as there was no 3rd striker, a key element in the last "3" mentioned. Keep following me around and quoting me though. Makes me feel cool Ok, we didn't play 4-3-3, it changes absolutely nothing. Keeping it simple and short is still a tactic, and playing a 4-3-3 or a 4-2-3-1 or any of its variants encourages that tactic with these players. Show a bit of humility man. Still think Ba should be on the wing? Humility, innit. It's getting childish now. There was no 3rd striker which means there couldn't have been a 4-3-3. Ba in the middle, Cisse favouring the right (as he has done for ages) and... I think Ba should be part of a fluid front three, interchanging much as he did last night with Cisse, exactly as I've been saying. Don't try and play the childish card again man, grown ups admit when they might have gotten something wrong.

And others were saying that a 4-3-3 or a variation encourages keeping it on the floor, passing and moving and moving up the pitch as a team. You arrogantly dismissed that theory and talked about 'magical' football and 'automatically' improving the football just through placing players on a bit of paper in a certain shape. THEN you tried to say that the fact that we managed to actually pass and move a bit last night (in a 4-2-3-1) proves that it's not about tactics, it's ridiculous. You've had your pants completely pulled down, give it up.

That's not a tactic then? You might have something to say if we'd stayed 4-4-2 in the last two games and seen an improvement. As it is we've gone 4-3-3 and seen an emphasis on passing and moving because its more achievable in that formation with these players. We didn't play 4-3-3. We obviously didn't as there was no 3rd striker, a key element in the last "3" mentioned. Keep following me around and quoting me though. Makes me feel cool Ok, we didn't play 4-3-3, it changes absolutely nothing. Keeping it simple and short is still a tactic, and playing a 4-3-3 or a 4-2-3-1 or any of its variants encourages that tactic with these players. Show a bit of humility man.