Andy

Not sure you can really blame Krul there - deflection off Campbell was awful.

Was that aimed at me btw? Then someone should ban you! http://i34.tinypic.com/2wm2m4n.jpg http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/avs/avatar_5087.png http://images.football.co.uk/Dynamic/Group/Source/6a582ccef8914013a4f0cb01bfb16faa.jpg

We've been warned before for fixture lists.

Everton are generally a well organised team with one or two classy players in defence and midfield. If you compare the two teams player by player there isn't exactly a gulf between the respective strongest XIs, and it showed today.

Could have made a decent Riquelme-type player for someone if he'd had the right training and regular football. Certainly had the vision, technique and composure. Was never made for English football though, and has never looked like a central midfielder either; simply doesn't have the engine or strength for it. Shame really because I didn't dislike him as much as others did when he was here.

Yep.

Probably me. I need to obtain a special dialing wand for my iPhone. And a new router to avoid making the same post 100 times.

Probably me. I need to obtain a special dialing wand for my iPhone.

Probably me. I need a special dialing wand for my iPhone.

He should have enough money to buy the house outright tbh, no excuse from a Footballer that played 10 seasons in the premiership to not be able to afford to pay the rest of the house off. he got it right! Wrong context. Lay off the lad. He got the "of" in the sentence "the rest of the house" right too.

Demanding rather than hoping for, in some cases. Anyway, things like press-releases and the like are irrelevant. The thing they should be judged on over the summer is whether they've done their job of helping the manager improve his squad - which they have. If the club can survive and stabalise itself over the next couple of seasons, the relegation (and the monumental mistakes that led to it) will no longer be relevant. The people who run the club will rightly be judged on their errors, and likewise they should equally be judged on their ability to correct those errors and learn from them.

This we all know. The question is why was it released at all? The 'expectations' of the fans would have been fuck all given the recent history Ashley just had (Keegan, appointing JFK, not spending in Jan, selling Milner and making a profit etc.). Who in their right minds would have had any expectations that Ashley would open the chequebook? As it is they've stated 'no capital investment' then went and spent fucking money on players We're ran by incompetents and arseholes, simple as that. If you read back through the forum I'm pretty sure you'll find people (pre-statement) expecting more than £10m to be spent on improving the squad.

isn't he meaning the general health of the clubs finances? i.e. debt levels, income levels etc. that's what i read into it from malandro anyway, not how much they had to spend on players: "I just want to know what the club’s financial position is and what the plan is to deal with it" were the words used We do that by filing the company accounts every March/April. I'm kind of with malandro on this, they shouldn't be issuing statements like the no capital investment and all the other shit about Asley financing 20m out of his own pocket and so on. This implies the clubs finances are not in good shape so it's natural to wonder about it surely if you're that way inclined? Frankly I don't care either way, the shite that comes out of the club borders on the insane/idiotic at times so I read nothing into any of it, or at least try to. Surely it's better to say "we've got nothing" than to say "yeah, we're loaded, milk us for as much as you can", though? Surely no-one believes hay statement was intended to influence our transfer negotiations? Fucking hell. I didn't say that, my point is that saying that money was there would hardly have been a better approach and would have influenced our negotiations... If they'd said nothing people would have expected money to be spent by default. The statement was intended to lower expectations.

isn't he meaning the general health of the clubs finances? i.e. debt levels, income levels etc. that's what i read into it from malandro anyway, not how much they had to spend on players: "I just want to know what the clubs financial position is and what the plan is to deal with it" were the words used We do that by filing the company accounts every March/April. I'm kind of with malandro on this, they shouldn't be issuing statements like the no capital investment and all the other shit about Asley financing 20m out of his own pocket and so on. This implies the clubs finances are not in good shape so it's natural to wonder about it surely if you're that way inclined? Frankly I don't care either way, the shite that comes out of the club borders on the insane/idiotic at times so I read nothing into any of it, or at least try to. Surely it's better to say "we've got nothing" than to say "yeah, we're loaded, milk us for as much as you can", though?

That's insane. Made more insane by the fact that it looks that we've strengthened very well this transfer window and we've barely spent like £8m. Throwing money at things isn't always the answer. Well show me the clubs (with the possible exception of Arsenal) who regularly win or challenge for honours over the last 15 years who have not spent significant amounts of money on players on a regular basis. These insane clubs like Man U, Chelsea, and Liverpool have clearly got it wrong. It's about the calibre of players you bring in, not how much you spend on them. Surely as Newcastle fans we've learned that by now? I don't think many teams in the league have actually improved their teams more than we have over the summer (on paper, anyway); if we can do the same in the next windows we might start aiming towards breaching the top 6 again sooner than we expected.

I agree that he's not good enough for our first team, but if we have the option, I'd rather see him sitting on the bench than Shola. What? Not that complicated like... Carroll and Ben Arfa playing off him would be my first choice forwards.

I agree that he's not good enough for our first team, but if we have the option, I'd rather see him sitting on the bench than Shola.

... Is what Hughton will play. I know Jon will jump on this but I can't see Hughton not playing Nolan. Not for at least a good few games without a goal. As has been mentioned so many times, people said the same about Nicky Butt last season... I think Hughton realises that he simply has to start his strongest XI every week, and as the season goes on I think he will use Nolan more as an impact player if we're in need of a goal. I'm pretty sure Ben Arfa has been told that the position in the "hole" is his (based on his quotes saying that Hughton understood what kind of player he was) and that played a big part in him wanting to come here.

... Is what Hughton will play.

Any club's fans outside of the top 6 would probably be content if they had brought in the players we have in the window IMO: in particular the two midfielders. The fact that we've managed to bring in the players we have with so little expenditure is an added bonus.

Apparently not. No other journalist / twatter is carrying it. Seems to suggest that it's pretty much as good as done as well.

"Decent" in the circumstances? It's fucking miraculous.

Translate pls.... My French isn't brilliant, but I think it's basically saying that he's having a medical tomorrow and terms have been agreed with all parties.

I'd be confident of staying up with this team. Shows how times have changed. I think if we had a line-up on par with that in the pre-relegation days, before we were all brought down to Earth with an almighty bang, we'd probably be hoping for a top 8 finish.

To be fair, no-one really has a clue if the extra S should be there or not http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7426717.stm If the word naturally ends in an S...you just have apostrophe with no following S. The club have it correctly written at the ground. Not sure why all the supposed champions of grammar struggle with it (BBC & Papers). Because, as with many things in the English language, it's not as cut and dried as you'd like to believe - even if we weren't talking about a proper noun which doesn't have to necessarily follow standard conventions anyway. I can't think of any situation where a word in singular-form ends in "s" and an apostrophe-"s" shouldn't be added to the end of it. Omitting the final "s" is optional in informal writing but I wouldn't say that was the case in formal writing...