sicsfingeredmong

The defending of them in this case might have something to do with Parker being sold on 6th June, Ashley not owning the club until 15th June only to find we no longer have a hold up in the Barton transfer a day later on the 15th June. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/n/newcastle_united/6729863.stm The obstacle you raise, with regards to Ashley taking complete control and that having a perceived delaying effect on transfers in the wake of him buying out SJH's shares in late May before finally taking control on June 15, certainly didn't act as temporary roadblock with regards to the Viduka signing. A pertinent point when you consider that up until June 7 Ashley owned all but approx 23% of the club's shares, all the while Shepherd was in his sickbed with pnuemonia as Mort effectively handled the takeover and ran the ship. By then it was pretty clear who was running things, and Shepherd was basically on the outer already. Mort being officially named 'chairman' weeks later was just a foregone formality.

Why don't you google it if you're using it to back something up? The only things I remember him saying is words to the effect that we would no longer be ripped off by paying OTT for players. The article, with Mort's 'good business' reference pertaining to our transfer dealings in the opening two weeks of the transfer i'm talking about - which refer to the Barton/Viduka/Geremi and Parker's respective transfers, was posted on this very forum. Why doesn't Baggio go and find it. The interview i refer to was posted on this very forum ages ago. Baggio is quite adept at scouring bandwidth & finding dates etc. Since his major contribution to the last two pages this thread has revolved around providing debatative support for you Mick, rather than formulating his own argument, Baggio should have little problem with regards to time constraints and being cluey enough to find the statement which you obvously believe doesn't exist. It was strikingly convenient in one other thread that Souness' forgotten quotes - ie. in reference to Owen's transfer, that the player in question was in fact Souness' buy and not one of Shepherd's trophy signings - somehow went missing despite the internet bieng a hub of information.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/w/west_ham_utd/6706955.stm Parker was sold to West Ham on the 6th of June, we then happen to raise whatever our intial offer was for Barton and it gets accepted in the process - ie. to match West Ham's bid: and West Ham were looking to buy 2 central midfielders at the time - and this took place after Parker's outgoing transfer was finalised. We eventually sign Barton a week later. The timeline backs up this opinion imo, that is from even getting from first to second base - getting to the stage where City let us through the door and allowed us to the talk to the player in question. Mick's point, backed up by his link of course, is still a moot one. It was worrying at the time to see the board waiting on incoming funds, rather than knocking the ambitious Hammers right of the water from the get-go, before getting back in the ball-park. Closely resembles a 'finance through sales/sell to buy' transfer policy to me. Cheers. Just about the only transfer that stands on it's own - ie. one that wasn't financed by one major outgoing transfer, or through the sell-offs of bits & pieces or bit-part players - was the Smith transfer, and even that went on the back of a period of inactivity while the cautious buggers up top scoured over the books - something they should've down prior to buying SJH's shareholding...... all the while Allardyce's alleged targets slipped through the net, and i'm sure this is the transfer which Mick alluded to as being the deal that wasn't dependant on the book-end sales of Parker & Dyer at both ends of the transfer window. Despite the shambolic happenings pertaining to January there seems to be quite a bit of resolute defending of Ashley & Mort going on here. I have a sneaking suspicion this might be the case simply because they're not Freddy Shepherd.

And then say: Slight contradiction there, shirley? PS I'll ignore the way you chose only to deal with the case of one of the three recent managers appointed after the transfer window closed. :rolleyes: No it isn't, because Allardyce hadn't added to his squad during the previous window prior to being sacked. Mort and Ashley weren't going to back him, in fact Mort questioned Allardyce targetting of defenders. Bold piece: you still miss my point ie. sacking & hiring managers..... and timing.

Mort's press release early in the same transfer window, as i've referred to - somebody will no doubt 'google it', is good enough to back up my claim.

The Barton transfer was on hold because Barton wanted a loyalty bonus of £300,000 and Man City wouldn't pay him, the transfer went through because we payed him that bonus. Check paragraph 4. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/article1909844.ece I stand corrected, i thougt you were having another crack at Fs

Mick: I couldn't be bothered looking through pages of posts which have been layed out in the wake of my previous contribution here, which you have no doubt responded to. Barton's incoming transfer here was basically signed, sealed & delivered just prior to Ashley's buy-out of SJH's shareholding. Immediately after Mort & Ashley stepped in the aforementioned transfer deal was put on hold until Parker's move to West Ham was completed. When Mort stepped in, amidst talk of a 'billion dollar owner' induced spending spree, he quickly declared the club would be prudent in it's transfer spending. *Is it no coincidence that soon after finalising the Barton deal Mort then came out in the press and inferred that the triple acquisition of Barton, Geremi & *Viduka i think - in exchange for the incoming revenue received courtesy of Parker's departure - was in his exact words 'good business'. The payout given to Barton imo is a bit of a moot point. *This ties in with my opinion that Ashley & Mort have so far run a transfer buying/selling policy in conjunction with a 'financial bottom line' way of thinking. This is all good & well in the financial world, which is of course their respective backgrounds, or if you're running a little grocery shop on a street corner........ the bottom line - re: overheads/expenditure vs income - is all that counts. In our case where this season - both in the summer, and recently for reasons i already higlighted a pathetically organised mid-season window when Keegan took over - we stood on the threshhold of either being a 'darkhorse for a European berth' or 'in danger of dropping like a stone', Ashley & Mort's in their cautious approach in the transfer market when combined with their scattershot/Lady Luck driven strategy last month - ie. bringing back Keegan, abeit with no time & financial backing for Keegan to begin his rebuilding plans as he saw fit - have imo effectively drawn up the perfect blueprint in how to facilitate a club's relegation. The players deserve a slating of course, from a playing sqaus perspective we're a self-harming mix of 'old players on their last legs' and 'greedy/headturned youngsters who couldn't give a s*** about the team's current plight', but at the top-level the blame falls sqaurely on Mort & Ashley's shoulders.

I agree about the Allardyce appointment, he wasn't a recognised serial failure like his previous two appointments, very few if any could have seen the way things would go with him. The Barton transfer was put on hold while the greedy b****** held out for his loyalty bonus, a bonus we had to pay in the end to get the transfer through, it had nothing to do with a sell to buy policy. I'm also sure we brought somebody in for £6 million while the Dyer transfer looked to be going nowhere after we had problems with the way West Ham were trying to do the deal. Shepherd was at one stage slated for trying to get Souness to jump ship, rather than paying him off and getting rid of, and rightly so because the incompetant manager was causing immense damage to the time. Yet in accordance to your version of things it's okay to for Team Mort & Ashley to put a major cog in Allardyce's building plans - ie. Barton's transfer - on hold in order to pay-off another bloke. Different courses for different horses there Mick.

I think you are being a bit harsh on Ashley there - at least Keegan was appointed DURING the transfer window. Unlike Souness appointed 5 days after the transfer window closed. Unlike Roeder appointed 2 days after the transfer window closed. And unlike Sir Bobby who was appointed about a week after the transfer window closed. *Robson was given an entire transfer window to further strengthen the 1st team unless of course our attempted signing of Rooney was just a smokescreen aimed at delivering the aforementioned player into United's lap, and Souness should've benefitted from the club's transfer activity associated with that Summer. Granted it was a 'panic sacking', but you can't level the blame at Shepherd re- the timing of SBR's sacking & Souness' appointment. Afterall it was Douglas Hall who was crying 'Robson would've got us relegated'. Despite being undermined, when the The Halls' mouthpiece and convenient whipping horse for the supporter base announced that SBR had one final season, it was still very much Robson's team........... until Dyer's bratish display when he threw the captain's armband to the ground effectively told the The Halls otherwise. *The point i'm making is 'newly appointed managers' walking into the hotseat on the back of a transfer window, whether it be the Summer or Winter windows, after his predecessosor has balled his opportunity is just about a formality in football. Inheriting another manager's squad, and having to work with that sqaud is an accepted hazard which goes hand in hand with the profession. At the time this certainly wasn't a negative issue according to Souness given that he labelled his then newly acquired squad 'as the best one he's had at his disposal', or words nearest to that anyway. Prior to the Winter window just past Mort had already gone public on two separate fronts. He questioned Allardyce's management of the first team by declaring 'that the team was not playing as a unit' and that 'Allardyce obviously wasn't their choice - ie. the previous regime's appointment - and they effectively decided to stick it out'. By going public, especially with regards to the first point/raising concerns over Allardyce's performance, imo they effectively issued a vote of 'no confidence'. If Ashley & Mort by that stage had in fact had little or no confidence in Allardyce's potential to things around an earlier sacking - ie. at the start of the window, followed by an immediate appointment - would've given Keegan, or any other successor, some sort of platform to build upon in the form of a couple more valuable weeks to make things happen in the window. Right now, due to Ashley & Mort's inability to act on their pre-conceived convictions earlier...... and Ashley in the wake of Allardyce's sacking is on the record as having said 'that he should've bought in his own team from the outset, Keegan has been dealt shit hand by the blokes now running the show.

Granted Allardyce couldn't adapt his 'underdog/spoiling style of football' here on the big stage, but Mort and Ashley's handling of the club has been nothing short of comical in the wake of the Allardyce's appointment. Shepherd could not have seen Allardyce's eventual inability to adapt to a bigger stage/bigger club. This he cannot be held accountable, but the club's dealings in the wake of Sam's appointment fall squarely on the cautious/conservative buggers who now run the club. For starters they financially didn't back Allardyce in the Summer, for example several of our incoming transfers hinged on players departing once we had secured the incoming revenue streams. The sales of Parker and Dyer in particular acted as the twin catalysts behind our spending flurries at the bookends of the transfer window - the already secured transfer of Barton, at least at the agreement stage between ourselves and City, was put on hold as Mort quickly established a 'sell to finance buys' policy. During the above mentioned window i would've preferred to have seen Ashley pump another 20mill into the transfer coffers, as opposed to him reducing the club's debts and making the club a more lucrative asset for potential buyers in the event of him wanting to pull the plug & cash-in later on. Sacking a manager so late in a transfer window, without having a successor already signed sealed & delivered on the dotted line, leaving Keegan - or whoever else - inadequate time to strengthen the sqaud was amauterish bordering on suicidal. Sacking Allardyce at the beginning of the window, and appointing Keegan soon after whilst having the neccesary time and financial backing to make things happen in the window just past would've been a good move. As much i respect Keegan as a club manager circumstances beyond his control, circumstances which been dictated by the powers that be aka Mort & Ashley, have put him behind the 8-ball from the outset. Right now i'm prepared to label the Keegan appointment as being a desperate gimick, a desperate roll of the dice. In the form of Souness we had a manager who relied on having Lady Luck rescue the team from it's on-field doldrums, it appears that we now have top-level pair - aka Mort & Ashley - who gambled the club's future on similar footnote. There was nothing wrong with Shepherd's appointment of Allardyce, if he indeed was the sole string puller on this front. Allardyce had Bolton punching above their weight. The same rule of thumb would apply to Moyes as well, and i'm sure many supporters would've applauded such a move - ie. a football based decision - if the previous board had pulled off such a move. Judging by the original post's motive the power of hindsight, and the blame game which can ensue, is certainly a beautiful thing.

I said something similar while ago but if his name was something along the lines of 'Jean De Talaise', as opposed to being a local product which he is, he would've been lynched from the Tyne Bridge by now............. a fate destined for the likes of Buomsong etc etc.

Some may see it as being an unwanted return to the past, or trying to relive a recent era by bringing back certain some figures back into the mix - much like Keegan's re-appointment, but a return of Steve Black would be a positive step forward for the club. In his field, and they're judged on keeping players motivated & physically running at near-full capacity for most of a season's campaign, he is a rare gem.

Any manager isn't worth the weight of the piece of paper their contract is written on if they're unable to recognise the shifts in game tempo, fluctuations in possession balance and whatnot as it happens from the dug-out & make the necessary changes, especially if they alternatively need to rely on a bloke downloading stats to a laptop as a means of making any potential strategic changes at half-time. Pro-Zone was originally supposed to be just a an analysis add-on, at best. For example by crunching the numbers - ie. yards covered by a player over the course of 90 minutes - a player's fitness level after returning from injury could be equated. But from what i've read it was analysis system which was used to compliment the information already provided by the backroom staff - ie. physios etc - to the manager. On face value Big Sam seemed to use Pro-Zone, and the stats that were being crunched up by the tech bloke Fleig, as a means of defending or justafying the s**** brand of football he was having the team play as 'balanced passing football'. An exchange of short passes among the defensive back 4 followed by an aimless punt up the park doesn't equate to a 'balanced passing attack', something Allardyce tried to peddle by using Pro-Zone generated stats as his argument backbone. Pro-Zone = I.T. blokes milking football for all it's worth. Getting back to the first paragraph, and this relates to decisions a manager has to make on the fly in conjunction with how the game is being played out - that's what they're payed for, Pro-Zone is irrelevant imo.

As a player who was also prolific abroad, when eventually departing for big money on the Continent, Waddle deserves a mention as well. The package of having the 'core strength/centre of balance' necessary to ride a challenge and the ability to dribble the ball at speed is a rarity, and i haven't seen many to rival Waddle. Perhaps Giggs deserves mention in this regard. On the players i've seen i'd go with Gazza, Beardsley and Waddle........ with a slight leaning toward the first two.

And players of Ronaldo's ilk - ie. tearaway, ball-carrying wingers - have to constantly contend with defender's pulling the shirt, in particular the 'shirt pull' from the inside as the ball-carrier tries to beat his man on the outside. Often the senior official is blindsided depending on the ref's positioning, and it's a tough one for the sideline officials' to call as well. It's an often unpunished foul. I have no problem when ball-carriers go down 'softly', or overplay the physical contact, when there's a hint of contact as mentioned above because a defender is trying to illegally negate the attacker's ability to gain that yard or two advantage, and players of Ronaldo's quality - ie. who have speed, the close control and technique needed to dribble at top speed, and the delivery/final ball & shooting ability to compliment - only need to gain that sort of leverage in order to wreak havok on the opposition. If that overplay, on the part of the attacker going for a foul, occurs in a dangerous area on the edge of the box or inside the penalty area then it's tough luck. The shirt pulling art of defending is a game of Russian Roulette. Many times a defender will get away with it further up the pitch, however when they get nabbed - ie. when somebody like Ronaldo plays for the freekick or penalty when their progress is being impeded - it's often costly. IMO it's a case of tough luck on the part of the defender, ultimately what goes around comes around. If Duff goes down softly, and that results in a goal for us whether it be via freekick or penalty, and that has a bearing on us avoiding the drop this season or qualifying for Europe in a better year. Do i have a problem with that?........ hell no!

He's probably contributing to their rent payments in some way ............................. he'll probably be able to claim that as a tax deduction. I fully agree, and have suggested in the past that the club should steer clear McKay represented players, regardless of ability. McKay has a track record of peddling players, after they have a 'break-out season', to clubs higher up the standings. I see that Chimbonda - currently not in Ramos' plans - has been raised, as a player many supporters would like to see draped in a Toon shirt. I'm against such a move for three reasons: 1. He's of a similar age to Beye - mid to late twenties - and with regards to ability there just about on par with each other imo. 2. A Chimbonda has the potential to unsettle an already in-form player in Beye, just as Duff's arrival played a part in unsettling N'Zogbia when it became clear that Zoggy's career, in his preferred position that is, had been effectively been placed on the backburner. 3. The McKay Factor. One good season, let's say one that is measures up to his prolonged run of form prior to the transfer to Spurs, and McKay will be on the phone talking to clubs like Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool and some higher calibre clubs on the Continent.

Agree with just about everything written there. The sections placed in bold summarise Owen's situation perfectly.

Shallow comments to be honest, especially the piece i've underlined. Formation-wise Souness upset the entire midfeld balance in order to accomodate Parker in that all-out defensive role you speak of where his sole responsibility, or job, was to laterally patrol the attacking hole infront of our back 4. He was by no means a star performer either especially when placed alongside somebody like Makalele. Parker just adequetly carried out was a pretty basic & one-dimensional 'hacker role'. Roeder had the right idea re-Parker, by employing him in a balanced central midfield role - similar to that of Lee - but it was a failed bid to restore the team's midfield ability to move the ball across the midfield line from left-to-right or vice versa. Parker just didn't have the footballing brain needed to carry out that particular role, as Lee had, to be that 'first receiver & ball-player in the middle of the park' or to be more specific he never demonstrated an ability to quickly calculate what ball/outlet pass needed to be played when the oppositions' outfield defensive lines and shape were broken following a turnover in possession. Matches are pinched, or a multi-goal rout can be inflicted, within those brief moments of broken play...... during the transition phase between attack & defense. For all but six weeks during Roeder's full season at the helm Parker was a constant bloody roadblock which effectively wiped out that vital ingredient of play. Roeder wasn't clueless as far as determining the sort of balanced defensive/attacking that was ultimately bestowed upon our then captain, from a team standpoint that is. Roeder's mistake was that he placed too much trust in a captain who clearly wasn't up to the job, and that was painfully evident when Roeder reinstated him back into the first eleven when the too-many times mentioned player returned from his mid-season break form injury. IMO the reinstatement of Parker, despite having a well functioning central duo in Emre & Butt performing well at the time, largely contributed to the team's freefall over the closing third of last season. IMO there are two positive legacies to speak of when highlighting Allardyces's reign, and these were hand packaged by the man himself. One being the recruitment of Beye, the other being the departure of the useless pile of s*** that was Scott Parker.

The club should try to avoid McKay-represented players, because he's well known for serving his clients up to mid-low table clubs before peddling them around soon after. and Chimbonda is a classic example. It's this feature which makes him the sewer rat among high profile agents imo. I'd be interested to know how many of McKay's clients are currently on either Arsenal or Man.U's books, just as to know if either of these clubs choose to steer clear. Lengthy contract renegotiations, and agent-fed papertalk featuring want'away players, are the identifiable fingerprint of McKay's indirect involvement with a club. McKay represented players = more trouble than they're worth imo.

I've never made any sort of comparison to Milner, nor am i questioning or pissing on Solano's attacking attributes by using Geremi as a so-called benchmark as i think you've incorrectly interpreted, since you've backed up your point with the 'nearly ten years of excellent service' reference. But they share similar limitations, that being inability an to get up and down the pitch as i've highlighted, and Solano had a terrific 'running mate' in the form of Hughes. Hughes wasn't top drawer, when compared with the likes of Cole, but he got the job done. Beye appears to be a natural successor to Hughes, and would be able to support Geremi who is more of a 'ball-playing' wide attacker as opposed to an all-out ball carrying winger. For this type of wide-man the balance on the flank has to be right, and this is duly provided by the play of the fullback. It's not about questioning the merits of both players, it's more about getting the combination right. IMO Beye's balanced attacking & defensive play as a 90 minute end-to-end fullback, and Milner's 'one-paced' running style of play doesn't match-up. Of the current options available i'd prefer the ball-player - ie. Geremi - who imo more effectively compliments Beye who is dangerous going forward, over the attributeless headless chicken in Milner who not only tries to do it all by himself but also doesn't spot and utilise his overlapping fullback often enough.

Agree with that. Compare that to Milner who if he can't beat his man first time, tries a step-over, if that doesn't work, he shifts the ball onto his other foot...and if that doesn't work, just blast it off the full-back. = generally provides sweet bugger-all in terms of 'end product', hence for the time being play Geremi in his preferred position and if Duff isn't within Keegan's right-wing frame give young Lua Lua - who looks as though he could play across the line - an extended crack it at and of course the opportunity to make the position his own.

But in order to cover up his physical limitations, and he wasn't a pure 'pacy/ball carrying winger', he still needed wide attacking support both from the ever overlapping Hughes, and of course from Bellamy who constantly patrolled both wide channels depending on which flank the build-up play was eminating from. Geremi, as a wide attacker, never blew past defenders.......... yet it never stopped him from consistently putting in dangerous final ball/crosses. What he needs at this stage of career, and i bring up Solano's wide assistance from Hughes both offensively & defensively, is a decent end-to-end fullback to accompany him because at the end of the day i have greater faith in Geremi's wide delivery into the danger areas in & around the box as opposed to Milner, because Geremi is a proven product in this area.

Hence you play him on the right, in front of a fullback who can get up and down the flank all day and Beye fits the bill now that he has physically acclimatised to the pace and more importantly to the EPL's end-to-end pattern of play......... this would be akin to the Solano & Hughes double-act under Robson's renureship imo.

You forgot to mention that Birmingham and Wigan lost and gained no points last night ! Fck me man. Because they were playing other teams in the bottom half. You happy with 4th from bottom? For this season? Yes. Next? No. This shows how far we have fallen - all of you who said "give Souness more time, give Roeder time, ALlardyce will fix us" should be f****** ashamed of yourselves. We should be railing against being in the bottom 5 or 6 (a genuine threat to us now), we should be making SJP not just a bad place to come to for away teams, but a place where players KNOW they have to play well for us. Anyone who accepts s**** like Geremi, Smith, Ameobi, Rozenhal, and even TRIES to make excuses for them should bow their heads in abject shame. Agree & disagree with you in equal measure. It's why some supporters, and the following thoughts were voiced on this forum, were stunned amidst the flacid crowd response in the wake of Souness' first season. A season of underwhelming performances were lost amidst the result of the day, that being a gutsy season closing effort against Chelsea. Such incompetance, both from a team & management standpoint, over the course of a season wouldn't stand-up at Anfield for example. Houllier was virtually shouted out of the job, the board listened to it's supporter base who became frustrated at the brand of football Houllier's team was dishing up at the time - despite the Cups and his penultimate CL finish which imo was greatly influenced by injuries to our key players down the stretch ie. Bellamy and Woodgate, our defensive rock & our creative foil around the box. I still think if the SJP terraces had rallied against Souness enmasse, as was the case re: Houllier/Liverpool, after the already mentioned season closer against Chelsea the board - ie. The Halls - would've swiftly pulled the trigger in response and that would've would've stopped the cancerous Souness regime dead in it's tracks. As for supporters 'hanging their heads in shame' for accepting s**** like Geremi etc etc. It's my opinion that Geremi would still make a better RW option than Milner. The likes of Cacapa & Rozenhal, i wanted to see how they'd fare beyond the first month of the campaign where they're were blessed with having to face some lightweight attacking frontlines during the opening stages of their premiership careers - both have failed. Don't peddle this 'don't try to make excuses for them' because i'll rewind the clock a bit. Up until Parker pulled the fingered salute at home you spent the best part of a year defending Parker's performance level under successive managers, especially during Roeder's tenureship where at one stage you suggested playing him in exactly the same role - positionally wise - as he was utilised in Souness's so called 442, and Souness' so-called 442 resembled a narrow & unbalanced 4-1-3-2 which because of it's the team's inability to laterally stretch the opposition's defensive ranks with some left-to-right sideline passing/possession play across the midfield line only served the purpose of having the team play out of it's own half & defending for their lives for the best part of 90 minutes. And yet despite the ramifications of such a positional change, as opposed to Roeder's misguided faith in utilizing him in a balanced offensive & defensive 442 central midfielder in the Rob Lee mould - a role which he clearly wasn't up to, you made that call. At the time you were more than happy to see the midfield formation & balance compromised in order to get the best out of a player who in your exact words was s***. Take a leaf out of your own book mate. SBR said recently that Mourinho had personally warned him that Geremi's legs had gone so I don't agree that he would be any good as a winger - he's hopeless where he's been playing, and that doesn't require anywhere near as much pace as the wing ; the guy is a waste of space and he isn't the only one - should never have been Captain. Solano never had the pace, not did he ever have the stamina required to be the prototypical end-to-end winger...... a player who could break out of the defensive half & carry the ball through a staggered opposition midfield line, nor was has he able to get back and provide defensive support in the event of the team losing possession when he was fully committed forward near the opposition box or in the wide delivery/crossing zones. Even Robert put in a more noticeable defensive shift, he just couldn't tackle with the blood & guts vigour normally attributed to a born and bred defensive fullback - ie. Neville - and Robert was burned by a sector of the supporter base because of this. Back to Solano's lack of pace & legs/stamina, even in his prime. He had the energetic Hughes playing behind him, whose stamina level - and the accompanying propensity & the ability over the course of 90 minutes to overlap his winger/Solano before tracking-back when required - papered over Solano's physical limitations. In the present i think Beye, who has acclimatised physically and to the pace of the end-to-end nature of the EPL, would provide the necessary cover for a player - ie. Geremi - who at this stage of his career shares physical limitations akin to Solano's. On the right i'd prefer somebody who at least has the upper body strength required to shoulder off a challenge and beat his man that way, and somebody who unlike Milner can deliver with consistency a cross, or final ball, which at least has 'goal scoring potential' written on it.

You forgot to mention that Birmingham and Wigan lost and gained no points last night ! Fck me man. Because they were playing other teams in the bottom half. You happy with 4th from bottom? For this season? Yes. Next? No. This shows how far we have fallen - all of you who said "give Souness more time, give Roeder time, ALlardyce will fix us" should be f****** ashamed of yourselves. We should be railing against being in the bottom 5 or 6 (a genuine threat to us now), we should be making SJP not just a bad place to come to for away teams, but a place where players KNOW they have to play well for us. Anyone who accepts s**** like Geremi, Smith, Ameobi, Rozenhal, and even TRIES to make excuses for them should bow their heads in abject shame. he's right. in the past few years we should only have signed proven quality world class players. simple really No, we shoudl have signed better players than we did. And not pretended that players who are at best average are top class. Simple, really. not top class but possibly as good as we could have got at the time. you should be a football manager,you make it sound so easy All we coudl have got at the time? Get to f***. You seriously think we couldn't have gotten better than SMITH for £6m? Well done, you are a soopafan. God bless you. You forgot to mention that Birmingham and Wigan lost and gained no points last night ! Fck me man. Because they were playing other teams in the bottom half. You happy with 4th from bottom? For this season? Yes. Next? No. This shows how far we have fallen - all of you who said "give Souness more time, give Roeder time, ALlardyce will fix us" should be f****** ashamed of yourselves. We should be railing against being in the bottom 5 or 6 (a genuine threat to us now), we should be making SJP not just a bad place to come to for away teams, but a place where players KNOW they have to play well for us. Anyone who accepts s**** like Geremi, Smith, Ameobi, Rozenhal, and even TRIES to make excuses for them should bow their heads in abject shame. Agree & disagree with you in equal measure. It's why some supporters, and the following thoughts were voiced on this forum, were stunned amidst the flacid crowd response in the wake of Souness' first season. A season of underwhelming performances were lost amidst the result of the day, that being a gutsy season closing effort against Chelsea. Such incompetance, both from a team & management standpoint, over the course of a season wouldn't stand-up at Anfield for example. Houllier was virtually shouted out of the job, the board listened to it's supporter base who became frustrated at the brand of football Houllier's team was dishing up at the time - despite the Cups and his penultimate CL finish which imo was greatly influenced by injuries to our key players down the stretch ie. Bellamy and Woodgate, our defensive rock & our creative foil around the box. I still think if the SJP terraces had rallied against Souness enmasse, as was the case re: Houllier/Liverpool, after the already mentioned season closer against Chelsea the board - ie. The Halls - would've swiftly pulled the trigger in response and that would've would've stopped the cancerous Souness regime dead in it's tracks. As for supporters 'hanging their heads in shame' for accepting s**** like Geremi etc etc. It's my opinion that Geremi would still make a better RW option than Milner. The likes of Cacapa & Rozenhal, i wanted to see how they'd fare beyond the first month of the campaign where they're were blessed with having to face some lightweight attacking frontlines during the opening stages of their premiership careers - both have failed. Don't peddle this 'don't try to make excuses for them' because i'll rewind the clock a bit. Up until Parker pulled the finger at home you spent the best part of a year defending Parker's performance level under successive managers, especially during Roeder's tenureship where at one stage you suggested playing him in exactly the same role - positionally wise - as he was utilised in Souness's so called 442, and Souness' so-called 442 resembled a narrow & unbalanced 4-1-3-2 which because of it's the team's inability to laterally stretch the opposition's defensive ranks with some left-to-right sideline passing/possession play across the midfield line only served the purpose of having the team play out of it's own half & defending for their lives for the best part of 90 minutes. And yet despite the ramifications of such a positional change, as opposed to Roeder's misguided faith in utilizing him in a balanced offensive & defensive 442 central midfielder in the Rob Lee mould - a role which he clearly wasn't up to, you made that call. At the time you were more than happy to see the midfield formation & balance compromised in order to get the best out of a player who in your exact words was s***. Take a leaf out of you own book mate Oh, yes, i made a mistake with Parker. I fully accept that. Which is different to those who STILL pretend Geremi, Smith, Cacapa, et al are good enough. Everybody makes mistakes re: judgement calls. In the case of Ameobi, Carr and the like there's no excuses. In the case of Geremi i'd like to see him used in his preferred posiition - RW - before branding him as being shite, Because as a right-side attacker he never relied on pace, he was frequently able to shoulder off a challenge and his delivery was in most instances up to scratch. I liken him to Solano, but with added physical presence. If he does make a hash of it on the right when given a substantial opprtunity then fair enough, your call has been duly noted. With that said the continued devolopment of Lua Lua interests me more, especially next season.