Conjo

Can easily see us scoring again on a counter attack. Problem is I can just as easily see Spurs scoring more too. Would like to see Schar & Fraser on for Ritchie and Joelinton and go for a 3-5-2-ish formation.

Just hope the players don't get discouraged and takes the game on by themselves. Just ignore Bruce and prove you have something to bring to this team in the future.

We were never keeping a clean sheet. Keep the heads up lads get another!

Realize we're only 8 minutes in here, but Longstaff man. Different player if he keeps this up.

what the fuck has happened to Longstaff? Loving his intensity.

I don't think there's any more thought behind the tea towels/dress up than say the whoopers that dressed as pantomimes with berets & baguettes during the "French revolution". Just wish someone was informed enough to take these people aside and explain in simple terms why it comes off very wrong in this instance. Not going to ruin the match experience for me anyway.

Think I've mentioned it before as well, but I really don't understand what Iwobi does to warrant a place in this Everton team.

So frustrating, but so inevitable. You just know even if they are the only ones in the entire stadium dressed like that the cameras will find and highlight them.

I think he was underrated on the left/forward left position as well when Cisse was on fire. Whether it was Pardew, player disputes or combination of both that resulted in slightly altered tactics week to week to give both some time as center forwards, it was a shame that we didn't stick with that system even if it meant we didn't get the very best our of Ba.

If I hadn't got more clarity on the Bruce contract situation I'd be pretty concerned and disappointed about right now, but given the circumstances, despite wanting him gone, I understand why and I am prepared to give new owners time to find a way to get rid of Bruce in the cheapest way possible. Would still have liked them to ask Bruce to step away from training and match duties as a bare minimum but can also see there's also good arguments for letting him continue.

The E N F O R C E R

But at the time there was no guarantee the takeover would go through. I also don't get what incentive there would be for Ashley in this? He's sacked managers in the past so would have to think about a scenario where the takeover didn't go through, so surely he would want to limit compensation as much as possible...?

Jesus christ!!! It can't be that straight forward? Even by Ashley/Charnley standards that is poor. I refuse to believe that it is intentional. The intent from Newcastle side has to have been that a new 3 year term is to be automatically renewed after a 3 year period has been completed, but rather that Charnley have put forward or accepted bad wording to the contract that is not clear and open for opportunistic interpretation which is now the dispute....surely? Purely speculation from my side, but is it fair to assume that Newcastle ownership feels we have a case for terminating the contract and paying out compensation for remainder of this season, while Bruce feels he has a case for demanding that they compensate for a full term, and that we have offered him a compromise to get it settled sooner rather than later? This certainly alters my view and feeling towards the new owners as to why he isn't gone yet.

Can anyone explain in simpleton terms what this means/how the contract works? Normally when I hear "rolling contract" I associate that with easier and cheaper to terminate. I know the Athletic put out an article back in July which apparently gives some clarity on it, but at that time I didn't really care if he was here for another season or 10 as long as Ashley owned us so didn't really pay attention to what was said on here.

I'll believe that then, as it makes the reasoning for keeping him on easier to swallow if nothing else

Is there something I've missed? I've asked in this thread previously without any source or reference being given. I see many others using this argument too but where do the notion that all first team coaching staff will leave if they sack Bruce come from? If Bruce had another job lined up I could see the risk that he might bring them with him, but there's no incentive for them to leave now if he got sacked. Maybe if they were honorable and loyal Bruce fans and decided to leave in solidarity (which I strongly doubt as they would most likely miss out on compensation). There's no indication that they are a package deal.

Probably not, but it sure as hell isn't an indication that gives any confidence that they will make timely, important decisions in the future. Yeah the sale happend quickly in a sense, but they've been planning the acquisition and monitoring the club for at least 2 years, Stavely for 4. They know how Bruce has performed, they know what the fans think of him, they still have Charnley and an HR department available to sort the administrative/formalities to get him out.

I got a quite detailed response this morning on the e-mail I sent last night from the vice chair. I don't feel comfortable sharing the response without consent, but can ask if he is ok with me sharing it. If not, it actually do seem like e-mailing them directly instead of communicating via social media will get you a better explanation than what you get in 2-3 short lines via twitter, so would advise you to do so. That being said, it doesn't seem like they are entertaining the idea to change the decision to co-opt Alex and they are acting within the NUST rules (ref. rule 63) https://nufctrust.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/NUST-Rules.pdf

Assuming we're talking about the same situation it looked like something out of a Beardsley highlight clip. Was amazing.

So we buy Haaland first, then Isak, Mæhle & Bjørkan and become the English vikings?

Rival clubs are angered around the increased competition for top-four spots Love it when they are angry, for the wrong reasons, especially since they were seemingly very much involved in blocking the takeover last year Fuck'em to hell

They say he is co-opted, but if he never really left as they say, he wouldn't really be co-opted would he? Co-opted if my google is strong enough is when "people who are chosen by the appropriate body to represent a specific area of interest or issue of consideration. These representatives are not elected members of the Council, and are appointed because of their level of knowledge and experience, such as headteachers, diocesan representatives."

Isn't that more common when the clubs have someone else lined up that wants to bring in their own coaching staff? Can't remember entire coaching staffs ever dissapearing along with the manager when clubs have sacked a manager and temporarily installs a caretaker.

Well that was a short lived positive experience Since they just ask you to e-mail them any concerns, would anyone with a bit more eloquent English than myself maybe be interested in drafting a mail concerned NUST members can e-mail to them about this self re-instated hog?

Where have you got this weird idea that coaching staff dissapears if they terminate Bruce's contract? Day before (?) takeover was announced, NUST published a poll that got national media coverage where 95% of fans said Steve Bruce should walk away from his post in the best interests of the club. Easiest decision ever for new owners.