Happy Face

Chateau chataigniere

I'm singing 'we're gonna win 4-3'. Having a blast. That's the spirit. Cabaye and cisse are better options than we usually have on the bench. Howay. I'm getting another bottle of wine in.

Ok, i'm coming round. Kinnear might be better.

Or the creation of better opportunities. Although, only Chelsea have a better proportion of shots in the 6 yard box than us

http://strackattack.com/gifs/paul%20ince%20blackburn%20football.gif That did managers who write no favours.

http://nbcprosoccertalk.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/llorisavb.png http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Jose+Mourinho+Chelsea+v+Hull+City+Premier+YrXWm0NjJxyl.jpg http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01819/Moyes_1819328c.jpg http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000EYHFYF1dwAk/s/860/860/130824-039-Aston-Villa-Liverpool.jpg Divvies

I asked the question if his interest free 'gift' doesn't balance the scales. There are lots of clubs with big debts, not paying any interest whatsoever on it, and still taking money from advertisers...in at least one case, paying a shitload to advertise their own company as a way of pumping in hundreds of millions under FFP. Ashley's not special in covering the debt. He's doing no more than owners at Stoke, Chelsea, QPR, Blackburn, Fulham or Wigan according to these numbers... http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/apr/18/premier-league-finances-club-by-club On the other hand, Man U , Arsenal, Villa, Bolton, Spurs, Liverpool, Man City, Sunderland and Norwich all pay out millions a year on interest. Whatever is true of the interest payments, every club bar Newcastle sells their advertising space to the highest bidder as far as I'm aware. No matter what business the owner is in.

The Newcastle United Regression Factor or NURF.... http://www.forbes.com/sites/zachslaton/2013/09/30/manchester-united-or-tottenham-hotspur-who-is-more-likely-to-be-the-newcastle-united-of-201314/

It's not down to opinion whether Pardew was making excuses before the Man City game had even started. Those quotes would be easily found if they existed. As it is, the only pre-game quote i can find is... He definitely blamed the Cabaye situation afterwards, but I think Southall is inaccurate with his view of when those excuses were made.

They're comparable. If we'd actually spent £4m on transfers, maybe that would be worth comparing and putting up with Sports Direct advertising for too

You didn't quote the rest of his article... Pmsl. Assume this article was written from a chat over a pint. Distrust pens and anyone that can use them.

So people will shut the fuck up about Ashley not taking any interest on his loans and not taking any money out of the club then? If FMA wants to charge himself interest on the loans he had to provide due to his own incompetence he can, it's up to him. At least the stadium wouldn't look like such a tacky mess anymore. Cutting off your nose to spite your face there. Why would you invite that if it would harm the club financially? Ashley, prick that he is, is only responsible for £30m or so of the debt. £90m+ was there when he arrived, and accumulating £6m of interest every year. I'm not cutting anything off, you're the one who suggested him charging interest on the loans, not me. I want the club to maximise its revenue streams, you seem content to suck the cock of whichever club official offers it. Now you can show me a pie chart if you like. It's not cock sucking. It reduces revenue if nufc are paid for sports direct advertising and pay interest on debt at the going rate. Everyone agrees that we would prefer paid advertisers at the club, but Ashley is a prick who places the interests of Sports Direct above those of NUFC. Given that fact, its better this way than giving him justification for changing the terms of his loan.

So people will shut the fuck up about Ashley not taking any interest on his loans and not taking any money out of the club then? If FMA wants to charge himself interest on the loans he had to provide due to his own incompetence he can, it's up to him. At least the stadium wouldn't look like such a tacky mess anymore. Cutting off your nose to spite your face there. Why would you invite that if it would harm the club financially? Ashley, prick that he is, is only responsible for £30m or so of the debt. £90m+ was there when he arrived, and accumulating £6m of interest every year.

Would it placate people if Sports Direct paid £4m a year for the advertising and then Mike Ashley charged the club £4m a year interest on the debt? You usually pay for advertising. But you usually pay interest on debt. Both situations are not the norm. I would be interested in knowing what the market value of our advertising space is and the average interest on a £129m loan. So we can judge the shortfall. I expect we'd be saving on interest rather than losing out on advertising.

They reckon he's talking to Galatasarry

If anyone is making way I'd rather drop Cabaye than Anita. Pardew has egos to cater to though, unfortunately.

That's a pretty short term view. I'd prefer Pardew to continue learning at the moment than risk upheaval like we saw in 08/09. I base my view of what sort of working relationship they might have on what I perceive to be the footballing outlook of the people Ashley brings in compared to the footballing outlook of the people he's shown himself incapable of getting on with. Time and again he has shown that simple minded purveyors of no-nonsense football like Wise, Kinnear and Pardew are people that he gets on with. Anyone with a more romantic view of the beautiful game or anyone that builds a rapport with fans such as Keegan, Hughton or Shearer get moved aside quite quickly.

I do not doubt he could get a more attractive loooking brand of football out of our current squad. Since Brondby he's never stuck a job for more than 14 months. He got £30m to spend at Swansea this year and recouped nowt. There is no chance in hell that he and Ashley could form a working relationship.

That's it like. Like fantasising that the removal of Shimon Peres from power is likely to solve the middle east crisis.

My arch Nemesis? He was one of many top flight managers I said i wouldn't necessarily risk the upheaval of a sacking for. It was the Laudrup bum-boys that couldn't accept that.

Our ability to break down opposition defense is still as bad as it ever was. Remy has caused a bit more chaos which has led to opportunities. But its not yet an effective system of switching play and using the pace of runners to create space for the others. I'm hopeful that will come though.

Spudil seemed to be looking for some clarification.

http://i41.tinypic.com/slmx53.jpg I did this after the villa game which shows our progress on more short passing and less going long. The increased accuracy follows naturally from that I think. On total short passes... 9th on 398 per game. Last year 14th on 327 per game.

On 81.4% Compared to 10th last season on 79.8%

I've noticed a few claiming that they don't defend him, while defending him. Are you saying Pardew doesn't have one redeemable feature? He's learned nothing? Corrected no mistakes? You expose yourself as an unthinking dimwit if so. There was a bloke sat behind me last night, spent the whole game laying into our players, calling them maggots, bellends, pricks and cocks. Marveaux and Sammy got it in the neck most. He was droning on and on constantly about our lack of width. I am no fan of Sammy or Marveaux, but I would defy anyone to argue that this man was not a f***ing c***, unable to judge a performance as it plays out in front of him. To appreciate the good and criticise the bad. Strike a balance. What has that bloke got to do with ANYTHING? There's a difference between striking a balance and levelling the playing field. If I looked hard enough, I'd be able to find some redeeming qualities in some of the worst managers in the PL history, there are always ways to look at things in order to make people seem better. It's like getting 'punctual' in your report card, it means nothing. It's just there, taking up unnecessary space, making things look balanced in quantity and not quality. As far as I can see, that's exactly what you're doing. Putting a positive spin on things that to the majority are viewed as either negative, or a given. You could say that that's the product of a pessimistic outlook, but I would argue that a lot of people, myself included have gone through the same way of thinking as you for varying periods of time, until they've come to the conclusion that, actually, it was all evidence upon evidence of Pardew being s***. Going back to your way of thinking now, when I've already drawn a patient and defined conclusion that Pardew isn't good enough makes no sense. I wasn't striking a balance when I thought those things, I was entirely kidding myself that things would get better, when all of the signs pointed towards them getting worse, and all of the outcomes proved that they had. That bloke was criticising the Sammy based on his preconceived notions of shitness based on previous performances (and those of his brother) not on what was actually a top quality performance. He wasn't giving him the benefit of the doubt. No point giving him the benefit of the doubt cos he's been s*** whenever he's played before. I'd call that unfair. It's not about looking hard enough for something to spin positively. There are tens of thousands of words written on here about what he does wrong. What's the harm in saying "well actually...." when there's an opposite view to be given. Aye, but that's neither about Pardew, nor by anyone on here. That's irrelevant to this. It was about me defending players I don't rate that highly against the unfair blanket criticism they were receiving. ...that and I'm still annoyed by the prick