Happy Face

We had belief, confidence and a never say die attitude. None of this giving up in the second half, we fought tooth and nail until the final whistle. Wasn't always pretty and we had a few cloggers but I preferred it to the dross we serve up these days. Plus Hughton was a genuine, decent bloke. If all the games in the league ended after 45 minutes we'd have finished above Spurs.... http://stats.football365.co.uk/dom/ENG/PR/fsthalf.html

He offered about one fifth of the reward that the players could have earned for the club with a win. www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2326007/Premier-League-prize-money-table-final-game-2013-season.html#ixzz2TqqwqdBk Shrewd. Err, he didn't have to offer anything at all. It cost him nothing to make the offer...and slightly increased the chances of the club seeing anything of that extra cash.....which were always pretty slim. It also would have cost him nothing not to make the offer. Why isn't that obvious? Why do you think he did it then? Again, I think it was a diversionary tactic. He doesn't so stuff where he won't gain in the end in some way. I think he did it to make a statement and to compensate for Pardew's stupid comments. He still didn't have to do it though. He did it 2 years ago as well though, and Pardew hadn't made any deaft comments then. Remind me what he did? http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Newcastle-news-Mike-Ashley-will-pay-unsung-office-staff-500k-bonus-if-team-beats-West-Brom-today-article738839.html

The wealthy clubs finish better off. The more frugal clubs finish worse off. Tells you something about how the clubs are set up to cope with the demands of Europa. Clubs much poorer than us coped much better than we have this year though.

He offered about one fifth of the reward that the players could have earned for the club with a win. www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2326007/Premier-League-prize-money-table-final-game-2013-season.html#ixzz2TqqwqdBk Shrewd. Err, he didn't have to offer anything at all. It cost him nothing to make the offer...and slightly increased the chances of the club seeing anything of that extra cash.....which were always pretty slim. It also would have cost him nothing not to make the offer. Why isn't that obvious? Why do you think he did it then? Again, I think it was a diversionary tactic. He doesn't so stuff where he won't gain in the end in some way. I think he did it to make a statement and to compensate for Pardew's stupid comments. He still didn't have to do it though. He did it 2 years ago as well though, and Pardew hadn't made any deaft comments then.

Generally the wealthy clubs tbf

http://i40.tinypic.com/33xygya.jpg On average teams drop one or two places the season following Europa League qualifying. However, since the Europa League started in it's current format 4 years ago not a single qualifying team from England has taken such a downturn in the league. We dropped 11 places. Fulham had the next worse drop when the dropped just 5 places from 2009 to 2010.

They wouldn't have been his winnings they would have been the clubs. It does nothing whatsoever to support the idea that Ashley will pay a quality manager the going rate either way....or that any manager worth their salt would work under the conditions imposed on them. He's trying to run the club in the most cost effective way he can, he always has, and he probably thought he'd hit the jackpot last season with the system he'd implemented with Pardew in charge. The only way Pardew will be in charge, or another yes man like him, will be if Ashley still believes that this is the most cost effective way to go about things. Spot on

They wouldn't have been his winnings they would have been the clubs. It does nothing whatsoever to support the idea that Ashley will pay a quality manager the going rate either way....or that any manager worth their salt would work under the conditions imposed on them.

Tilting the criticism from Pardew towards Ashley on here would improve the balance. Don't think I've been unfair on Ashley or kind to Pardew though.

He offered about one fifth of the reward that the players could have earned for the club with a win. www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2326007/Premier-League-prize-money-table-final-game-2013-season.html#ixzz2TqqwqdBk Shrewd. Err, he didn't have to offer anything at all. It cost him nothing to make the offer...and slightly increased the chances of the club seeing anything of that extra cash.....which were always pretty slim.

He offered about one fifth of the reward that the players could have earned for the club with a win. www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2326007/Premier-League-prize-money-table-final-game-2013-season.html#ixzz2TqqwqdBk Shrewd.

He's only 'up' because you included agent's fees from outgoing transfers? Edit: To be a bit clearer, those headline numbers don't include the fees lost to agents or to loyalty bonuses: we pay them on incoming transfers, so they're same, but on outgoing transfers, it's money that doesn't come to NUFC so figures should be lower. Fair point. I can only really base it on reported numbers. No idea on those costs. The total incoming lokks about £120m - £130m. If we assume 10% on agents fees (fair?) then that would take £12m-£13m off the total.

Me neither. I don't think it's possible to challenge the top 5 regularly with cheap buys, but there's no reason we can't maintain mid-tale finishes shopping in the bargain bin as well as we have. It's only relevant here as player investment is used to justify the line of thought that Ashhley can bring in a manager with any class.

His reason for believing Mike will appoint a better/more expensive manager was that we have made big investments on the field. The fact that we have not actually spent that much on the playing staff, points to this faith in further investment off the field being baseless. Further, investment in playing staff is not particularly relevant because playing staff offer a return on investment. They can be sold at profit, or at least allow the club to recoup some of what was paid. Managerial appointments offer no such return, so for Mike Ashley it's pissing money away. He's a cheap and nasty man. Go into Sports Direct if you don't believe it.

NUSC brigade I went along to one of their meetings to see the craic. Paid my dues once. I was supportive of them for a bit...until they said they were gonna buy the club. Nob cheeses. I think the investment in players has been minimal at best. He's still over £16m up on that score... http://i44.tinypic.com/20ku0oy.jpg

"Sir"? OK, I'll respond line by line to your original post and then to the behemoth above. This is the question I was looking at with my pie charts. I didn't mention Europa or injuries, like you asked....I based it solely on Premier league appearances and the inconsistency in the line ups Pardew was able to put out. You chose to bring injuries and Europa into it (have you stabbed your own face yet?) The first sentence being due to injury. The latter being less true as we advanced, to the point where teams we put out against benfica were almost entirely first teamers. I'd been told not to mention injuries, but if you're asking me to now,I broadly agree. By the same token I have seen complaints at how little Ben Arfa got starts when returning from fitness recently. Only coming on from the bench for 3 weeks. Another example of Pardew being damned either way. I'm not sure how this counters my point? I agree with it, Simpson has been in and out of the side due to the arrival/suspension of Debuchy. so either Debuchy has been playing alongs ide a CB and behind a RW that he's never played with before...or Simpson (the lesser player) has been filling in. Who played RB for the other 12 games? I think Anita played some there....further inconsistencty within the team...and that's just one position. I've seen very little from Anita that suggests he deserves a place over Perch if we're talking about the holding role he fills in the absence of Tiote. Anita wasn't fit for 1 game Bigirimana started (Arsenal), he played with him in another (Man U), so that criticism relates to one game (Reading). I didn't realise was a cunts smiley. Sorry. how about

On the other hand that blows Pardew's biggest excuse out of the water, tiredness, Europe, extra games, blah blah. You can't have it both ways. I don't think you have to have played every game in a season to get tired. Benitez was complaining about tiredness at Chelsea before christmas. Sissoko played something like 10 games in 30 days after he signed. 1 game every 3 days for a bloke that's never played the game at the pace we do in England. It was inevitable his form would wane.

I don't want Pardew at the club for exactly the same reasons I didn't want him from day 1. That doesn't mean I started chanting "Pardew out!" at his first game against Liverpool. All of his failings that are apparent now were apparent then. If anything, he has over achieved in his time here, considering my expectations.

Cheers. I was surprised Dave seemed to be suggesting it it because I thought he would know from my previous form on here that I'm not any sort of WUM at all. I know from posting here before that good posters like him and Wullie can easily understand the basic points I'm making, while not necessarily having to agree at all. Can't see anything in those diagrams or the description of them that could be construed as trolling.

I was replying to Inochi, not Raconteur. You think I'm trolling?

Mmmmm....Pie.

KK right again. Last season literally didn't happen did it. Has to be a question Ashley asks: How did a team that finished fifth and had five first-team players added in January finish in fifth place? (And if you mention Europa League or injuries I will stab you in the face) That's like asking for two positive integers that add up to make 2, but forbidding the use of 1 in the answer. Wrong. That ignores the fact that our players played significantly fewer ganes than many at more successful clubs. It ignores the woeful domestic cup runs, and the fact that in the EL group matches, we sent out virtual reserve teams on occasion. Nor does it acknowledge that some injuries were the direct result of managerial mismanagement (such as Ben Arfa being played when clearly unfit) or through institutional mismanagement (the failure of the club to investigate the occurance of muscle injuries borders on negligence, while the lack of fitness which potentially leads to injuries is, again, directly under the control of the manager.) But don't let that stop you pushing your barrow. You'd make a good advocate for Pardew in his "showdown" talks, except that he doesn't need one because he's so good at PR Go and troll someone else, Face EDIT: Just realised I made a typo, and that it should have read "...finish in fifth last place." So had you trolled me by pointing out my error, there would have been no response. But in your rush to push your ridiculous agenda, you ignored the tap-in in favour of a speculative scissor kick that ended in the stands... I made no reference to your typo. I got what you meant. Our players played significantly fewer than players at other clubs due to injury. The best thing to do is compare Premier league starts for the last 2 seasons....... 2011/2012 http://i40.tinypic.com/a2did0.jpg Here you can see just how consistent the spine of our team was. 6 players all started over 30 games. Over the season a manager selects 418 players to start a game. Just those 6 players were selected 211 times...over 50%. Only 24 players were needed. 6 of those playing 2 games or less. which leaves us with a core of 18 players. Remarkably consistent selections. 2012/2013 http://i39.tinypic.com/i6jcdl.jpg Here you can see just inconsistent the past season has been. This time, only 3 managed 30. We had to go through the 8 most played players before we'd covered half of the seasons selections. 27 players were needed this time. with only 2 playing 2 games or less. Which means our core was a much wider spread of 25 players. There was none of the consistency in team selection of the year previous, and with that comes less opportunity to work up a settled system.

OP updated

KK right again. Last season literally didn't happen did it. Has to be a question Ashley asks: How did a team that finished fifth and had five first-team players added in January finish in fifth place? (And if you mention Europa League or injuries I will stab you in the face) That's like asking for two positive integers that add up to make 2, but forbidding the use of 1 in the answer.

We kept possession but didn't create nearly enough chances. Or rather, when we did create chances/looked like a half decent attacking unit, we seemed to reverse the progress, sit back and distribute the ball without ideas. There's always a massive gap between Cissé and the midfield. No plan. The movement off the ball is still missing so while the players are passing it nicely they don't actually go anywhere. This is down to the lack of coaching input from Pardew as far as I'm concerned. I doubt it would even cross his mind unless he came on here and read it. I agree but the point I was making really was that we showed we can actually hold on to the ball rather than resort to long balls and gifting possession. With a coherent attacking game plan we would look very good IMO Again, and I hate to harp on about it, we've been hitting less long balls than 3/4 the teams in the league. Think we need to recognise that the "hoofball" has stopped. I see "hoofball" as our defenders/keeper launching it into the opposition half. Most annoyingly when not under any pressure, but also whenever we're soaking up wave after wave of attack. We saw an awful lot of that early in the season. That is what we're inclined to do with Simpson, Williamson, Taylor, Krul and Perch in the team. Their replacements have been much less inclined to play that way. Coloccini, Elliot, Haidara, Santon, Mbiwa and Debuchy are all MUCH more inclined to play a short pass, than a long hoof. This is where we've seen a reduction in long balls. That said. Pardew has no clue whatsoever about what it takes to have a team play through an opposing defence. Where we STILL persist in long balls is from further up the field, no matter how long we pass it around in midfield, go back to the keeper, try both wings....in the end....inevitibly...if Ben Arfa doesn't run with it into the box, if Cabaye doesn't have a shot from distance, we float an aimless one into the box in the hope of somone getting on the end. It's infuriating to see this pattern played out ad nauseum and understandable the frustration it creates.