Chris_R

NHS backlogs due Covid and Tory cutbacks.

The old, "non-SD" font from the front of the East Stand.

They'll justify it based on our acceptance of it. Somehow holding out for just a few months longer will make it OK, because we've already done it.

I'm not even sure it's their biggest meltdown this week. And we're only on Wednesday.

Whilst a well-timed slide tackle is great to watch, especially if it cleanly wins the ball but still clatters the opponent up in the air, it's always a massive risk that the ref just cards you anyway for "being out of control" or something like that. Love to see them, but perfectly happy to not see any and for him to carry on exactly as he has been. If/when we're well clear of the drop zone, fair enough, but we really don't want to lose him for several games to a stupid red.

This is the bit I don't get. In their heads: - Short puts a quarter of a billion pounds in to try and prop up a club the fans would rather watch in the pub, keeps them in the PL for years doing this but then walks away and writes off almost all of that investment when things finally just get too expensive for him. He's apparently a bad owner. - Ashley takes countless millions OUT of Newcastle and puts it in his own pockets, but because we don't tumble down the leagues in spite of this and because occasionally he does buy us some players (thanks Mike) but still for far less than he's asset stripped out of us for years, he's apparently a good owner. It's just incomprehensible.

Also with Trippier out, Shelvey is guaranteed to start because of set pieces.

I expect we lose this, but get through it with no injuries and another decent performance. Maybe we can steal something. Hopefully we see a bit more Bruno, but I doubt he'll start and will only get good game time if we're behind.

Worked great when we put Ritchie at wing back....

FWIW I think both decisions were right. First contact did look fractionally outside, whereas the goal did look offside. Both were so incredibly marginal though that either or both could be deemed "not a clear error" and allowed to stand as the on-field decision. The problem then comes from consistency - If only one decision stands and the other is overruled, then there's angry fans on one side or the other. Thankfully both were scrutinised, which leads to anger in the stands about what a clear and obvious mistake represents, but otherwise you run the risk of it being open to interpretation.

True, but by that metric it shouldn't rule out their goal either.

I'm probably at a 2. Buzzing for the matches, really enthused again. To get to a 1 I guess I'd need a season ticket.

Yeah that's why we were awarded a penalty instead of a free kick in the first half...

Most US insurance has some kind of excess, normally several thousand dollars, think you call it a deductible? Even if you don't have that, most do. I've had numerous conversations with Americans where they've attempted to defend their (ridiculously overpriced) insurance with "well I only had to pay $5k!" Anyway, good win today!

To be fair, in the US nobody can afford to get treatment so even the patient won't let you call an ambulance.

Whilst I'm in favour of not disrupting a winning team, I think now it is appropriate to bring Bruno on. He's a game changer, and we need to change this game.

Whilst I want to see him too, if we keep winning and the current 3 stay fit and available, then he doesn't start. So no, we don't "have to" start him soon because us NOT starting him means we're winning every match, which is the most important thing. Cons: We don't get to see Bruno Pros: We win every match Eventually though we'll not win, and then he'll come in. Which seems fair enough to me. Players have to believe that if they play well enough and do well enough, that they can keep someone else out the team. Dropping someone after Everton would send out the reverse signal - Doesn't matter what you do, I'll always play the other guy.

However true it might be, I don't think I've ever sat thinking about the Jacobites, the coal industry or shipbuilding when thinking about my dislike of Sunderland. They're just a bunch of scruffy, mouthy oiks from down the road who occasionally need putting back in their place. Let's not overcomplicate things.

I dunno, I think Ashley's legacy is far greater. In the wrong direction, admittedly, but by the sheer magnitude of how he changed the club and the legacy he left us, what Ashley did was unparalleled.

Even now just listening to him speak is amazing. He oozes passion for the game in general, the city of Newcastle, and NUFC. He's got boundless integrity, enthusiasm, energy, everything he says is worth listening to. Honestly I could listen to him talk about football forever. Everything he says is worth listening to.

As a manager, when he arrived we were facing potential oblivion when we were heading out of the 2nd Division with mountains of debt, relegation would have possibly caused the club to fold. He not only stopped us getting relegated, the next year we were promoted as champions and then finished 6th then 3rd in the PL from memory. Then the year after that w nearly won the whole thing. Absolutely unprecedented success since probably the mid 1950s, if we're not allowed to think highly of Keegan then who exactly should we think highly of? Everyone else since 1955 has done worse, both as players and managers. Yeah, we won the Fairs Cup in 1969 but although Keegan didn't win a trophy, I think his overall achievements are greater than a cup run. Aside from that, he's one of the ones who just "gets" the area and the city. Rafa did too, hence why he's highly thought of, and Bobby Robson too. Keegan always talked us up, not put us down. It was said of his team talks that he'd make the players feel 10 foot tall, make them believe they could conquer the world. Well he did the same for us as fans. Sure, we fell short, but it was a fucking magnificent ride and he gave us pride and belief. If Keegan hadn't come as manager in 1992, this club might not exist. It's that simple. But he didn't just save us, he nearly won the league and made us all feel not like gatecrashers, but like we had every right to sit at that top table as equals. And for a few years, we did just that.

Cole played 34 PL games in 1995/6, then 33 two years later and 32 the year following that. He played 45 games in all competitions for us in 1993/4 scoring 41, and equalled or bettered that appearance level for 3 consecutive seasons for Man U from 1997/8 to 1999/00 but never got more than 25 in a season. He also played 43 games for them in 1995/6, scoring 13. Aside from whether or not he played as regularly, which at times he maybe did not, his strike rate also dropped markedly. His strike rate with us in all competitions was 0.81, but for Man U it was 0.44. Yes he was good for Man U, that's still a very good return, and you can argue he added other things to his game as well if you want, but we clearly saw the best of him in black and white.

From what I understood, Cole thought he was "it" around that time, the adulation had got to him a bit and his training was deteriorating. If he'd have stayed, maybe his career would have nosedived. By moving to Man U under Fergie, he got a kick up the ass and pushed on again which might never have happened if he'd have stayed because he'd have gotten comfortable. Also, for all we say he excelled at Man U, he never recaptured the form he had for us. Not even close. "That" season he scored 41 in 45 with 34 in the league, and overall in his time with us he scored 68 in 84. For Man U, that drops to a somewhat less stellar 121 in 275, nowhere near as good, and his best season for them yielded 25 goals in all competitions, only 15 of which were in the league. Maybe Keegan saw a chance to sell him whilst his value was at its highest, knowing that he'd already peaked.

Players who dribble or try to create will always lose the ball. It comes with the territory. I imagine every single winger in history who can carry the ball has been described as "frustrating".

Those suggesting it should be one of Shelvey, Joelinton or Willock dropped for Bruno are missing that Willock isn't playing in the same position as the others. He's much more advanced. You drop him, someone has to play further forward. Bruno has been bought specifically to strengthen our central midfield, so it's not him. Shelvey can't run, so it's not him When Joelinton shoots, it's more likely to hit himself in the face than the back of the net so it isn't him either. Willock plays, for me. He's the one you want on the end of Bruno's through passes, not the other two. Can you imagine Shelvey or Joelinton getting played through every match? Bruno will have an aneurysm by March watching Jonjo wading through treacle or Joelinton trip over his own feet each time.