Incognito

Pardew seems to be a media luvvy much like Martin O'Neill is.

Aye, that was my thought too.

Yourself, Chez and HF were always quality posters here. Wish you'd all come here more often. Whoa, a tripler? Who are you on Toontastic then? Btw Wullie and Dave (to a lesser extent). You've become very cynical blokes. You used to be full of life (Wullie to a lesser extent ). The Internet has aged you both terribly. I'm not, but I used to be billytray on here. Probably time to return to my former name come to think of it.

Yourself, Chez and HF were always quality posters here. Wish you'd all come here more often.

Cracking post that .

If it's so obvious what Jonas offers, why do so many people say he's clearly wrong in playing him when fit? Think it's a question of whether people think the team needs his qualities or we would be better off sacrificing them for more attacking flair. The evidence is there that we aren't better off for it. When he's been forcibly sacrificed we have conceded by the bucket load. Again, down to the non existant transitional play. Attack or defend. The manager has to take the blame for this.

Our first 11 when all are fully fit would be the envy of 75% of the Premier league. Our second 11 would struggle to get out of the Championship. Stoke sent Shola back 5 years ago....and he's still our best threat from the bench. I think the injuries have helped Pardew's because in the fact, with everyone fit, I wouldnt trust him to select the right personnel. I don't think Sissoko or Cabaye have played in their natural positions since January, plus it seems he'll always find a spot for Jonas. He always will too. We've conceded less goals in the games Jonas plays. I hate to go back to the stats but I do like to back up what I say, so here goes.... If you look at how long each player has spent on the pitch, and how many goals were conceded when that player was on, then it's clear the value Pardew places in Jonas... Top 5 Gutierez - 58.9 minutes per goal conceded Cabaye - 57.9 Williamson - 55.9 S Taylor - 53.9 Ben Arfa - 53.6 When he got injured we immediately conceded 4 at Man U then 7 at Arsenal in the next 2 games The next time he missed any football was when he got dragged off against Liverpool. we were 2 nil down then....but we conceded 4 in the second half alone without him. Most would prefer our attacking players to be attacking of course, and Jonas has done nothing for us there. But it's clear where Pardew sees his value to the team, defensively. I find it worrying that a manager is so reliant on his left winger to not concede to 6 and 7 goal scorelines. This is exactly what I was getting at. In the same way Taggart selects Welbeck in the "harder" games. It is because he is the best defensive forward they have.

Our first 11 when all are fully fit would be the envy of 75% of the Premier league. Our second 11 would struggle to get out of the Championship. Stoke sent Shola back 5 years ago....and he's still our best threat from the bench. I think the injuries have strangely helped Pardew's cause because in the fact, with everyone fit, I wouldnt trust him to select the right personnel. I don't think Sissoko or Cabaye have played in their natural positions since January, plus it seems he'll always find a spot for Jonas.

Fair play to HF , I don't agree with a lot of what he says, but at least he conveys it in a decent, respectful, non condescending manner.

Maybe the woman said she needed a piss when he asked for sex and he misunderstood ?

He doesn't trust Ashley to appoint anyone better. As CG pointed out, he's been a classy poster despite the cynicism thrown his way in the last few pages. Well said.

Add Liverpool away to that list too HF.

So we end NETD again. Get real ffs. It's not about league position this year. It's about head-to-head results. We're never getting that title. League table don't lie marra. though I agree with you.

Cheers marra I don't think he can make us ATTRACTIVE either. I don't think he (or Ashley) care about how attractive we are. I think for him to at least be EFFECTIVE though, like we were last season, requires some semblence of consistency in the formation used and the first 11 filling the places. Yes I tend to agree.

So we end NETD again.

We played as a unit last season. It was a negative unit, but it was an remarkably rigid system for at least the first half of the season which proved very effective. Do you give Pardew any leeway on not being able to get back to any sort of consistency on that front due to injuries? As I said, I don't believe he has the tools or the nous to make us an attractive side to watch, but also one that wins games in a regular basis. Having said that, reluctantly, I will back him if he is still Newcastle United manager next season, and it is apparent he has learned from this awful season .

The biggest critique aside from his negative and cowardly tactics is that we rarely play as a unit. We either defend or attack, it is either one or the other. We never have a balance of both. Of course if we attack more, we get left short at the back and vice versa. It's not a point exclusive to me, others gave pointed it out, so why hasn't the manager rectified it, or even made it evident he knows about it ?

Sunderland will get ultra mullered at Spurs mate.

Aye, even looking past the whole Pardew thing I've never been a one to decorate overly with football stuff. Just looks shit imo. Agreed, i've got nothing hanging up though I've got stuff I could. It's about keeping up appearances as well. http://images5.fanpop.com/image/photos/28800000/KUA-keeping-up-appearances-28842070-700-525.jpg I'd rather have Pardew than Hyacinth Bucket tbh.

To be honest, Stu posts total hoopjuice no matter what season it is.

Me, on that occasion To be fair I just thought that as stats were being used to back up certain arguments that we might as well have the most relevant ones possible. I meant as in some gadgie sitting in front of every game and marking off each chance, or each corner etc.

Who compiles these awful tables? I mean how ridiculous

I'm sorry but that is hilarious and not in a good way. That is such a 'holier than thou' attitude towards supporting the club it's depressing. 'The club isn't going to reach your standards to make up for your shit life so chose something else' seems to be the general theme. You can accept the realism that we're not great and we shoulsnt exopect to be and you can do so because it's not making up for deficiencies in your life? I'm sorry but my life is great, and the football I've been subjected to this season is fucking shite, mate. Totally unacceptable and none of the shite excuses peddled wash. I'm sure this applies to everyone else too. What a terrible post. Just so insular. Surprised you expected any better mate tbh.

Direct, thats about all I can say about it. i would say 'Boredom' go out there and bore the opposition to death, when they are finally half asleep hit them with the counter long ball. I can't see anything that jumps out as a particular style but its direct. Long ball, free kicks in our half launched into the oppo box. yeah i guess it can be easy for a lot of people to label us a long ball team, but then you get down to it and think it over, our long balls are far too horrifically poor , which leads to the conclusion the team and manager don't train solely for long balls. So you scatch your head and think we dont pass the ball short that much either, we dont try to keep the ball either,... what style is this? its f***ing relegation fodder style. no question. yeah its long ball, but its not even effective Allardyce style long ball Because it is panic, get it away from our goal as far as possible long ball.

We have no real pattern of play, no real way of keeping the ball. You are contradicting each other while being in agreement. Has Pardew set us up to play well in the first halves of games or not? Reading was the prime example. Dominated for an hour before Pardew shat himself and whipped off the main fretts to Reading, Marveaux and Cabaye , who had ran the show between them. Ended up losing. That's a bad example, as it's not entirely true. He took of Marveaux, that much is true. I forget who replaced him. However, Cabaye then asked to come off as he felt a knock/strain of some kind. That unfortunately left us well short on creativity and forward momentum. I'm sure that you can find a better suited example though. Not really as it was Cabayes comeback game after a lay off and Pardew must've had an inkling he wasn't going to get the 90. In which case, why did he take off Marveaux beforehand ? He may not have got the 90, but I'd hazard a guess that he was expecting him to last longer than the 60 (I think?) he did manage. As I say, it's a bad example because you'd given the impression that he'd elected to 'whip' them both off, despite them playing well. That wasn't the case, as an unexpected situation had caused the second substitution. Something he admitted after game, if I remember correctly. In this example, it wasn't his absolute intention to completely stifle our creativity and forward impetus. There'll be other, clearer, and more damning examples. You could point to those instead? He said it was unexpected. I'm saying that Cabaye struggles to get 90 when he plays week in week out, so it shouldn't have been unexpected and he should never have even contemplated taking Marveaux off beforehand. It was rank bad management, and effectively cost us the game. You're twisting your argument again, Billy. It perhaps wasn't the greatest example of prescient management, but, a deliberately negative move with the sole intention of 'shutting up shop' it was not. Like I've said, there are plenty of other examples you could use, as this is far from being your 'prime' one. I'd say taking your two most creative players off was shutting up shop personally. Especially as he brought Perch and I think Anita to replace. Sigh. We've gone full circle and we're now back at square one. It's unfortunate that you have to adopt this approach any time someone engages you in debate, as I'm sure you're not stupid. You've had ample opportunity to provide more examples, or even one, yet you're persisting with your 'prime' example that has many questions over it. It is the one that irritated me most. But we've got deeper and deeper due to negative substitutes and also id wager keep what we hold half time team talks, in our last 3 away games. But you didn't need me to tell you that.