oldtype

Smith in the midfield literally has all of Butt's weaknesses (reckless tackling, horrible distribution, low awareness) with none of his strengths (positioning/covering). As for Smith v. Shola up front, Shola Ameobi has scored more goals this season than Smith ever will for the remainder of his career. That's all there is to it really.

That 11m was Boumsong, Babayaro, and Amdy Faye by the way. Not a tall order, money or quality wise.

I'm sorry, but he absolutely is the putrid player most make him out to be. People have just forgotten because how bad he is because he's been out of the team so long. Makes Butt look like Fabregas in midfield, makes Ameobi look like Trezeguet in the attack. And Xisco, by the way, has scored more goals.

and why is that? paper thin midfield. smith can cover if we desperately need. What? So he can run around as a forward somehow managing to be in the wrong place all the time, never take any shots on goal, play with his back to the opposition goal for 90 minutes and fail to link up along side anyone else unfortunate to be playing along side him? Or are you talking about his midfield ability where he somehow manages to be in the wrong place all the time, dives into unnecessary tackles, fails to link up with anyone else in the midfield, or defence, or attack and manages to gift at least one edge-of-the-box free kick to anyone we're playing. We'd be better off playing with 10 men than put Alan Smith in the team. he showed, albeit some years ago now, that he has atleast some ability. If he can regain fitness i belive he could be an okey sub/cover for midfield/striker. however, alot of other players should get the nod ahead, and we should deffo offload him. however not until the summer. It's just been so long since you've seen Smith play. You've forgotten how utterly horrible he is.

How is it "better" ? Do you not think the Keegan Newcastle team would challenge for the title ? Do you think the England team of 1990 is not better than the one of the last few years ? Why do you think that football "always" improves ? Its not the case mate, believe me. There are plenty of players through the ages who would still walk into current teams. You are the best of your era, you can't do better than that and you can stand alongside the best players of any other era too. I think the Keegan Newcastle team would probably finish between 4th & 6th around the likes of Arsenal & Villa. Prepared to be shot down here, but that's my opinion. It also goes beyond just a direct comparison in quality. Back in Keegan or even Robson's days it was easy to build a team that could put away opponents in the bottom half of the league with consistency. These days teams like Villa will have their bad days where they're completely outplayed by a team like us. Not only is the league much better in general, it's also much more level. (Excluding the "top four," of course) as detached from the true reality as those who attempted to suggest that under Ashley we were trying to sign young players with potential for the first time in our history. What you say is nothing new, it's always happened and always will. NE5, isn't it a fact (I know you like that word) that in the mid-90s, the Premiership was maybe the fifth or sixth most prestigious league in the world, when now it is unquestionably number one? Isn't it a fact that the talent pool in the 90s was mostly limited to players from the British Isles (with a few notable exceptions,) while now the best talent in the world flocks to the league? Isn't it the fact that the Premiership has been absolutely dominating the Champions League in recent years? Isn't it the fact that the amount of money in the league has increased nearly a tenfold in the past decade? Despite all that, are you sure the Premiership is still the same old league it was in the 90s? European Cup: Winners 1977 - Liverpool Winners 1978 - Liverpool Winners 1979 - Forest Winners 1980 - Forest Winners 1981 - Villa You were saying ? We were talking about the change from the mid-90s to 2008. Completely unrelated to those results. But then again, you're probably above such insignificant things as common sense. were we ? You may have been. But I was saying that nothing changes, you have the same teams to beat. If you are top of your era, you stand beside anyone else who is top of a different era. If changes and advances are made in training, medical techniques, dietary research, they benefit all teams. Newcastle United has always been one of the top clubs in the country, to bring this nearer home, but we only capatilised, or attempted to, on our potential during the period 1992-2007. You said that English clubs have dominated the Champions League lately, I have shown you they dominated it more in a different era. Its been a good last few years, but there have been other good years. English teams also won the Fairs Cup from 1968-1972. Aside of those European Cup wins, there have been others, a few losing finalists and lots of semi finalists too. Leeds lost the final in 1975, and Liverpool won it again in 1984, and lost the Final in 1985, the year of the Heysel disaster. Not bad is it ? 6 winners and 2 losing finalists in 11 seasons. The current world champions are Italy too by the way. How many Italian internationals play in the premiership ? You make another childish comment in your last line again. Do you want to discuss this like an adult or not ? The fact that English first division was also dominant in the 70s and 80s does that prove that the English first division has not changed in quality from 1996 to 2008 and certainly, absolutely does not prove that the quality of football in the top English division has remained constant over the past however many years. You can pull out completely unrelated stats all you want. Absolutely does not change the fact that you're talking nonsense and absolutely does not change the fact that you cannot tell me with a straight face that the Premiership is unchanged in quality in the past decade. I don't even know why I bother arguing you. You'll just respond by completely misrepresenting my arguments, trotting on stats which have absolutely no relevance, or making some pathetic attempt at wit and typing in "mackems.gif" Heck, I'm pretty sure that nothing I'm saying right now is even registering with you. You're just to caught up in your own world and your own whacked out view of things. For both our sakes I'm going to stop biting and just ignore you now. I certainly have no desire to become the next Mick.

Wigan have fans?

How is it "better" ? Do you not think the Keegan Newcastle team would challenge for the title ? Do you think the England team of 1990 is not better than the one of the last few years ? Why do you think that football "always" improves ? Its not the case mate, believe me. There are plenty of players through the ages who would still walk into current teams. You are the best of your era, you can't do better than that and you can stand alongside the best players of any other era too. I think the Keegan Newcastle team would probably finish between 4th & 6th around the likes of Arsenal & Villa. Prepared to be shot down here, but that's my opinion. It also goes beyond just a direct comparison in quality. Back in Keegan or even Robson's days it was easy to build a team that could put away opponents in the bottom half of the league with consistency. These days teams like Villa will have their bad days where they're completely outplayed by a team like us. Not only is the league much better in general, it's also much more level. (Excluding the "top four," of course) as detached from the true reality as those who attempted to suggest that under Ashley we were trying to sign young players with potential for the first time in our history. What you say is nothing new, it's always happened and always will. NE5, isn't it a fact (I know you like that word) that in the mid-90s, the Premiership was maybe the fifth or sixth most prestigious league in the world, when now it is unquestionably number one? Isn't it a fact that the talent pool in the 90s was mostly limited to players from the British Isles (with a few notable exceptions,) while now the best talent in the world flocks to the league? Isn't it the fact that the Premiership has been absolutely dominating the Champions League in recent years? Isn't it the fact that the amount of money in the league has increased nearly a tenfold in the past decade? Despite all that, are you sure the Premiership is still the same old league it was in the 90s? European Cup: Winners 1977 - Liverpool Winners 1978 - Liverpool Winners 1979 - Forest Winners 1980 - Forest Winners 1981 - Villa You were saying ? We were talking about the change from the mid-90s to 2008. Completely unrelated to those results. But then again, you're probably above such insignificant things as common sense.

Not too bothered about Tottenham winning the Carling Cup again. With the CC being what it is, win it once than alright that's good you've actually won something, but I figure winning it twice, especially on consecutive years, comes with a heavy dose of apathy.

Kinnear may be completely inept, but as Bassong > Taylor indicates he's not insane. Butt v Guthrie would be such an obvious choice... If he gets that wrong there's just no hope.

May I ask why you only seem to post when things are appearing to go well for Spurs? Going well? Didn't they get beat 2-0 by the bottom side of the league last week? It's pretty sad though, to think that whenever anything that could be even remotely construed as exciting for Spurs is about to happen, the first thought in Martin Jol's mind is "OMFG I've gotta go act ITK on that Newcastle board!" Aye ok, but the fact they are signing Appiah working on Downing etc, through to the final of the cup. Strikes me as Spurs just being Spurs again. Their first priority has to be to solidify their defense yet there they go signing more overpriced attacking players. Downing won't move (I don't think Spurs can afford it in the first place having just shelled out to bring back Defoe,) and Appiah is 50/50 to flop. During the summer I said that despite all the bells and whistles, I'd much rather have our summer signings than Spurs'. I still would.

It's not really journalism thought is it, coming from a guy on a sunderland message board whose lawyer mate told him. Well, lazy making-shit-up then.

May I ask why you only seem to post when things are appearing to go well for Spurs? Going well? Didn't they get beat 2-0 by the bottom side of the league last week? It's pretty sad though, to think that whenever anything that could be even remotely construed as exciting for Spurs is about to happen, the first thought in Martin Jol's mind is "OMFG I've gotta go act ITK on that Newcastle board!"

We've been linked with Adriano every window since he's turned shit I think. It's just lazy journalism, assuming we're a club that picks up "past-it" stars.

I don't agree with this entirely (in fact, I agree with everything bar the bold) but it's not far from being accurate. He has been good this season, see Villa (h), Man City (h), and cameo's against Everton (a), and Portsmouth (a) when he was excellent. However, Spurs (h), Hull (h) and Sunderland (a) he was dreadful, especially the first two I listed there. But yeah, most people here are over-reacting. It probably should have been 2 years with a third depending on appearances. He scored against Sunderland. Was coming back from injury/didn't have much time against Spurs. Hull was before his "Kinnear Renaissance," and honestly, everyone was shit then. Shola's been about as good as Shola can be this year.

How is it "better" ? Do you not think the Keegan Newcastle team would challenge for the title ? Do you think the England team of 1990 is not better than the one of the last few years ? Why do you think that football "always" improves ? Its not the case mate, believe me. There are plenty of players through the ages who would still walk into current teams. You are the best of your era, you can't do better than that and you can stand alongside the best players of any other era too. I think the Keegan Newcastle team would probably finish between 4th & 6th around the likes of Arsenal & Villa. Prepared to be shot down here, but that's my opinion. It also goes beyond just a direct comparison in quality. Back in Keegan or even Robson's days it was easy to build a team that could put away opponents in the bottom half of the league with consistency. These days teams like Villa will have their bad days where they're completely outplayed by a team like us. Not only is the league much better in general, it's also much more level. (Excluding the "top four," of course) as detached from the true reality as those who attempted to suggest that under Ashley we were trying to sign young players with potential for the first time in our history. What you say is nothing new, it's always happened and always will. NE5, isn't it a fact (I know you like that word) that in the mid-90s, the Premiership was maybe the fifth or sixth most prestigious league in the world, when now it is unquestionably number one? Isn't it a fact that the talent pool in the 90s was mostly limited to players from the British Isles (with a few notable exceptions,) while now the best talent in the world flocks to the league? Isn't it the fact that the Premiership has been absolutely dominating the Champions League in recent years? Isn't it the fact that the amount of money in the league has increased nearly a tenfold in the past decade? Despite all that, are you sure the Premiership is still the same old league it was in the 90s?

I've never been impressed by West Ham this season and I've honestly been startled at the good results they've gotten lately. I think they just might be this season's "Robin Hood" team: taking points from the rich and giving them to the poor. We'll play decently and win. Honestly don't feel that threatened.

How is it "better" ? Do you not think the Keegan Newcastle team would challenge for the title ? Do you think the England team of 1990 is not better than the one of the last few years ? Why do you think that football "always" improves ? Its not the case mate, believe me. There are plenty of players through the ages who would still walk into current teams. You are the best of your era, you can't do better than that and you can stand alongside the best players of any other era too. I think the Keegan Newcastle team would probably finish between 4th & 6th around the likes of Arsenal & Villa. Prepared to be shot down here, but that's my opinion. It also goes beyond just a direct comparison in quality. Back in Keegan or even Robson's days it was easy to build a team that could put away opponents in the bottom half of the league with consistency. These days teams like Villa will have their bad days where they're completely outplayed by a team like us. Not only is the league much better in general, it's also much more level. (Excluding the "top four," of course)

Apologies, I have this unfortunate tendency to descend to the level of whoever I'm responding to.

well, if you think that, what DO you think is the reason ? Of course its because of the change of ownership. Ambitions and standards have dropped. Nothing else could cause your change of attitude. The fact that we've festered down here so long that we've used up any sort of good will we amassed during the Keegan and Robson eras. To incoming players, we're no longer a big club that's hit hard times, just another one of them s*** clubs. The fact that the rest of the PL has improved so drastically in the past few years that it's no longer just a matter of throwing together any half-decent squad to become "the best of the rest." We now have to leapfrog the likes of Villa and Everton who have already entrenched themselves as near permanent fixtures in the top six, Man City, who have infinite money, and Tottenham, the greatest f***ing club on Earth. The whole Keegan shitfest. I suppose this wouldn't have happened if Ashley wasn't the owner, I'll give you that. Then again, if Shepherd was still hear we probably would've kept Big Sam until at least this season and God knows where we'd be by now. Let's not play the "what if" game. how has it improved ? It hasn't. Football is the same as it always was. All teams and clubs evolve, and the team of 1996 would still be in there chasing the title right to the end. If you honestly believe that the quality in the Premiership hasn't went up in the past decade, then you probably haven't been watching football at all. Which wouldn't surprise me. Wanking over pictures of Freddie Shepherd must take up a lot of your time. oh dear. Dragging the place down now aren't you How old are you exactly ? mackems.gif you made a childish post, and aren't mature enough to reply. Smashing, well done. (oh look, I've gone and done it again.)

well, if you think that, what DO you think is the reason ? Of course its because of the change of ownership. Ambitions and standards have dropped. Nothing else could cause your change of attitude. The fact that we've festered down here so long that we've used up any sort of good will we amassed during the Keegan and Robson eras. To incoming players, we're no longer a big club that's hit hard times, just another one of them s*** clubs. The fact that the rest of the PL has improved so drastically in the past few years that it's no longer just a matter of throwing together any half-decent squad to become "the best of the rest." We now have to leapfrog the likes of Villa and Everton who have already entrenched themselves as near permanent fixtures in the top six, Man City, who have infinite money, and Tottenham, the greatest f***ing club on Earth. The whole Keegan shitfest. I suppose this wouldn't have happened if Ashley wasn't the owner, I'll give you that. Then again, if Shepherd was still hear we probably would've kept Big Sam until at least this season and God knows where we'd be by now. Let's not play the "what if" game. how has it improved ? It hasn't. Football is the same as it always was. All teams and clubs evolve, and the team of 1996 would still be in there chasing the title right to the end. If you honestly believe that the quality in the Premiership hasn't went up in the past decade, then you probably haven't been watching football at all. Which wouldn't surprise me. Wanking over pictures of Freddie Shepherd must take up a lot of your time. oh dear. Dragging the place down now aren't you How old are you exactly ? mackems.gif (that was my attempt at a traditional NE5-style non response. Did I do good?)

Big, strong, has recently learned how to hold up the ball and use it to link up. Takes decent penalties.

This winter kind of reminds me of 2006-2007. We went into the winter thinking that we all thought we'd make some big signings because the squad was literally falling to pieces. Unfortunately, all we got was the Gooch on loan. January is just a bitch. Nobody wants to sell, everybody wants to buy. Unless you're rolling in cash it's a fairly safe bet that your club won't be doing any business. Personally I think we'll sell no-one and buy no-one (excluding various youngsters) this winter. And if that happened, I wouldn't be too bothered. We're not getting relegated this year unless something truly ridiculous happens. Summer is when you buy players. Experience has told me that you should never, ever expect anything from January.

well, if you think that, what DO you think is the reason ? Of course its because of the change of ownership. Ambitions and standards have dropped. Nothing else could cause your change of attitude. The fact that we've festered down here so long that we've used up any sort of good will we amassed during the Keegan and Robson eras. To incoming players, we're no longer a big club that's hit hard times, just another one of them s*** clubs. The fact that the rest of the PL has improved so drastically in the past few years that it's no longer just a matter of throwing together any half-decent squad to become "the best of the rest." We now have to leapfrog the likes of Villa and Everton who have already entrenched themselves as near permanent fixtures in the top six, Man City, who have infinite money, and Tottenham, the greatest f***ing club on Earth. The whole Keegan shitfest. I suppose this wouldn't have happened if Ashley wasn't the owner, I'll give you that. Then again, if Shepherd was still hear we probably would've kept Big Sam until at least this season and God knows where we'd be by now. Let's not play the "what if" game. how has it improved ? It hasn't. Football is the same as it always was. All teams and clubs evolve, and the team of 1996 would still be in there chasing the title right to the end. If you honestly believe that the quality in the Premiership hasn't went up in the past decade, then you probably haven't been watching football at all. Which wouldn't surprise me. Wanking over pictures of Freddie Shepherd must take up a lot of your time.

We can. It's just that when we do it we're a selling club without ambition. When Pompey do it it's "good business." As an aside, I really, really, really wouldn't want to be a Pompey fan right now. Redknapp took them on an amazing ride up from relegation favorites to an established top half side, and even won them the FA Cup while doing all that. But it's all come unhinged in a ridiculously short amount of time this year. They lose their manager, replace him with someone completely unqualified, slide back down near the relegation zone, and now they're selling their best player. What a come down. At least we've been shit for long enough that the success of the Robson era is only a distant memory. They fucking won the FA Cup last year, now they're relegation fodder again in just six months time. It must hurt.

well, if you think that, what DO you think is the reason ? Of course its because of the change of ownership. Ambitions and standards have dropped. Nothing else could cause your change of attitude. The fact that we've festered down here so long that we've used up any sort of good will we amassed during the Keegan and Robson eras. To incoming players, we're no longer a big club that's hit hard times, just another one of them s*** clubs. The fact that the rest of the PL has improved so drastically in the past few years that it's no longer just a matter of throwing together any half-decent squad to become "the best of the rest." We now have to leapfrog the likes of Villa and Everton who have already entrenched themselves as near permanent fixtures in the top six, Man City, who have infinite money, and Tottenham, the greatest fucking club on Earth. The whole Keegan shitfest. I suppose this wouldn't have happened if Ashley wasn't the owner, I'll give you that. Then again, if Shepherd was still hear we probably would've kept Big Sam until at least this season and God knows where we'd be by now. Let's not play the "what if" game.