oldtype

It's Saturday morning, I've nothing to do, match is on TV, and I haven't the slightest desire to turn it on and watch it.

I guess I could get my wish of a Korean sending Sunderland down in a roundabout way. Realistically the FA aren't going to go back on something that's already been decided though.

Meh, the players have packed it in for the season and so have I.

Oh well might as well give the points to the team that actually needs them.

Our draw is significantly lower than the CL-capable clubs)(Manchester, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs, maybe Everton ) and slightly higher than non-CL clubs, same as its always been. Most footballers will be unaware or indifferent about the vast majority of things about the club that annoy us as fans.

Newcastle

I still don`t see how its worse other than it was retaliation and a manager should know better. Certainly wasn`t more powerful or aggressive. Because he feels that if he doesn't add that caveat he'll be lynched Honestly Ian you should just stay out of this thread. I know you're just trying to make a reasoned argument but people aren't buying what you're selling.

On the opposite end of the spectrum there's NBA basketball, where you could be sent off for swearing. Imagine every player who screams "fuck off!" at the official getting a red.

Good performance and a win against Greece today. Even Park Chu-Young scored.

There's an argument to be made that if you look at it from the perspective of each individual player unilaterally consenting to the risk and waiving the right to suit for all reasonably foreseeable football-related injury, as opposed to an implicit agreement among players not to bring suit against each other for what happens during matches, I think you could argue that it applies to managers as well. All of this is debatable and largely pointless in the end, of course.

Most players are exempt from legal liability for minor physical threats/harm to other players based on a theory of implied consent. Basically, if you're a professional football player you've signed on for the risk of injury and the occasional flaring of tempers. Whether this extends to managers assaulting players as well would be an interesting question that I don't have the answer to.

Quite the opposite, he is highlighting the unfairness in the way the two cases have been dealt with. I'd like to know the circumstances of his case and what he did before deciding that it's unfair. Now it just looks like he's using it as an excuse to complain about his own treatment. Some goon appeared from nowhere at half time when we played Hull in the cup in 2009 and attempted to tear down a banner Keith was holding up. Keith threw three punches, none of which connected. Never been in trouble of any kind before. Fair enough, didn't realize he was a personal acquaintance of people on here. It sounds like he received and completed a fair punishment relative to what he did, but I can understand why he'd feel aggrieved about the current situation.

Quite the opposite, he is highlighting the unfairness in the way the two cases have been dealt with. I'd like to know the circumstances of his case and what he did before deciding that it's unfair. Now it just looks like he's using it as an excuse to complain about his own treatment.

That conversation would have much more credibility if it wasn't initiated by someone who's already on a stadium ban.

We're talking about an owner that was willing to keep the job open for a guy who had a heart attack in the middle of a tight relegation battle.

The fact that Pardew's incident was caught live on television will ensure that the punishment is far more severe than Ince's.

Ashley was willing to wait for Kinnear after the guy nearly got himself killed. Something like a ten-game stadium ban isn't going to influence his thinking.

What the rest of the world says doesn't really matter because the one person whose opinion means anything is fully behind him.

If Ashley intended on sacking him, this fine would be a lot more. There wouldn't be a fine at all. The fact that the club is willing to engage in internal sanctions to quell the media and try to lower the FA ban is clear evidence that they stand 100% behind their manager.

He's the manager. The very hierarchy that exist in work mean that a manager has more power and would therefore get a more severe punishment for an indescretion That is indeed how is it should work in theory. I'm just pointing out a flaw in the logic of the "I would get sacked for that" argument that comes up whenever this sort of transgression occurs though. Just because I would get sacked at work for headbutting someone doesn't have any bearing on what would/should happen to Pardew or anyone else.

The persistent "if I did that at work" argument really doesn't make any sense. Clearly different jobs have different standards and footballers don't play by the same rules as the rest of us.

Just confirms he's not leaving. Meh.

Honestly I really do think the media are overreacting. It's silly and embarrassing but you'd think he'd stripped himself naked on camera or something. I might even be offended if it was a manager I liked.

It honestly doesn't feel like that big of a deal to me but if it gets him sacked I'm all for it

Finishing 5th was a once in a lifetime kind of situation that is unlikely to recur. A combination of fantastic luck and multiple teams going completely off the rails. The top 6 isn't a closed shop but to get in there regularly will require consistent year-on-year investment, not just a one time splurge of 20m or whatever. We won't do that so we'll never get in under current ownership. In that context I guess eighth is a good finish.