quayside

God that tribute was emotionally hard to get through today. What it was like for his family I cannot imagine. RIP Speedo.....

Who would you have brought on for Tiote? I have to admit from where I was sitting I thought Sinclair had scored with that shot in the second half - but apart from that I think we could handle just about any counter Swansea could muster. So as I see it Ben Arfa comes on with minutes to play. I would have taken Best off for Shola but Hatem comes on for either Tiote or Obertan and we trust our back five to hold out and we try to win the game. I thought AP got it wrong today.

I really don't know if anyone thinks Pardew is better than he is, for me he's better than others we might have had and he's better than the man he replaced. So for my money his appointment wasn't another Ashley mistake. We'll just have to see whether he gets found out as you put it. The feature of this season thus far (Norwich apart) has been that we have picked up points in the games where we might have expected to. I can't really classify losing away at Norwich with no central defenders on the pitch as a pivotal result, but I'm well aware that some feel we should have done better. As a matter of interest if Colo and Williamson aren't fit who would you play through the middle?

Saw AP interview on BBC and he said nothing about anyone being suspended. He said Colo and Tiote could well be back next Saturday and Williamson is playing for the the reserves mid week.

Be even more amusing if they don't... Nah I reckon most of them will just blame Bruce and how Super Martin O'Neill needs to rebuild etc.. But you get limited chances per season to play teams like Blackburn at home, fail to take 3 points and without doubt they have issues, MON and rebuilding programs or not.

We've no goal scoring threat from our back four without Raylor

Be even more amusing if they don't...

Oh s***. It's not real man So Gosling then.....

Other than our game this is the only other one I've got any real interest in this w/e. MON has to get Bendtner to play like he wants to be there and score - and if not Bendter then some other f*cker has to. And that defence of theirs looks very 2007 to me. MON has a reputation for motivation, be interesting to see what he can do.

Tbf I did only say better than might be expected

Wonder what was the point in this article then. http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/newcastle-united/nufc-news/2011/12/09/mehdi-abeid-ready-to-rumble-at-carrow-road-72703-29923490/ I read the article and I think it says that Abeid (and Gosling) will be ready to come into the reckoning once the AFC gets going in January. From other stuff going around it sounds like Smith has the gig this w/e. Yup - but on past history with AP I think there's at least a half decent chance Smith will play better than many might have expected. Best, Lovepants, Raylor, Saylor and Guthrie all have after all.

Shame we aren't all with you to share the joy....

Wonder what was the point in this article then. http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/newcastle-united/nufc-news/2011/12/09/mehdi-abeid-ready-to-rumble-at-carrow-road-72703-29923490/ I read the article and I think it says that Abeid (and Gosling) will be ready to come into the reckoning once the AFC gets going in January. From other stuff going around it sounds like Smith has the gig this w/e.

I don't really want to de-rail this thread, I just mentioned Taylor in here because I think him being in the team is a bit of a joke. As for how well the defence played, I think in was in spite of him rather than because of him and I would rather the manager was pro-active than reactive. After all, I think most people predicted how it would go over the last three games with him in the team. As for his goals scored, Cabaye has shown against Blackburn that he can hit a free kick so nobody can say that we wouldn't have had goals without Taylor taking them. Taylor is almost a goal every 15 premier league games for us, his goals are welcome but let’s not make them out to be more regular than they are. As for Pardew, his man management seems to be his strong point and he's getting the best out of most of our players. Let's see how he does over the coming months when he hasn't got his best players to pick from. Being a tad pedantic the winning goal against Everton was hit from open play. But we'll never know if another left back would have given us a better points tally at this stage and my view is not. Anyway I suppose the main point is that I can't blame AP for Raylor playing at left back, in fact I would credit him for getting the best out of a player who is doing a job well out of position. I think AP would much rather have had a specialist left back in there, but he didn't get one.

He's played well once and that was against Stoke, other than that he's relied on having Jonas covering him out wide and Coloccini coming over to help him out. He regularly gets taken out when the winger takes him on, it has become more obvious recently because he's been sussed and it will happen more often now that it's been worked out and seen by everybody on TV. As for the left back we failed to sign, we knew we were losing a left back and went out and signed a defender who can play at left back and we gave him the number 3 shirt. I can only guess that we strengthened a position we knew we was going to be massively weakened rather than leaving that side and upgrading a player who would have been the best full back at the club at that time. Whether he played well or not and however it happened he has played left back in a side that did well defensively and he scored a couple of goals others playing in that position might not have scored. Personally, I don't think he has cost us points, I'm not trying to argue that we weren't badly exposed down our left but we didn't lose to Man City and Chelsea because of Raylor, and we have nicked 2 Premiership wins because he can hit a ball. Being done by sides like Man City and Chelsea is one thing but if Norwich do a proper job on us and take points because of Raylor on our left then I'll concede we have been rumbled. Sorry not sure I get the point in your second para but if it is that Enrique left and we didn't bring in a better specialist left back, then yes I agree.

Up until fairly recently Raylor hadn't been a problem, we had a bloke filling in at left back who had actually instigated some game changing moments (going our way). I don't think the failure to sign a left back (and there seems to be "divided opinion" on whether Santon is a left or right back) is down to AP, its DL who closes the deals or not - and he didn't.

That is a heart breaking picture. Like all of us I have no idea what happened with Gary Speed but Louise is an incredible person for wanting to be there for these tributes. It rips me apart emotionally and I never met the man so quite what it is like for her.....

I could never ever see MON managing at our club. Everything about his style is contrary to what we are doing at present. Bruce was no different, look at the signings Bruce made (Wes Brown etc) we just aren't going to go into that sort of crap again. Allardyce killed that off. You got decently paid off - but thanks Sam.

Please Or you could just stop commenting in it (I'm not saying your opinions are wrong or anything like, but it would be a better solution to stop the debate than lock the thread) Ok will do, I don't think I can take much more of it anyway.

Please

What and who is defending Barton of anything based on him being a better person? This place is like a mental institution at times. I'm guessing this is your interpretation of what I wrote? You said: So that's was, in part, what I was referring to - yes. So what am I excusing Barton for or defending him on based on him being a better person like? He also has a stupid hair cut, might as well base my defence around that. It would make more sense if you did. It would make as much sense as your claim that he's being defended based on becoming a better person. Are you going to tell me what I'm defending him on based on him being a better person? Or point anyone else that is? I'm glad you can bold irony for the cheerleader and his mate anyway. I would have thought it was fairly obvious from what you said that you were using your belief that he is trying to make himself a better person as a defence. And I don't buy the argument. Haven't got a clue what you are on about in the last two sentences of your post above though. So nobody is defending anybody on anything based on him becoming a better person, glad we've managed to clear up another myth, dear god, surely the first thing you make sure you can do before engaging in debate is read and write to a decent standard. And so the theme of irony makes a massive return to the thread. Well yes, I suppose it's the last thing people do and instead they just ignore the issue when it becomes a problem. Feel free to tell me what is being defended and by whom, for being a better person if you ever find an example and I'll see if I agree with you. I already have and can't be arsed to do so again. The irony of you, who can't even understand your own posts, handing out a lecture on being able to read and write to a decent standard is clearly lost on you.

What and who is defending Barton of anything based on him being a better person? This place is like a mental institution at times. I'm guessing this is your interpretation of what I wrote? You said: So that's was, in part, what I was referring to - yes. So what am I excusing Barton for or defending him on based on him being a better person like? He also has a stupid hair cut, might as well base my defence around that. It would make more sense if you did. It would make as much sense as your claim that he's being defended based on becoming a better person. Are you going to tell me what I'm defending him on based on him being a better person? Or point anyone else that is? I'm glad you can bold irony for the cheerleader and his mate anyway. I would have thought it was fairly obvious from what you said that you were using your belief that he is trying to make himself a better person as a defence. And I don't buy the argument. Haven't got a clue what you are on about in the last two sentences of your post above though. So nobody is defending anybody on anything based on him becoming a better person, glad we've managed to clear up another myth, dear god, surely the first thing you make sure you can do before engaging in debate is read and write to a decent standard. And so the theme of irony makes a massive return to the thread.

What and who is defending Barton of anything based on him being a better person? This place is like a mental institution at times. I'm guessing this is your interpretation of what I wrote? You said: So that's was, in part, what I was referring to - yes. So what am I excusing Barton for or defending him on based on him being a better person like? He also has a stupid hair cut, might as well base my defence around that. It would make more sense if you did. It would make as much sense as your claim that he's being defended based on becoming a better person. Are you going to tell me what I'm defending him on based on him being a better person? Or point anyone else that is? I'm glad you can bold irony for the cheerleader and his mate anyway. I would have thought it was fairly obvious from what you said that you were using your belief that he is trying to make himself a better person as a defence. And I don't buy the argument. Haven't got a clue what you are on about in the last two sentences of your post above though.

What and who is defending Barton of anything based on him being a better person? This place is like a mental institution at times. I'm guessing this is your interpretation of what I wrote? You said: So that's was, in part, what I was referring to - yes. So what am I excusing Barton for or defending him on based on him being a better person like? He also has a stupid hair cut, might as well base my defence around that. It would make more sense if you did.