fredbob

It's not so strange, Shepherd had used up any goodwill a long time ago. If Ashley and Mort make blunder after blunder with their decision-making they'll soon find support dwindling just like the old board. In the meantime you can either buy in and see if they deliver, or you can decide they don't know what they are doing and hark back to the Shepherd glory years. the hilarious thing about this, is you seem to have convinced yourself that the new board have done better already I'm not convinced of anything, but will give the benefit of the doubt until I know better. If you can tell me for definite that we are doomed to failure next season under the new regime and why I'll listen, otherwise your conjecture's no better than mine really. Except, mine isn't "opinion". The highest 3 consecutive league positions in 50 years is a FACT AND NOT OPINION As is also the FACT that only 4 clubs have qualified for europe more than us in the last decade, and also in the last 15 years. Your "opinion" may tell you different if you like but I prefer to go by facts. Cheers Have we been here before? and your "opinion" is that these facts aren't facts, correct ? mackems.gif "Facts" which dont tell the full story, or are a true reflection of the clubs actual position. What a load of bollocks. You can state stats and "facts" till the moon turns to cheese but if you cant use them with the correct perspective then they are in essence, meaningless, its exactly what you are doing, and its actually laughable that you belittle other peoples opinions when they show the same level of wieght that your crappy facts do. "7 European qualifications in 10 years" holds about as much weight as "we were in decline"

id disagreewith that to be honest, its a league with the biggest clubs and a faster pace, spznish football maybe techincallybetter but there are far too many inconsistent teams in there bar the top 2 or 3. id much rather watch the best that the PL offers over th best la liga does.

When we didnt qualify for Euro 2008, alot of peole were looking at the reasons that the team failed and went on about the grass root schemes and the youth, i remember one bloke saying that english youth were lazy and not disciplined. He said there was a definite attitude difference between the foreign lads and the english lads. He said the foreingers were always more determined to suceed and improve there selves where as the english lads were happy to do there training and leave. 16m for Bent sums up things to be honest, i stil cant get over that. i dont believe in this "bad foreigners being a problem" surely ppl arent suggesting that the quality is there but they'd rather go for the cheaper crapper version? I for one would hate to see the quality of the EPL suffer because of the introduction of a home grown player quota.

Arsenal or Spurs i reckon, Zogs saying he misses his family in London, so thats where he'd go. If he went to Arsenal he wouldnt play for a while becuase he's not the finished article yet (mind you neither is Walcott), and that would piss him off immensely. I can see him at spurs though. which is a horrible thought, just watching a few videos of him and he just looks like a quality player. If anything i thnk in this team his contribution is underated. There havent been too many productive players this season. He's such a dangerous player, i dont know of a player who has had him in his pocket, ive seen him have quite games where he doesnt get into the game but havent seen a RB dominate him at all. As for Downing, ridiculously overrated, his delivery is his best asset and even then its not amazing, he cant beat a man either and hasnt got the aility to cut inside so he's pretty predictable as a winger. No thanks.

For me personally, i'm not sure if i'd of been happy if Keegan was appointed under Shepard. Im a lot more happy that he was appointed under Ashley with his millions but id be more happy to have any apppointment under ashley because of his millions. However i think the appointment was a little short sighted and i think there were better appointments out there, again though, arguably, this was the only appointment bar mourihno who could of appeased the fans and bought some time for the club. Which may of been a factor in the clubs decision so...

Its kind of strange, i look at what Mort and Ashley have done and only a couple of things that they have done wrong in my book is the timing of the sacking, which arguably they had no other choice, the other thing they have done wrong, in my opinion anyway, is the appointment of Keegan, dont get me wrong i love having him back, buti dont thing its the best appointment ashley could of made. Id like to say i woldnt of given Shepard any stick if he;d of done the same, but who's to say....

Ya...was against Compostela (Not the best name for a football team...kind of like Nutella but made of....). Long time ago...I think they're non-league now. Great goal tho. YouTube classic. The defenders pulling his shirt might as well have been water skiiing. Football from another planet. There was a goal which always stick in mind for me, not sure if its the game your on a bout but i remember him break picking the ball up from 40 yards out then forcing himself through a sandich of defenders with just pure power and pace, then slap into the back of the net.

but divers often get caught,and i'm not just having a go at the cynical hack. whati mean is cheating....is the dive as bad as the trip on a midfield break ?,they arent tret as such by refs or fans Do divers get caught as much as hackers though? Probably not, there are alot a variable factors as well, as a cynical foul will often occur during a counter attack either in the middle of the field or a bit further up, occasionally you get the professional foul which is dealt with accordingly. You often dont get to see an end product from a set piece resulting from a cynical hack, whereas diving is more concentrated around the opposition box, which is a lot more of a dangerous position, you often see a lot of penalties resulting from dives which cost games, which is inexcusable. There is a deceptive element in diving, but none is the hack.

Whats being debated now? I dont understand where you're coming from NE5, money was available, and Keegan has openely said it was his decision not to bring anyone in? Are you suggesting that Mort andAshley told keegan to tell the media that there was money available when there wasnt? I dont understand your logic with Bentley, that is blackburns very best player, are you saying we should pay the premium on a player like Bentley and the fact that we havent makes us unambitious? Thats a bizarre opinion in my book.

Alot of what occured can be contrived either way, it was either an irrational decision on one hand, with no back up plan, or was something that needed to happen under the circumstances. For me i think the timing of the sacking was about as close to the best they could of done. We have to remember that the club had an extremely busy fixture list which i imagine was being met with intense training my Allardyce. In my opiinion, the board would of been in no position to sack Allardyce with such pressure of imporatant fixture. Games were coming up days after day and to get another manager to assess the squad, assess the target and assess the strategic review of the club and get the team prepared for all these big fixturewould of been impossible. This is why Allardyce stayed to when the fixtures started to die down, maybe he should of gone a week earlier in the transfer period, but to me there was no doubt that he had to go then and not in the summer, what would of been the point of backinga manager you know you dont want? As it stands, Keegan did have a bit of time to look for targets and he made an attempt (that we know of) to get one of only a handful of players that could of improved our squad. To me that shows that there board do have good intent and ambition, within the fist 2 weeks of a new mans appointment they were willing to spend a decent amount very soon.

My issue with the team at the mo is how to fit Zog, Enrique and Duff in the squad. There a lot of issues with the squad at the mo. - Duff has been pretty good since he's been back, doesnt really deserve being dropped -Enrique offers alot defensively which Zog doesnt at LB -Zog offers a hell of a lot more attacking wise at LB, in fact as an attacking option its probably his best position because he gets a lot more space as a LB than he does as a LM. -Zog cant play in CM, he doesnt get the space he needs to be effective, his passing isnt good enough and he loses the ball a little too much and with the DM back up we have at the moment, thats the last thing we need. -Duff and Zog as a partnership down the left have been excellent, in my opinion, Enrique + Zog/Duff dont have the same strengths. The issue really is that we have 3 good players whose best qualities clash with the each other and the interests of the team. The olnly way i can think of accomdating all the players is having Duff and Zog on either wing, swapping throughout the match, with Enrique at LB and Emre in the centre with Faye. Faye is both our best DM and CB, i think though that he is more needed in the DM because its important that we are able to win back possession well and distrubute play well, he'd provide a decent amount of protection for Emre who i think is needed in the centre because he doesnt give the ball away much also his distubution can be excellent. For me, the team should be Harper Beye Taylor Cacapa Enrique Faye Duff/Zog Emre Zog/Duff Martins Owen

People writing Owen off seriously need to have a word with themselves. Can anyone actually name me a striker similiar to Owen who would of thrived is the exact same situations? Maybe Eto'o? Do people genuinely think that he would be effective in the team that Allardyce put out, having come back from such serious injury? After all, in a 3 year period we can only really judge Owen on this seasons offering? In 3 years, Owen has only had a handful of games and has had to come back from career threatening injuries. He may of lost a yard of pace but he hasnt lost a single brain cell, i think it was Hoddle who said Owen isnt a natural finisher but an instictual finisher and that is a gift not many strikers have. So far he has played 4 games for Keegan ( inc.Stoke) where the team has played carpet football and tried to put pressure on teams, and has stuck 2 away. I think its unfair to judge Owen in a team manged by Allardyce because Owen was never going to be succesful under Allardyces tactics. I have absolutely no doubt that if Keegan gets the team playing with confidence and fluidity then Owen will be prolific again and i hope people who have written him off on the back of a handful of games under Allardyce eat there words with a side ordering of humble pie.

Great post, i cant help but think that it is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. There have been some ridiculous articles written over the course of the past 2 or 3 weeks which have been desigined to do nothing but antagonzie a region and its people. It has created an us versus them mentality which needs to be address in the best possible way which is to ignore it. Unfortunately i think the threads created do nothing but relay those antagonistic views and also induce this victim mentality which is so vitriol to the club.

Depends where you see our main weakness, if you think its the midfield then Faye should play in the midfield, if you think it is the defecne then Faye should play in the centre of defense. Simple as that really. Persoanlly i think the weakiness lie in midfiled so i wouldnt think twice about putting faye in midfield.

Disappointd with the result, thought there were a few positives to take out the game, primarily the effect of keegans approach starting to take effect, thought there was a some excellent periods of play by both teams, Boro posed no more attcking threat than we did but looked better overall because of there defensive stregth which i think we lack massively, extremely unorganized and Butt offered very little protection, O'neil was found in a lot of space because of Zog absences at times. I personally thik our weakness lie with the defensive organisation, Cacapa was good today, but he's being applied in the wrong way, he needs to play the ferdinand role and leave Taylor to play the Terry role. Was left exposed too often and fortunately for us his ability got us out some sticky situation. Butt was invisibe inthe second half, exceptionally poor, though Emre wasgood, just what we needed to be honest, kept the ball really well, cant think of too many times he gave the ball away, looked to get forward at all times and linked up play quite well. Barton wasnt great, wasnt very effectivein the wide role. Though Duff was excellent, has been very good since being back from injury, very direct, always looking to attack, links up realy really well with Zog, those 2 would be my first choice on the left flank if Zog was so defensively poor, thought Zog could cut it in the Cm but starting to think otherwise, Zog ofrers more going forward than any other left back in the premiership, Evra and Clichy are miles ahead defensivel but attacking wise Zog is superb because of the space he finds himself in. Owen was very good today, made some good runs. We didnt create many chances today again but he was usually very close to being on the end of any half chances we created. Did well for his goal. Smith just doesnt cut the mustard as a first team striker unfortunately, i think he gets picked on by refs though a bit, which is very annoying. Viduka looked like the sort of player we need, from what little i saw of him. Overall, there are big improvements to be had as an attacking unit. Looked a bit unbalanced as an attacking unit, and we dont keep pressure sustained in the opposition half which can only be done with players like Emre and Duff who retain the ball exceptaionlly and look to find space. Our major problem is our defensive organisation, Butt was very poor, Zog went missing at times, Carr was ok, but not solid enough and Taylor and Cacapa just dont look good together, i personally think Taylor is the weaker defender out the 2. Cant wait for Faye to get back. If i was Keegan, i would drop Butt, and play Barton exclusively as a DM, Beye for Carr, my big dilemma would be who to drop out of Duff, Zog and Enrique would also drop Smith, and play Viduka.

Nobby would be priceless right now, definitely miss him, but Parker, i can live without, although i was disappointed he left i felt he could of been a good squad player, he;s very similar to Barton, only Barton is probably better, i hope Barton gets converted to a DM, he's tenacious enough to do the role well.

Well? what ? He's good at saying the right thing, Kev like. Do you think he's going to say outright he didn't want Dennis Wise ? You know full well I'm on about him saying the funds were there if he wanted them. That we didn't buy anyone because he chose not to, rather than the board not backing him. Hello? NE5??

I think people are wrong about not needing a DM. We had the Parker/Emre oartnership which was only effective under souness when he tried to make Parker a DM. Under Roeder, Emre was most effective with Butt, becasue under Roeder he gave Parker a Gerrard type role. Barton is very similar to Parker. How should we use him?

Im 100% certain that they said the same about Anderson as well.

I thought that was Anderson?

not suggesting anything Dave. I find the hypocrisy of standards - which boils down completely to personalities - quite amazing. Simple fact is that I've seen this before. Unambitious board who aren't prepared to compete with the winning clubs but attempt to pacify fans with talk of "youth systems", "the future plans"....blah blah, other such bollocks. Simple fact also is that you need players the top teams want if you want to challenge them, never mind beat them. Particularly incredible is the fact that Keegan showed everybody this the first time round. I don't think Mort has the slightest clue about football and how it works. They / he [interesting one this, will it be Ashleys fault as major shareholder or Morts as chairman if Keegan fucks off or fails] will have to catch on quickly or Keegan will put them under pressure or bugger off. Quite right too if he does under those circumstances. I simply don't buy the people who are now supporting this deluded "kids policy" instead of spending money, when all we heard every other week under the old board was "splash the cash you greedy fat b******" Amazing. The sooner we are back in europe the better. And if Ashley and Mort don't realise this, for me they can both bugger off. Right. I think it's now plainly obvious that your agenda is merely to attack the new board regardless. When you say things like "people are supporting the kids policy INSTEAD of buying big players" etc.... That's a load of bollocks LM and you know it. People are saying that it will do us no harm to try and uncover a few gems in the process, until we are able to attract the Berbatovs of this world!! No one is saying the board to should aim to produce an entire first team from youth talent!!! But if one or two turn out to be useful, then why not? Amazing Shame, but I think for a long time the agenda of numerous people was simply to attack the old board whatever they did regardless. And still is, in fact. Buying up the best kids and ignoring the present is nothing other than taking a punt at gaining success on the cheap, and doesn't bode well I'm afraid. I've tried to tell you it doesn't work, because it hasn't in the past at pretty much any other club plus common sense tells you it isn't so simple as this - so if you think differently, then of course thats your opinion. I look forward to seeing your u-turn. Do you mean when we tried it with Bassedas, Cort, Bramble etc...? You could look at Craig Bellamy and Laurent Robert if you like, but it wouldn't suit your "opinion" would it. As you are unable to distinguish the difference between the board backing their managers, and where it becomes the managers responsibility to make good judgements rather than poor ones [bobby Robson too] there is really no point in attempting to explain this to you. You've got me all wrong, and you are still seemingly reluctant to read my posts properly, and answer to "facts" you pointed out. Bellamy and Robert are EXACTLY the type of signings we should be making. As we did with Ferdinand, Ginola and Batty. Quality players, in their prime, that would have walked into the top clubs at the time. I am in no way disputing that whatsoever. What I'm saying is that for some reason, we haven't gone out and bought these players in the summer (for somewhat obvious reasons being the takeover and big sam's uncertainty over his own future and the assessment the new owners felt they needed to make). We couldn't sign this type of player in January due to the arrival of a new manager, and little time left in the window. Now...would it have been better not to have signed anyone at all? I'm in no way arguing that we shouldn't go after the top players. But what I'm saying is that if for whatever reason we didn't or couldn't, then there is no harm in bringing in some youth, and taking a chance that one or two might turn out better than average. They could either be integrated into the first team, or sold at a profit. WHAT'S THE HARM IN THAT? (question in caps so you don't miss it). As for your argument, which you continue to avoid answering to.....i listed the players you said were youth players we bought the last time we went down the "kids policy" route. I responded by saying that those were NOT youth team signings, and that some were even above 20 at the time and established internationals/first team players. Please read the post carefully so you don't misinterpret what I'm saying, and give a fair response, as I'm trying to have a debate. If you choose not to, then don't waste my time or yours. I'm hoping....but I'm not holding my breath. EDIT: Oh and by the way, you conveniently ignore the FACT that we made a bid for Jonathan Woodgate this window. A big player in his prime. I've answered your post. I would also point out that we didn't buy Woodgate, unlike last time, also in the January window. Perhaps, as has been pointed out, Woodgate saw Spurs as a more progressive club than us ? How does that grab you, because they certainly weren't when we were run by the halls and Shepherd. And strangely too, they were more progressive than we were before the halls and Shepherd. Work it out for yourself, but don't let personalities or the facts I've just told you, affect your "opinion" We didn't get Woodgate because the fact is that we have gone backwards since he was here the first time. We started to go backwards because Shepherd made some abysmal decisions in appointing Souness and Roeder (still believe Big Sam was a good decision). No one disputes the fact that the Halls/Shepherd/Keegan were the ones to thank for putting Newcastle back on the map, and turning us into perennial big hitters. But when things start to sour, and people with responsibility begin to make mistakes, then they need to go. Just as one needs to sell a player once he's past it regardless of how good they were in the past. The new regime has been in for 5 minutes, and you're accusing them of lack of ambition. I think that is bullshit, and smacks of bitterness. Shepherd had been there for years, and people got on his back when they had seen enough. Believe you me, if the new board are here for a while, and begin to make mistakes year after year, and show signs of ineptitude year after year, I'll want them out too. So far they haven't had anywhere near enough time to do what they want to do, but imo they have signaled their intentions loud and clear. Obviously, action speaks louder than words, and we can only hope, wait and see. As for you answering my question regarding the players you claim were youth signings....I still can't find the answer. How on earth were Bramble, Cort, Bassedas (), O'Brien, LuaLua comparable as youth signings to Tozer, Kadar, Baheng, Zamblera and Sodeberg??? Well done, you join the ranks of those who rather absurdly think that for some reason the major shareholdes ie the Halls, stood back and allowed someone with less shares to make the major decisions all on his own. ..........blah blah blah If Mort et al were to spend big this summer would you eat your words, would that put you 100% behind them? If not why? I just dont understad who else we could of signed? If there were loads of people available and suitable then why were Portsmouth, Villa et al not after them after them? I've no words to eat. If they do, better late than never, assuming Keegan hasn't pissed off of course. Why the u-turn anyway ? You were absolutely adamant the club shouldn't be spending money a short while ago ? Fair enough, no words to eat... You read what you want to read, ive always said its a bad idea spending lots of money in Jan, by the looks of it most the other clubs feel the same way as well. Why? No ambition? Ive always said that if a player is available and essential we should go for him, i was against Allardyce getting lots of money because he hadnt done anything with his own signings which showed to me that new sigings wouldnt make any difference if the coaching and set up wasnt working. Ive also said openly at thr risk of sounding as though i was contradicitng myself that Keegan should get money, i think all new managers should get money when they first join and in the summer. Two key times in my eyes. Come next january if keegan hasnt madea success of any signings in the summer and the team i will say the same thing and that will be Keegan shouldnt get much money. In my eyes i have been completely consistent with my views, i dont understand how you can criticize the club when the likes of Villa, Port, Man C, Blackburn, Man U, Arse and many more, they have a hell of a lot more at stake than we do, (i dont think we wil get relegated). Does that show no ambition from these clubs. I dont understand what your argument is, turnover of x amount of players this january i can only think of 3 players in the entire window who would of improved us. 1 we were in for, he chose not to go for us? Money? i doubt it, Tott have a wage cap, the other 2 signed for massively superior clubs to ours.

not suggesting anything Dave. I find the hypocrisy of standards - which boils down completely to personalities - quite amazing. Simple fact is that I've seen this before. Unambitious board who aren't prepared to compete with the winning clubs but attempt to pacify fans with talk of "youth systems", "the future plans"....blah blah, other such bollocks. Simple fact also is that you need players the top teams want if you want to challenge them, never mind beat them. Particularly incredible is the fact that Keegan showed everybody this the first time round. I don't think Mort has the slightest clue about football and how it works. They / he [interesting one this, will it be Ashleys fault as major shareholder or Morts as chairman if Keegan fucks off or fails] will have to catch on quickly or Keegan will put them under pressure or bugger off. Quite right too if he does under those circumstances. I simply don't buy the people who are now supporting this deluded "kids policy" instead of spending money, when all we heard every other week under the old board was "splash the cash you greedy fat b******" Amazing. The sooner we are back in europe the better. And if Ashley and Mort don't realise this, for me they can both bugger off. Right. I think it's now plainly obvious that your agenda is merely to attack the new board regardless. When you say things like "people are supporting the kids policy INSTEAD of buying big players" etc.... That's a load of bollocks LM and you know it. People are saying that it will do us no harm to try and uncover a few gems in the process, until we are able to attract the Berbatovs of this world!! No one is saying the board to should aim to produce an entire first team from youth talent!!! But if one or two turn out to be useful, then why not? Amazing Shame, but I think for a long time the agenda of numerous people was simply to attack the old board whatever they did regardless. And still is, in fact. Buying up the best kids and ignoring the present is nothing other than taking a punt at gaining success on the cheap, and doesn't bode well I'm afraid. I've tried to tell you it doesn't work, because it hasn't in the past at pretty much any other club plus common sense tells you it isn't so simple as this - so if you think differently, then of course thats your opinion. I look forward to seeing your u-turn. Do you mean when we tried it with Bassedas, Cort, Bramble etc...? You could look at Craig Bellamy and Laurent Robert if you like, but it wouldn't suit your "opinion" would it. As you are unable to distinguish the difference between the board backing their managers, and where it becomes the managers responsibility to make good judgements rather than poor ones [bobby Robson too] there is really no point in attempting to explain this to you. You've got me all wrong, and you are still seemingly reluctant to read my posts properly, and answer to "facts" you pointed out. Bellamy and Robert are EXACTLY the type of signings we should be making. As we did with Ferdinand, Ginola and Batty. Quality players, in their prime, that would have walked into the top clubs at the time. I am in no way disputing that whatsoever. What I'm saying is that for some reason, we haven't gone out and bought these players in the summer (for somewhat obvious reasons being the takeover and big sam's uncertainty over his own future and the assessment the new owners felt they needed to make). We couldn't sign this type of player in January due to the arrival of a new manager, and little time left in the window. Now...would it have been better not to have signed anyone at all? I'm in no way arguing that we shouldn't go after the top players. But what I'm saying is that if for whatever reason we didn't or couldn't, then there is no harm in bringing in some youth, and taking a chance that one or two might turn out better than average. They could either be integrated into the first team, or sold at a profit. WHAT'S THE HARM IN THAT? (question in caps so you don't miss it). As for your argument, which you continue to avoid answering to.....i listed the players you said were youth players we bought the last time we went down the "kids policy" route. I responded by saying that those were NOT youth team signings, and that some were even above 20 at the time and established internationals/first team players. Please read the post carefully so you don't misinterpret what I'm saying, and give a fair response, as I'm trying to have a debate. If you choose not to, then don't waste my time or yours. I'm hoping....but I'm not holding my breath. EDIT: Oh and by the way, you conveniently ignore the FACT that we made a bid for Jonathan Woodgate this window. A big player in his prime. I've answered your post. I would also point out that we didn't buy Woodgate, unlike last time, also in the January window. Perhaps, as has been pointed out, Woodgate saw Spurs as a more progressive club than us ? How does that grab you, because they certainly weren't when we were run by the halls and Shepherd. And strangely too, they were more progressive than we were before the halls and Shepherd. Work it out for yourself, but don't let personalities or the facts I've just told you, affect your "opinion" We didn't get Woodgate because the fact is that we have gone backwards since he was here the first time. We started to go backwards because Shepherd made some abysmal decisions in appointing Souness and Roeder (still believe Big Sam was a good decision). No one disputes the fact that the Halls/Shepherd/Keegan were the ones to thank for putting Newcastle back on the map, and turning us into perennial big hitters. But when things start to sour, and people with responsibility begin to make mistakes, then they need to go. Just as one needs to sell a player once he's past it regardless of how good they were in the past. The new regime has been in for 5 minutes, and you're accusing them of lack of ambition. I think that is bullshit, and smacks of bitterness. Shepherd had been there for years, and people got on his back when they had seen enough. Believe you me, if the new board are here for a while, and begin to make mistakes year after year, and show signs of ineptitude year after year, I'll want them out too. So far they haven't had anywhere near enough time to do what they want to do, but imo they have signaled their intentions loud and clear. Obviously, action speaks louder than words, and we can only hope, wait and see. As for you answering my question regarding the players you claim were youth signings....I still can't find the answer. How on earth were Bramble, Cort, Bassedas (), O'Brien, LuaLua comparable as youth signings to Tozer, Kadar, Baheng, Zamblera and Sodeberg??? Well done, you join the ranks of those who rather absurdly think that for some reason the major shareholdes ie the Halls, stood back and allowed someone with less shares to make the major decisions all on his own. ..........blah blah blah If Mort et al were to spend big this summer would you eat your words, would that put you 100% behind them? If not why? I just dont understad who else we could of signed? If there were loads of people available and suitable then why were Portsmouth, Villa et al not after them after them?

Exactly, if anything it shows that the quality of player avaialable just wasnt good enough.

taylor is stronger and makes better defensive pozitional decisions than rozenhal Wheater didnt have 50,000 people hyping him up as the next john terry, then ripping him apart when a couple of years later he isnt fifa player of the year. Taylor would be twice the player he is now if he had moved on to the clubs sniffing round him. Granted s*** players around him and poor coaching hasnt helped his progress, but thats not to say he still cant be a great defender. Some realism and patience inserted into the geordie dictionary could do wonders for any player pulling on a black and white shirt. Which clubs are these like? No one decent's interested in him. He isn't s***, but he isn't that good either. Haventspurs and liverpoolbeen sniffing around, or is that speclation "created" to get anew contract?

You mean behind the front 2? I dont think he'd be mobile enough or hard working enough to do that role. just occasionally dropping off to win flick ons and trying something creative, like a through ball or two. like you say, maybe a year or 2 late for that idea though. See i dont know how good he'd be with him facing the goal from deep, at boro he was at his most dangerous with his back to the goal in the box. If we're playing "carpet football" then i personally dont think he'd flourish with the amount of possession he'd need to be effective...then again stranger things have happened.