fredbob

the thing is with picking Owen is as last season proved we dint create enough for Owen to be best utilised, i think its more important to have a players who gonna be able to implement a way of playing which would best utilise Owen, i think Owen needs too much support to be considered vital, if anythin he holds back the sides ability to change the way they play there football and tactics. Somone like Viduka is more an imporatnt striker than Owen in my opinion.

Simple question, just interesting to see who you think is individually the most important player on the grass and why? For me, i think Roz has been a breath of fresh air for us, really good to see a defender who is able to link the defence with the midfield, i love the way he gets forward as well, reminds me of Albert! I cant help but think that Emre may be instrumental to us but only time will tell!

I think he's absolutely average tbh. He struggles to control the ball, can't pass it accurately more than 10 yards & can't head it for s***. He can't tackle, fails to bring others into the game and can't hold it up when it's pinged up to him. He is, however, fast as f*** when latching onto a through ball and can shoot very powerfully every now and again. I don't like you. Which bits do you disagree with? Well i disagree with the fact that you've pointed out these flaws, which you're not too wrong about (although i feel his flaws are majorly highlighted too much so) and with all these apparently obviouls fundamental flaws he's still managed to stick the ball in the back of the net 20 odd times (in his first season in a differnt league), that speaks mountains to me, there are many strikers out there who dont have any obvious weaknesses yet couldnt hit an elephants arse with a frying pan, why is he lambasted so much?? You've agreed with me yet still had a little dig! He isn't as good as you think he is. Sorry but it's the truth. He'll score goals but it doesn't make him a good footballer. He struggles badly with the rudiments of the sport and he flatters to deceive more often than not. He's just not that good tbh. I wish he was. But he's not. I agree upto a point, although, he's good in the air, and his link up play improved loads, not great but better, the rudimentary of football is having a good touch and yes his first touch is very very inconsistent sometimes its brilliant sometimes its poor. I cant help but think that sayin he'll score goals but that doesnt make him a good footballer is a load of crap to be quite honest, if you're a striker and your scoring goals you're doing your job, making you a good footballer...surely? it doesnt matter if 90% of the time your second touch is a tackle if at the end of the day you've managed to put 20 goals away. Would you rather we had Bellamy over Martins? To me, accoriding to your defininton Bellamy is a better footballer, but could you count on bellamy to sticck 17 goals away and save us from relegation?? I dont think so. I think Martins contribution to last season was more than we would ever of got from bellamy. How can anyone say someone who scores goals is a poor footballer??? Heskey (arguably) - better footballer...gonna give you 10 goals a season Bellamy - better footballer...not even goona get into double figures Johnson... the list could go on according to your definintion, these are all players who have played in the english league all there lives and still havet made an impact anyway near what martins has, yet you all still manage to think that Martins is a poor footballer....mind boggling. It really is. Gets way too much schtick.

I think he's absolutely average tbh. He struggles to control the ball, can't pass it accurately more than 10 yards & can't head it for s***. He can't tackle, fails to bring others into the game and can't hold it up when it's pinged up to him. He is, however, fast as f*** when latching onto a through ball and can shoot very powerfully every now and again. I don't like you. Which bits do you disagree with? Well i disagree with the fact that you've pointed out these flaws, which you're not too wrong about (although i feel his flaws are majorly highlighted too much so) and with all these apparently obviouls fundamental flaws he's still managed to stick the ball in the back of the net 20 odd times (in his first season in a differnt league), that speaks mountains to me, there are many strikers out there who dont have any obvious weaknesses yet couldnt hit an elephants arse with a frying pan, why is he lambasted so much??

Yeah - same level of player. If Nugent has anywhere near the same impact Martins did last season I will bring my left testicle to you on a silver plate. Fuck it, you can have my right one as well, make it a pair for ya if Nugent has the same impact Martins did.

Yeah - same level of player. errr...who's gonna be the first to bite?? The fact that a player can be hailed as a multi-million pound superstar when he can't even control a football is a criminal enditment of the state of English football. Footballers who are about 17 league levels above what the average fan has ever played should be able to control a ball with either foot, pass to a teammate 5 yards away and hit the target from anywhere in the box with the vast majority of their attempts. Martins fails to do these things alarmingly often. This doesn't apply just to Martins - it certainly applies to Shola and in recent years to a few other so called leading lights we've employed but I'm pig sick of adulation being poured on nothing more than half-decent footballers. If you want to know what a good striker should be like its pretty simple - we have one - Owen. Same level as Nugent....huh??? Ok, the thing is, is that in the end, he;s stuck the ball away more often than most strikers in the prem, thats what a strikers for correct? I thik people are being sooo short sighted when they look at some of the poor touches he makes, or how he's been absent in some games, for some reason they're outlined more than others, i dont understand how a player who is able to score 17 goals in a team which couldnt spell creativity let alone implent any can be even mentioned in the same breath as Shola "fizzy pop league" Ameobi, or Nugent. Ridiculous statement.

Yeah - same level of player. errr...who's gonna be the first to bite??

Like who? Who is this imaginaery replacement we see who has the same pedigree as martins at such a young age? Played at International level, played at Champion Leagues level, played in UEFA, played in one of the most defensive leagues in Europe coming out with a decent goalscoring record. Someone who can replicate the 20 odd goals Martins has already scored for this club, all in there first season at a new league? Oh yeah, all for 10m....i'd love to know, anyone fancy obliging? Where did I state that his replacement needs to have the same age or experience as him? Two that I can think of are Anelka and Gudjohnsen, both are considerably better footballers, have played for Big Sam before and are established in the Premiership, would probably leave us a tidy profit from any Martins sale, and are players wed probably have a very good chance of landing given their present situations. Their age isnt ideal for the price tag theyd be in, but thats peanuts compared to the benefits of finishing higher up the table, particularly in the long term. Its impossible for any of us to know how different things might be with one player instead of the other - look at the impact Bellamy for example had with us when he was here, compared to the same team with for example Ameobi in it. I think the general rule that holds in most cases is that a player who's basic game is considerably better and more consistent will enable the team to be far more effective as a unit than a player with more talent but a far worse standard of, and consistency in, his general play. It often boils down to a case of possession - when the team plays it forward to Martins and he loses it every other time, then the team will naturally suffer compared to when they play it forward to Gudjohnsen for example and he maintains possession 90% of the time. More team moves, more possession, etc etc. Were not even talking about a key player at all in Martins, he might turn out to be one in the longer term and he may have been last season due to our utter lack of options and squad depth, but right now hes not in our first team if everyone is fit, and he may not even fit in Big Sam's preferred system for all we know. Ive always had the viewpoint that we could replace any of Ferdinand, Shearer, or Owen if we truly wanted to or needed to, and our recent history shows that weve done that without fail - had we missed out on Owen, wed have landed Torres. Had we sold Shearer at the right time, we could have signed Eto'o, who we were linked with heavily at one point - we only missed out on Shepherd's preferred Shaerer replacement, Rooney, because of ManU spending the following summer's transfer budget to finance the move. Therefore, if we can replace even our very best players, why shouldnt we be able to replace Martins, even more so with Ashley's money and Allardyce's knowledge? Ok to be fair, i dint mean to pick on your quote like i did, it just sums up alot of what people are thinking and saying yet arent justifying, people keep sayin he isnt worth 10m when he is and i was pointing out the reasons why, you're right in sayin players like Anelka and Gudjohneson are better but i'd still take martins over Anelka for 10m.

Like who? Who is this imaginaery replacement we see who has the same pedigree as martins at such a young age? Played at International level, played at Champion Leagues level, played in UEFA, played in one of the most defensive leagues in Europe coming out with a decent goalscoring record. Someone who can replicate the 20 odd goals Martins has already scored for this club, all in there first season at a new league? Oh yeah, all for 10m....i'd love to know, anyone fancy obliging?

European pub teams account for 7 or 8 I think. His touch, passing, awareness and "footballing brain" are absolutely terrible. Having said that he has an unpredictable rawness which gets a few which is great but its nothing to build on. Talk of anything anywhere near or above what we paid for him is laughable. lol, he has a lot to build on in my opnion, i dont understand how anyone can honestly belive that martins has lost value, are you people all insinuating that he wasnt worth 10m in the first place? If all these teams we play in the UEFA cup are pub teams, how the fuck can anyone place any value on winning the cup?? it boggles the mind some of the crap people come out with. I mean he made the bigget contribution to the team last year in his first season in a different league at the age of 22, i know that he blows hot and cold alot but i dont place his value on what other people are worth or what individual flaws he has, thats just plain stupid, i place his value in accordance with his value to the team and quite frankly he made the biggest contribution to the team last year. hence my belief that hes worth 13-14m

apart from the goal at spurs last season when has martins actually conjeured up something amazing. more myth making ? I would say his goals vs Bolton (overhead kick) and City were from balls where many strikers simply wouldn't have scored. i'll grant you the bolton one but the citeh goal,for all it showed good technique wasn't "amazing" or very special. he's quick,powerful with a canny eye for goal but i feel there is a myth about his "conjeuring" abilities. He's scored 20 goals(?) for us man, i can think of a at least 3 or 4 goals which relatively speaking were out of nothing, which if ya think about is quite a high ratio, too high a one to say he doesnt have a "conjuring" ability. For me he is a bit special.

Yeh, yakubu sounds like a good shout, always rated him to be fair, though still there are too many for 10m with the same quality as martins. The thing is, is that with yakubu i think you can afely say that you wont get any world class performances, whereas the same definetely cant be said for martins, as inconsistent as he is, i think he's worth every penny and a little bit more then what we paid.

Like who? bear in mind he's 22, has CL experience, and has played for one of the biggest teams in europe(not that that should have a baring on thier value) and 10m doesnt get you too much better in my opinion. I'd rather have potentially 10 years of MArtins for 10m then say 3 years of Klose.

errrr...not sure he's done anywhere near anough to warrant a loss on what we've paid, surely? 17 goals in a new league, first season poor team, you cat base his value on individual flaws or weakness, you base your value on his contribution to the team, and so far, he saved us from releagtion, and has made a decent contribution so far. Simple innit!

People seems to make Bent the benchmark for what everyone else is worth, which is a load of bollocks, Henry is worth 16.5m?? I'd say martin is worth 14-15m max, are there many players nowadays who are actually worth £20+?, in todays market i'd say no.

Bellamy

Bent cost more than Thierry Henry as well.....i think £15m is about adequete.

but if he stays fit till january ? Like i said, catch 22, i also rate Anelka as high, if not higher than Owen, he has at least had the potential and the main ingredient to be one of the best strikers in the world, i dont think we'd be losing out on goalscoring prowess if we signed Anelka, and to be honest his all round play is now much better than Owens, minus the life threatening injuries and fit him in a team manged by a manger he seems to respect and you have a ready made replacement with a tidy £5-6m(?) profit. Far more adaptable than owen in terms of formation and strike partners as well. Theres a whole can of worms to be opened on commitment issues by both players but i wont go so far. going off memory i don't think anelka has been anywhere near as proloific a goalscorer as owen since anelka left arsenal.even the better all round player bit is a bit misleading,he's abetter prospect playing wide than owen but through the middle i reckon owen is a better goalscorer and as good a player(for that position). as i've earlier said,for me, the decision should come down to owens fitness and how allardyce best sees the direction of the team(i'm not too keen on 4-3-3 at the moment even if anelka was brought in).if owen stays fit and plays well and we look like progressing it would be madness to sell,it's a decision that shouldn't be made now. Yeh, to be fair you make a fair point about being there respective goal scoring records. I still think that Anelka is more of a team player, better all round play, in the end, to get the Best out of owen i think you need to fit the team round him, he needs a strong partner, you cant play him as the wide man of 3 (which i neither like or want) you cant play him on his own, as was tried by Houllier at liverpool, his game is ALL about finishing which i suppose is fair enough, contrast that to Anelka and you have a far more rounded player, he can play on his own effectively, he's very strong, he doesnt need a contrasting partner to be effective, link up play is good, sets up a few as well, and he can finish well can also play anywhere in the front 3, for me, Anelka wuld be a more adaptable asset, where as Owen is a one mode goalscorer respectively. Its a difficult decision to make, and we would obvioulsy be selling one of the worlds most natural gifted goalscorers but i dont think it'd effect the team as muc has say losing Anelka would to Bolton (poor analogy as bolton are crap anyway)

but if he stays fit till january ? Like i said, catch 22, i also rate Anelka as high, if not higher than Owen, he has at least had the potential and the main ingredient to be one of the best strikers in the world, i dont think we'd be losing out on goalscoring prowess if we signed Anelka, and to be honest his all round play is now much better than Owens, minus the life threatening injuries and fit him in a team manged by a manger he seems to respect and you have a ready made replacement with a tidy £5-6m(?) profit. Far more adaptable than owen in terms of formation and strike partners as well. Theres a whole can of worms to be opened on commitment issues by both players but i wont go so far.

£15mill??? Catch 22, you either keep a player who's so injury prone, or sell him to one of your main rivals, hate to say it but i think i'd sell, i think Anelka is more than suitable and realistic option. I always though that Anelka is every bit as good as owen, Owen has his baggage with wages, injuries and commiment, but anelka has his massive commitment issues, although he seemed to have mellowed a bit. Seems like a no brainer to me.

Carragher in comparison to the (probably desrved) hype John Terry gets, also Agger, Paul Scharner, Laursen...

This for me absolutely confirm that we are 100% going in the right direction, i've never seen such a stable newcastle united! Its thse type of things which confirm my faith in SA, Big Mike and mr Mort, so far i am very very happy with everyhting thats happening, it jut show how much of a dinosaur we actually were when we're 10 years behind another football club. Goes to show that FINALLY we are being PROACTIVE rather than being historically REACTIVE.

i'd like to see a RW whos gonna get to the byline, to be honest id like to see Giles Barnes, its shame he's not been on show this season yet. SWP or lennon tyoe players, someone who'd b able to utilize both Viduka and Owen as a winger. Basically a right sided version of the Zog. Elano wold be nice as well!!

I dont think they'd work to be honest, i think Barton is an up and down midfileder which would hinder emre a little, just like parker did, put them 2 in a 3 man midfiled then maybe, but i think its important that Emre is given the attacking midfield/playmaker role in its entirety.

Yeh to be fair, i kinda agree that Smith is a decent buy, i know 6 mill is a fair bit of wonga, but would you rather we had two player one who is a 3 mill verstalie midfielder and one 3 mill 4th striker, or Smith who is a pretty good striker and a decent midfilder. I knw i'd prefer Smith.