timnufc22
-
Posts
1,391 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by timnufc22
-
-
1 hour ago, nemtizz said:
Neville and Carra deepthroating PGMOL to the shock of nobody.
I'm not always their biggest fans but I think they're absolutely right here. But, ironically for them, this is a symptom of the over-analysis culture that has been brought on by the likes of skysports/sport social media channels and also by VAR. Absolutely everything is analysed the the nth degree and there is this ridiculous search for football utopia, where grey areas and objectivity doesn't exist. As a consequence the dog is chasing it's tail and the search will never be fruitful.
The way Arteta went on after our game at SJP was everything wrong with the culture of managers and clubs that is seeping in, as Neville refers to. Just like our goal vs them, every decision was subjectively and frankly spot on imo - 'of course you'd say that' - I know, but I genuinely think that. If others disagree - fair enough. But to be pretending there's been some cut and dry robbery is ridiculous. I look at the nottingham forest penalty claims - my instincts for all of them are they're correct decisions! Contact does not mean foul; a player has to be impeded. I can see why others may disagree, again - grey area, objectivity etc. But to be claiming this sort of outrage is pathetic.
But this is VAR itself driving such thought processes, watching replays over and over, thinking things over and over, looking for concrete answers to subjective incidents. I absolutely hate it and it feeds the likes of Arteta and their disingenuous behaviour which will undermine the game if enough follow suit.
-
1 minute ago, Optimistic Nut said:
You can't measure offsides like that with the naked eye either, but here we are with a law where things like that could be deemed as off and linesmen are meant to even look for offsides like it.
Sooner we have the Wenger Law in at all levels, the better imo.
I think clear daylight between players may be a little too much, but there must be some leeway brought in and should have been when VAR was first introduced, as it effectively has changed the offside law which was was never enforced the way it is now. Not one person would have ever said that freeze-frame displayed an advance to the attacker and ruling that goal out completely flies in the face of the concept of offside.
-
SJP has an aura and history. Even if that aura is not justified at times re atmosphere, it's still in the mind of players when the fixture comes up. The same applies to Anfield and Old Trafford, no matter what we think of them, they're iconic. The tradition of shooting towards the Gallowgate end second half which has a literal pitch slope going that way - opposition players talk about feeling like they can't get out when the pressure is on and the atmosphere is up. The gradual upscaling on the ground over the years, an evolution and journey which represents different era's is something to be cherished.
An extended Gallowgate End would be fantastic and would look not only majestic but bloody intimidating. It would bring the capacity up to the likes of Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs especially if we can tweak the East Stand too.
The atmosphere is a separate issue in that seating arrangements need to be modified. Yes it would be 'easier' to do this with a new stadium, but I don't fancy bulldozing our home because we fear moving some fans around. If we had a second standing/singing section, particularly if something was arranged near the away fans, I think this would create a more sustained atmosphere over the season. Perhaps moving the away fans is an option to help trigger this. But whatever the acoustics of the ground are, there a clearly examples when that hasn't stopped great atmospheres in some games. The seating arrangements are the key.
I would have zero trust a new stadium wouldn't be a soulless shell of what he have. I know that's quite cynical perhaps too cynical. But looking at the big changes to the Bearnabu, it looks like a bloody shopping mall now imo - used to look like an epic coliseum and it's not even a new ground. And yes I know Spurs & Real Madrid have the retractable pitch to make it easier to host concerts, but realistically how much would that really going to increase concert opportunities etc?
We can surely upgrade the facilities inside the ground to help with more commercial activities outside of football. We can develop the strawberry land to bring in more revenue with the fanzone and include something more innovative afterwards.
I'd like to know how Spurs have transformed since they moved into their new ground. Has it allowed them to 'bridge the gap'? Have they won the league? Have they won a cup? Have they remained in the top 4 ever since? The answer to all of those is no. Has their atmosphere improved? I did not go to WHL nor have I been to the new stadium, but I would safety bet the answer is a no. And that is a damning indictment after the claims their stadium architecture will supposedly ensure 'great atmosphere' when it was built. Their fans are kicking off! They have not seen any progress made, literally. So all of this additional revenue is not the game changer people think it is imo and the grass is not necessarily greener.
I really hope the plan is to extend the Gallowgate End (a big f off sign "The Gallowgate End" would look epic as you drive/walk towards a new beast of a stand) and to increase slightly the East Stand if possible and build upon the fanzone area for additional commercial stuff along with hosting more events, sure.
-
9 minutes ago, janpawel said:
People have short memories, it wasn't long ago where people questioned Isaks ability/fitness and I even seen a few people say we should sell him to get a more reliable striker, now people are saying he's better than Shearer
Willock was quality last season and has attributes non of our other midfielders have, really hope next season he gets a chance to shine again
I say that with a view to selling one of Wilock or Longstaff and with Anderson & Miley very much in the frame to start games in midfield. I've do really like Wilock and hope he can get over his injuries - if we keep him and sign players we need without FFP hindrance then great. I just feel he is better further forward as a no10 but I know he was great last season carrying the ball from deep. I'm more thinking going the other way.
-
I'd be considering Ross Barkley. While its taken some time, he seems to have matured. His touch and passing is great, he looks to be a lot stronger now and can tackle. I think he could slot into the no6 (we need that alternative for Bruno) or no8 role's easily and would add that extra control in midfield we probably need at times.
Wouldn't be against also buying an experienced defensive midfielder who's happy to be cover and be a tactical option off the bench or for particular games here and there. Then I'd be looking to sell Wilock unfortunately who I've rated but the injuries are too much and I think he can be too hit and miss.
Joelinton__Bruno__Tonali
Anderson__Barkley__Miley/Longstaff
-
I like red numbers on a white patch/square if the kit is quite minimalistic, which it what it was at times in 70s/80s. But with other bright colours on the sleeves through noon, the PL logo and a third colour to the strip, the bright colour of red also thrown into the mix can then feel too much imo.
I think if there's no third colour to the kit then fine, otherwise I think black or white numbers are best, which are nostalgia for me tbf. White numbers on stripes would be absolutely readable and fine but if adidas go for the money making scheme of a patch to encourage us to get names and numbers then that's a shame, but not the end of the world if done with a bit of subtly. Personally I'd have no issue if they did the 98' shield every time, think its a good compromise.
I hope the adidas shoulder stripes are white (or black) - the adidas logo and those stripes combined with our black and white stripes are just the perfect combo. If the adidas shoulder stripes are grey it may look ok but it'd be a missed opportunity. Don't mind grey, blue or gold as a third colour for trims etc.
-
Man City will not win everything forever, it might be a long cycle but their cycle will come to a close at some point, likely when Guardiola leaves. Having this confidence, as repetitive as it might be, I probably prefer them to win the league to prevent Klopp & Arteta from lifting the trophy. I don't want their pathetic behaviour to be rewarded and obviously Klopp's leaving after this season anyway.
-
17 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:
Agreed re middle ground on rules, but Spurs’ success was still built on huge income. The year they reached the Champions League final - five seasons ago - their income was roughly double ours was in 22/23. In fact you have to go back a decade before their income was the same as ours last season - well before the explosion in income levels. We’re not likely to hit £400m in income any time soon with the current rules in place and no new stadium - I just don’t see how we do that.
Depressing or not, that is the current position. We can’t compete without being put on financial steroids for a period to bring in sustained success - that’s how you get the big sponsors and international revenues. Sad cases the world over need to buy the merchandise and consume shite with our badge slapped on it.
And how did Spurs gain that income? I stand to be corrected, but I don't believe it was through a sugar daddy injecting huge amounts of money from nowhere. They made a great managerial appointed (Pochettino) and recruited very well. Their academy produced one of the worlds best strikers. They clearly obtained great commercial deals. Granted they're a London club so I appreciate that is a caveat to this conversion.
They hadn't moved into their new stadium so were not generating income through NFL events etc. They were playing at Wembley, where again I stand corrected if they somehow had an event tie-in situation. Their average attendance there was 68k, which is a big boost to what they were used to at WHL, but not a massive amount more than some people are turning their nose up at for a SJP extension (61-62k).
I'm not naïve to the task again for us or any other similar sized football club nor to the clear vested interests from certain clubs to stop others progressing. But if we can strike together the right elements, it is possible to break into the top 6 and even top 4. The size of such a task means it would only be that much more rewarding. No pride in the Man City route and it would get boring fast too imo (the Etihad atmosphere attests to this).
Howe is clearly a manager players love to play for, he has a special connection with the players and I'm sure word travels in the football world how great he is, especially on a personal level. If he learns the lessons of this season and proves to be our long-term man, I think it can help to attract players, who will know they're in safe hands. If we extended SJP to 61-62k, sorted out the seating arrangements, the place would look and ideally sound stunning and one of the most special & unique venues to play at and would be a great selling point. Swap that with a new stadium if that's your preference. The more we maintain a European place EL/ECL - the more we can increase sponsorship and the more chance we have of cracking top 4 again. If we persist not only can we do it, but we can maintain it for a period I think too.
-
The idea of the club spending in cheat mode like Man City and Chelsea did is completely soulless and unexciting to me. There should be some middle ground to the rules, but Tottenham got regular top 4 finishes and within a whisker of winning the CL without sugar daddy spending, and this was before the new stadium. It can be done and the idea of anyone shrugging their shoulders muttering its impossible because we can't do a Man City is depressing.
-
Let’s be real, we play 451 and the striker has no support. Get Anderson further up with Isak, get Murphy off for Barnes and put Gordon RW.
-
Granted the roof isn't sloped, but if the gallowgate end matched the leazes end, would that not create more of a bowl effect and keep more noise in? Or would the east stand put pay to that?
-
55 minutes ago, leffe186 said:
Two soft Man U penalties later and I remember the annoyances
. Great game though.
As I alluded to in another thread, football was faster paced then and frankly a better watch imo. First time passes & crosses, balls in behind, defenders being properly tested but also slick passing too. I take this back to early 2000's. I hate that it's now seen as a cardinal sin to play a ball down the line as oppose to keep passing along the 6 yard box. It leads to so many touches and the game slowing down. The same applies to getting into the final third; unless there's a absolutely clear pass on, players (likely instructed) pass the ball back and switch play in an endeavour to get into the exact same position they were already in on the other flank! And maybe then they'll shoot/cross but then perhaps not and very rarely first time.
Defenders see it all in front of them, granted teams push up with a higher line more these days. I do agree with Owen though when he said you had to have more technique in his day; because players looked forward far more, strikers subsequently had a lot of quick balls fired at them and they needed a good touch to hold it or flick it on. I don't feel you got as much space in midfield back then as you do now.
When I watch the odd lower league game I see teams trying to play out like Man City and find it infuriating and quite sad. More often than not they're giving the ball away and silly goals as a result. I hope someone breaks this spell soon and we see more variation in style and tactics. Everyone has - used to have - their favoured way of playing but there's no right way and a clash of styles is one of the things which made the game interesting.
-
1 hour ago, NUFC91 said:
Exactly this, has to be or nothing simple as that. The leazes and milburn expansion was goof and practical at the time but by no means should we mirror it.
You mean keep a sloped roof, but higher obviously? -
Gordon was just as effective on the right when I saw him for Everton. I don't like both wingers being inverted, Murphy has shown the benefits of having a natural footer on one side, hitting in-swinging crosses. It's too predicable when players are cutting in on both flanks, but Gordon can still mix it up and drift across at times. Despite how great he's been this season, I can't help but feel that ultimately Barnes will always be more effective cutting in to score from that side.
I do think teams are getting too obsessed with over-playing and coming inside all the time. A first-time cross in the final third is still as dangerous now as it was twenty years ago if you have a good striker in the middle. Defenders have it easier these days because it's all in front of them and they can get organised because players take so many touches.
-
41 minutes ago, midds said:
Main problems I see with the East Stand are that it doesn't hold that many people and there's no corporate in there. Coming at this from a purely maximising income perspective btw. If we're all about money in the bank then it makes sense to completely rebuild the East stand to have boxes running along the entire length of it, that's the best view but we currently only have that in the Milburn which is a blocker. Middle tier running from goal-line to goal-line on both sides would be better financially surely? Nothing to say you couldn't raise the height a little maybe, rake it up as much as possible so you have a tier of normals at the bottom but squeeze in a couple of rows of boxes at prime viewing level.
Read that back to myself and it makes no sense but I know what I mean
I never liked that they ditched the boxes in the east stand in the first place, so we literally have a template of what you've described, at that time the regular seats were nearer to the pitch (not sure if they went too far to host international games etc). I don't know which version of the stand had the highest capacity.
Like you say, could have more room to play with if the previous 'Newcastle breweries' advert 'wall' was smaller and maybe the boxes at the top, with the regular seats going down from there. Think Villareal's stand but other way round.
-
1 hour ago, Pancrate1892 said:
As much as it makes sense for a complete rebuild.....that looks absolutely mint.
Another thing explored in a rebuild is the possibility of shifting the pitch into the milburn and raising it so pitch level is above where the press boxes are, then construct the new east stand further away from leazes terrace with the extra space, that would also enable more scope to fill out the east stand corners that hold barely 2000 each.
The new east stand could contain new changing rooms, tunnel and media/TV
Just a few other pictures from that page, obviously biased but for me it'd be the best stadium in the UK - as grand as Spurs' but with more of a colosseum feel and less of an Americanised stadium feel and with amazing history attached to it too. Granted Man U will upgrade/rebuild, but the rest wont look at good as this imo, it would be some sight. I totally understand the commercial side but this extension would bring in more boxes going along the Gallowgate so so would be a significant upgrade on a corporate level too. I don't know what's the stopping the club hosting gigs etc like other clubs to claim that money too, surely they can? Granted Spurs' American football games are something they have over the rest with their retractable pitch. But isn't it more fun to go up against the rest with identify and history behind us too?
I guarantee a lot of fans will be jealous if they're left with hollow new stadiums. I think Everton's new stadium looks to be a decent attempt at keeping some old school feel but it still lacks a unique or grandiose feel from it looks like so far. Many Man City fans miss Maine Road despite the obscene success. West Ham have moved stadium to somewhere with zero identity - how's that extra revenue going for them? They've dont quite well but nothing game changing. I say all this with the caveat that singing area's need to be arranged going forward.
-
37 minutes ago, Mikky said:
Would people be bothered if we ever renamed the stadium if the future? Is is a big deal - not from Newcastle so don’t know what the feeling would be - Obviously don’t want an obscure name like KitKat arena - something like Adidas Arena, Allianz Stadium, Aramco Arena etc etc
As a compromise I’d rather go with a new sponsors’ logos on both panelling underneath the tv screens where sports direct used to be (I say both assuming a Gallowgate extension replicates the leazes) aswell as other arenas of the ground (bench, milburn reception) and a sponsored training ground. I know both wouldn’t bring the same money as an official ground name but it would still be a decent chunk. -
Whatever happens, it's vital the seating arrangements incorporate more signing/standing sections. If the gallowgate end was extended to match the rest of the ground, it would be a thing of beauty. Some great pictures here someone has posted over the years: https://www.facebook.com/GallowgateExpansion/photos I would miss the sloped roof, but there's no doubting how imposing and intimidating this would be. You could get an additional seats in the L4 milburn/gallowgate corner and along with the new L7 seats you could get an extra 8k seats, possibly 9k who knows. This would take the capacity to potentially 61k. Is there a reason why we don't host more gigs etc for additional revenue? Perhaps there would be more scope with additional inside facilities added to a new gallowgate end? Capacity wise, I think 61k is enough and it's important to keep some element of demand as someone said earlier.
-
Don’t see why people would be vicious about him, he’ll be feeling the pressure for than anyone being a local lad, but he lacks the sharpness and quickness of play. Partly confidence but partly it’s his style of play. I don’t necessarily agree with playing Anderson & Wilock in this formation as I think they’re no.10’s more than anything else, but if Anderson can be disciplined enough defensively I’d play them both and take Longstaff out.
-
Livra/Krafth____Shar___Burn____Hall
Murphy__Longstaff__Bruno___Barnes
_________Anderson/Wilock_____________
__________________Isak________________
Once again Willock is slow to read the danger and track his man for one of the goals, like Palmer v Chelsea who drifted behind him unnoticed. He’s a no10 and playing him deeper is going against his instincts and costing us goals. We need to play with a partnership in the middle with proper midfielders imo and Wilock/Anderson can be the link between them and Isak, going off Anderson’s performance I’d lean towards him. Ideally I’d take Longstaff out the firing line but I feel shoehorning no10’s into deeper midfield positions is undermining us and needs to be changed, granted I understand Howe is unlikely to do this. -
The solution is to have a slight leeway - if the technology can implement this. By the nature of the offside law itself, we instinctively know what can be classed as an advantage or not, there's a middle ground that could easily be settled on. This new proposal is too much I think but to be ruling goals out because a spec of their kneecap happened to be ahead of the play before going through one on one also goes against the point of the rule in the first place.
-
It's so frustrating because I think he's a great player to have in the squad and has been a brilliant signing overall but to play every single game regardless of form puts a totally unnecessary negative spotlight on him. It's like Howe has crafted this situation himself - I don't think many would have much bad to say about Burn at all if he'd been rotated this season, but the situation sticks out like a sore thumb when he's playing LB every single week and not offering the pace (defensively and offensively) and technical capability of Livramento or Hall. I know Howe insists he's never loyal to players for the sake of it, but if he thinks Burn earns his place through his height and leadership then I think he's just plain wrong imo, when it's offset against other elements. They are human beings and I can't help feel that when they're in the trenches together and form those bonds, Howe has been blinded by it when it comes to earning your place in the team, when balancing all competition players for the position.
-
My two cents worth are I first of all totally disagree with playing injured players, injections etc or not; surely it's the creative remit you have as a manager to find solutions around this, whether it would be other personal or formations/tactics. Looking at Hall at Chelsea, I don't see why he couldn't have done a job for a few games in left-centre mid to replace Longstaff who can then get fully fit. That's if you don't want to start Miley, who I understand you want to protect, although at least a few more games wouldn't be of harm you'd have thought. The handling of Botman seems to have been poor and if he's playing like this as the result of any discomfort whatsoever, he should be taken out straight away.
The lack of game time for Hall and Livramento has infuriated me. It was the same with Target, who is a very good player and should have started more games in his time here imo. Hall looked at home in the PL for Chelsea. Look at his performance away to Man U in the cup... he was brilliant. He scored a peach of a goal ffs, you don't score that if you're lacking confidence etc (at the time anyway). I was genuinely looking forward to see him play this season and rotate in games at LB and even the odd game in midfield. I just don't agree with the policy of no rotation/subs of the defence. I know Howe said he likes that area to be settled, I get that, but I don't think you need to limit rotation to this extent. Wolves away being one blatant example.
I think we're ultimately trying to fit square pegs in round holes in midfield at the moment. The flat 3, where the middle player presses high up, is leaving us far too exposed. Granted Joelinton is a big miss in this regard, but when you watch Chelsea's second goal when Palmer drifts behind our midfield, Wilock doesn't see the danger, who's job in that position was to come across and do so I would have thought, with Burno ahead of him. For me, this is not Wilockd natural game - he's a no.10, ultimately. He should be playing off a striker, he's basically in the mould of Kevin Nolan but more skilful. Anderson is also a no.10 from where I'm sitting. These players are not suited to playing inside left spending half the time running back in their own box. Perhaps if we had a holding midfielder instructed to sit in with them, then yes, but thats not the case. I know Wilock did play there last season a lot of the time, so I'm quite aware there's a clear argument to make that I'm wrong based on that. I'm just going off what I see at the moment and moving forward.
I'd like to see something like the following in midfield/forward
________________Isak_____________________
______________Wilock____________________
Barnes__________________________Gordon
___________Bruno___Tonali______________
or
___________Isak_____New Striker____________
____________Wilock/Gordon_____________________
_______Joelinton_______Bruno______________
_________________Tonali____________________
If Tonali has the intelligence to play that role. If not, we need a new no6 imo.
I say all this with the deep desire to see Howe become our SAF. It's clear he is amazing with the players and his dedication and time put in with the players both on a footballing level and human level should never be forgotten. He goes in to win every game and my god it's so hard to argue against some decision after last season. This is why it can be so infuriating to see, what I humbly perceive, as mistakes because I really, really want him to succeed. I'd hate to see nothing more than support for him inside SJP. In this regard I wish he'd read the room a bit more with the likes of Longstaff; people are starting to lose patience - rightly or wrongly- and he needs to be taken out before the murmurs of discontent get louder. I know you can't run a club and team based on fans' every fickle emotion but you've got to be a little savvy at times too and protect any knock on effect to the team as a whole.
Ideally he's given the full 24/25 season and we can judge from there. There needs to be some loyalty and honour shown. But I do hope things change with injured players and rotation.
-
6 minutes ago, Yorkie said:
What's this got to do with Trippier knocking it down for Mudryk in injury time? How is it relevant?
We needed to try and get more of a foothold in the game and having Hall on the left could have helped with that. He’s a fine technical player with good pace. I don’t see why he couldn’t do that job on the left playing with Tino behind him. Even though we were relativity comfortable defensively and putting in a fine showing at the back, if you’re constantly defending you’re always liable to a mistake, like Trippier made. We needed to reduce the defensive workload and having more technical players on the pitch would help with that.
NUFC kits & merchandise: 2024/25 home kit on sale
in Football
Posted
Are the shoulder adidas stripes white or grey for the home top?