themanupstairs

Hmmm, I would have preferred Santon sitting this one out...

Will do him the world of good to get that clean sheet if we manage it.

How's Temuri getting on these days?

 

Manager of Georgia, so I wouldn't imagine he'd have a great record.

 

P 24, W 9, D 7, L 8

 

For a country like Georgia, that's pretty impressive.

 

Debatable as it'll depend who they've played; according to wiki their last wins came against Moldova, Albania, Luxembourg, Belarus (A).

 

True, but they also narrowly lost to Spain, drawn in Greece, beaten Croatia in his time there.

 

on the whole he does seem a good manager like, not one you'd have predicted back in the day. Never forget going wild in the frontroom when he scored in Zagreb. The precursor to the greatest game I've ever attended.

 

That was class.

 

Did "Marco" Viduka play against us in that game?

 

Aye, him upfront, Prosinecki pulling the strings in the middle.

Silvio Maric too no?

Ranger up front with Obertan and Sammy imo.

I'm not surprised. Pretty sure he met up with the squad to sign before the Everton match.

Welcome Mathieu.

Sakho 

Bless you

Was worried to see he has only scored 1 league goal this season. Then i realised he has only played 410 minutes of football. Now I'm worried why he has only played 410 minutes of football.

 

He was injured at the start and Marseille went with Gignac and now he's first choice.

 

Not a strange thing to do tbh, for example at Bayern.... Gomez will injured at the beginning of season, Manzukic came in and has been great and now Gomez is on the bench.

 

I'm not really worried about that tbh.

 

Do you know how Marseille usually line up? The Ghanaian forwards they have, have played more games than Gignac.

The Ayew's 

Don't remember the chap's name but he registered a few weeks back, posted some reall insightful stuff then spoiled himself by insisting that everyone surely knows Ashley is doing a good good. There are others.

Tollemache. Brilliant poster, regardless of his opinions.

The only player we have who looks remotely like a b2b midfielder is Dan Gosling (possibly Abeid but haven't seen enough).

 

The only player we have with the physical attributes to make it as a b2b midfielder is Sammy Ameobi.

 

You what?

When he puts on a bit more muscle, he'll have the PHYSICAL attributes to perform as a modern day b2b midfielder. The closest thing we have to Yaya Toure.

Very very highly.

Until he came to England.

The only player we have who looks remotely like a b2b midfielder is Dan Gosling (possibly Abeid but haven't seen enough).

The only player we have with the physical attributes to make it as a b2b midfielder is Sammy Ameobi.

agreed

Is there any reason why Newcastle fans hate Poyet so much apart from scoring against us a lot? I'm afraid I'm tooyoung to remember his Chelsea career, only remember parts of his Spurs

Wembley man 

Best "is this real life" face there by berto

Go on frdrk/ssr

Who's this Johnny Forren guy?

For a manager who regularly goes through 3 or 4 formation changes per game because he's set us up incorrectly to say that he couldn't  find a way at any point in the 90 minutes to have Cisse up front is completely laughable.

 

The excuses trotted out by some that we had to put Shola in there due to the way we'd prepared for the game in advance is f***ing idiotic.

 

There were 3 spare days between the Arsenal and Everton games, and i imagine one was just resting after a hectic schedule. So that's two full days of training. And Ba met with f***ing Chelsea the day after the Arsenal match for christ's sake so if Pardew's honestly preparing to use him during this game the man is off his rocker.

 

What's more, if he's looking to play 4-3-3 - guess what - we already have a perfect tailor made replacement ready who can play down the middle in that formation and score shedloads - his name is Papiss Cisse. He's played that role many, many times - the idea that he can't due to lacking preparation is nuts. Remember when he signed? Newly returned from ACON, and Pardew put Best in the starting lineup (lol), he got injured, Cisse came on with no preparation, looked the dog's bollocks and scored.

 

On top of that, while Shola has his uses as an impact sub, he's good for 25 minutes tops in a game - starting him and keeping him on til the end is madness.

 

The only slight glimmer of sense i can see to it is that he was brought in to cope with Everton's aerial prowess - in which case you've just picked your main striker as, let's face it, a goddamn defender, while keeping your best striker - one who has wished to play centrally all season - stuck out in purgatory on the wing. And if we're led to believe this horseshit theory about Ba intending to play that role - he was also planning to use him as a battering ram, another mis-use of his talents to go along with how he's wasted others or turned them into crap this season.

 

It's another one of those Souness-esque moments for me and there's been too many recently.

Fuck me. More eloquent and spot on than anything I could drum up in my posts.

Wonder if the Ba fee is paying for Debuchy,meaning we are skint and there will be no more signings unless there is another outgoing.

Transfers this window should be paid for by next year's tv money. This isn't fun and games any more. Survive and Ashley gets it back. Go down and we're fucked anyway.

Hope these quotes mean that things have come to a head between Pardew and his superiors. Money is there to be spent, and he'll keep saying it's tight so as to get good deals. Staring down the barrel if we don't bring in 3 this window.

For a manager who regularly goes through 3 or 4 formation changes per game because he's set us up incorrectly to say that he couldn't  find a way at any point in the 90 minutes to have Cisse up front is completely laughable.

Because they had given him permission to speak to chelsea yesterday, no doubt he was in London.

 

Could those talks not have taken place today if we wanted them to? I'm just flabbergasted that we decided not to play him when he's still ours, yet didn't want to change the gameplan and ended up playing f***ing Shola Ameobi in his place.

 

It's pretty obvious from Pardew's comments that the club couldn't wait to draw a line under the whole thing. For the first 20 minutes or so, our players looked completely amped, and I genuinely thought Everton were in for a backlash thumping.

 

That may be the case, but if it then means having to play Shola for the full 90 minutes plus extra time when we've known for years he's only effective for 30 at the most I think we've cut our nose to spite our face.

 

f*** that! Since when did losing Ba to injury or to Chelsea have to mean playing Shola for 90 minutes?

 

You need to read what I wrote. I'm not saying playing Shola for 90 minutes was the correct decision at all, but that is what actually happened, so my question is if that was in pardew's mind, why did we not try our utmost to have a player whose registration we own on the pitch playing for us, unless we weren't allowed, in which case that's fair enough in itself, although it still shouldn't have resulted in Shola playing.

Aye i know what you meant. The question was directed at the manager not at your post.

The stick that he is getting for straight swapping Shola for Ba is way over the top.

 

He had prepared the formation all week to include Ba in the center and Cisse on the right, an hour before kick-off he can be forgiven for not wanting to switch too many player roles for this week.

If he cant switch things in a couple of hours what chance has he got during a game, explains his s*** subs etc

 

He could have changed it, but what about the players? Would they be comfortable with an entirely different set of instructions, for a different position, a couple of hours before a game? He made the right, if unpopular, call last night.

That's laughable, how long do you think it would have taken to tell and coach Cisse to play in his usual position?

 

Yeah, and the others?

 

What others? Sammy, Obertan or Marveaux would have played in Cisse's place. And?

 

Obertan had been playing on the left, in this formation. Marveaux had been playing as part of the midfield three. Sammy is Sammy. If we'd taken Marveaux out of the midfield three, someone would have had to replace him. That would have been Perch. But, wait, Perch was playing right back. So, who do we play there? Santon, and bring Fergie in? Who knows. My point is that Shola for Ba was a straight swap, and the work in training could be retained. If we'd went for Cisse up top, then we'd have had to make at least three other changes.

 

I'd agree that Shola was a straight swap for Ba had he been a player of similar quality. Being a big b****** doesn't justify the straight swap however. Shola's movement (lack of) up front dictated our forward play. The only time he got into a good position he fluffed his shot wide.

 

And?

 

Just because Shola has similar physical attributes to Ba doesn't mean could replace his quality forward play. I really can't see how making this straight swap benefited us in any way last night. It was a defeatist move by the manager. As soon as Chelsea's bid was made, Pardew should have had an arm around Cisse to tell him "right, it's your time son - get out there and do what you do best".

 

Probably ridiculous to say this in hindsight, but I'm pretty confident we'd have won last night if Cisse started in the middle. The amount of fouls and aimless headers by Shola was staggering and hindered us big style.

 

I've already said how I think the straight swap benefited us. I was annoyed when I saw the team, but calmed down when I realised why it had been done. Cisse scored and we had chances to win the game. I'm not reaching for the razor blades because a player I don't like got a game.

Dafuq man, I love me some Shola! On as a 70th minute sub to hold on to a lead or to try and win a game. He's not a 90 minute player by any stretch.

Deal expected to be completed tomorrow according to SSN.

 

 

 

 

I never get how you can sign a player with minutes to go on deadline day but it takes a week any other time.

The manager would be busy preparing for games, and everything should be running on squad schedule. On deadline day everything is geared towards making that final signing or two, so the manager would have planned ahead for that. I guess.

The stick that he is getting for straight swapping Shola for Ba is way over the top.

 

He had prepared the formation all week to include Ba in the center and Cisse on the right, an hour before kick-off he can be forgiven for not wanting to switch too many player roles for this week.

If he cant switch things in a couple of hours what chance has he got during a game, explains his s*** subs etc

 

He could have changed it, but what about the players? Would they be comfortable with an entirely different set of instructions, for a different position, a couple of hours before a game? He made the right, if unpopular, call last night.

That's laughable, how long do you think it would have taken to tell and coach Cisse to play in his usual position?

 

Yeah, and the others?

 

What others? Sammy, Obertan or Marveaux would have played in Cisse's place. And?

 

Obertan had been playing on the left, in this formation. Marveaux had been playing as part of the midfield three. Sammy is Sammy. If we'd taken Marveaux out of the midfield three, someone would have had to replace him. That would have been Perch. But, wait, Perch was playing right back. So, who do we play there? Santon, and bring Fergie in? Who knows. My point is that Shola for Ba was a straight swap, and the work in training could be retained. If we'd went for Cisse up top, then we'd have had to make at least three other changes.

 

I'd agree that Shola was a straight swap for Ba had he been a player of similar quality. Being a big b****** doesn't justify the straight swap however. Shola's movement (lack of) up front dictated our forward play. The only time he got into a good position he fluffed his shot wide.

 

And?

Just because Shola has similar physical attributes to Ba doesn't mean could replace his quality forward play. I really can't see how making this straight swap benefited us in any way last night. It was a defeatist move by the manager. As soon as Chelsea's bid was made, Pardew should have had an arm around Cisse to tell him "right, it's your time son - get out there and do what you do best".

Probably ridiculous to say this in hindsight, but I'm pretty confident we'd have won last night if Cisse started in the middle. The amount of fouls and aimless headers by Shola was staggering and hindered us big style.

Because they had given him permission to speak to chelsea yesterday, no doubt he was in London.

 

Could those talks not have taken place today if we wanted them to? I'm just flabbergasted that we decided not to play him when he's still ours, yet didn't want to change the gameplan and ended up playing f***ing Shola Ameobi in his place.

 

It's pretty obvious from Pardew's comments that the club couldn't wait to draw a line under the whole thing. For the first 20 minutes or so, our players looked completely amped, and I genuinely thought Everton were in for a backlash thumping.

 

That may be the case, but if it then means having to play Shola for the full 90 minutes plus extra time when we've known for years he's only effective for 30 at the most I think we've cut our nose to spite our face.

Fuck that! Since when did losing Ba to injury or to Chelsea have to mean playing Shola for 90 minutes?

The stick that he is getting for straight swapping Shola for Ba is way over the top.

 

He had prepared the formation all week to include Ba in the center and Cisse on the right, an hour before kick-off he can be forgiven for not wanting to switch too many player roles for this week.

If he cant switch things in a couple of hours what chance has he got during a game, explains his s*** subs etc

 

He could have changed it, but what about the players? Would they be comfortable with an entirely different set of instructions, for a different position, a couple of hours before a game? He made the right, if unpopular, call last night.

That's laughable, how long do you think it would have taken to tell and coach Cisse to play in his usual position?

 

Yeah, and the others?

 

What others? Sammy, Obertan or Marveaux would have played in Cisse's place. And?

 

Obertan had been playing on the left, in this formation. Marveaux had been playing as part of the midfield three. Sammy is Sammy. If we'd taken Marveaux out of the midfield three, someone would have had to replace him. That would have been Perch. But, wait, Perch was playing right back. So, who do we play there? Santon, and bring Fergie in? Who knows. My point is that Shola for Ba was a straight swap, and the work in training could be retained. If we'd went for Cisse up top, then we'd have had to make at least three other changes.

I'd agree that Shola was a straight swap for Ba had he been a player of similar quality. Being a big bastard doesn't justify the straight swap however. Shola's movement (lack of) up front dictated our forward play. The only time he got into a good position he fluffed his shot wide.