Jayson

Amazing, what more can you say!

Hes had it right defensively all season and hes now showing the attacking intent also. Class man. Look at the two strikers hes given us and now hes turned perch into Maldini, what more could people need!

Hes had it right defensively all season and hes now showing the attacking intent also. Class man. Look at the two strikers hes given us and now hes turned perch into Maldini, what more could people need!

Karma is wonderous

Great result for us, glad to see pards getting some credit on here.

Cisse who were apparently mostly him So he wanted a defender, then decided on a striker instead who he has recently admitted he has problems integrating and stating " there is hardly any point in having him on the pitch" ? Im not so sure, but feel free to present me with evidence to the contrary. Think defender was the priority, then they just found out Cisse had become available which was relatively unexpected and didnt want to miss the opportunity from what i remember reading. Pardew had supposedly watched both Ba/Cisse when he spent time over in germany.

If RVP wasn't so good, Arsenal would be mid-table. If Messi wasn't so good, Barca wouldn't be the best team in the world. If Rooney hadn't scored 20 this year, no way Man U would be winning the league. If Yaya Toure didn't play as often, Man City may not contend for the title. Team minus best/better players = less points and worse league position. I'm referring to chances created. Think we're 3rd bottom of the chances created league. CHANCES CREATED MINIMAL BA ON FIRE MAXIMAL. Your strikers form would influence your strategy though wouldnt it. Theyre not seperate from eachother. If it hadnt been that way we'd have had to adopt a different way of playing to achieve goals/points. As said before, we tried it at Fulham when Ba went off to ACON.

Dont get the impression hes been involved with choosing many of them directly apart from Ba/Cisse who were apparently mostly him

Give over, every person who is saying we could play better are saying that the points total and league position is better than expected. Actions louder than words and all that. If you valued it moreso as you said earlier, your satisfaction would outweight your dissastisfaction. It clearly doesnt as you post criticism of Pardew on here daily.

Seems to me a lot more dissatisfaction for performances from some than credit given to Pardew for being efficient at picking up points. Who has achieved both solid performances & gotten the most from their squad this season anyway. The top 3 & Swansea? The level of criticism for not achieving it isnt really balanced is it.

Not this s*** again man. Obviously if anyone looks at the league table they say "well toon fans must be delighted". However our fans have actually watched all our matches this season. Huh? Reread. Im asking our fans who should be happier, not what they think. The respective ability of the sides above us to keep possession & dominate games has been highlighted in this thread & used as evidence we underperform under Pardew. Yet many would agree those 2 sides have underperformed in terms of picking up points for the quality of their squad, in comparison to how we have done. So should people be more dissapointed with our attacking play than satisfied with our strengths in other areas? Many seem to be. Happier in terms of what exactly? All things considered I'd say Liverpool fans should be happiest. They won a cup and are in with a shout for another one. Additionally they have one of the tightest defenses in the league, dominated a lot of games this season, created alot of chances and could reasonably argue that with a good poacher (like Cisse i suppose) they'd have collected a lot more points. Is that not sort of Jayson's point though? They spent £70m on dross. If they'd spent that correctly (nothing stopped them signing Ba & Cisse rather than Carroll for example) they really should be at least on par with Spurs & Arsenal. Aye you cant really make a manager free from blame for the form of his strikers when he specifically signs them & then decides how they are coached.

Not this s*** again man. Obviously if anyone looks at the league table they say "well toon fans must be delighted". However our fans have actually watched all our matches this season. Huh? Reread. Im asking our fans who should be happier, not what they think. The respective ability of the sides above us to keep possession & dominate games has been highlighted in this thread & used as evidence we underperform under Pardew. Yet many would agree those 2 sides have underperformed in terms of picking up points for the quality of their squad, in comparison to how we have done. So should people be more dissapointed with our attacking play than satisfied with our strengths in other areas? Many seem to be.

Well most people want possession based attacking football. Their sides have achieved that, yet have not achieved other things we have under Pardew. Who's fans should be happier?

Which teams have gotten the most out of the talent they have in the prem this season. Us, Liverpool or Chelsea?

We're running too much cause we don't keep a hold of the ball when we get it and that isn't due to having bad players it's cause they are INSTRUCTED to hit the front early. that is exactly my point Parky Pardew did well to get the message across to the entire side in seconds after we scored, must be using earpieces like. No chance it could have anything to do with some players just lacking the right mentality. Just like Shola purposely only becomes lethal in training i imagine. Bloody Pardew man.

On 59pts for this week, 610th ranked world score this week for now anyway. 3 to go. Nice week so far. Wouldnt mind someone getting injured so Val comes off my bench

We'd likely be in a champions league position right now if Saylor had stayed fit.

If our overall play hasn't changed much then all the arguments about Pardew playing a better brand of football then he who cannot be named are utter bollocks. Dont really disagree. Dont think much has changed in terms of our play than last season, perhaps a few more moments of class via throughballs/finishing. The thing Pardew changed was our defensive ability & its worked out very well for us with Ba doing business down the other end. The issue is whether he focuses on defense so much because hes decided that it deserves the most attention based on our current squad, or whether he does it because hes simply very defensively minded. The former has the potential to take us forward, the latter much less so. People are all guessing atm which one is true. The periods in games where we play nice passing football like the start of yesterday suggest to me he is capable of it & next season will be a much better indication of his overall ability.

very good How do you disagree? Mate, we got run over and were lucky only to concede 2. Anything other than an arsenal win would have been daylight robbery. Because blocking chances is lucky for a defence? Strange pov really.

very good How do you disagree?

I dont think our overall play has changed that much, Ba has just become less prolific recently & Krul's long balls have started wearing on people overtime. Defensively not much has changed & thats Pardews main strength. In our last 3 Norwich couldnt score, Arsenal only managed a 2nd via an error, Sunderland needed a pen to score.

That's very relevant to the topic of passing, cheers. Quite pertinent to the topic of winning football matches, which Alan Pardew (the perosn being discussed in this thread) is paid to do. Just broadening the debate is all I don't think anyone's debating that we won the game. Could've fooled me. We beat a confident Norwich side. Who don't forget, beat us 4-2 last time out. The point discussed is how we seem to win games by solitary goals usually dependent on some outstanding play by one of of Cisse, Ba or HBA instead of teamwork with a coherent formation and tactics (unless you consider the hoofing in the second half as tactics). The problem with the model that we are adopting is that we don't dominate games and can at anytime lose/draw games that in theory we should/can win. It also gives us next to zero chance (Man Utd game aside) of taking points of the top 4-6 teams even at home, which is what we should be targeting if we are serious on getting into Europe. Maybe some will have to wait till we get a tonking from Liverpool for the penny to drop. Dependant on outstanding play? Cant really say that in this example when Cisse missed more sitters than class goals he scored. We dont dominate games no, it hasnt made us less likely to lose/draw games than we should win in theory. Look back at the season, bar unusual circumstances we pretty much win every game you'd expect under Pardew. I made a thread on this yesterday. We definately do less well against the top 7 but its to be expected. Which games so far against them would you have expected more from us? Swansea at home, Wolves at home, Sunderland at home, West Brom at home. Definately more points on offer in those games. Wolves/Sunderland yeah & individual circumstances still decided those games. Swansea/Wbrom i wouldnt say we could have expected much more. We drew 0-0 with Swansea and lost 2-3 against West Brom at home. Both teams currently ranked 8th and 12th respectively. Maybe we just have different expectations, if we are targeting Europe and beyond, using Pip's formula in the OP of the "Battle for 7th" thread, these are teams that we should be beating at home. I'm curious why you think we couldn't (shouldn't?) expect more than a total 1 point out of the potential 6 on offer?? You'd expect to win looking at them yeah. Swansea achieved their lowest poss all season in our game, went all out defence & theyre hard enough to score against when they dont do that as Man city found out. If you remember there was barely any space in the box atall, Ba had to do acrobatic overheads to get a shot that wasnt blocked & it was still saved. He also hit the post. Dont think we could have done much more. West Brom was just our defense for me due to having 1 Cb. 2 goals should be enough to get points from a game. Only Spurs/Arsenal/Swansea have put 3 past wbrom all season & swansea needed a penalty. So that leaves 2 sides who managed it & theyre 2 of the best attacking sides in the league. Possible to do? Yes. But no chance can we expect it. We just conceded to many. For the Swansea game, based on soccernet's stats, possession was 51% vs 49% in their favor. Perhaps they were ultra defensive, but this is even more reason to believe that the way to break down a resolute defence is not by lumping the ball forward but by playing passing the ball around and moving up as a team. You only need to see how the top teams do this when faced with such a defensive strategy. This is what we don't do which is why end up losing points that we could have won. Crucially out of the 22 shots we had, only 3 were on target which is what you get from percentage football ala Pardew. You might have a point that against West Brom, it is our defence that screwed up. But once again out of 26 shots, only 5 were on target. This low percentage of shots of target is a clear symptom of percentage football where you just try to shoot even if in a crappy position as opposed to creating genuine chances (like one on ones) where it is harder to miss. The seasonal possession stats put earlier in the the thread had them down at 42%, bbc has it at 43%. So few were on target likely due to the number of blocks they put in on shots. Again, check their scores against the other best sides on the division. They barely concede. There is no solid reason to believe any change of how we played would have resulted in more, nor was this game an example of us lumping it as our possession showed. I havent checked SOT v w brom, but all of this would influence pardews tactics anyway. You can say we have less chances, but the quality of our strikers (Ba at that time) also score from less as he did with 2 goals. If that happens it enables you to give them less to work with if that results in you better balancing your side. For us meaning our defence is better covered by the midfielders.

We have a seasons worth of performances that show little correlation between possession/domination & results in comparison to the importance of simply having a very strong defensive system and attackers that will do enough to get the points. If teams have a very hard time scoring against you & you are good at putting the ball in the net, you will win games against most sides. Pardew has put in place the defensive system that achieves that & bought the attackers that do the business the other side. In what way is it likely that this will suddenly stop working? you've mentioned the two parts of pardew's gameplan which i agree is essentially the basis of his approach, then you ask how will it suddenly stop working? i'll tell you how; given the inherent complexity of the plan all it takes is for either the defence to become more porous or the attackers to be unable to keep scoring from the scraps they're given by launching the ball up the field every single time it's a system that requires both to work all of the time, if you have a system and approach that includes the midfield doing creative things and the team as a whole coached to build attacks together through passing football then that adds another dimension that has to fail completely before results start going south it's fairly simple It doesnt require both to work all of the time. Both doesnt work all of the time for any team in the league, it requires both of them to work most of the time. Which they do, thats why its worked. If the defensive system is strong and efficient & the attackers are of high enough quality both will maintain at similar rate. Especially if you have two attackers like Cisse/Ba who can cover if the other isnt on top form. You havent actually suggested why either would stop working most of the time.

That's very relevant to the topic of passing, cheers. Quite pertinent to the topic of winning football matches, which Alan Pardew (the perosn being discussed in this thread) is paid to do. Just broadening the debate is all I don't think anyone's debating that we won the game. Could've fooled me. We beat a confident Norwich side. Who don't forget, beat us 4-2 last time out. The point discussed is how we seem to win games by solitary goals usually dependent on some outstanding play by one of of Cisse, Ba or HBA instead of teamwork with a coherent formation and tactics (unless you consider the hoofing in the second half as tactics). The problem with the model that we are adopting is that we don't dominate games and can at anytime lose/draw games that in theory we should/can win. It also gives us next to zero chance (Man Utd game aside) of taking points of the top 4-6 teams even at home, which is what we should be targeting if we are serious on getting into Europe. Maybe some will have to wait till we get a tonking from Liverpool for the penny to drop. Dependant on outstanding play? Cant really say that in this example when Cisse missed more sitters than class goals he scored. We dont dominate games no, it hasnt made us less likely to lose/draw games than we should win in theory. Look back at the season, bar unusual circumstances we pretty much win every game you'd expect under Pardew. I made a thread on this yesterday. We definately do less well against the top 7 but its to be expected. Which games so far against them would you have expected more from us? Swansea at home, Wolves at home, Sunderland at home, West Brom at home. Definately more points on offer in those games. Wolves/Sunderland yeah & individual circumstances still decided those games. Swansea/Wbrom i wouldnt say we could have expected much more. We drew 0-0 with Swansea and lost 2-3 against West Brom at home. Both teams currently ranked 8th and 12th respectively. Maybe we just have different expectations, if we are targeting Europe and beyond, using Pip's formula in the OP of the "Battle for 7th" thread, these are teams that we should be beating at home. I'm curious why you think we couldn't (shouldn't?) expect more than a total 1 point out of the potential 6 on offer?? You'd expect to win looking at them yeah. Swansea achieved their lowest poss all season in our game, went all out defence & theyre hard enough to score against when they dont do that as Man city found out. If you remember there was barely any space in the box atall, Ba had to do acrobatic overheads to get a shot that wasnt blocked & it was still saved. He also hit the post. Dont think we could have done much more. West Brom was just our defense for me due to having 1 Cb. 2 goals should be enough to get points from a game. Only Spurs/Arsenal/Swansea have put 3 past wbrom all season & swansea needed a penalty. So that leaves 2 sides who managed it & theyre 2 of the best attacking sides in the league. Possible to do? Yes. But no chance can we expect it. We just conceded to many.

We have a seasons worth of performances that show little correlation between possession/domination & results in comparison to the importance of simply having a very strong defensive system and attackers that will do enough to get the points. If teams have a very hard time scoring against you & you are good at putting the ball in the net, you will win games against most sides. Pardew has put in place the defensive system that achieves that & bought the attackers that do the business the other side. In what way is it likely that this will suddenly stop working?