Jayson

Woulda preferred Guthrie in the middle, but he obviously doesnt fancy Lua lua. With Rtaylor playing at left back, doesnt leave many options.

Its very simple. Hughton deserves some praise & Shearer shouldnt judged on 8 games for the same reason you are saying. Your content to give Hughton 10 games & say nothing because you know how difficult it is to "raise levels of moral and motivate", but you think Shearer failed dismally because he didnt win in his first 5? It doesnt add up to well. We've no idea how Shearer would have done at this level, theres little reason to think we'd not have been doing just as well with a more premiership ready team.

Getting points against top 8 sides is quite a lot for a team in relegation form for the majority of the season. Portsmouth & stoke are the only games you could hope for more from. His 2nd & 4th match in charge. His biggest mistake was taking on a very poor side with 8 games left. Even then we were relegated because of a dissallowed goal & a deflection, things outside of his control by far. He had done enough to keep us up.

True. Reality is everythings shown us that we're already good enough to win this league regardless. We were winning games before Harewood joined. We won games with only Ranger upfront, Only Carroll upfront, Ranger & Carroll, Ameobi & Carroll, Harewood & Lovenkrands. Even with Butt in midfield, even with Geremi playing, even down to 10 men. The standard of opposition hasnt changed. Yet we come away worrying that if we dont sign certain positions it'll be risky. We are the most consistant side in this division. The only games we've lost is when we had both of our first choice centre backs out. Even when we concede with them, its normally after sitting back on taking the lead & a problem we give ourselves rather than being outplayed at 0-0. We've just had two crap games against bottom of the league sides & we're still 8 clear of 3rd with the two sides below us playing eachother next. We are prone to worrying, we look more than good enough.

Only normal teams would avoid giving a player a medical before hes about to play another game, we're Newcastle It all makes perfect sense

It took Keegan 10 games to get us a win. Including being thrashed 4-1 by Villa & 5-0 By Man united. We also didnt lose to a side outside the top 7 under him either & played our best football in a long time. Shearer did it in 6. 5 out of his 8 games we played teams in the top 8. We had a point stolen against Fulham with the disallowed goal, along with Bassong being sent off. We've then only lost to a Villa side needing a win to get 5th in the table due to a deflected goal. You cant expect a side who are all very low on confidence/belief after a crap season to turn it around instantaneously. Anyone judging Shearers managerial ability to be poor on the back of that is nuts.

What Zog needed was a decent manager to drill into him to pass after he'd gone past a player & not try to beat another two everytime. Losing the ball from trying to do to much was always his main fault. That and his temperament obviously, but if he'd been taught better he'd have been playing more & had less to moan about anyway.

I still think we'll go up without Harewood, so if we're bringing someone in may aswell take a risk. Beckfords clearly going to be Andy Cole part 2, its all set up perfectly.

Owens probably underated if anything

By the media Butt clearly wins this hands down

Jonas is better at what? Being spiderman

Had another watch of Bergkamps. I remembered it being a lot simpler than what i just watched Thought he just knocked it round using outside of his right as it was going along the floor. Great technique if he meant to do that tbf.

Jonas is better

Bergkamps is quick thinking to me, thats the main thing im impressed by. I dont see it as being an especially hard piece of skill to pull off though, just one that most wouldnt even think to do.

Was never that impressed by either Bergkamps or Di Canio's. Figueroa's probably wins

Guthrie could cover both 1 & 3 and Lovenkrands #2. We dont necessarily need to sign either. If Guthrie was played in the right place, lovenkrands pace would likely be used more effectively. Unfortunately the two currently in central midfield are neither the best passers or have the best vision & Guthrie plays on the other side of the pitch.

As has been said, that didnt only apply to him.

Agree with dcmk mostly. Colo wasnt up for it last season & you cant make excuses for him. As of yet there is no real reason to believe he'll be able to step up this time either. HOPEFULLY he'll have more confidence, better positioning & decision making after this season. Because as said, he doesnt have the attributes to do make up for it as others might when he cocks it up.

Its the idea behind the word effective that confuses things, makes it harder to explain than it needs to be. Which player improves our quality of football more than any other? Which player is in possession the most for us? Which player does most of our attacking play go through? So which player not being there would result in us both having the ball less & creating less? Which player takes more pressure of the defence because of the above than any other? etc Thats why i call him our most "effective" player. He does more for us as a team on his own, than any of the others. Our standards as a whole would drop more without him than any other. Whether he'd do it at a higher level is a sidepoint as i say, i think he would. Hes just very underated on here for what he gives us. If he doesnt score or set up a goal each game people think hes near useless or lazy/uninterested.

August 22nd Arsenal 4 Portsmouth 1. Man Utd 5 Wigan 0 December 31st Arsenal 4 Portsmouth 1. Man utd 5 Wigan 0 Bit strange that

I expect Jonas would do the same at a higher level, its a sidepoint anyway. Jonas makes our football as a whole better than most of them do, itd be the same at this level or the next. Simply because the way he plays makes us keep it on the floor, drives us foward and gives space to others. They make us a side who can score goals at a poor level with a team that would play very poor attacking football without Jonas - whilst also having far less possession. At a higher level, a team that plays good football is going to do better than one who plays rubbish football but can finish against Championship sides. I didnt say anything about Colo/taylor/enrique not being effective, i said theyre all atleast as or more effective than Jonas.

Nolan isnt more effective in his position atall. He gets goals at this level because its a crap level. He provides little to us as a team. Guthrie wouldnt get the time he has on the ball, or the ball atall half the time if not for Jonas. Shola is a similar argument to the above two together, except he plays much less part in build up play. Smith is useful at breaking things up to an extent, he doesnt do it as much as Jonas is on the ball. Taylor/Colo constantly break up play, atleast as much or more than Jonas is on the ball. So they are equally/ perhaps more effective. Enrique is similar except he does it slightly less than the above two. Harper Does well with what comes at him, would probably do the same at a higher standard. When you balance up what they give us vs what the poor side of their game takes away from us, id still say that yes Jonas is one of our most effective players.

No its just wrong

As i said. As a whole he has a bigger effect on our team than most of them. Hes more effective. If we replaced Ameobi/Nolan we'd likely still get goals. If we replaced Jonas we'd likely play long ball football even more than now & be under pressure for most of the game.

Name them Harper - Maybe Enrique - Maybe Coloccini - Equallyso Taylor - Equallyso Smith - No Nolan - No Guthrie - No, not on the wing. Changed my mind. Shola - No