Frazzle

I can already predict the post match interview with Hughton. "You can't fault the team for effort" and "We've got a game on Saturday where we can put things right"

They'll probably hear it when they're out drinking a couple of nights before the game so no need.

Doubt they'll score two mate.

Utter bollocks. We've played some fantastic football at times, it's a bad patch that needs fixing, stop talking as if every goal we've scored has been pure luck. We've never played good football really, some good results but not good football.

Don't think either of them will, Hughton said Colo will play Sat. very good news Yup, we should look a lot better when he's back.

Don't think either of them will, Hughton said Colo will play Sat.

Ask most people and they'd say Carroll at least put more effort in than Harewood, I realise putting effort in means more than chasing down balls but ignoring the ball two yards away is inexcusable. Hardly incredible bias, which is a bit rich coming from you.

It's good from the point of view we need someone in the managers chair. It's good from the point of view that it should bring some much needed stability. It's good that Hughton gets at least until the end of the season to prove himself. It's bad that the job hasn't gone to Mourinho/Hitzfeld/Sven etc etc etc but that's called being realistic. FWIW Ashleys is a sack of s***. Is that clearer for you? So Hughton gets until the end of the season to prove himself but Shearer can be written off as being **** after eight games? I am indeed having difficulty comprehending this. Now why are you bringing Shearer up? Your approach to judging the respective managers just seems really strange. One is given a full season (and pre-season to prove himself) while the other only got a handful of games. Or to put it another way one willingly stays at the club despite the uncertainty of his position while the other one f***s back off to MOTD. Our last 45 mins of football under Shearer is the most gutless performance I've seen from any Newcastle team - and I've seen us relegated 3 times. How's it Shearer's fault he has to go back to MOTD? I'm sure if Ashley offered him a contract he'd probably take it (although I'm less sure about this now) and if Ashley offered him a contract back at the start of June he'd have bitten his hands off. I don't disagree with the second bit though, although it's not really that great a reason not to give Shearer a second chance (not alone anyway). If you're going to judge Shearer on those eight games you should judge Hughton on his first eight games which were equally as bad (or at least very close to being as bad, despite being under less pressure and arguably having easier games). Hughton has apparently just been offered a managers contract, are you saying he should have f***ed off like Shearer at the end of last season? No? Hughton was under contract as a coach and took over as caretaker, Shearer had a contract for eight games which expired at the end of the season and Ashley seemingly didn't want to give him a contract. I don't see what Shearer was supposed to do? He clearly wanted the job and didn't want to run off. But he did. While Hughton stayed. Which of the two has done the most for us this season? We don't know if Shearer was offered a contract, obviously no-one knows what was going on but no paper ran with stories of 'Shearer turns down Newcastle.' It's obvious Shearer wanted to stay or he wouldn't have bothered going to any meetings with Ashley. Granted he may have wanted unreasonable demands but I think its safe to say Ashley wanted to spend nothing, why else would he put the club up for sale straight away after? Why not get another manager who'd work for half of what Shearer wanted and demand half as big a transfer kitty? And looking back over Ashley's reign I'm more inclined to believe unreasonableness from Ashley's side rather than Shearer's (and I'd say that with almost all manager's in Shearer's place). Also, I can't remember exactly (so may very well be wrong) but I don't think Hughton was ever offered a new contract, he just carried on with his coaching contract and this is why he's now negotiating a new, proper manager's contract. He's obviously done more for us this season but that's hardly Shearer's fault.

It wasn't every ball though was it? There was a couple of occasions where he lost the ball and he defender standing a couple of yards away had time to compose himself and make a clearance, Harewood didn't even have to run he just had to stick a foot in. Maybe if Harewood had've scored I'd be of a different opinion, call it fickle but it's harder to excuse no effort AND no goals.

Well to be honest I don't think Harewood deserves a place in the team after his lack of effort and hissy fits on Saturday.

Forgot this was tomorrow (today I guess now) I thought it was Wednesday. Harper R.Taylor--Simpson--Zurab--Jose Guthrie--Smith--Nolan--Jonas Carroll--Lovenkrands ...is what I'd go for, the team mostly picks itself with our injuries. I've been critical of Lovenkrands but he should still have a chance to play upfront. Scunthorpe is the perfect opportunity for him to show he is worthy of a striking place, as I think they've got a fairly leaky defence? Think it will be 0-1 (Nolan) as well.

It's good from the point of view we need someone in the managers chair. It's good from the point of view that it should bring some much needed stability. It's good that Hughton gets at least until the end of the season to prove himself. It's bad that the job hasn't gone to Mourinho/Hitzfeld/Sven etc etc etc but that's called being realistic. FWIW Ashleys is a sack of s***. Is that clearer for you? So Hughton gets until the end of the season to prove himself but Shearer can be written off as being **** after eight games? I am indeed having difficulty comprehending this. Now why are you bringing Shearer up? Your approach to judging the respective managers just seems really strange. One is given a full season (and pre-season to prove himself) while the other only got a handful of games. Or to put it another way one willingly stays at the club despite the uncertainty of his position while the other one f***s back off to MOTD. Our last 45 mins of football under Shearer is the most gutless performance I've seen from any Newcastle team - and I've seen us relegated 3 times. How's it Shearer's fault he has to go back to MOTD? I'm sure if Ashley offered him a contract he'd probably take it (although I'm less sure about this now) and if Ashley offered him a contract back at the start of June he'd have bitten his hands off. I don't disagree with the second bit though, although it's not really that great a reason not to give Shearer a second chance (not alone anyway). If you're going to judge Shearer on those eight games you should judge Hughton on his first eight games which were equally as bad (or at least very close to being as bad, despite being under less pressure and arguably having easier games). Hughton has apparently just been offered a managers contract, are you saying he should have f***ed off like Shearer at the end of last season? No? Hughton was under contract as a coach and took over as caretaker, Shearer had a contract for eight games which expired at the end of the season and Ashley seemingly didn't want to give him a contract. I don't see what Shearer was supposed to do? He clearly wanted the job and didn't want to run off.

It's good from the point of view we need someone in the managers chair. It's good from the point of view that it should bring some much needed stability. It's good that Hughton gets at least until the end of the season to prove himself. It's bad that the job hasn't gone to Mourinho/Hitzfeld/Sven etc etc etc but that's called being realistic. FWIW Ashleys is a sack of s***. Is that clearer for you? So Hughton gets until the end of the season to prove himself but Shearer can be written off as being **** after eight games? I am indeed having difficulty comprehending this. Now why are you bringing Shearer up? Your approach to judging the respective managers just seems really strange. One is given a full season (and pre-season to prove himself) while the other only got a handful of games. Or to put it another way one willingly stays at the club despite the uncertainty of his position while the other one f***s back off to MOTD. Our last 45 mins of football under Shearer is the most gutless performance I've seen from any Newcastle team - and I've seen us relegated 3 times. How's it Shearer's fault he has to go back to MOTD? I'm sure if Ashley offered him a contract he'd probably take it (although I'm less sure about this now) and if Ashley offered him a contract back at the start of June he'd have bitten his hands off. I don't disagree with the second bit though, although it's not really that great a reason not to give Shearer a second chance (not alone anyway). If you're going to judge Shearer on those eight games you should judge Hughton on his first eight games which were equally as bad (or at least very close to being as bad, despite being under less pressure and arguably having easier games).

It's good from the point of view we need someone in the managers chair. It's good from the point of view that it should bring some much needed stability. It's good that Hughton gets at least until the end of the season to prove himself. It's bad that the job hasn't gone to Mourinho/Hitzfeld/Sven etc etc etc but that's called being realistic. FWIW Ashleys is a sack of s***. Is that clearer for you? So Hughton gets until the end of the season to prove himself but Shearer can be written off as being **** after eight games? I am indeed having difficulty comprehending this. Now why are you bringing Shearer up? Your approach to judging the respective managers just seems really strange. One is given a full season (and pre-season to prove himself) while the other only got a handful of games.

If there is no long term plan, whats the point then ? I dont buy the "it gives us stability" line because we are, apparently, still on the market and being run by an incomptent bunch of fuckwits. Having a bloke in charge with the official title of "manager" doesnt change that one iota. Agreed. Changing Hughton's job title and giving him a bigger wage does not give us stability.

It's good from the point of view we need someone in the managers chair. It's good from the point of view that it should bring some much needed stability. It's good that Hughton gets at least until the end of the season to prove himself. It's bad that the job hasn't gone to Mourinho/Hitzfeld/Sven etc etc etc but that's called being realistic. FWIW Ashleys is a sack of s***. Is that clearer for you? So Hughton gets until the end of the season to prove himself but Shearer can be written off as being **** after eight games? I am indeed having difficulty comprehending this.

2sheds has started for him. Comprehension is not your strong point is it? Nor is arguing yours. 'Says the Shearer lover' I dunno I did a pretty good job on shredding your position on our last encounter when you couldn't prove 'I hated Keegan' So try again, where have I defended this decision? Take your time....................................... "Why does it matter if he's a 'Shearer lover' or not? Anyone can see Hughton's not up to the job regardless of whether Shearer is a good manager." Answer this first. Seems strange you'd even bring Shearer up, considering you harbour no ill feelings towards him... Jimmymag sat all starry eyed during Shearers disasterous 8 games in charge. Suddenly the same man is an expert on bad games. But that really has nothing to do with you does it? Now that I've answered your question its your turn. Found any proof yet to back up your twaddle? As I said, what does it matter what he thinks of Shearer? You can't even deconstruct the argument he made without resorting to 'Shearer lover', everyone can see Hughton isn't a very good manager and never will be, hence why Spurs never kept him on whenever he was caretaker for them or why he's never before had a manager's job despite being 50+. My turn then, how about saying sacking Robson is worse than appointing Hughton? Sacking Robson wasn't the problem, appointing Souness was much worse, Roeder probably worse still. Hughton's appointment would top Souness and Roeder's appointments never mind the Robson situation. I can't see how anyone can logically say sacking Robson (when we could've easily found a decent replacement and not a manager of a team lower than us) was worse than the potential appointment of Hughton. I can only think their ignoring the severity and stupidity of Ashley's decisions. For what reason? Who knows. Never mind asking another question where is your proof that I'm defending this decision? I explained why it looked like you were defending the decision. No-one in their right mind would say sacking Robson was worse than appointing Hughton (for the reasons I gave), it seems you're playing down what would literally be the worst decision in the clubs recent history and the only reason I can think anyone would do this is to try and defend Ashley. Do you think it is a good decision then?

2sheds has started for him. Comprehension is not your strong point is it? Nor is arguing yours. 'Says the Shearer lover' I dunno I did a pretty good job on shredding your position on our last encounter when you couldn't prove 'I hated Keegan' So try again, where have I defended this decision? Take your time....................................... "Why does it matter if he's a 'Shearer lover' or not? Anyone can see Hughton's not up to the job regardless of whether Shearer is a good manager." Answer this first. Seems strange you'd even bring Shearer up, considering you harbour no ill feelings towards him... Jimmymag sat all starry eyed during Shearers disasterous 8 games in charge. Suddenly the same man is an expert on bad games. But that really has nothing to do with you does it? Now that I've answered your question its your turn. Found any proof yet to back up your twaddle? As I said, what does it matter what he thinks of Shearer? You can't even deconstruct the argument he made without resorting to 'Shearer lover', everyone can see Hughton isn't a very good manager and never will be, hence why Spurs never kept him on whenever he was caretaker for them or why he's never before had a manager's job despite being 50+. My turn then, how about saying sacking Robson is worse than appointing Hughton? Sacking Robson wasn't the problem, appointing Souness was much worse, Roeder probably worse still. Hughton's appointment would top Souness and Roeder's appointments never mind the Robson situation. I can't see how anyone can logically say sacking Robson (when we could've easily found a decent replacement and not a manager of a team lower than us) was worse than the potential appointment of Hughton. I can only think their ignoring the severity and stupidity of Ashley's decisions. For what reason? Who knows.

2sheds has started for him. Comprehension is not your strong point is it? Nor is arguing yours. 'Says the Shearer lover' I dunno I did a pretty good job on shredding your position on our last encounter when you couldn't prove 'I hated Keegan' So try again, where have I defended this decision? Take your time....................................... "Why does it matter if he's a 'Shearer lover' or not? Anyone can see Hughton's not up to the job regardless of whether Shearer is a good manager." Answer this first. Seems strange you'd even bring Shearer up, considering you harbour no ill feelings towards him...

2sheds has started for him. Comprehension is not your strong point is it? Nor is arguing yours. 'Says the Shearer lover'

would you rather jfk? Don't be stupid, but Hughton is not the man to manage this club, the last 3 games have only confirmed the obvious. Says the Shearer lover Why does it matter if he's a 'Shearer lover' or not? Anyone can see Hughton's not up to the job regardless of whether Shearer is a good manager.

2sheds has started for him.

He is closer to them (but better) than the likes of Drogba and Torres IMO. True (although he arguably plays a slightly different role), I agree. Just didn't want him grouped with wannabes like Aguero.

Rooney is easily world class, he should never be coupled with the likes of Aguero and Anelka.

It's a sad day for the club when our reaction to Chris Hughton's appointment isn't this: