Interpolic

Our set pieces to Williamson remind me of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem

Aaaand, that's what we're gaining with Debuchy.

FUCK!

Balls, QPR winning.

That was fucking shit, both Shola and Cisse.

Floated to Williamson.

Wouldn't bother if I was you, Mapou.

What a guy. The only role he's less suited for than Newcastle manager is one of those police negotiators who tries to persuade people not to jump off buildings, the negative bastard. "Everyone else has it way better than you, you might as well just give up mate!"

Hang on, why is everyone talking about Shola?

There's so much intent like, it's lovely to see.

Fair enough, I meant he failed in August.

- That's a stupid question, how can I answer whether he's failed in the long term? - In my job there are sometimes mitigating circumstances but one side of the fence needs to swallow it up and commit more time/money/resource to compensate. There's sometimes a bit of debate over who does that but generally it's fairly obvious, i.e. it's one side's fault or whatever. I think it takes us too long to do deals and we only ever seem to do one at a time. And we only focus on a handful of markets. It's very small-scale and if a transfer falls through we're back to square one, and at the end of the day it gives a very convenient excuse for our net spend every window to be minimal (if anything's spent at all) and for us to keep soldiering on with the same absolutely fucking shite players in the team week after week.

We played Danny Simpson and James Perch there for half a season, we're now a few points off relegation. We should have paid the price or moved on to the next target.

Very related question: Would you have advocated matching QPR's terms and getting Remy? Nope. So you accept there are sensible limits we should adhere to, and that even in this pressurised environment we have to stay true to our wage structure etc etc...? I mean I think we've pretty much covered all this but I thought I should at least reply where I've asked a question I'm in agreement about 1 isolated situation. I was discussing this earlier, think of Llambias' job as if he was actually tasked with improving our squad and progressing us as a football club in the short and long term (I personally doubt this is anywhere near the top of his list of priorities, but let's set that aside). Well in that case he's failed, it doesn't matter why he's failed. And in January he's failing, it doesn't matter why he's failing but he's failing. In my job I get given a deadline, a budget and that's it. If I don't meet it then I'm fucked unless I can justifiably blame it another party. What's the difference here? He needs to bring in players as that's the fans' expectation and he's not doing it. We ended last summer with a smaller squad than the season just gone, despite having come off a season where we were quite clearly lucky with injuries and would have more games due to Europe. That's negligent to the club, it's an absolute joke that they're not moving heaven and Earth to sort it now.

We're in agreement in a sense but I don't think the January market's as complex as you make it out to be, and it doesn't help that we only focus fully on 1 league and half arsed on another 2 or 3. This will always happen, we will always only have 2 or 3 targets and if they fall through then we go with what we've got for yet another half-season. And it will always be an excuse for the 'higher-ups' at NUFC to spend fuck-all. An additional point is that I think these daft cunts have dug us into a hole where we should consider stopgaps, loans, short-term deals, etc. But they won't. Their 'principles' might end up forcing us out of the league, especially if our demoralised squad don't pick up at least 4 points from the next 2 games.

Very related question: Would you have advocated matching QPR's terms and getting Remy? Nope.

That's rubbish. I'm more inclined to believe that you may have to bid £500k or so more on Jan 1st than Jan 31st perhaps, in which case you should just do it. And anyway, we get the other argument all the time from manager and board on deadline day. "Ah well, we were so close to the deadline that clubs were demanding ridiculous prices". That's why we didn't even try to replace Andy Carroll after a few enquiries, risking another relegation. You swallow everything they feed you mate, I find it very strange that an intelligent person would never question it.

And if you don't think we need every possible advantage at the moment you're really in for a shock. Imagine the buzz tomorrow if we'd started the game with a new forward, blitzed Reading and pushed on from there. But no "There's no question of bringing in signings before any particular game in January for me". If they gave a fuck about the club they'd have been gutted at their summer indecision by October and would have started lining things up. They're trying to get away with the smallest possible outlay they can man, and you know it.

:lol: So they fucked up in August but they can't be expected to make up the difference a bit in January? You're unbelievable mate.

Well it would have been canny to have not been forced to play Obertan and Williamson tomorrow in a crucial game that could end up being the difference between us staying up and going down, that's all. We've had 19 days to ensure that's not the case, we're gambling on a smaller scale by leaving it late in that respect.

You're not bothered about tomorrow's result then?

Well we agree, but my point is we'll see in the next 2 weeks. If we don't bring in a forward and a centre half then it doesn't matter if we stay up or not, he's taking the risk.

So he'll get in the players we need before Feb 1st. Phew. Cheers for letting us know.