Punk77

Fantastic save by. I will be gutted if he's not our no 1 next season.

If we get a decent offer, sell him. Although he's been doing a great job in defense, he's way to weak in attack. It's worrying that Ferguson, who is completely inexperienced at this level, managed to create more in attack against Stoke. Ferguson was not afraid to challenge if his opponent had no safety, and he succeeded to. Simpson on the other hand hit a support pass when he met the slightest of resistance. A modern back must be good in attack too. That gives us more options. But I have no objections if he stays. His work ethic is good, and he's shown improvement in defense. But I do not see him as a first choice next season. He's a solid backup.

For me it's an easy choice. This is a man that almost bankrupted the club, he was injured most of the time, didn't originally want to play for us but changed his mind when he saw the salary offered, went straight home after football practice and generally didn't give a damn about the club's destiny. Although Fred and Souness are equally to blame for bringing in this idiot, Owen still is the biggest mercenary fuck to be associated with this club.

Name the players that we were after and how much they were going to cost. We were after Larsson, but failed to agree personal terms. We had two bids for N'Zobia turned down (10 and 12 mill).

You're hilariously gullible. And you're hilariously idiotic. The fact that Pards wasn't able to bring in players, does not mean he didn't try. But I'm glad they were not keen to be held ransom for some stupid wage demands for a mediocre player like Larsson. But I'm willing to question why they loaned out Routledge and Xisco. They're needed now. I guess they took a gamble. It might pay off if because it enables the club to save even more money which can be plowed into new players next season. If we go down on the other hand, those loans will be seen as pretty stupid. But I'm fairly certain we'll cope.

FFS! They club tried to bring in many players during the january window. But unlike before, it was not willing to pay more than what the players were worth. The price of Carroll represents a good example of how idiotic the january window is. We'll be fine. We have a 2 weeks off and multiple players will be back soon. And we're meeting many of the dumping candidates at home.

Do you actually think any other manager would have done better? We have FIVE first team players out. And we have not enough depth to replace them. There are very few teams that have a sufficient squad to replace so many players. I'm worried about relegation too, However, the reason why we've ended in this situation has little to do with pardew, but with us being without non-replaceable players for far to many games.

Tbf to Pards, the current injury situation is horrific and puts serious limits on his tactics. We are down to our bones, and when so many key players are missing, it's obvious that the results will suffer. I think Chris would not have done any better under similar circumstances. It's in the dying stages of the season, like we're now, that the match program is taking its toll. As the season progresses, so do the amount of injuries and suspensions. Pardew has been without Barton for a total 6 matches due to injury, and Tiote has already been out for three, and is will now be out for two more. They're our most important players without a doubt. Them out= many points lost. CH on the other hand benefited from Carroll and almost an injury free squad. In other words it's hard to compare CH with Pardew. Also, most managers would have struggled under a similar injury situation.

In what way? I don't see how he could do any worse than Harper's been doing. Agreed. Krul's weakness is first and foremost his ability to sweep behind the defense, which is Harper's strong side. But Krul has good reactions. I'm pretty sure that Krul would have saved Sturredge shot. Harper seems helpless on shots from distance. He doesn't have the agility. Using Harper will not benefit us at all, he's not a keeper for the future, while Krul is. Abilitywise they're probably even steven right now. The difference is that Harper never will be a better keeper than he's now. Playing Harper will only hinder Krul's development.

Agreed! He's scored 11 goals, but still he inhibits our game since the offensive distribution responsibility falls on our defensive midfielder. Without Barton, we suck. Judging from position played, it's Nolan who should take charge, but he doesn't. The question that needs to be asked is: Could we have scored more goals without Nolan than with him. It's likely that a more movable and creative offensive midfielder could have created more goals for our other players than Nolan's 11. We have not the best attacking line. But tbf, the service they're getting is utter rubbish. Loven is all about runs behind the defense line, however he's not received one good through pass the whole season! I think you'll find Lovenkrands problems are far greater than the quality of service he's received this season. EDIT: the rest of your post is another dollop of cliched codswallop, once again served up in a unique PUnk77 format. Loven has been rubbish, I agree. But his play is suffering tremendously since we have no midfielder that's able to hit a through pass! The only exception is Carroll's third goal against Sunderland. Now we're forced playing with Nolan due to our injury situation. But his limitations on the pitch should be acknowledged. Yes he's our top scorer, but his play "steals" goals from other players. It's almost like Bent: He bags plenty, but the way he conducts himself on the pitch, makes it harder for other players than him to score goals. Last season, that resulted in Sunderland being highly dependent on Bent, since his movements and style of play precluded others from getting into good scoring positions. The same goes from Nolan. His inability to distribute the ball, makes it harder for everybody else since the attackers are not getting through balls and the ball is not distributed to the wide men where the opponent defense is not organized. It's only Barton crossing from right to left. Consequently Barton and Simpson are always playing against an established defense.

Agreed! He's scored 11 goals, but still he inhibits our game since the offensive distribution responsibility falls on our defensive midfielder. Without Barton, we suck. Judging from position played, it's Nolan who should take charge, but he doesn't. The question that needs to be asked is: Could we have scored more goals without Nolan than with him. It's likely that a more movable and creative offensive midfielder could have created more goals for our other players than Nolan's 11. We have not the best attacking line. But tbf, the service they're getting is utter rubbish. Loven is all about runs behind the defense line, however he's not received one good through pass the whole season!

Whether fit or not, I'd be imposing a 48 hour ban of the city centre nightspots before any game for our players. Totally unprofessional that these clowns are recovering from injuries and are arsing about on the drink when they should be taking it easy. I think in years to come (and it may take a while) clubs will end up banning their players from city centre nightlife. It creates nothing positive. Agreed! Intake of alcohol makes the injury heal slower. Fucking amateurs.. It's especially serious when we consider our injury situation..

Still Harper's mistake. Maybe Campell should have done better. But you should not give away the ball like Harper did. The defense line was logically disorganized which gave Stoke enough room to take advantage of the cross.

He practically ruined the second half before we got started. Excluding the goal, Stoke had nothing in the first half. I honestly believed that we could turn this around. And then Harper decides to seal the match. An unforgivable mistake for such an experienced keeper. He also should have taken the shot from Sturredge. With a better keeper, we would have had 2 points more, minimum. Loan out Krul next season, Forster as keeper no 1, and Harper as reserve..

They had the same problem with Morientes. Lpool didn't understand how dependent he was on solid wing play. . So let's all hope they continue to display the same ignorance when it comes to Carroll.

They actually play some sexy football too. The match against Bristol was fantastic.

appreciation thread? My sentiments exactly. Tread title should be changed to something more derogatory..

Fantastic manager, but he's a fucking cunt off the pitch. Constantly harassing referees, completely forgetting the infamous "fergie-time." Managed to complain about Carra's tackle, but at the same time defended Shrek's elbow. Hypocrite motherfucker.

True, but at the same time a lot of clubs used player sales to gradually progress. Spurs have to a certain extent. I just hope we keep Enrique basically, that's the safest bet. As much as I hate the c***s, Spurs is a prime example. Their netspend was pretty minimal until recently (selling the likes of Carrick, Berbatov, Keane, Defoe) for big fees and building the squad with that cash. It's only really been the last year or so that the net spend has increased a lot and are spending big without needing to sell their star players...and even then I reckon if a mega club offers over the odds for the likes of Bale or Modric they'd struggle to keep hold of them. The way Spurs and Arse have build their squads are good examples yes. Right now we're not able to hold onto our best players if they want to go. But through building brick by brick, we can develop enough depth to establish ourselves at around the European spots. Selling Carrick allowed Spurs to buy the likes of Bale. And us selling Enrique, could make it possible for us to go out and buy good talents with loads of potential.

I also believe that's the ambitions and not the money that will cause him to leave us.

He should be on a par with Ben Arfa, Tiote, Barton (if he signs a new contract), Jonas, etc. Anymore than that and you get a situation where the rest want more which completely goes against any wage structure we've set up. Also, I'm sure he was more than happy with £40k or whatever it was when he was playing the likes of Doncaster, Preston & Scunthorpe. Agreed! if he's not satisfied with such an offer, then so be it. Making an exception for Enrique, could lead to a never ending spiral where players under contract negotiations will use Enrique's new salary as a justification for their demands. That will put the club in a weak position where it either must accept the blackmail (and risk the club's economical viability) or is forced to sell those players in question. Breaking the salary structure could also unsettle players just signed, such as Tiote or HBA, which is something we absolutely do not want.

When I was referring to the previous salary-regime, it pointed to to the previous salary policy that was installed by FS but continued by MA,until the latter took to his senses and installed a wage cap.

It's a dangerous path to take. If he's given let us say £80 000 a week, that's not suddenly going to improve his play further. If his heart is not in the right place, his performances will suffer, like the ones he's given us lately. There's no direct connection between pay and performance, like you obviously think. We cannot buy motivation. We've experienced that earlier through the likes of Owen and Luqe. The most important thing for us now is to improve our overall squad depth. If Enrique doesn't sign, we're able to bring in van aanholt and an two three good talents for the money we save on Enrique's salary and his sales price. That might hurt us in the short run, but Van Anholt might improve, and if he's injured or suspended we have better players to replace him than Perch.

Everything is relative. If he'd been on a lousy contract such as Tiote's original deal, he's in his rights to claim a new and improved contract. But the man signed under the previous regime, so he's already well paid. Some reports believe he's on 60 000 a week. He's not worth more. Although he had to stuck with a club in turmoil, we must not forget that he wasn't an instant success. He should remember that one of the reasons for his current development should be ascribed to the fact that the club has continued to play with him, despite some weak displays. The first two seasons he was an unstable performer, with some great displays but also some horrific. This is the first season that he's delivered consistently on the highest level. I want Enrique to stay, but not for all cost. I honestly believe that we're able to find an replacement that could be just as good if given time. We should not offer him ludicrous money. If he wants to quit, it's not because of the money, since he's already well paid. He wants new challenges.

For me he should be the back up to the first choice atm Disagree. From what I've seen of him, he's first team material. His ticket to Chelsea's first team is exceptional expensive since they got Cole. The only way we're able to sign him is if he knows he's replacing Enrique. Besides, if we're as patient with Van Aanolt as we've been with Enrique, he could develop into one hell of a lb. Remember that Enrique was mediocre for two seasons.. I think Van Aanholt is not interested in changing club just to be backup, again.