Crayola Kid

That Ronaldo stat is absolute bollocks. It is actually 21. U sure? Either way, fuckin hell

Aye he's not a lone striker He got an award as best attacking mid for last season - is this where he played for tenerife? Is that maybe just behind a lone striker? Anyone?

That's the thing. Raging vs four wins on the bounce. That's why I am thinking whether I'd like us to win or draw versus lose by 5 tomorrow in terms of the bigger picture. Wanting the team I've supported for 40 years, and which is in trouble, to lose heavily. f***ing hell. yeah, some SUPPORTer you are I know it isn't an easy think to come to terms with, I've spent enough time thinking about it myself, but: Lost 5 games in a row, fail to score in any of them Beat Spurs That sequence then sets us up for another 5 game losing streak being acceptable because we got one good result. One match in the wider scheme of things means nothing. i don't want the utter, utter mediocrity our chairman and manager think are OK to go on any more. What kind of supporter is our chairman if he thinks failing to score for nine hours is acceptable? I wouldn't want to have one of my fingers cut off, either, but if I thought it'd stop disease from spreading to the rest of my body, I'd lop the f***er off myself. I absolutely guarantee you, if we keep this manager, we will finish 15th or below AGAIN this season. And he'll still be our manager next season, even if we get relegated. Who the f*** would want that? Saw a stat today that rams home how badly villa are doing. I know he's incredible, but it's now true that Ronaldo has scored 20 times himself since Villa last scored. It took a lot of getting my head around, and I even checked it to be sure. Since your last goal, 13th sep, CR7 has 20 Says lots about him, but lots about you lot, too

Pardews paradox - the manager under the least threat of the sack for poor results is the most cautious/negative manager in the league. If he isnt going to be sacked, what is he afraid of? He should be throwing everything in the squad at the opposition week in, week out, having fun trying to score as many as possible and fuck the consequences. He has in a way got license to do this as that awful run of results hasnt shifted him from his job?! Maybe he has started to realise it? Nah

Loved the pass he hit to find Cabella on the opposite side of the pitch - hammered it to the lads feet to give him time to shoot before the defence could react

So, the ref tells liverpool wall to move back, they refuse and instead of booking someone the refs caves in? Then they creep over his line when he draws it where they told him to? What a load of crap from the players AND the ref

It's a load of drivel though, as we had the second best defence in the league that season despite what the press tell you. We lost the league because Ferdinand's arse fell out, and also Lee stopped scoring for about 3 months too. If we'd have had Shearer for that run-in we would have won it, due to him being a lot tougher mentally than Sir Les. So I can totally understand why Keegan decided to bring him in. I've never heard anyone blame Ferdinand and Lee before. Is this a commonly held view? No. I agree with the point re Ferdinand, and know many others who went home and away every week back then who agree too. He lost it at the worst possible time - a moment of composure from him v Man Utd at home for example, and we'd have made it. Batty in, Clarke out - that was as much a reason as any for results dipping that season. Clarkey played it forward whenever possible, whereas Batty was all about keeping possession and so didnt look for the forward pass as often, or as quickly. The team was better at attacking quickly, Sir Les especially, and so just didnt do as well after that switch. Not sure whether Shearer would have done any better than Les in that run in as it was, but I reckon he'd have argued for getting the ball forward more quickly as a basic tactic

You're not boxing it down. You have to box it down

exactly, even villa flood people forward when they know they can break...been watching for 3 years pardew's tactics of leaving it to 1-2 players to try and break down a defence i think it's finally going to unravel 'cause he no longer has a ba or remy to do it for him Twice when we have managed to get bodies forward, Sissoko has played a rubbish first time pass under no pressure. He does this a lot

Combined, or individually?

Made more tackles than anyone else on our team, according to Who Scored. Proper livewire, and not as lightweight as he looked in photos

Gouffran strolling like a good un as they pass around him

For sure, the thing is, we all know there are costs but the 'net figure' posts and websites dedicated to 'net figures' never include them. Elephant in the room. Net figures as they are given are useful to get a picture of what is being spent and in what direction the investment is going but they arent all they are supposed to be?

It's been suggested that the tranfer policy is incomings must be paid for by outgoings. Any other income will be used for servicing debt and a rainy day fund if we're relegation threatened come January. Happy Face, as someone who pulls an enormous amount of detail from the financial side of how the club is run, can you not factor in some of the cash lost during a transfer, when looking for a net figure over a period of time? I mean, the agent must be paid for, the player takes a cut, a ten million pound transfer can't net a club ten million pounds, can it? I think of the movement of money in these deals as being like the movement of water in a game on 'It's A Knockout', spilling out everywhere. This isn't to say NUFC have spent more than the net amount, but all clubs, because money leaks out every time a player is bought or sold, that's why agents like to tout players around, and why certain agents move certain players as often as possible (or try to at least). Can you put a figure on it? Sure it will vary, but say it was a ten million pound sale - can anyone hazard a guess as to how much the selling club will bank? I know clubs have lots of costs, and some people will say that these payments should be lumped in with wages etc, but for me they are solely brought around by the transfer happening and so should come off the net figure when discussing transfer business over a set period. Ten million pound sale, what do you say? 8 mil in the bank? 7? 9.5? i just whack in the amounts reported when a sale happens. There are no reports of agents fees or owt so not something I could reasonably include and source. Fair enough, and it's the same everywhere (other media, forums), but it's a huge thing to miss when building an overall picture. If a player takes ten percent (a benchmark I've heard often enough?), then over a period where 50m is taken in sales, there are costs of 5m before any payments are made to agents. I imagine it to be around 15 percent, but that's without any specific knowledge other than such as you pick up when reading various sources. Shouldnt be used to defend our club when all clubs are in the same boat, but it does suggest money above that received in sales has been spent this year so far. Still, maybe Tiote will cover that

It's been suggested that the tranfer policy is incomings must be paid for by outgoings. Any other income will be used for servicing debt and a rainy day fund if we're relegation threatened come January. Happy Face, as someone who pulls an enormous amount of detail from the financial side of how the club is run, can you not factor in some of the cash lost during a transfer, when looking for a net figure over a period of time? I mean, the agent must be paid for, the player takes a cut, a ten million pound transfer can't net a club ten million pounds, can it? I think of the movement of money in these deals as being like the movement of water in a game on 'It's A Knockout', spilling out everywhere. This isn't to say NUFC have spent more than the net amount, but all clubs, because money leaks out every time a player is bought or sold, that's why agents like to tout players around, and why certain agents move certain players as often as possible (or try to at least). Can you put a figure on it? Sure it will vary, but say it was a ten million pound sale - can anyone hazard a guess as to how much the selling club will bank? I know clubs have lots of costs, and some people will say that these payments should be lumped in with wages etc, but for me they are solely brought around by the transfer happening and so should come off the net figure when discussing transfer business over a set period. Ten million pound sale, what do you say? 8 mil in the bank? 7? 9.5?

I think Pardew's 'shape' has for a long time been better described as 4 3 2 1, rather than a 4 2 3 1. The role Jonas played, until Gouffran took it over, may have had nominal attacking responsibilities, but was and is more about allowing fullbacks to overlap. In short, most of the line-ups above have one more forward than we will end up playing with, and one less covering-midfielder-shown-in-a-wide-position-on-the-sky-graphics-but-who-actually-sits-in-when-we-break. Three attackers behind a striker? Not likely, IMO. This is why I agree with those who think Colback will play most weeks when fit, I think it suits his game to a tee. It doesnt get the heart racing but going on what Pardew has served up before it's what I think we'll get. Krul Janmaat Colo Willo Haidara Anita/Sissoko Tiote Colback Cabella De Jong Riviere

Mike Ashley needs to up his game if he's going to keep seeing off the young pretenders: http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/jul/03/massimo-cellino-leeds-united-paddy-kenny

They were both long journeys home... I'll never forget listening to that Fenton game, genuinely traumatic. Ian, I was a young lad with a season ticket, but no sky tv. I had a new lass though, who's dad had sky, so I went round there. It was in Sunderland. The old man (god rest his soul) was out of his chair, screaming at both goals. What a fucking night. I was out like a shot at full time, me and the lass went to the local to pack as many drinks into an hour as was possible before the pub shut. I couldnt look at him, fuming like. Water under the bridge in the end, married his daughter, got on very well eventually. That was a fucking awful night though. That stupid cunt who lost his dog on youtube brought it all back a year or two ago, as well.

Think about Cabaye. Good player, found his feet, very good player. Current footballing logic dictates he has to go. Has to. Did. The next one will, too. Thats under any owner who isnt 'the proposed scenario'. Imagine a manager who is the equivalent of Cabaye, and somehow we get him. He finds his feet after showing promise in another league. He prospers. He'd have to leave, too. How many players and managers do we watch, as they improve and inevitably leave, before the Devil's deal becomes tempting? I watched the lads leave in the 80's, Waddle, Beardsley, Gascoigne. That was meant to be over, when we were bought out. It's back. The next Keegan, if he was manager, would catch the eye with us amd win the league with someone else. Fuck that man, I'm in for the ride.

I'd take the re-brand, but understand those who wouldn't. For me, football has changed so much already that you may as well take the ride and enjoy it. And in the scenario proposed, we're still called Newcastle, yeah? That's plenty. It would be generations before the legend of the clubs history was more about the new brand. When John Hall talked about a midweek european super league, he wanted us to get on board as he knew those who missed out were toast. I agreed when he said it, but we fell short, and when the real big money arrived we fell away. If we'd have made the jump before the money arrived, and gotten ourselves onto the top table it would have been huge for the club, the fans, the region as a whole. It didnt quite happen, I'd take a second chance under the proposed circumstances. It doesnt change anything that happened in the past, and it would be the only likely way of us matching the teams of the mid-90's and early 00's for skill and excitement. Those level players, if they arent good enough for Man City or whoever, they sit on the bench at a top club now, they don't sign for us. One last point. If we said no, and watched Red Bull Sunderland join the elite instead, would that be enough to make you regret it? Whats the real difference in saying 'you bought the league' and saying 'you won the derby cos you had the world record striker playing for you'?

Fred would raise 5m a season in sponsorhip money, in place of all of the SD signage. Then pay himself 5m a season in wages and dividends. Neither for me.

It's worse than 'for no money'. The out of contract players will get loyalty bonuses for seeing their contracts out, often estimated at around about a years wages.

Remember Glenn Roeders quotes about Oba Martins being on fire in training. Wished at the time of one of the journos present would have thrown back 'Yeah, Glenn, but that's against Titus Bramble...'

They have 10 games left, and they are all cup finals now! Good job Mackems fucking love cup finals!!!1!

Imagine what it would have looked like without Colo! He seems to have noticed that no-one seems capable of making anything happen, but he cant be playmaker from centre half ffs