samptime29

Steve Bruce is nowhere near important enough to write stuff like this about, it's ludicrous from Edwards. Only way to unite the fan base.........FIGHT!......... or get a new manager Careful, the Judge and Samp will be on here ridiculing your brave ideas. Not really given I want rid of Bruce. Judge/Samp, there is a good piece in The Mag by Jim Robertson regarding the media bias and unfair reporting on Bruce/Newcastle United. The responses are great (as in fans have had enough). Then there is a brilliant story by George Caulkin in The Athletic slagging off Steve McManaman for his outrageous platitudes towards Bruce. You really need to read them and realise that we fans do have a voice and it now doesn't seem so silly of me saying we really need to take the gutter media to task. Just saying. I want a new better manager next season. I want the takeover asap. If next season, we are stuck with no takeover, and with Bruce and Ashley, I will be pissed off and angry about it.

If you look at the table and the table alone, then technically Bruce has not done a bad job. If you look at the actual football that is played then it's been a worse job than even Carver pulled off....at least a few of his attempts at managing games got above 35% possession. The only time a respectable football team should win a match like that is if it's a 2nd/3rd division team against one of the top six and it's been a massively hard fought shock. No topflight premiership team should be sitting in their own 18 yard box for 3/4 of every game regardless of opposition and expect to get any results other than through luck. Bruce has had us playing like a league 1 side, scared to death of every other team they've come up against (except for maybe Bournemouth). No modern manager should have only one plan that consists of putting 10 men behind the ball every game and hoping to score a goal on a counter attack. Fine against top half teams, but when it's against relegation candidates its pure cowardice and being more concerned with not losing than winning. This should not be considered acceptable by anyone who wants the best for their team. Loved Carver's free flowing football. Tasty on the eye and we got results. :lol: Recent games possession: Southampton away 62% Sheffield United home 46% Villa home 52% Bournemouth 45% West Ham home 57% Every game above 35%. Yes we don't usually have much of the ball, but you can't argue Carver was better, because he sometimes got above 35% possession. Use facts, use evidence in your arguments man. Not this knacker using "facts" again. We can't play against 10 men all the time you know. Two recent games. Palace away game 56% possession. Burnley home game 54% possession. Facts back up your argument. You should try it sometime. I find facts can distort the truth sometimes. I'm a good believer in using common sense and my own judgement on subjects I'm well versed in. You should try sometime it instead of acting like a robot. You believe we played better football under Carver? 15% win ratio, 8 losses in a row, and 3 total wins in 20 games, but we played better football than we do now? Do you agree with gjohnson? Try reading the post properly again you plum. Never said Carver was any good cos he wasn't, he was utter garbage, but he didn't send out a starting eleven to cower in their own half and hope the other team made a balls up and conceded You said: " If you look at the actual football that is played then it's been a worse job than even Carver pulled off....at least a few of his attempts at managing games got above 35% possession." I provided evidence that is the last 7 games (excluding City) our possession stats were 45% to 62%. Do you see why you look a moron now? Even Rod doesn't agree with you on this. Even my good friend LV wouldn't agree with you on this one. Carver was the worst manager we've had in my lifetime. Worst football, worst manager. This point isn't up for debate.

If you look at the table and the table alone, then technically Bruce has not done a bad job. If you look at the actual football that is played then it's been a worse job than even Carver pulled off....at least a few of his attempts at managing games got above 35% possession. The only time a respectable football team should win a match like that is if it's a 2nd/3rd division team against one of the top six and it's been a massively hard fought shock. No topflight premiership team should be sitting in their own 18 yard box for 3/4 of every game regardless of opposition and expect to get any results other than through luck. Bruce has had us playing like a league 1 side, scared to death of every other team they've come up against (except for maybe Bournemouth). No modern manager should have only one plan that consists of putting 10 men behind the ball every game and hoping to score a goal on a counter attack. Fine against top half teams, but when it's against relegation candidates its pure cowardice and being more concerned with not losing than winning. This should not be considered acceptable by anyone who wants the best for their team. Loved Carver's free flowing football. Tasty on the eye and we got results. :lol: Recent games possession: Southampton away 62% Sheffield United home 46% Villa home 52% Bournemouth 45% West Ham home 57% Every game above 35%. Yes we don't usually have much of the ball, but you can't argue Carver was better, because he sometimes got above 35% possession. Use facts, use evidence in your arguments man. Not this knacker using "facts" again. We can't play against 10 men all the time you know. Two recent games. Palace away game 56% possession. Burnley home game 54% possession. Facts back up your argument. You should try it sometime. I find facts can distort the truth sometimes. I'm a good believer in using common sense and my own judgement on subjects I'm well versed in. You should try sometime it instead of acting like a robot. You believe we played better football under Carver? 15% win ratio, 8 losses in a row, and 3 total wins in 20 games, but we played better football than we do now? Do you agree with gjohnson? No Good - we've found some common ground.

If you look at the table and the table alone, then technically Bruce has not done a bad job. If you look at the actual football that is played then it's been a worse job than even Carver pulled off....at least a few of his attempts at managing games got above 35% possession. The only time a respectable football team should win a match like that is if it's a 2nd/3rd division team against one of the top six and it's been a massively hard fought shock. No topflight premiership team should be sitting in their own 18 yard box for 3/4 of every game regardless of opposition and expect to get any results other than through luck. Bruce has had us playing like a league 1 side, scared to death of every other team they've come up against (except for maybe Bournemouth). No modern manager should have only one plan that consists of putting 10 men behind the ball every game and hoping to score a goal on a counter attack. Fine against top half teams, but when it's against relegation candidates its pure cowardice and being more concerned with not losing than winning. This should not be considered acceptable by anyone who wants the best for their team. Loved Carver's free flowing football. Tasty on the eye and we got results. :lol: Recent games possession: Southampton away 62% Sheffield United home 46% Villa home 52% Bournemouth 45% West Ham home 57% Every game above 35%. Yes we don't usually have much of the ball, but you can't argue Carver was better, because he sometimes got above 35% possession. Use facts, use evidence in your arguments man. Not this knacker using "facts" again. We can't play against 10 men all the time you know. Two recent games. Palace away game 56% possession. Burnley home game 54% possession. Facts back up your argument. You should try it sometime. I find facts can distort the truth sometimes. I'm a good believer in using common sense and my own judgement on subjects I'm well versed in. You should try sometime it instead of acting like a robot. You believe we played better football under Carver? 15% win ratio, 8 losses in a row, and 3 total wins in 20 games, but we played better football than we do now? Do you agree with gjohnson?

If you look at the table and the table alone, then technically Bruce has not done a bad job. If you look at the actual football that is played then it's been a worse job than even Carver pulled off....at least a few of his attempts at managing games got above 35% possession. The only time a respectable football team should win a match like that is if it's a 2nd/3rd division team against one of the top six and it's been a massively hard fought shock. No topflight premiership team should be sitting in their own 18 yard box for 3/4 of every game regardless of opposition and expect to get any results other than through luck. Bruce has had us playing like a league 1 side, scared to death of every other team they've come up against (except for maybe Bournemouth). No modern manager should have only one plan that consists of putting 10 men behind the ball every game and hoping to score a goal on a counter attack. Fine against top half teams, but when it's against relegation candidates its pure cowardice and being more concerned with not losing than winning. This should not be considered acceptable by anyone who wants the best for their team. Loved Carver's free flowing football. Tasty on the eye and we got results. :lol: Recent games possession: Southampton away 62% Sheffield United home 46% Villa home 52% Bournemouth 45% West Ham home 57% Every game above 35%. Yes we don't usually have much of the ball, but you can't argue Carver was better, because he sometimes got above 35% possession. Use facts, use evidence in your arguments man. Not this knacker using "facts" again. We can't play against 10 men all the time you know. Two recent games. Palace away game 56% possession. Burnley home game 54% possession. Facts back up your argument. You should try it sometime.

If you look at the table and the table alone, then technically Bruce has not done a bad job. If you look at the actual football that is played then it's been a worse job than even Carver pulled off....at least a few of his attempts at managing games got above 35% possession. The only time a respectable football team should win a match like that is if it's a 2nd/3rd division team against one of the top six and it's been a massively hard fought shock. No topflight premiership team should be sitting in their own 18 yard box for 3/4 of every game regardless of opposition and expect to get any results other than through luck. Bruce has had us playing like a league 1 side, scared to death of every other team they've come up against (except for maybe Bournemouth). No modern manager should have only one plan that consists of putting 10 men behind the ball every game and hoping to score a goal on a counter attack. Fine against top half teams, but when it's against relegation candidates its pure cowardice and being more concerned with not losing than winning. This should not be considered acceptable by anyone who wants the best for their team. Loved Carver's free flowing football. Tasty on the eye and we got results. :lol: Recent games possession: Southampton away 62% Sheffield United home 46% Villa home 52% Bournemouth 45% West Ham home 57% Every game above 35%. Yes we don't usually have much of the ball, but you can't argue Carver was better, because he sometimes got above 35% possession. Use facts, use evidence in your arguments man. Read the post properly. Not saying Carver was any good as he clearly wasn't, but the football was still better than anything served up by your mate Steve. I've learned the hard way. I used to ignore him but just lately I have had a go back at him. He just loves an argument. Just wait, you'll see. The football was shite under Carver. What the fuck are you about man? We lost 8 in a row under Carver. He won 3 games, drew 4, and lost 13. Win ratio of 15%. "But the football was still better than anything served up by your mate Steve" :lol: Again you stated Carver was better, because sometimes we were over 35% possession with him. Implying that we are never over 35% possession currently. Excluding City in the last 5 games we've had possession levels of 45% to 62%. :lol: I'll ask again: what the fuck are you about?

If you look at the table and the table alone, then technically Bruce has not done a bad job. If you look at the actual football that is played then it's been a worse job than even Carver pulled off....at least a few of his attempts at managing games got above 35% possession. The only time a respectable football team should win a match like that is if it's a 2nd/3rd division team against one of the top six and it's been a massively hard fought shock. No topflight premiership team should be sitting in their own 18 yard box for 3/4 of every game regardless of opposition and expect to get any results other than through luck. Bruce has had us playing like a league 1 side, scared to death of every other team they've come up against (except for maybe Bournemouth). No modern manager should have only one plan that consists of putting 10 men behind the ball every game and hoping to score a goal on a counter attack. Fine against top half teams, but when it's against relegation candidates its pure cowardice and being more concerned with not losing than winning. This should not be considered acceptable by anyone who wants the best for their team. Loved Carver's free flowing football. Tasty on the eye and we got results. :lol: Recent games possession: Southampton away 62% Sheffield United home 46% Villa home 52% Bournemouth 45% West Ham home 57% Every game above 35%. Yes we don't usually have much of the ball, but you can't argue Carver was better, because he sometimes got above 35% possession. Use facts, use evidence in your arguments man.

Got Twitch account on PS4, sorted. 2-0 win Toon.

Apart from the bottom 3 that matters. Brewcie has kept us ticking over until the new owners & manager comes in. Simple as dat. Oh my god, do you not get sick of your own shite patter? "We need to strike back against the media" Hahahaha amazing. "All I said was he's doing an ok job". Priceless, ya pair of knackers! Any plans yet on how to strike back against the media? You've had a night to sleep on it. It's being done as we speak. We spread the word on boards such as these, phone ins etc. I also subscribe to The Athletic and those proper journalists don't fall for the shite spouted by "experts" and "pundits" that crawl up Bruce's ring piece. Unlike you two spineless two faced gob shites. That's not very nice.

Apart from the bottom 3 that matters. Brewcie has kept us ticking over until the new owners & manager comes in. Simple as dat. Oh my god, do you not get sick of your own shite patter? "We need to strike back against the media" Hahahaha amazing.

Preferred the 3-4-3 we finished with last season. Two ball playing centre-backs in Schar & Lejeune, wing-backs could start higher up, Almiron and Perez (would be ASM) would be higher up, Shelvey wouldn’t have to drop so deep to pick up possession and could do what he does further up the pitch. Everything just clicked and looked good. Almost identical to how Nuno has Wolves set up. That formation didn’t work under Bruce because the ball playing CBS were swapped for Clark & Fernandez. Wing-backs and the midfield naturally had to drop deeper to pick up possession, with the knock on affect being Almiron and ASM having to come deeper to get possession too (With Almiron more often than not on his wrong side too) leaving Joelinton all on his own. Under a PFM like Bruce, 4 at the back will look more comfortable but I still preferred the 3-4-3 we finished with last year. Fair enough.

Dubs would make their bench. But yeah nobody else.

The commentary was dire on BT Sport last night like.

Of course, we played some lovely stuff after the Man Utd home loss. I just get the impression on here, most would prefer 4-2-3-1 and was wondering how many would say Schar should get into the 2 CB's? I like Schar, obviously he is a talented player - it's a tough call to see whether he should be first choice in a back 4.

That’s not true. What's not true?

Think most of us prefer playing with 4 at the back. Does Schar get in your best 2 CB's?

That game was the most boring game I've ever been to. Ever. We didn't attack until the 80th minute. 19% possession, and it was a Yedlin own goal, not a penalty, that we lost to. I remember the match thread, after the game, and posters were going mental at how we played. Defensively the shape was good, but offered nothing going forward for most of the game.

Why do you always forgive the unforgivable? Your support for your club is admiral, your support for Bruce is not....... Eh? :lol:

All three of have said we need to a new manager to progress the club forward. We all want the takeover, and we want a successful Newcastle United. Because we don't call Bruce a "fat cunt" and don't hate him, a load of dribbling goons on the board gan mental. Tonight was terrible, we were shit, and far too slack. It was a shame after going 6 unbeaten.

He hasn't had a run in the team - that doesn't help. But his passing wasn't great, and the effort wasn't all that great either.

Gash.

He's literally been the difference between us going down and staying up this season. Bit of an exaggeration Not all all. Youve simply been blinded by this post lockdown run and forgotten everything that preceded it. I haven't. Judge is right. No he isn't. If Darlow had been in goal all season we'd have been in the bottom 3. We're 16 points clear of the relegation zone. And literally bottom of every meaningful stat, shots, possession, the lot. The one thing we are top of is the chart that says our goalkeeper has made far more saves than any other keeper in the league. Of course he's saved his us points, but clearly not fucking 16 points. Howay man. We would be in the relegation zone now if Darlow or Elliott had been our goalkeeper all season. People were shitting themselves when it looked like he could miss the rest of the season after the Southampton match. I appreciate this Newcastle Exaggeration Online, but we would not be in relegation zone. We wouldn't be on 43 points, but there's nee way we'd be on 26 points man. We'd be on less. :lol:

He's literally been the difference between us going down and staying up this season. Bit of an exaggeration Not all all. Youve simply been blinded by this post lockdown run and forgotten everything that preceded it. I haven't. Judge is right. No he isn't. If Darlow had been in goal all season we'd have been in the bottom 3. We're 16 points clear of the relegation zone. And literally bottom of every meaningful stat, shots, possession, the lot. The one thing we are top of is the chart that says our goalkeeper has made far more saves than any other keeper in the league. Of course he's saved his us points, but clearly not fucking 16 points. Howay man. We would be in the relegation zone now if Darlow or Elliott had been our goalkeeper all season. People were shitting themselves when it looked like he could miss the rest of the season after the Southampton match. I appreciate this Newcastle Exaggeration Online, but we would not be in relegation zone. We wouldn't be on 43 points, but there's nee way we'd be on 26 points man.

We're safe man, why so ANGRY? We got beat here 6-1, and 5-0 a few seasons ago. Liverpool have just been beaten 4-0 here and they've lost 2 games all season. We have been terrible like, but let's not pretend 4-0 is some abysmal score that never happens to us here (or other better teams). Are we allowed to say it's bad yet? We've been really bad. Far too slack and City are far too good.

He's literally been the difference between us going down and staying up this season. Bit of an exaggeration Not all all. Youve simply been blinded by this post lockdown run and forgotten everything that preceded it. I haven't. Judge is right. No he isn't. If Darlow had been in goal all season we'd have been in the bottom 3. We're 16 points clear of the relegation zone. And literally bottom of every meaningful stat, shots, possession, the lot. The one thing we are top of is the chart that says our goalkeeper has made far more saves than any other keeper in the league. Of course he's saved his us points, but clearly not fucking 16 points. Howay man.