If Sunderland were higher than Newcastle.....................

[Martin Lol]

............ because Newcastle were blooding youngsters, how would you feel?  Under no circumstances or would you accept it as it was for the long term benefit of your team?

 

Alan Curbishley says he would put youngsters in for the spanners but only if it didn't mean that they fell behind Spurs in the league table!

 

........... Teenage striker Freddie Sears, defender James Tomkins and England Under-21 midfielder Mark Noble have brought the feel-good factor back to Upton Park during an uninspiring campaign from the club's more established stars.

 

Hammers fans would take a bottom-half finish if it means they get to see more of the local kids that have excited them. But Curbishley, an East End boy himself, insists supporters do not want to end up below the old enemy.

 

He said: "It depends on whether Spurs are likely to finish above us. The fans won't be too happy about that. We'll have to see.

 

"It's the bigger picture I must look at. I have no doubts about putting the youngsters in and if the situation arises I'll do it.............

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/2008/03/28/west-ham-boss-alan-curbishley-has-dilemma-over-young-stars-89520-20365558/

 

 

Personally, provided there is nothing to play for and we don't get relegated, it wouldn't bother me if Spurs were behind West Ham (or any other club for that matter) if it was being caused by decisions that would be for the long term benefit of the club.  I'd take short term pain for long term gain.  I'm just very surprised that Curbishley would consider what the fans thought before what he thought was good for the club.

[CPL]

From my point of view if we avoided relegation and Sunderland finished above us majority of us will take that for this season, as lets face it been a very disappointing campaign.

[rocksammy]

............ because Newcastle were blooding youngsters, how would you feel?   Under no circumstances or would you accept it as it was for the long term benefit of your team?

 

Alan Curbishley says he would put youngsters in for the spanners but only if it didn't mean that they fell behind Spurs in the league table!

 

........... Teenage striker Freddie Sears, defender James Tomkins and England Under-21 midfielder Mark Noble have brought the feel-good factor back to Upton Park during an uninspiring campaign from the club's more established stars.

 

Hammers fans would take a bottom-half finish if it means they get to see more of the local kids that have excited them. But Curbishley, an East End boy himself, insists supporters do not want to end up below the old enemy.

 

He said: "It depends on whether Spurs are likely to finish above us. The fans won't be too happy about that. We'll have to see.

 

"It's the bigger picture I must look at. I have no doubts about putting the youngsters in and if the situation arises I'll do it.............

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/2008/03/28/west-ham-boss-alan-curbishley-has-dilemma-over-young-stars-89520-20365558/

 

 

Personally, provided there is nothing to play for and we don't get relegated, it wouldn't bother me if Spurs were behind West Ham (or any other club for that matter) if it was being caused by decisions that would be for the long term benefit of the club.  I'd take short term pain for long term gain.  I'm just very surprised that Curbishley would consider what the fans thought before what he thought was good for the club.

 

youve qualled for europe allready ....

[Martin Lol]

............ because Newcastle were blooding youngsters, how would you feel?   Under no circumstances or would you accept it as it was for the long term benefit of your team?

 

Alan Curbishley says he would put youngsters in for the spanners but only if it didn't mean that they fell behind Spurs in the league table!

 

........... Teenage striker Freddie Sears, defender James Tomkins and England Under-21 midfielder Mark Noble have brought the feel-good factor back to Upton Park during an uninspiring campaign from the club's more established stars.

 

Hammers fans would take a bottom-half finish if it means they get to see more of the local kids that have excited them. But Curbishley, an East End boy himself, insists supporters do not want to end up below the old enemy.

 

He said: "It depends on whether Spurs are likely to finish above us. The fans won't be too happy about that. We'll have to see.

 

"It's the bigger picture I must look at. I have no doubts about putting the youngsters in and if the situation arises I'll do it.............

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/2008/03/28/west-ham-boss-alan-curbishley-has-dilemma-over-young-stars-89520-20365558/

 

 

Personally, provided there is nothing to play for and we don't get relegated, it wouldn't bother me if Spurs were behind West Ham (or any other club for that matter) if it was being caused by decisions that would be for the long term benefit of the club.  I'd take short term pain for long term gain.  I'm just very surprised that Curbishley would consider what the fans thought before what he thought was good for the club.

 

youve qualled for europe allready ....

 

Even if we hadn't, it wouldn't change my thinking.  If blooding youngsters is more important to Spurs than finishing ahead of West Ham I would do it.  If the league positions changed, Spurs were 10th and WHU 11th, there's a £500k loss to the spanners.  If they think developing their youngsters is worth more than £500k they should do it irrespective of what the fans thought.

[Benwell Lad]

Very confusing your London tribal things. Why do West Ham see you as the "enemy", I think Chelsea feel the same.

Your natural rivals in north London are Arsenal, so why do the pride of east and west London also hate you so much ?

[ElDiablo]

Very confusing your London tribal things. Why do West Ham see you as the "enemy", I think Chelsea feel the same.

Your natural rivals in north London are Arsenal, so why do the pride of east and west London also hate you so much ?

 

Everyone hates Spurs, it's one of the unwritten laws of football.

[Guest MarkMag]

If we finish below the dirty mackems, I couldn't give a sh*t, cos i know we will kick their arse next season (providing they don't go down) once Keegan buys some decent players.

[NG32]

Staying in the prem this season is the most important regardless of which freaks are above us.

[ross magoo]

Maybe it's because i'm not from Newcastle but I couldn't give a toss about Sunderland.  I don't base my expectations for Newcastle on what Sunderland "achieve".  It's not about them it's about us.

 

Granted, I don't have to go into work and listen to them though.

[Optimistic Nut]

If we finish below the dirty mackems, I couldn't give a sh*t, cos i know we will kick their arse next season (providing they don't go down) once Keegan buys some decent players.

 

Eh?

[Guest toonlass]

Couldn't care less to be honest. What the mackems do doesn't bother me, unless of course its something I can laugh at them for.

[Martin Lol]

Very confusing your London tribal things. Why do West Ham see you as the "enemy", I think Chelsea feel the same.

Your natural rivals in north London are Arsenal, so why do the pride of east and west London also hate you so much ?

 

Without getting involved in the 'big club' thing again, West Ham and Chelsea historically (70'/80's) viewed themselves as being a big club like Spurs but jealous that Spurs were successful in domestic and european cup competition.  Since the formation of the Premier League Chelsea motored ahead and even more so when Abramovich took over.  With West Ham, they still haven't moved on so they hang on to the old belief that they are rivals to Spurs and Chelsea.  Personally, whilst there are a lot of London derbies each season, the only ones that really matter to me are against the scum, how I view West Ham is no different to how Chelsea view Fulham.  Chelsea are a bigger club on the field than Spurs on the field, even if that success was bought, but I view them as the level to aspire to, not rivals, because quitely clearly at the present time we're not.

[Benwell Lad]

Very confusing your London tribal things. Why do West Ham see you as the "enemy", I think Chelsea feel the same.

Your natural rivals in north London are Arsenal, so why do the pride of east and west London also hate you so much ?

 

Without getting involved in the 'big club' thing again, West Ham and Chelsea historically (70'/80's) viewed themselves as being a big club like Spurs but jealous that Spurs were successful in domestic and european cup competition.  Since the formation of the Premier League Chelsea motored ahead and even more so when Abramovich took over.  With West Ham, they still haven't moved on so they hang on to the old belief that they are rivals to Spurs and Chelsea.  Personally, whilst there are a lot of London derbies each season, the only ones that really matter to me are against the scum, how I view West Ham is no different to how Chelsea view Fulham.  Chelsea are a bigger club on the field than Spurs on the field, even if that success was bought, but I view them as the level to aspire to, not rivals, because quitely clearly at the present time we're not.

 

Got it. Arsenal Spurs is like Newcastle Sunderland, but West Ham hating you is a bit like Boro hating us whereas we regard Boro as no different to any other team we play. It's clear.

[Lotus]

I would think Spurs and Hammers feel they are rivals because they are on a similar level. Arsenal and Chelsea are so far ahead of either of them that any rivalry can't be based on competition.

[TRon]

In this context, where the two teams are going nowhere, I would definitely be blooding promising youngsters. In fact, as soon as we are mathematically safe, that's what I hope we will be doing with the likes of Kazenga and Carroll maybe.

[Martin Lol]

Very confusing your London tribal things. Why do West Ham see you as the "enemy", I think Chelsea feel the same.

Your natural rivals in north London are Arsenal, so why do the pride of east and west London also hate you so much ?

 

Without getting involved in the 'big club' thing again, West Ham and Chelsea historically (70'/80's) viewed themselves as being a big club like Spurs but jealous that Spurs were successful in domestic and european cup competition.  Since the formation of the Premier League Chelsea motored ahead and even more so when Abramovich took over.  With West Ham, they still haven't moved on so they hang on to the old belief that they are rivals to Spurs and Chelsea.  Personally, whilst there are a lot of London derbies each season, the only ones that really matter to me are against the scum, how I view West Ham is no different to how Chelsea view Fulham.  Chelsea are a bigger club on the field than Spurs on the field, even if that success was bought, but I view them as the level to aspire to, not rivals, because quitely clearly at the present time we're not.

 

Got it. Arsenal Spurs is like Newcastle Sunderland, but West Ham hating you is a bit like Boro hating us whereas we regard Boro as no different to any other team we play. It's clear.

 

Exactamundo!!

[Martin Lol]

I would think Spurs and Hammers feel they are rivals because they are on a similar level. Arsenal and Chelsea are so far ahead of either of them that any rivalry can't be based on competition.

 

The scum are rivals on locality, not on playing ability.

[madras]

providing we stay up and i have the feeling we are going in the right direction i don't care where other teams finish.

 

 

it's happened before under ardiles,for all we were down the bottom most of the season there wasn't a clamour for him to go or any booing as we were playing decent football till he realised we had to get points,by then it was too late and he had to go for us to survive.

[Lotus]

I would think Spurs and Hammers feel they are rivals because they are on a similar level. Arsenal and Chelsea are so far ahead of either of them that any rivalry can't be based on competition.

 

The scum are rivals on locality, not on playing ability.

Yeah, i'm aware of the geography

 

I was refering to the Hammers - Spurs thing.

 

In the past (Under SBR for example) i don't recall much Anti-Spurs comments from NUFC fans. Since our decline and your improvement in fortunes you see much more of it. Antipathy is likely to be stronger when the 2 clubs can be compared in terms of performance or they are both competing for more or less the same thing, i.e. Arsenal vs Manure.

[Guest teepee]

I would think Spurs and Hammers feel they are rivals because they are on a similar level. Arsenal and Chelsea are so far ahead of either of them that any rivalry can't be based on competition.

 

The scum are rivals on locality, not on playing ability.

Yeah, i'm aware of the geography

 

I was refering to the Hammers - Spurs thing.

 

In the past (Under SBR for example) i don't recall much Anti-Spurs comments from NUFC fans. Since our decline and your improvement in fortunes you see much more of it. Antipathy is likely to be stronger when the 2 clubs can be compared in terms of performance or they are both competing for more or less the same thing, i.e. Arsenal vs Manure.

 

some thruth there - once we hated pool, manure etc - now it seems to be spurs, villa and the likes. i large part because they are closer to our shitty level.

 

sunderland we always hate - and finishing below them will certainly hurt, no matter who played the matches...

[Martin Lol]

I would think Spurs and Hammers feel they are rivals because they are on a similar level. Arsenal and Chelsea are so far ahead of either of them that any rivalry can't be based on competition.

 

The scum are rivals on locality, not on playing ability.

Yeah, i'm aware of the geography

 

I was refering to the Hammers - Spurs thing.

 

In the past (Under SBR for example) i don't recall much Anti-Spurs comments from NUFC fans. Since our decline and your improvement in fortunes you see much more of it. Antipathy is likely to be stronger when the 2 clubs can be compared in terms of performance or they are both competing for more or less the same thing, i.e. Arsenal vs Manure.

 

I think it eminates from clubs being roughly similar sizewise and their mutual aim to play with a bit of style.  It could be argued that West Ham and Newcastle are roughly on a par with Spurs, the intensity grows when one club wins trophies and the other two don't.  I'm not talking about the Carling Cup this year but over the past 30 years Spurs have won a number of trophies in both Europe and domestically, WHU won one in the early 80's and Newcastle haven't won any in that time.  There's no real logic why that should be so, that's just the way it has been.  Maybe perceptions of who our rivals are would be different now if Newcastle had won one of the 2 Cup Finals or not been done at the end by Man Utd in the Premier League.

 

The fact is that Spurs have won some trophies in that period and Newcastle have just come up a little short in the Premier League and FA Cup, not just once but on a number of occasions.  The gap between being winning and losing is very small.  Both West Ham and Boro have won a Cup but neither have done enough to suggest that there is the consistency there for them to be viewed as genuine competition.  Personally, I see Newcastle as competition to Spurs and West Ham not, which could be considered strange as West Ham are above Spurs and Newcastle below.  I believe Newcastle can win something each year in exactly the same way as I think about Spurs.  I never honestly think West Ham (or Boro) are likely to win anything.

[Dave]

Always intensely disliked Spurs tbf. As much to do with the annual bumlicking from the press as anything.

[midds]

I want what's best for Newcastle, not what's worst for Sunderland.

[Nobody]

If we finish below the dirty mackems, I couldn't give a sh*t, cos i know we will kick their arse next season (providing they don't go down) once Keegan buys some decent players.

 

Eh?

Doesn't make much sense, does it?

[Guest float one in]

Must admit, I would feel a little uneasy looking at the league table, but it wouldn't be a huge problem. Not to the extent that I'd rather young players weren't being blooded, that's for sure. That sort of attitude seems a bit small mided and petty.

In particular I'm eager to see Carrol get a run of 5-6 matches and see what he can do. That would be better for NUFC than the small amount of satisfaction to be gained from finishing above the mackems.