The old Chris Hughton discussion thread

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Here Chris, you heard of a little thing in football...it's called FOUR FOUR f***ing TWO.

 

It's no coincidence that when he took Nolan off and stuck Shola/Carroll up there together, we looked 500% better. We should play two up top more often.

 

I think also it was to do with fact they had just scored and werent as eager to push forward. We done perfectly well in the 2st half with 1 up front, expect it should have been Carroll and not shola

 

 

We barely did anything. It was City slowly getting better and better, until they brought on Johnson who had the quality to break us down.

 

We played the "Oh well, 1-1 is a good result, let's just stay like this and we'll definitely draw" which almost never works.

 

Spot on.  Just like last weekend's one nil win.

 

Since our best football was played in the first half, i'd say Johnny Hall's premise was patently shite, so very far from 'spot on'.

 

I think that's what he was getting at, 'job done' at half time sort of thing.

 

He said we should have played 4-4-2 and we were miles better when Nolan came off. I saw us play our best football in the first half.

 

Not in the post I quoted or the bit I put in bold before saying it was 'Spot on' he didn't.

[ChezGiven]

Here Chris, you heard of a little thing in football...it's called FOUR FOUR f***ing TWO.

 

It's no coincidence that when he took Nolan off and stuck Shola/Carroll up there together, we looked 500% better. We should play two up top more often.

 

I think also it was to do with fact they had just scored and werent as eager to push forward. We done perfectly well in the 2st half with 1 up front, expect it should have been Carroll and not shola

 

 

We barely did anything. It was City slowly getting better and better, until they brought on Johnson who had the quality to break us down.

 

We played the "Oh well, 1-1 is a good result, let's just stay like this and we'll definitely draw" which almost never works.

 

Spot on.  Just like last weekend's one nil win.

 

Since our best football was played in the first half, i'd say Johnny Hall's premise was patently shite, so very far from 'spot on'.

 

I think that's what he was getting at, 'job done' at half time sort of thing.

 

He said we should have played 4-4-2 and we were miles better when Nolan came off. I saw us play our best football in the first half.

 

Not in the post I quoted or the bit I put in bold before saying it was 'Spot on' he didn't.

 

Only because of the forum settings, i can still see it in this reply.

[ChezGiven]

Yeah, he actually hasnt seen the players since the final whistle at Stoke.

 

What the players do in training is irrelevant if they don't do it on match days. 

 

Well we were unlucky to lose, so they got something from their week long preparations right.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Here Chris, you heard of a little thing in football...it's called FOUR FOUR f***ing TWO.

 

It's no coincidence that when he took Nolan off and stuck Shola/Carroll up there together, we looked 500% better. We should play two up top more often.

 

I think also it was to do with fact they had just scored and werent as eager to push forward. We done perfectly well in the 2st half with 1 up front, expect it should have been Carroll and not shola

 

 

We barely did anything. It was City slowly getting better and better, until they brought on Johnson who had the quality to break us down.

 

We played the "Oh well, 1-1 is a good result, let's just stay like this and we'll definitely draw" which almost never works.

 

Spot on.  Just like last weekend's one nil win.

 

Since our best football was played in the first half, i'd say Johnny Hall's premise was patently shite, so very far from 'spot on'.

 

I think that's what he was getting at, 'job done' at half time sort of thing.

 

He said we should have played 4-4-2 and we were miles better when Nolan came off. I saw us play our best football in the first half.

 

Not in the post I quoted or the bit I put in bold before saying it was 'Spot on' he didn't.

 

Only because of the forum settings, i can still see it in this reply.

 

Apology accepted.

[ChezGiven]

Here Chris, you heard of a little thing in football...it's called FOUR FOUR f***ing TWO.

 

It's no coincidence that when he took Nolan off and stuck Shola/Carroll up there together, we looked 500% better. We should play two up top more often.

 

I think also it was to do with fact they had just scored and werent as eager to push forward. We done perfectly well in the 2st half with 1 up front, expect it should have been Carroll and not shola

 

 

We barely did anything. It was City slowly getting better and better, until they brought on Johnson who had the quality to break us down.

 

We played the "Oh well, 1-1 is a good result, let's just stay like this and we'll definitely draw" which almost never works.

 

Spot on.  Just like last weekend's one nil win.

 

Since our best football was played in the first half, i'd say Johnny Hall's premise was patently shite, so very far from 'spot on'.

 

I think that's what he was getting at, 'job done' at half time sort of thing.

 

He said we should have played 4-4-2 and we were miles better when Nolan came off. I saw us play our best football in the first half.

 

Not in the post I quoted or the bit I put in bold before saying it was 'Spot on' he didn't.

 

Only because of the forum settings, i can still see it in this reply.

 

Apology accepted.

 

None proferred. The premise of his point was full of shit.

[Mick]

 

Well we were unlucky to lose, so they got something from their week long preparations right.

 

I'm not trying to have a go at Hughton because he wasn't as bad as soome are saying.  Still, I can't see anything in how Nolan played that could justify how well he's possibly trained.  If Hughton picks him based on training even though he offers very little during a game then he deserves all of the stick he gets.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Here Chris, you heard of a little thing in football...it's called FOUR FOUR f***ing TWO.

 

It's no coincidence that when he took Nolan off and stuck Shola/Carroll up there together, we looked 500% better. We should play two up top more often.

 

I think also it was to do with fact they had just scored and werent as eager to push forward. We done perfectly well in the 2st half with 1 up front, expect it should have been Carroll and not shola

 

 

We barely did anything. It was City slowly getting better and better, until they brought on Johnson who had the quality to break us down.

 

We played the "Oh well, 1-1 is a good result, let's just stay like this and we'll definitely draw" which almost never works.

 

Spot on.  Just like last weekend's one nil win.

 

Since our best football was played in the first half, i'd say Johnny Hall's premise was patently shite, so very far from 'spot on'.

 

I think that's what he was getting at, 'job done' at half time sort of thing.

 

He said we should have played 4-4-2 and we were miles better when Nolan came off. I saw us play our best football in the first half.

 

Not in the post I quoted or the bit I put in bold before saying it was 'Spot on' he didn't.

 

Only because of the forum settings, i can still see it in this reply.

 

Apology accepted.

 

None proferred. The premise of his point was full of shit.

 

Not the bit I put in bold which I was specifically................

 

Tell him he's full of shit in future, not me.

 

Good to (very briefly) see you at the weekend btw.

 

 

[ChezGiven]

 

Well we were unlucky to lose, so they got something from their week long preparations right.

 

I'm not trying to have a go at Hughton because he wasn't as bad as soome are saying.  Still, I can't see anything in how Nolan played that could justify how well he's possibly trained.  If Hughton picks him based on training even though he offers very little during a game then he deserves all of the stick he gets.

 

At least he hauled the fucker off today. He's gonna pay for that later though when Nolan put hims back in the BDSM dungeon he obviously keeps him in. Brave in the circumstances.

[ChezGiven]

Here Chris, you heard of a little thing in football...it's called FOUR FOUR f***ing TWO.

 

It's no coincidence that when he took Nolan off and stuck Shola/Carroll up there together, we looked 500% better. We should play two up top more often.

 

I think also it was to do with fact they had just scored and werent as eager to push forward. We done perfectly well in the 2st half with 1 up front, expect it should have been Carroll and not shola

 

 

We barely did anything. It was City slowly getting better and better, until they brought on Johnson who had the quality to break us down.

 

We played the "Oh well, 1-1 is a good result, let's just stay like this and we'll definitely draw" which almost never works.

 

Spot on.  Just like last weekend's one nil win.

 

Since our best football was played in the first half, i'd say Johnny Hall's premise was patently shite, so very far from 'spot on'.

 

I think that's what he was getting at, 'job done' at half time sort of thing.

 

He said we should have played 4-4-2 and we were miles better when Nolan came off. I saw us play our best football in the first half.

 

Not in the post I quoted or the bit I put in bold before saying it was 'Spot on' he didn't.

 

Only because of the forum settings, i can still see it in this reply.

 

Apology accepted.

 

None proferred. The premise of his point was full of shit.

 

Not the bit I put in bold which I was specifically................

 

Tell him he's full of shit in future, not me.

 

Good to (very briefly) see you at the weekend btw.

 

 

Johnny is too sensitive, not like you you leathery old git.

 

Nice to see you too mate.

[Mick]

 

At least he hauled the f***er off today. He's gonna pay for that later though when Nolan put hims back in the BDSM dungeon he obviously keeps him in. Brave in the circumstances.

 

 

He was spot on with his subbing of Nolan, pity he was started though.

[JH]

Here Chris, you heard of a little thing in football...it's called FOUR FOUR f***ing TWO.

 

It's no coincidence that when he took Nolan off and stuck Shola/Carroll up there together, we looked 500% better. We should play two up top more often.

 

I think also it was to do with fact they had just scored and werent as eager to push forward. We done perfectly well in the 2st half with 1 up front, expect it should have been Carroll and not shola

 

 

We barely did anything. It was City slowly getting better and better, until they brought on Johnson who had the quality to break us down.

 

We played the "Oh well, 1-1 is a good result, let's just stay like this and we'll definitely draw" which almost never works.

 

Spot on.  Just like last weekend's one nil win.

 

Since our best football was played in the first half, i'd say Johnny Hall's premise was patently s****, so very far from 'spot on'.

 

I think that's what he was getting at, 'job done' at half time sort of thing.

 

He said we should have played 4-4-2 and we were miles better when Nolan came off. I saw us play our best football in the first half.

 

Not in the post I quoted or the bit I put in bold before saying it was 'Spot on' he didn't.

 

Only because of the forum settings, i can still see it in this reply.

 

Apology accepted.

 

None proferred. The premise of his point was full of s***.

 

I should have said I was on about the 2nd half specifically.

 

We played some very good stuff inbetween equaliser and half time (which i've said in another post), but they went in at half time, changed their play and ultimately came out and won the game, whereas we left it until they'd scored to change it (even before they scored, there were whispers it was Shola coming off for Carroll).

 

We were crap in the second half and looked much better in a 4-4-2.

[ChezGiven]

Here Chris, you heard of a little thing in football...it's called FOUR FOUR f***ing TWO.

 

It's no coincidence that when he took Nolan off and stuck Shola/Carroll up there together, we looked 500% better. We should play two up top more often.

 

I think also it was to do with fact they had just scored and werent as eager to push forward. We done perfectly well in the 2st half with 1 up front, expect it should have been Carroll and not shola

 

 

We barely did anything. It was City slowly getting better and better, until they brought on Johnson who had the quality to break us down.

 

We played the "Oh well, 1-1 is a good result, let's just stay like this and we'll definitely draw" which almost never works.

 

Spot on.  Just like last weekend's one nil win.

 

Since our best football was played in the first half, i'd say Johnny Hall's premise was patently s****, so very far from 'spot on'.

 

I think that's what he was getting at, 'job done' at half time sort of thing.

 

He said we should have played 4-4-2 and we were miles better when Nolan came off. I saw us play our best football in the first half.

 

Not in the post I quoted or the bit I put in bold before saying it was 'Spot on' he didn't.

 

Only because of the forum settings, i can still see it in this reply.

 

Apology accepted.

 

None proferred. The premise of his point was full of s***.

 

I should have said I was on about the 2nd half specifically.

 

We played some very good stuff inbetween equaliser and half time (which i've said in another post), but they went in at half time, changed their play and ultimately came out and won the game, whereas we left it until they'd scored to change it (even before they scored, there were whispers it was Shola coming off for Carroll).

 

We were crap in the second half and looked much better in a 4-4-2.

 

That last sentence is slightly contradictory given we only went to 4-4-2 in the second half.

 

They changed it, we responded so where did it all go wrong? It was only Mancini's City ffs. The ref beat us in the end, not the delay in switching it.

[colinmk]

Here Chris, you heard of a little thing in football...it's called FOUR FOUR f***ing TWO.

 

It's no coincidence that when he took Nolan off and stuck Shola/Carroll up there together, we looked 500% better. We should play two up top more often.

 

I think also it was to do with fact they had just scored and werent as eager to push forward. We done perfectly well in the 2st half with 1 up front, expect it should have been Carroll and not shola

 

 

We barely did anything. It was City slowly getting better and better, until they brought on Johnson who had the quality to break us down.

 

We played the "Oh well, 1-1 is a good result, let's just stay like this and we'll definitely draw" which almost never works.

 

Spot on.  Just like last weekend's one nil win.

 

Since our best football was played in the first half, i'd say Johnny Hall's premise was patently s****, so very far from 'spot on'.

 

I think that's what he was getting at, 'job done' at half time sort of thing.

 

He said we should have played 4-4-2 and we were miles better when Nolan came off. I saw us play our best football in the first half.

 

Not in the post I quoted or the bit I put in bold before saying it was 'Spot on' he didn't.

 

Only because of the forum settings, i can still see it in this reply.

 

Apology accepted.

 

None proferred. The premise of his point was full of s***.

 

I should have said I was on about the 2nd half specifically.

 

We played some very good stuff inbetween equaliser and half time (which i've said in another post), but they went in at half time, changed their play and ultimately came out and won the game, whereas we left it until they'd scored to change it (even before they scored, there were whispers it was Shola coming off for Carroll).

 

We were crap in the second half and looked much better in a 4-4-2.

 

That last sentence is slightly contradictory given we only went to 4-4-2 in the second half.

 

They changed it, we responded so where did it all go wrong? It was only Mancini's City ffs. The ref beat us in the end, not the delay in switching it.

 

I agree with that. I'd be very surprised if we had managed to hold them like we did in the first half with a 4-4-2.

[Guest Chris P]

Waddle going on about how high we play the defence up the pitch. third match in a row i think. The first against villa. T other commentator today says "you've been saying that for 35 minutes but Newcastle are still in control.

 

tactically i like Hughtons style , its a bit gun'ho but as waddles co commentator said this afternoon , it seems to be working

[Guest Heneage]

I'm feeling for him right now. I acknowledge he's made mistakes, but he's had some shite luck.

[Guest BlacknWhiteArmy]

Waddle going on about how high we play the defence up the pitch. third match in a row i think. The first against villa. T other commentator today says "you've been saying that for 35 minutes but Newcastle are still in control.

 

tactically i like Hughtons style , its a bit gun'ho but as waddles co commentator said this afternoon , it seems to be working

 

Aye, he's said it in every ESPN game we've had, starting with Rangers.

[JH]

Here Chris, you heard of a little thing in football...it's called FOUR FOUR f***ing TWO.

 

It's no coincidence that when he took Nolan off and stuck Shola/Carroll up there together, we looked 500% better. We should play two up top more often.

 

I think also it was to do with fact they had just scored and werent as eager to push forward. We done perfectly well in the 2st half with 1 up front, expect it should have been Carroll and not shola

 

 

We barely did anything. It was City slowly getting better and better, until they brought on Johnson who had the quality to break us down.

 

We played the "Oh well, 1-1 is a good result, let's just stay like this and we'll definitely draw" which almost never works.

 

Spot on.  Just like last weekend's one nil win.

 

Since our best football was played in the first half, i'd say Johnny Hall's premise was patently s****, so very far from 'spot on'.

 

I think that's what he was getting at, 'job done' at half time sort of thing.

 

He said we should have played 4-4-2 and we were miles better when Nolan came off. I saw us play our best football in the first half.

 

Not in the post I quoted or the bit I put in bold before saying it was 'Spot on' he didn't.

 

Only because of the forum settings, i can still see it in this reply.

 

Apology accepted.

 

None proferred. The premise of his point was full of s***.

 

I should have said I was on about the 2nd half specifically.

 

We played some very good stuff inbetween equaliser and half time (which i've said in another post), but they went in at half time, changed their play and ultimately came out and won the game, whereas we left it until they'd scored to change it (even before they scored, there were whispers it was Shola coming off for Carroll).

 

We were crap in the second half and looked much better in a 4-4-2.

 

That last sentence is slightly contradictory given we only went to 4-4-2 in the second half.

 

They changed it, we responded so where did it all go wrong? It was only Mancini's City ffs. The ref beat us in the end, not the delay in switching it.

 

I agree the referee cost us the game, but you can't afford to shut up shop like we tried to do today - it's why we lost last week too.

 

Changing the play after you've gone behind is too late.

[Ronaldo]

Waddle going on about how high we play the defence up the pitch. third match in a row i think. The first against villa. T other commentator today says "you've been saying that for 35 minutes but Newcastle are still in control.

 

tactically i like Hughtons style , its a bit gun'ho but as waddles co commentator said this afternoon , it seems to be working

 

God almighty.

[Skeletor]

There's nothing gung ho about the way we play. We play nice possession football, whilst rarely creating chances.

[midds]

The problem with playing Ameobi up top by himself is that when he (frequently) forgets how to play football, every time you play the ball up to him he can't keep hold of it and it comes back at you constantly.

 

IIRC, Carroll was coming on for Ameobi (like for like) until Johnson scored and he changed it and dragged Nolan off so we had 2 up top to go for the equaliser.

[quayside]

I'm feeling for him right now. I acknowledge he's made mistakes, but he's had some s**** luck.

 

Yup.

[ChezGiven]

There's nothing gung ho about the way we play. We play nice possession football, whilst rarely creating chances.

 

Tiote and Jonas at full back isnt gung ho?

[Guest]

4-4-2 got slaughtered during the World Cup, now everyone seems to want it back.

 

Fickle as fuck.

[Skeletor]

There's nothing gung ho about the way we play. We play nice possession football, whilst rarely creating chances.

 

Tiote and Jonas at full back isnt gung ho?

 

Nope.

[ChezGiven]

There's nothing gung ho about the way we play. We play nice possession football, whilst rarely creating chances.

 

Tiote and Jonas at full back isnt gung ho?

 

Nope.

 

Not too arsed how its described but our style of play is not negative.