Revolution Number 9 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 picks wrong team, doesn't lose. the man is a silver haired god and i'm gay for him That's one way of looking at it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Tonight wasn't the sort of game to play free-flowing football. Aye we were poor, but nowhere near as bad as some people are making out. I can see us playing much better at Villa on Saturday. Did someone forget to tell QPR? Completely missed the point there. They're the home team, new owner, newly promoted, new team... And we have new players, a stronger squad, a new style of play... Hope you're not backing up the argument against the original post here. Because it's right. Huge difference between our new players and theirs. That's fair enough, but without looking I'm pretty sure people were arguing that we'd win the game and/or finish above them because said new players couldn't/wouldn't gel. Well they looked a far better TEAM than we have in any game so far this season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I think it's time to start Marveaux in place of the relatively hum-drum Obertan at Villa. I'd wager though that we'll have to wait until Nottm Forest to see Santon in action. It's sensible to bed new foreigners in slowly, especially with Santon being so young. Raylor was poor tonight but he's been competent in the other three games and I reckon he'll start again on Saturday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conjo Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I think one of the reasons people are going OTT is that the changes that needed to be made were so blatantly obvious for everyone to see. If Pardew had put Santon on for Raylor after half-time, and got Ba/Sameobi on for Shola at least before the 60 minute mark, trying to play a bit more positive, I think most people would have been quite satisfied with the result today knowing that we at least tried. Given Raylors importance since the start of the season, I think it´s fair game that he got to start, but he should have been off at half-time given how the game went. Maybe Pardew struck a deal with Warnock? If he kept Raylor on, Warnock would swap SWP over to the left? I think Warnock saved us a point today by doing that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Tonight wasn't the sort of game to play free-flowing football. Aye we were poor, but nowhere near as bad as some people are making out. I can see us playing much better at Villa on Saturday. Did someone forget to tell QPR? Completely missed the point there. They're the home team, new owner, newly promoted, new team... Why should that make us resort to Stoke tactics though? Especially considering a whole none of the signings we brought in this summer are suited to said tactics meaning playing that way could be seen as actively handicapping ourselves. Pardew himself has said we weren't good tonight. Do you think that's how he set us out to play? Sometimes though you have to adapt and with SWP & Taarabt running us ragged you can't always play the way you want. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Tonight wasn't the sort of game to play free-flowing football. Aye we were poor, but nowhere near as bad as some people are making out. I can see us playing much better at Villa on Saturday. Did someone forget to tell QPR? Completely missed the point there. They're the home team, new owner, newly promoted, new team... And we have new players, a stronger squad, a new style of play... Hope you're not backing up the argument against the original post here. Because it's right. Huge difference between our new players and theirs. That's fair enough, but without looking I'm pretty sure people were arguing that we'd win the game and/or finish above them because said new players couldn't/wouldn't gel. Well they looked a far better TEAM than we have in any game so far this season. Give them a few weeks when the whole mood starts to change and see if they play like that. I bet they don't play that well at home all season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 How about starting with your best eleven, and making changes when they're obviously needed. That would be some great adapting by Pardew. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Tonight wasn't the sort of game to play free-flowing football. Aye we were poor, but nowhere near as bad as some people are making out. I can see us playing much better at Villa on Saturday. Did someone forget to tell QPR? Completely missed the point there. They're the home team, new owner, newly promoted, new team... And we have new players, a stronger squad, a new style of play... Hope you're not backing up the argument against the original post here. Because it's right. Huge difference between our new players and theirs. That's fair enough, but without looking I'm pretty sure people were arguing that we'd win the game and/or finish above them because said new players couldn't/wouldn't gel. Well they looked a far better TEAM than we have in any game so far this season. Give them a few weeks when the whole mood starts to change and see if they play like that. I bet they don't play that well at home all season. Who gives a fuck? They pissed on us, that's all I care about at this point in the discussion. Wondering if you even watched it tbh. Teletext? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlelunchbox Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I think one of the reasons people are going OTT is that the changes that needed to be made were so blatantly obvious for everyone to see. If Pardew had put Santon on for Raylor after half-time, and got Ba/Sameobi on for Shola at least before the 60 minute mark, trying to play a bit more positive, I think most people would have been quite satisfied with the result today knowing that we at least tried. Given Raylors importance since the start of the season, I think it´s fair game that he got to start, but he should have been off at half-time given how the game went. Maybe Pardew struck a deal with Warnock? If he kept Raylor on, Warnock would swap SWP over to the left? I think Warnock saved us a point today by doing that. it aint even so much about how shit shola and taylor are, its more about the lack of any simple change that should have been and easily made yet pardew refused to or simply watching a different game. we played qpr! im not saying we thought we were entitled to beat them and get 3 points, but we fucking do expect to atleast play remote competitively and adaquate enough vs them. had we played well and got a draw, no fucking problems but its the fact we were utter garbage and to rub salt in the wounds our manager did not do fuck all about it to even remotely change the team around. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Oh f*** off man. I think if that had been any other season from 2003-4 onwards, we'd have lost tonight anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Part of the problem - yes. He got things wrong today obviously. But I do wonder how much control people think managers have over individual players' performances. It isn't Football Manager or FIFA out there. The manager can change players if they are playing poorly, you don't need football manager of FIFA to do that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 How about starting with your best eleven, and making changes when they're obviously needed. That would be some great adapting by Pardew. In time we'll see Ba, Marveaux and Santon start. For the time being we've gone with tried and tested players and bedding the new players in slowly. It's quite a sensible approach, especially if fitness is an issue and it has clealy been with Ba and Marv. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Conjo summed it up perfectly tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hughesy Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Part of the problem - yes. He got things wrong today obviously. But I do wonder how much control people think managers have over individual players' performances. It isn't Football Manager or FIFA out there. The manager can change players if they are playing poorly, you don't need football manager of FIFA to do that. He can change 3 of the personnel. He can't change how they are playing on the night. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Are you suggesting that it is Pardew's fault that the players kept giving the ball away? He picked the wrong team, he was part of the problem. Ryan Taylor and Shola shouldn't have come out for the 2nd half as they were both as bad as they can get. Part of the problem - yes. He got things wrong today obviously. But I do wonder how much control people think managers have over individual players' performances. It isn't Football Manager or FIFA out there. When he knows that there's a high chance of said individual players' perfrmances being shit, like Shola, like Raylor, then yes, he takes responsibility. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolution Number 9 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Tonight wasn't the sort of game to play free-flowing football. Aye we were poor, but nowhere near as bad as some people are making out. I can see us playing much better at Villa on Saturday. Did someone forget to tell QPR? Completely missed the point there. They're the home team, new owner, newly promoted, new team... Why should that make us resort to Stoke tactics though? Especially considering a whole none of the signings we brought in this summer are suited to said tactics meaning playing that way could be seen as actively handicapping ourselves. Pardew himself has said we weren't good tonight. Do you think that's how he set us out to play? Sometimes though you have to adapt and with SWP & Taarabt running us ragged you can't always play the way you want. He could have fooled me if it wasn't how we were set up to play. Also, their winger and playmaker having good game = we can't try to pass, lets hoof it? That seems to be your point? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hughesy Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 How about starting with your best eleven, and making changes when they're obviously needed. That would be some great adapting by Pardew. In time we'll see Ba, Marveaux and Santon start. For the time being we've gone with tried and tested players and bedding the new players in slowly. It's quite a sensible approach, especially if fitness is an issue and it has clealy been with Ba and Marv. Spot on - there is clearly reasoning as to why Pardew chose the team he did. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 How about starting with your best eleven, and making changes when they're obviously needed. That would be some great adapting by Pardew. In time we'll see Ba, Marveaux and Santon start. For the time being we've gone with tried and tested players and bedding the new players in slowly. It's quite a sensible approach, especially if fitness is an issue and it has clealy been with Ba and Marv. Mental if Ba and Marveaux aren't fit yet. Unless Santon is crocked he should have been on after an hour maximum tonight IMO. Were we worried about playing him away at QPR? I can't see why any of the other games are too different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Tonight wasn't the sort of game to play free-flowing football. Aye we were poor, but nowhere near as bad as some people are making out. I can see us playing much better at Villa on Saturday. Did someone forget to tell QPR? Completely missed the point there. They're the home team, new owner, newly promoted, new team... Why should that make us resort to Stoke tactics though? Especially considering a whole none of the signings we brought in this summer are suited to said tactics meaning playing that way could be seen as actively handicapping ourselves. Pardew himself has said we weren't good tonight. Do you think that's how he set us out to play? Sometimes though you have to adapt and with SWP & Taarabt running us ragged you can't always play the way you want. He could have fooled me if it wasn't how we were set up to play. Also, their winger and playmaker having good game = we can't try to pass, lets hoof it? That seems to be your point? I'm saying on a night where their main two threats were better than Jonas & Cabaye, I can't blame us for being more direct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Take away that last point tonight anyway, and I think you've summed up why we got a point tonight instead of lost. Take Cabaye out for Nolan and our midfield would have been well and truly f***ed. He wasn't great but his energy was brilliant. They had more than enough chances to win tonight, our midfield didn't get us the draw, our defenders did and Nolan would have made no difference to that. Simpson and Taylor both saved us on the line, without either we would have lost. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I think it's time to start Marveaux in place of the relatively hum-drum Obertan at Villa. I'd wager though that we'll have to wait until Nottm Forest to see Santon in action. It's sensible to bed new foreigners in slowly, especially with Santon being so young. Raylor was poor tonight but he's been competent in the other three games and I reckon he'll start again on Saturday. Obertan looks clueless. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 How about starting with your best eleven, and making changes when they're obviously needed. That would be some great adapting by Pardew. In time we'll see Ba, Marveaux and Santon start. For the time being we've gone with tried and tested players and bedding the new players in slowly. It's quite a sensible approach, especially if fitness is an issue and it has clealy been with Ba and Marv. How are we bedding them in slowly, if they're (Santon) not even playing? He should start today - Raylor proved that. Why in the world Santon didn't even get some minutes with Raylor being so shit, is beyond me. Santon needs to play, he's fit, in good form - no excuses what so ever. The sensible approach is rubbish - loads of managers and players have shown that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Take away that last point tonight anyway, and I think you've summed up why we got a point tonight instead of lost. Take Cabaye out for Nolan and our midfield would have been well and truly f***ed. He wasn't great but his energy was brilliant. They had more than enough chances to win tonight, our midfield didn't get us the draw, our defenders did and Nolan would have made no difference to that. Simpson and Taylor both saved us on the line, without either we would have lost. I think if Nolan had been playing they'd have had even more free reign to do what they wanted. And you could argue if Kenny hadn't made a finger tip save we might have nicked it ourselves. Did Krul make a save tonight? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolution Number 9 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Tonight wasn't the sort of game to play free-flowing football. Aye we were poor, but nowhere near as bad as some people are making out. I can see us playing much better at Villa on Saturday. Did someone forget to tell QPR? Completely missed the point there. They're the home team, new owner, newly promoted, new team... Why should that make us resort to Stoke tactics though? Especially considering a whole none of the signings we brought in this summer are suited to said tactics meaning playing that way could be seen as actively handicapping ourselves. Pardew himself has said we weren't good tonight. Do you think that's how he set us out to play? Sometimes though you have to adapt and with SWP & Taarabt running us ragged you can't always play the way you want. He could have fooled me if it wasn't how we were set up to play. Also, their winger and playmaker having good game = we can't try to pass, lets hoof it? That seems to be your point? I'm saying on a night where their main two threats were better than Jonas & Cabaye, I can't blame us for being more direct. So we should revert to Stoke whenever someone has a good game against us then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I think it's time to start Marveaux in place of the relatively hum-drum Obertan at Villa. I'd wager though that we'll have to wait until Nottm Forest to see Santon in action. It's sensible to bed new foreigners in slowly, especially with Santon being so young. Raylor was poor tonight but he's been competent in the other three games and I reckon he'll start again on Saturday. I'd replace Ryan Taylor with Santon, Shola with Ba and Obertan with Marveaux. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts