Dr Venkman Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 Wonder what Chris Hughton would of done... probably left the second half talk to Nolan seeing as he was the real manager Oh come on bloody hell. Hughton would never have let us go down to bloody 4-0 down in the first place. IIRC when he was in charge we BEAT the gooners 1-0 didn't even bloody need to comeback. I mean credit where credits due Pardew must have done a good team talk and well done for that. The match was unbeliavable and I loved it but still going 4-0 down is still very bad when compared to not conceding and winning 1-0 isn't it. Bolton away never happened in your world i guess. Yes it did happen but so did beating Aston Villa 6-0 and the Mackems 5-1. Yet to see results like that under Pardew. West Ham & Liverpool at home never happened in your world either i see. i could have beaten west ham on my own that night Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpal78 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Wonder what Chris Hughton would of done... probably left the second half talk to Nolan seeing as he was the real manager Oh come on bloody hell. Hughton would never have let us go down to bloody 4-0 down in the first place. IIRC when he was in charge we BEAT the gooners 1-0 didn't even bloody need to comeback. I mean credit where credits due Pardew must have done a good team talk and well done for that. The match was unbeliavable and I loved it but still going 4-0 down is still very bad when compared to not conceding and winning 1-0 isn't it. Bolton away never happened in your world i guess. Yes it did happen but so did beating Aston Villa 6-0 and the Mackems 5-1. Yet to see results like that under Pardew. West Ham & Liverpool at home never happened in your world either i see. i could have beaten west ham on my own that night For your bullshit posting I will just reply that I could have beaten Villa whilst sleeping, don't have to post nonsense is you want to make a point Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotus Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 One thing that keeps cropping up in my mind is that, one of the supposed main reason he was brought in was that he could be better trusted in the transfer market. Now, looking at how January panned out i'm beginning to wonder, he could be better trusted to do what? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mantis Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 One thing that keeps cropping up in my mind is that, one of the supposed main reason he was brought in was that he could be better trusted in the transfer market. Now, looking at how January panned out i'm beginning to wonder, he could be better trusted to do what? shhhh, we arent allowed to mention that. i aint warming to him and never will. his open, honest interview on sat was only because he couldnt hide from facts presented about his previous comments. facts are he currently manages a weaker team than when he arrived. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 One thing that keeps cropping up in my mind is that, one of the supposed main reason he was brought in was that he could be better trusted in the transfer market. Now, looking at how January panned out i'm beginning to wonder, he could be better trusted to do what? Was it? Who gave that reason? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
80 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 In implicit terms, Llamsbias and Ashley, in the form of a 'source'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 One thing that keeps cropping up in my mind is that, one of the supposed main reason he was brought in was that he could be better trusted in the transfer market. Now, looking at how January panned out i'm beginning to wonder, he could be better trusted to do what? not ask for any spending money? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Told Steven Taylor he was too 'top heavy'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATB Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Thank god for that. Maybe he can try and move a bit when he is playing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 One thing that keeps cropping up in my mind is that, one of the supposed main reason he was brought in was that he could be better trusted in the transfer market. Now, looking at how January panned out i'm beginning to wonder, he could be better trusted to do what? Perhaps you can link us to an official list of the reasons Hughton was replaced by Pardew. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 'supposed' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 'supposed' Uh-huh. So why complain on the back of "suppositions" that are probably bullshit? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Where did he complain? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 By the way that is one of the most sensible reasons they could have had for replacing Hughton with Pardew. For some reason I highly doubt you are amongst those who believe it was just because he's their mate etc. Not that you'd admit it anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Don't know if it's been mentioned but Pardew said in his pre match press conference yesterday that before we brought in Kuqi we had been offered "two or three players" (Aliadiere / Ewerthon ?) but he had "serious doubts about their fitness and mentality". Good job we got the injured Irish nutjob in from the Villa then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Now that Dave's given up trying to pick a fight (stop it man, you'll get yeself banned! ) I'd still be interested in any non-suppositional link concerning the club's reasons for replacing Hughton with Pardew. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Didn't think so. There's been no official reasoning whatsoever given by the club. So presumably they don't know either, going by your logic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallace Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Didn't think so. There's been no official reasoning whatsoever given by the club. So presumably they don't know either, going by your logic. And Hughton has said himself, that they did not give him a reason for his sacking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Didn't think so. There's been no official reasoning whatsoever given by the club. So presumably they don't know either, going by your logic. And Hughton has said himself, that they did not give him a reason for his sacking. Code for racially motivated tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 For all the theories, it wouldn't surprise me if it was simply a case of Pardew's wages being less than what Hughton was wanting in his new contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 For all the theories, it wouldn't surprise me if it was simply a case of Pardew's wages being less than what Hughton was wanting in his new contract. Low wages, knows Dekka, v.unlikely to kick up a fuss with the board, media friendly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpal78 Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 By the way that is one of the most sensible reasons they could have had for replacing Hughton with Pardew. For some reason I highly doubt you are amongst those who believe it was just because he's their mate etc. Not that you'd admit it anyway. Nope the simplest reason was that Hughton was likely gonna get us down, not good enough for the Premiership! Our form especially at home has improved greatly under Pardew not that you'd ever admit that! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 There's been no official reasoning whatsoever given by the club. That's what I thought. So pardon me wondering where the "the supposed main reason he was brought in" stuff came from. And no, I am not "amongst those who believe it was just because he's their mate etc." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 So why do you believe they made the change, given that there's nothing official? Is it really such an outrageous suggestion that one of the reasons is because they think Pardew will be better in the transfer market? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Golfmag said from the start the reasoning was that pardew would be less pally with the players and so would make it easier for the club to cash in on players. everything he's said has materialised so far so i'll stick with his info. as for knowing pardew before he was appointed, pardew himself said he'd met llambias 8 or 9 times at various events so they were certainly acquainted with one another. you think that kind of networking had nothing to do with why he got the job? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts