Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Why didn't he buy a striker? He didn't have time, he only had 15 minutes left of the transfer window. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foluwashola Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think he was the difference between 1 and 3 points today although you can't fault him for leaving Best and Lovenkrands on for so long when you consider how much they cost us. So the manager is to blame for the poor finishing of his side, laughable. Why didn't he buy a striker? Er, Finnish Romario mate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliottman Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Doing well, I think everyone will just accept staying up and seeing the season out with everything that has gone on. The summer and next season will be time to judge him properly. Doing well though with limited resources. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think he was the difference between 1 and 3 points today although you can't fault him for leaving Best and Lovenkrands on for so long when you consider how much they cost us. So the manager is to blame for the poor finishing of his side, laughable. Why didn't he buy a striker? Because he wasn't given any money? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think he was the difference between 1 and 3 points today although you can't fault him for leaving Best and Lovenkrands on for so long when you consider how much they cost us. So the manager is to blame for the poor finishing of his side, laughable. Why didn't he buy a striker? Because he wasn't given any money? Well he claims it was because he was so impressed with the ones we've got. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think he was the difference between 1 and 3 points today although you can't fault him for leaving Best and Lovenkrands on for so long when you consider how much they cost us. So the manager is to blame for the poor finishing of his side, laughable. Why didn't he buy a striker? Because he wasn't given any money? Well he claims it was because he was so impressed with the ones we've got. Well after weeks of claiming that he was going to "bang on the door of the chairman", he was hardly going to turn around and say "Oh well, I'm a gullible bastard. He didn't give me any money which is a shame, because all the strikers we've got are shit" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Nobody spends any money in January... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Because he wasn't given any money? He spent money on a player who was already at the club until the end of the season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Probably because he's a spineless weasel who will do whatever he's told. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think he was the difference between 1 and 3 points today although you can't fault him for leaving Best and Lovenkrands on for so long when you consider how much they cost us. So the manager is to blame for the poor finishing of his side, laughable. Why didn't he buy a striker? Because he wasn't given any money? Well he claims it was because he was so impressed with the ones we've got. Well after weeks of claiming that he was going to "bang on the door of the chairman", he was hardly going to turn around and say "Oh well, I'm a gullible bastard. He didn't give me any money which is a shame, because all the strikers we've got are shit" Well after weeks of telling us Andy Carroll wasn't for sale, he sold him so that's an absolutely ridiculous point. Mick has made the point for me (EDIT, no he hasn't he's talking about HBA) - why bring in an injured midfielder instead of, for example, Sturridge? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Because he wasn't given any money? He spent money on a player who was already at the club until the end of the season. Who is also injured and we already had a deal in place to buy at the end of the season Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Because he wasn't given any money? He spent money on a player who was already at the club until the end of the season. Who is also injured and we already had a deal in place to buy at the end of the season We did? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Because he wasn't given any money? He spent money on a player who was already at the club until the end of the season. Who is also injured and we already had a deal in place to buy at the end of the season We did? I thought that was part of the deal. I may be wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Because he wasn't given any money? He spent money on a player who was already at the club until the end of the season. Who is also injured and we already had a deal in place to buy at the end of the season We did? I thought that was part of the deal. I may be wrong. I think you are wrong tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Because he wasn't given any money? He spent money on a player who was already at the club until the end of the season. Who is also injured and we already had a deal in place to buy at the end of the season We did? I thought that was part of the deal. I may be wrong. I think you are wrong tbh. We had a deal in place if he played a certain amount of games(25), we simply brought that forward and bought him in January. I doubt this deal had anything to do with Pardew. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think he was the difference between 1 and 3 points today although you can't fault him for leaving Best and Lovenkrands on for so long when you consider how much they cost us. So the manager is to blame for the poor finishing of his side, laughable. Why didn't he buy a striker? Because he wasn't given any money? Well he claims it was because he was so impressed with the ones we've got. Well after weeks of claiming that he was going to "bang on the door of the chairman", he was hardly going to turn around and say "Oh well, I'm a gullible b******. He didn't give me any money which is a shame, because all the strikers we've got are s***" Well after weeks of telling us Andy Carroll wasn't for sale, he sold him so that's an absolutely ridiculous point. Mick has made the point for me - why bring in an injured midfielder instead of, for example, Sturridge? Because the money was probably already earmarked for HBA and I doubt Pardew even had much of a say in it either. My point is, the blame for me lies squarely at the door of the boardroom. I don't blame Pardew for not signing anyone in the window. Like Hughton before him, he's just making the best of a bad situation. He's just an irrelevant puppet in this whole charade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Because he wasn't given any money? He spent money on a player who was already at the club until the end of the season. Who is also injured and we already had a deal in place to buy at the end of the season We did? I thought that was part of the deal. I may be wrong. I think you are wrong tbh. We had a deal in place if he played a certain amount of games(25), we simply brought that forward and bought him in January. I doubt this deal had anything to do with Pardew. Ah shit aye that was it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think he was the difference between 1 and 3 points today although you can't fault him for leaving Best and Lovenkrands on for so long when you consider how much they cost us. So the manager is to blame for the poor finishing of his side, laughable. Why didn't he buy a striker? Because he wasn't given any money? Well he claims it was because he was so impressed with the ones we've got. Well after weeks of claiming that he was going to "bang on the door of the chairman", he was hardly going to turn around and say "Oh well, I'm a gullible b******. He didn't give me any money which is a shame, because all the strikers we've got are s***" Well after weeks of telling us Andy Carroll wasn't for sale, he sold him so that's an absolutely ridiculous point. Mick has made the point for me - why bring in an injured midfielder instead of, for example, Sturridge? Because the money was probably already earmarked for HBA and I doubt Pardew even had much of a say in it either. My point is, the blame for me lies squarely at the door of the boardroom. I don't blame Pardew for not signing anyone in the window. Like Hughton before him, he's just making the best of a bad situation. He's just an irrelevant puppet in this whole charade. I think his circumstances are totally different to those of Hughton. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think you are wrong tbh. The deal was in our favour apart from us having to buy him if he made a certain amount of appearances. I doubt many teams would have been pushing with us to sign him with his injury and lack of games this season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I agree, i think under Ashley I now find it difficult to blame any manager of ours for failings in the transfer market. Their hands are tied to an impossible extent. Keegan told us how they go in, in that anecdote before this seasons Liverpool game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think he was the difference between 1 and 3 points today although you can't fault him for leaving Best and Lovenkrands on for so long when you consider how much they cost us. So the manager is to blame for the poor finishing of his side, laughable. Why didn't he buy a striker? Because he wasn't given any money? Well he claims it was because he was so impressed with the ones we've got. Well after weeks of claiming that he was going to "bang on the door of the chairman", he was hardly going to turn around and say "Oh well, I'm a gullible b******. He didn't give me any money which is a shame, because all the strikers we've got are s***" Well after weeks of telling us Andy Carroll wasn't for sale, he sold him so that's an absolutely ridiculous point. Mick has made the point for me - why bring in an injured midfielder instead of, for example, Sturridge? Because the money was probably already earmarked for HBA and I doubt Pardew even had much of a say in it either. My point is, the blame for me lies squarely at the door of the boardroom. I don't blame Pardew for not signing anyone in the window. Like Hughton before him, he's just making the best of a bad situation. He's just an irrelevant puppet in this whole charade. I think his circumstances are totally different to those of Hughton. Not in terms of the transfer window. Hughton didn't get much money and most said 'he's just making the best of what little he has'. Pardew does the same and it's his fault. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Anyway FWIW. I'm not going to judge him (unless we go down, in which case he want shot with shit) until midway next season when he has "his squad and preseason" behind him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I agree, i think under Ashley I now find it difficult to blame any manager of ours for failings in the transfer market. Their hands are tied to an impossible extent. Keegan told us how they go in, in that anecdote before this seasons Liverpool game. Hughton must have been really good then because he seemed to get money to spend, even if it wasn't much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 It's perceived as common knowledge that Pardew knew he wasn't going to have much money to spend, as well as the fact he was brought in to toe the company line and not kick up much of a fuss. Whereas due to Hughton's standing with the fans he didn't have to toe the line, which despite it being speculation, is the reason why it cost him his job IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think he was the difference between 1 and 3 points today although you can't fault him for leaving Best and Lovenkrands on for so long when you consider how much they cost us. So the manager is to blame for the poor finishing of his side, laughable. Why didn't he buy a striker? Because he wasn't given any money? Well he claims it was because he was so impressed with the ones we've got. Well after weeks of claiming that he was going to "bang on the door of the chairman", he was hardly going to turn around and say "Oh well, I'm a gullible b******. He didn't give me any money which is a shame, because all the strikers we've got are s***" Well after weeks of telling us Andy Carroll wasn't for sale, he sold him so that's an absolutely ridiculous point. Mick has made the point for me - why bring in an injured midfielder instead of, for example, Sturridge? Because the money was probably already earmarked for HBA and I doubt Pardew even had much of a say in it either. My point is, the blame for me lies squarely at the door of the boardroom. I don't blame Pardew for not signing anyone in the window. Like Hughton before him, he's just making the best of a bad situation. He's just an irrelevant puppet in this whole charade. Why bring in Ireland instead of a loan striker? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts