Dave Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 There are meant to be positives though, not simply no negatives. Or else there was no point. I think Pardew is doing well, but to me to justify the change he needs to be doing significantly better than I believe Hughton would have done. I'm not sure I do, so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 But do you think Carroll would be here if Hughton was still manager? When Carroll was asking for more money Pardew told him to put it in writing, I think Hughton will have taken a different approach so who knows. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Don't see anything negative about Pardew's reign so far, except he's not Chris Hughton. The only really bad thing that's happened is selling Carroll, and everyone must know that that's nothing to do with him. Where's the improvement? Being the same is not good enough after our upgrade to a more experienced manager. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 There are meant to be positives though, or else there was no point. Not simply no negatives. Well give the man a chance, he's kept the squad together and we've turned in some good performances. We could have easily won against Sunderland, Tottenham and today. We didn't, aye, but that's football for you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 There are meant to be positives though, or else there was no point. Not simply no negatives. we appear to be more consistent,strong and organised. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 There are meant to be positives though, or else there was no point. Not simply no negatives. We generally look more organised and are playing it through the midfield better. He's doing OK with the resources he has - if Hughton had the same strike force at his disposal I think the results would have been worse than under Pardew. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 we appear to be more consistent,strong and organised. Yet we appear to be one place higher in the league going into an away game which a defeat will see us at best where we were when he came in, at worst lower depending on other results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikon Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 we appear to be more consistent,strong and organised. Yet we appear to be one place higher in the league going into an away game which a defeat will see us at best where we were when he came in, at worst lower depending on other results. Been without Carroll for a while as well, dont forget that mate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 we appear to be more consistent,strong and organised. Yet we appear to be one place higher in the league going into an away game which a defeat will see us at best where we were when he came in, at worst lower depending on other results. Nobody's trying to argue with the table. It speaks for itself, but it doesn't tell the whole story. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 We generally look more organised and are playing it through the midfield better. He's doing OK with the resources he has - if Hughton had the same strike force at his disposal I think the results would have been worse than under Pardew. We've only started playing through the middle since Shola was injured, we don't know what will happen when he comes back and we have the option of just hoofing it again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Been without Carroll for a while as well, dont forget that mate. I know and we chose not to do anything about it, I don't see that as a positive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Nobody's trying to argue with the table. It speaks for itself, but it doesn't tell the whole story. I agree with that but we have to measure performance and doing so in any other way is subjective. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Nobody's trying to argue with the table. It speaks for itself, but it doesn't tell the whole story. I agree with that but we have to measure performance and doing so in any other way is subjective. I agree, but football is a subjective game, especially on discussion forums! Measuring Pardew just by the progress up or down the table in the tiny amount of time he's been here is mental IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I agree, but football is a subjective game, especially on discussion forums! Measuring Pardew just by the progress up or down the table in the tiny amount of time he's been here is mental IMO. Football is subjective, results aren't. When can we start to measure progress by using the league table? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I agree, but football is a subjective game, especially on discussion forums! Measuring Pardew just by the progress up or down the table in the tiny amount of time he's been here is mental IMO. Football is subjective, results aren't. When can we start to measure progress by using the league table? The results are against different standards of opposition, with selection issues and various other problems that are not down to the manager himself, so the only reasonable answer to your question is that the progress under Pardew can be judged after a full season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 The results are against different standards of opposition, with selection issues and various other problems that are not down to the manager himself, so the only reasonable answer to your question is that the progress under Pardew can be judged after a full season. Hughton was judged after 16 league games. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 The results are against different standards of opposition, with selection issues and various other problems that are not down to the manager himself, so the only reasonable answer to your question is that the progress under Pardew can be judged after a full season. Hughton was judged after 16 league games. That's making a questionable assumption that he was sacked based entirely on results... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 That's making a questionable assumption that he was sacked based entirely on results... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 That's making a questionable assumption that he was sacked based entirely on results... may not be so funny if it was judged that he couldn't control his players. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Fuck me, the negativity in here is devastating at times. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 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? Because when we started the Ireland deal, we were desperately short in midfield, Carroll was still a NUFC player and Shola didn't have a fractured jaw. That's utter drivel. Our first choice midfield four were all available other than one who was suspended and would be back before Ireland was fit, Carroll we knew was injured for weeks or months and Shola is Shola, consistently either injured or shit. We've been desperate for another striker all season, not to mention the fact that we were actively attempting to sell Carroll. and again an anti Ashley protester using the Carroll sale to big up their argument. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 may not be so funny if it was judged that he couldn't control his players. I was laughing that Andy was repeating what somebody else had posted earlier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 I agree, but football is a subjective game, especially on discussion forums! Measuring Pardew just by the progress up or down the table in the tiny amount of time he's been here is mental IMO. Football is subjective, results aren't. When can we start to measure progress by using the league table? At the end of a season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 may not be so funny if it was judged that he couldn't control his players. I was laughing that Andy was repeating what somebody else had posted earlier. I thought the "done thing" in here was to beat the same arguments to a pulp. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punk77 Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Todays match was a huge step in the right direction. Can't remember last time we dominated so much. Ironic that we did not bag all points. As already mentioned, it seems like we now are a bit more organized. When you factor in all the injuries and difficult opponents I'm satisfied with the development. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts