Mick Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Then they did. But people still bring it up now as to why not to believe anything from them. If they can change to give a manager final say then they can surely change from lying too? We have no idea what is or isn't true, you can't blame the fans for that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Then they did. But people still bring it up now as to why not to believe anything from them. If they can change to give a manager final say then they can surely change from lying too? We have no idea what is or isn't true, you can't blame the fans for that. Then you can't blame some fans for suggesting that Pardew has no say in transfers, and thus was blameless for January. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Because this is Mike Ashley we're talking about. Me and him hold different opinions you know - because I think we'll struggle, doesn't mean he does. You said "result," not him. Anyway it's not really worth dragging this one out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Because this is Mike Ashley we're talking about. Me and him hold different opinions you know - because I think we'll struggle, doesn't mean he does. You said "result," not him. Anyway it's not really worth dragging this one out. I was taking the piss Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Then you can't blame some fans for suggesting that Pardew has no say in transfers, and thus was blameless for January. At least one manager since Keegan has claimed he had final say which suggests that the club made a mistake and learned from it. No manager since has said that he didn't and nobody within the club has either. I would be more likely to agree with you if it wasn't for that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I was taking the p*ss OK. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keefaz Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/8157/mikeashleyap450x300.jpg "Here you go, Alan, mate." http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/3083/pardew.jpg "Huh? What's that?" http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/2838/mikeashley2468x510.jpg "It's a, uh, chalice, mate." http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/4278/virginchalice.jpg http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4028/southamptonvbirminghamc.jpg http://img574.imageshack.us/img574/8403/alanpardew280756110a.jpg "A... chalice, you say?" http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/9337/mikeashley1197139.jpg "Aye." http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/6999/pic62757.jpg "It's not... poisoned or anything, is it, Mike?" http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/3250/mikeashley001.jpg "Don't be daft, Pards." http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/1914/alanpardew.jpg http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/1596/ashleykeegan.jpg "Drink up." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/8157/mikeashleyap450x300.jpg "Here you go, Alan, mate." http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/3083/pardew.jpg "Huh? What's that?" http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/2838/mikeashley2468x510.jpg "It's a, uh, chalice, mate." http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/4278/virginchalice.jpg http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4028/southamptonvbirminghamc.jpg http://img574.imageshack.us/img574/8403/alanpardew280756110a.jpg "A... chalice, you say?" http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/9337/mikeashley1197139.jpg "Aye." http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/6999/pic62757.jpg "It's not... poisoned or anything, is it, Mike?" http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/3250/mikeashley001.jpg "Don't be daft, Pards." http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/1914/alanpardew.jpg http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/1596/ashleykeegan.jpg "Drink up." :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keefaz Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Nice one, bellends. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Edited. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
80 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Colin- if you weren't concerned after the two games at Bolton and WBA where we looked a complete rabble (a la yesterday) then.....well let's just say I admire your optimism. I could probably pick two games from every club in the league where they've looked like that though. Couldn't you? That's football, surely? Also, I'm an advocate of the idea that stability is a huge foundation of success - especially for us - so there's a lot to be said for the idea that if anything was declining in the last two matches under Hughton, it's because he'd already been secretly sacked for Pardew and he and the squad were having firefight accusations and rumours sparked by Ashley in public and in private. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
80 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Fair enough, Hughton beat the likes of Arsenal, Everton and Villa, but how can he be labelled a "good tactician" when he then lost to West Brom, Bolton and Stoke? It comes down to the fact that points are points and you get no more beating Arsenal than you do beating Wolves. Bolton who are 7th and Stoke who are 10th? Why is it that when people review Hughton they say these were shit teams to lose to, but when they review Pardew the likes of Everton who were behind us in the bottom half become respectable? The irony of you mentioning those two teams in the context of tactics is that literally every shred of their reputation is built on scoring tactical victories against teams that are otherwise run better in almost every aspect. Is Mick McCarthy a good tactician, seeing as he's beaten Alex Ferguson, Carlo Ancelloti and Roberto Mancini and put three past Harry Redknapp for a draw for good measure? By the way, it doesn't matter who you're beating, but you get more points for winning than drawing, which is a lesson a scarily large number of teams seem to have learned better than ours. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinho lad Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/8157/mikeashleyap450x300.jpg "Here you go, Alan, mate." http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/3083/pardew.jpg "Huh? What's that?" http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/2838/mikeashley2468x510.jpg "It's a, uh, chalice, mate." http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/4278/virginchalice.jpg http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4028/southamptonvbirminghamc.jpg http://img574.imageshack.us/img574/8403/alanpardew280756110a.jpg "A... chalice, you say?" http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/9337/mikeashley1197139.jpg "Aye." http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/6999/pic62757.jpg "It's not... poisoned or anything, is it, Mike?" http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/3250/mikeashley001.jpg "Don't be daft, Pards." http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/1914/alanpardew.jpg http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/1596/ashleykeegan.jpg "Drink up." :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Bolton who are 7th and Stoke who are 10th? The former was around us in the table at the time, and Stoke were in the bottom three. Like I say, I didn't expect us to win but they shouldn't have got the points as easily as they did. Why is it that when people review Hughton they say these were s*** teams to lose to, but when they review Pardew the likes of Everton who were behind us in the bottom half become respectable? I don't know, I don't do that. The irony of you mentioning those two teams in the context of tactics is that literally every shred of their reputation is built on scoring tactical victories against teams that are otherwise run better in almost every aspect. So we are better than them then? Is Mick McCarthy a good tactician, seeing as he's beaten Alex Ferguson, Carlo Ancelloti and Roberto Mancini and put three past Harry Redknapp for a draw for good measure? I don't think a manager whose team has spent alot of time down the bottom of the league this season is a "good" anything. By the way, it doesn't matter who you're beating, but you get more points for winning than drawing, which is a lesson a scarily large number of teams seem to have learned better than ours. Yup. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 How can you be so sure that Ashley didn't tell Pardew to go f*** himself when he asked for money in January? Why didn't he get a loan striker in instead of Ireland? Sturridge or Vela perhaps? Because Ireland is costing him f*** all. So you agree with me that Ireland was brought in because he's injured and not despite the injury? And you support a manager who is complicit in this? Yes, I'd go along with that. Why do you either have to love or hate Pardew? I'm just not blaming him for the January window because it's not his fault. he's married a convicted serial killer, i've absolutely no sympathy for him when he gets his head stoved in with a hammer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
80 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 The irony of you mentioning those two teams in the context of tactics is that literally every shred of their reputation is built on scoring tactical victories against teams that are otherwise run better in almost every aspect. So we are better than them then? Eh? As it happens we might have been, but regardless the point is clear that they're tactically excellent teams. It's no surprise or shame to have an immature, inexperienced and under-invested in team drop points against them because much better ones do too. Accordingly a manager can be a good tactician and still need a lot more ammunition on top - e.g. raw talent - to hope to ensure a good result against them - a loss doesn't prove anything negative about him. Is Mick McCarthy a good tactician, seeing as he's beaten Alex Ferguson, Carlo Ancelloti and Roberto Mancini and put three past Harry Redknapp for a draw for good measure? I don't think a manager whose team has spent alot of time down the bottom of the league this season is a "good" anything. But the ones at the top of the league this season must not be either seeing as most of them have lost to him with much better teams... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Like I said earlier, a win is a win regardless. He's no further forward than if he'd beat Newcastle, Wigan and Aston Villa instead of Man U, Man City and Chelsea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
80 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Like I said earlier, a win is a win regardless. He's no further forward than if he'd beat Newcastle, Wigan and Aston Villa instead of Man U, Man City and Chelsea. So where's the sense in saying specific results dictate whether someone's a good tactician or not? In fact, going on this principle, there's no discussion to be had at all - I suppose the assumption is the best tactician is at the team that finishes first, and the second best tactician is at the team that finishes second, and the third... etc. etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Like I said earlier, a win is a win regardless. He's no further forward than if he'd beat Newcastle, Wigan and Aston Villa instead of Man U, Man City and Chelsea. So where's the sense in saying specific results dictate whether someone's a good tactician or not? In fact, going on this principle, there's no discussion to be had at all - either tactics aren't important at all or the best tactician is at the team that finishes first, and the second best tactician is at the team that finishes second, and the third... etc. etc. That's not what I'm saying at all. A good tactician is someone who knows how to approach games against the big guns and then how to approach games against the dross. It's fantastic that Wolves can win 1-0 against Manchester United, but if they lose to West Ham and Wigan then how is that good tactics on display? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
80 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Like I said earlier, a win is a win regardless. He's no further forward than if he'd beat Newcastle, Wigan and Aston Villa instead of Man U, Man City and Chelsea. So where's the sense in saying specific results dictate whether someone's a good tactician or not? In fact, going on this principle, there's no discussion to be had at all - either tactics aren't important at all or the best tactician is at the team that finishes first, and the second best tactician is at the team that finishes second, and the third... etc. etc. That's not what I'm saying at all. A good tactician is someone who knows how to approach games against the big guns and then how to approach games against the dross. It's fantastic that Wolves can win 1-0 against Manchester United, but if they lose to West Ham and Wigan then how is that good tactics on display? But then that is what you're saying - the only real indicator of a decent tactician is where their team finishes. The one who's approached the most games in the right way will be the one who won the league etc. if we can tell whether they had the 'right approach' by whether they won or not. In making your leap of logic, it neglects financial resources, talents and qualities of different parts of the teams, motivation, the aims of the clubs, both overall (whether it's a realistic Board asking for survival, or a prima donna-filled squad demanding trophies), or on the day (must win? must not lost? must not give the opposition three points? all different, of course). In contrast, I say tactics are subject to all these factors. It's the common explanation for why our home record was so unutterably shit in 04/05 under Robson - teams like Bolton came with the ambition of not losing and stifled our team which loved space and would otherwise score more points away from home where there was more of an onus upon our opposition to attack us and compromise the organisation of their defence. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Aye, alright. There's no point in arguing as we're going round in circles. You're right, I'm wrong Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
80 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I can work with that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hobshobs Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 If's and but's I know, but................. Let's say the going rate for an England international is around £15 million, more I know, but lets take that figure. Pardew thinks Nolan should be playing for England. That equates to him being prepared to pay £30 million of the £35 million from the Carroll transfer for two players, each of the calibre of Kevin Nolan. Supporting this club just gets worse by the day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest palnese Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts