Alan Pardew

[quayside]

It took even Bobby the best part of two seasons before we looked a decent team. His first season was a rescue job and the second was about as meh a season as you can get.

 

That's spot on.

I do wonder if times have changed a lot. Would there have been the patience and would he have been given the time to achieve what he did 10 years later? I genuinely don't have a clue on the answer to that.

[Guest BooBoo]

He got a bit more time as he was a local fella with a fantastic justified reputation for being a good boss.

 

However, on the whole, we are as a fan base quick to lose patience whether it be with managers or players.

[Dave]

Football fans, who knew.

[TRon]

It took even Bobby the best part of two seasons before we looked a decent team. His first season was a rescue job and the second was about as meh a season as you can get.

 

That's why I raised the point, in fairness to Pardew he's still building. But Bobby really believed in certain types of players like Dyer, Bellamy, Robert and the like. He definitely didn't give a shit about having big target men up front, in fact he broke up a relatively successful duo in Ferguson and Shearer quite ruthlessly to pursue his own philosophy by bringing Bellamy into the team. Whether Pardew has that sort of vision is where the jury is still out for me.

[Guest]

It took even Bobby the best part of two seasons before we looked a decent team. His first season was a rescue job and the second was about as meh a season as you can get.

 

That's why I raised the point, in fairness to Pardew he's still building. But Bobby really believed in certain types of players like Dyer, Bellamy, Robert and the like. He definitely didn't give a s*** about having big target men up front, in fact he broke up a relatively successful duo in Ferguson and Shearer quite ruthlessly to pursue his own philosophy by bringing Bellamy into the team. Whether Pardew has that sort of vision is where the jury is still out for me.

 

The original replacement was Carl Cort though, wasn't it?

[Guest BooBoo]

Yup, SBR only turned to Bellamy when it became clear that Cort was a crock.

[Hughesy]

It took even Bobby the best part of two seasons before we looked a decent team. His first season was a rescue job and the second was about as meh a season as you can get.

 

That's why I raised the point, in fairness to Pardew he's still building. But Bobby really believed in certain types of players like Dyer, Bellamy, Robert and the like. He definitely didn't give a s*** about having big target men up front, in fact he broke up a relatively successful duo in Ferguson and Shearer quite ruthlessly to pursue his own philosophy by bringing Bellamy into the team. Whether Pardew has that sort of vision is where the jury is still out for me.

 

You regard Ba and Cisse as target men?

[Guest]

I think he wanted him from Norwich, but seems to be this thing that he only didn't sign him that summer because we didn't get the Ferguson money in time and so he went to Coventry. Fact still remains though that that summer we chose Cort ahead of Bellamy.

[Beren]

I think he wanted him from Norwich, but seems to be this thing that he only didn't sign him that summer because we didn't get the Ferguson money in time and so he went to Coventry. Fact still remains though that that summer we chose Cort ahead of Bellamy.

 

Correct. It's in SBR's autobiography.

[TRC]

Wonder what would have happened had we got Zenden and Jeffers instead of Robert and Bellamy. I'm quite sure they were our original targets?

[TRon]

It took even Bobby the best part of two seasons before we looked a decent team. His first season was a rescue job and the second was about as meh a season as you can get.

 

That's why I raised the point, in fairness to Pardew he's still building. But Bobby really believed in certain types of players like Dyer, Bellamy, Robert and the like. He definitely didn't give a s*** about having big target men up front, in fact he broke up a relatively successful duo in Ferguson and Shearer quite ruthlessly to pursue his own philosophy by bringing Bellamy into the team. Whether Pardew has that sort of vision is where the jury is still out for me.

 

You regard Ba and Cisse as target men?

 

I don't, but clearly Pardew does if you look at how the ball arrives at them.

[TRon]

I think he wanted him from Norwich, but seems to be this thing that he only didn't sign him that summer because we didn't get the Ferguson money in time and so he went to Coventry. Fact still remains though that that summer we chose Cort ahead of Bellamy.

 

Not how I remember it. I was dubious about Bellamy at the time as I didn't think he was a finisher so was quite impressed that Bobby pushed that one through at £6m. He really did want him badly and his judgement proved right in the end.

[Tooj]

Even if I can agree with this to some extent it wouldn´t have been a great idé at Tottenham. He hadn´t the player and should have been playing deeper in the defence.

 

Of course its all conjecture, but I think playing HBA instead of Obertan gainst Spurs would have at least kept their defenders on their toes. With Obertan, their fullback was overlapping and we were under wave and wave of attacks.

 

FWIW, I reckon that if Ben Arfa had started against Spurs, he would have made some sort of difference. A difference from an attacking perspective anyway, I'm sure Hatem would have given BAE a rough time down the right wing and guess that would have meant more chances for us.

 

But, not sure if Ben Arfa's presence would have changed the overall outcome. We still would have lost imo as Spurs were simply too good - they exploited our weaknesses in CM (Guthrie/Perch were overwhelmed) and defence well. Whilst it could have been a different scoreline, it still would have been a Spurs win. Bringing Ben Arfa for Obertan in the first half wouldn't have made much difference either, the game was lost as soon as the second goal went in.

 

In all honesty, I'm kinda glad he didn't play Ben Arfa, as he'd have had little or no impact, and I think it would have been another excuse for Pardew to come out with something in the press about Ben Arfa needing to work hard to fit into the team ethos.

[Guest]

I know he always wanted him as he was after him twice. But in the summer of 2000 we had the choice of Cort or Bellamy even before Ferguson was sold, and we opted for Cort.

[Parky]

Even if I can agree with this to some extent it wouldn´t have been a great idé at Tottenham. He hadn´t the player and should have been playing deeper in the defence.

 

Of course its all conjecture, but I think playing HBA instead of Obertan gainst Spurs would have at least kept their defenders on their toes. With Obertan, their fullback was overlapping and we were under wave and wave of attacks.

 

FWIW, I reckon that if Ben Arfa had started against Spurs, he would have made some sort of difference. A difference from an attacking perspective anyway, I'm sure Hatem would have given BAE a rough time down the right wing and guess that would have meant more chances for us.

 

But, not sure if Ben Arfa's presence would have changed the overall outcome. We still would have lost imo as Spurs were simply too good - they exploited our weaknesses in CM (Guthrie/Perch were overwhelmed) and defence well. Whilst it could have been a different scoreline, it still would have been a Spurs win. Bringing Ben Arfa for Obertan in the first half wouldn't have made much difference either, the game was lost as soon as the second goal went in.

 

In all honesty, I'm kinda glad he didn't play Ben Arfa, as he'd have had little or no impact, and I think it would have been another excuse for Pardew to come out with something in the press about Ben Arfa needing to work hard to fit into the team ethos.

 

My thoughts are the same.

[Zero]

Wonder what would have happened had we got Zenden and Jeffers instead of Robert and Bellamy. I'm quite sure they were our original targets?

 

Yea, this.  We opted for Bellamy after Jeffers turned us down.

 

Jeffers was hardly a Bellamy-type player imo

[TRon]

I know he always wanted him as he was after him twice. But in the summer of 2000 we had the choice of Cort or Bellamy even before Ferguson was sold, and we opted for Cort.

 

Seems to me you are picking the worst periods of SBR at the beginning and at the end to make a point. I'm not surprised really as when you are dictated by stats that's what you are limited to.

[Guest]

Just making a point that you said Bobby wouldn't have went for two big strikers, when he did, that's all.

[NG32]

He played three at one point.

 

Ferguson Sheaer and Cort.

[Nordstrom]

Just having a good read of the beginning of this thread.

 

Couldn't have proven us any more wrong.

[Cronky]

An interesting statistic is that we are 5th from bottom of the league in terms of chances created, but 4th from top in terms of the conversion rate of those chances.

 

It sometimes feels to me like Pardew has pared down the art of winning games to the bare bones, and this no-frills method is what's carrying us through. It's not pretty to watch but tbh results are more important than performances.

 

I do have faith that we're a work in progress and we'll move forward from this point though.

[Dave]

The argument about the inclusion of Ben Arfa aside, I don't think we play particularly bad football. IMO it's a continuation of how we played under Hughton in general; sometimes we knock it about and look really good, sometimes we play the percentage game. The same as most Premier League clubs to be frank. Both approaches have got us results this season, and as long as that continues in the main then it's hard to criticise.

 

I can understand the concerns of those who think that moving towards a percentage game too often will see us moving backwards though. If we see this season out well and make Europe then I think Pardew will have more confidence in his own plans whatever they may be. Things are on something of a knife edge at the moment because we're doing better than seemingly anyone at the club expected, so he's scared to change anything too much in case he misses this opportunity.

[NG32]

WHat dave says.

[Shak]

Aye Dave, think we should also start playing some better stuff now that we have Cisse.

 

We haven't really had a striker who's a threat to get in behind the defense, Cisse gives us that. That should force teams to play a bit deeper and give us more space to play in. He also seems very much willing to work the channels and his movement seems quality, something the likes of Shola and Best didn't really give us.

 

Pardew has said he wants to move towards a more pass and move based game, we haven't really seen it consistently so far but he's only been here just over a year. We were built to be a long ball team when he took over tbh, you can't change that overnight. Adding players like Cabaye, Ba and Cisse seems to signal that we want to play it on the deck more, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt in terms of his long term plans.

[Parky]

An interesting statistic is that we are 5th from bottom of the league in terms of chances created, but 4th from top in terms of the conversion rate of those chances.

 

It sometimes feels to me like Pardew has pared down the art of winning games to the bare bones, and this no-frills method is what's carrying us through. It's not pretty to watch but tbh results are more important than performances.

 

I do have faith that we're a work in progress and we'll move forward from this point though.

 

Ba.