Alan Pardew

[AyeDubbleYoo]

We don't really have many attacking players, Ba has been class and HBA hasn't been given a chance. Now we have Cisse. I would say that's about it. Cabaye seems to prefer to sit deep and Jonas seems to have forgotten how to attck for the most part. We do need an injection of attacking intent from somewhere (Hatem!).

[johnnypd]

So far the defensive players have been the story of the season, probably due of Pardew's safe approach to the game. The attacking or flair players havent lived up to expectations very likely due to the same reasons. I have emphasize the point that we do not create enough open chances, and have very little attacking overlapping runs to support offensive moves.

Its actually quite usual that in an entire match, ours strikers are the furthest up front awaiting for a cross and very little actually goes through the middle. I put this down due to the lack of tactics or trying to play a very defensive game that often allows only a couple of attacking players to be involved.

 

Overlapping runs are usually staged or pre train on the pitch, so the players would find extra space, the player in possession would know exactly where the ball needs to go during the attack. We have very little or no such runs in games, very unusual for a top 6 team tbh.

 

In the long run, we definitely need to improve in terms of attacking and creation, teams could be founded out and the forms of other team could get better as well. Imo we would not stay top 6-7 if we dont find a will to improve our game come the last stretch of the season.

 

 

We don't really have many attacking players, Ba has been class and HBA hasn't been given a chance. Now we have Cisse. I would say that's about it. Cabaye seems to prefer to sit deep and Jonas seems to have forgotten how to attck for the most part. We do need an injection of attacking intent from somewhere (Hatem!).

 

[madras]

Once again I don't think pre-season helped. Tiote and Cabaye didn't play together once due to various farcical issues, in fact for most of the time they weren't even in the same country. As a result they still don't look the natural partnership one would expect them to be.

true at the start of the season but we are now 7 month on (call, it 5 given the last month and the season start) which should be enough. hopefully with 2 "proper" forwards the midfiled can get sorted and hopefully play like they should, not just creating from 30yds and defending but getting in/around the box aswell. guessing that tiote will be the holding player, no excuse for not hitting the box when theres a chance mind, cabaye should be in the box much more than he has been, his one big let down from his first season for us.

[madras]

We don't really have many attacking players, Ba has been class and HBA hasn't been given a chance. Now we have Cisse. I would say that's about it. Cabaye seems to prefer to sit deep and Jonas seems to have forgotten how to attck for the most part. We do need an injection of attacking intent from somewhere (Hatem!).

all the more bloody reason for us to have midfielders attacking the box. pardew loves his stats, i'd love to know which club has had the fewest amount of midfielders in the 18yd box (us and wigan would be my guess), did anyone see WBA/wolves the other day, even at 0-0 when wba flooded the box whenever they had the opportunity.

[Guest Dontooner]

We don't really have many attacking players, Ba has been class and HBA hasn't been given a chance. Now we have Cisse. I would say that's about it. Cabaye seems to prefer to sit deep and Jonas seems to have forgotten how to attck for the most part. We do need an injection of attacking intent from somewhere (Hatem!).

all the more bloody reason for us to have midfielders attacking the box. pardew loves his stats, i'd love to know which club has had the fewest amount of midfielders in the 18yd box (us and wigan would be my guess), did anyone see WBA/wolves the other day, even at 0-0 when wba flooded the box whenever they had the opportunity.

Aye we prefer to wear 3 condoms on a good day, unless we are chasing a game dont think they will come off.

[TherealnorthernTOON]

Has anyone given the thought that our progression was too fast for Pardew to comprehend? The plan, if we were about 10th, in that mix, our gameplan would've been good imo. But looking as it is, our gameplan is too simplistic for a top6 team. Wich we aren't if we are realistic. We just came up from the championship. We are trying to build a team. It takes time but as most people say our personell are looking more and more forward oriented then defending oriented. Give it time and we'll see how it turns out.

[madras]

Has anyone given the thought that our progression was too fast for Pardew to comprehend? The plan, if we were about 10th, in that mix, our gameplan would've been good imo. But looking as it is, our gameplan is too simplistic for a top6 team. Wich we aren't if we are realistic. We just came up from the championship. We are trying to build a team. It takes time but as most people say our personell are looking more and more forward oriented then defending oriented. Give it time and we'll see how it turns out.

no, you react to where you are, what you face and what you have, not where you think you should be, could face or might get.

[Sifu]

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.

 

I definitely think this is true. There is that argument that if you change a formula that has served you so well for most of the season then why change it? Such an argument has substance really - at the start of the season, with the emphasis being on defensive solidity, we were becoming harder to beat and that certainly worked in our favour. I guess any significant changes now could knack us between now and the end of the season. If this is Pardew's view then I can understand it tbh.

 

In terms of the football we've played, it has been pretty at times and at other times, downright atrocious but sometimes a mix of a passing game and direct football can work to our benefit (see the Man U game at St. James'). From what we've heard, Pardew does have an attention-to-detail approach when it comes to deciding on the tactics and that can only be a good thing. Of course, he has got it completely wrong at times but with mistakes, comes experience and I hope Pardew is learning from them (he certainly learned from his mistakes from Stoke last season and set us up to a brilliant win this season).

 

I also really think that Pardew had different plans for us during pre-season. I actually do believe that he wanted us to pass and play this season but because our pre-season turned out to be a terrible one (Ben Arfa getting injured, Tiote's visa problems), I reckon Alan had little choice but to throw his initial plans out the window and to work on something else (which has gone well tbh). If the next pre-season goes well (and if we finish this season strongly of course), can see us playing a different type of game next season, one which I think will be much better than some of this season's showings.

[Guest reefatoon]

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.

 

I definitely think this is true. There is that argument that if you change a formula that has served you so well for most of the season then why change it? Such an argument has substance really - at the start of the season, with the emphasis being on defensive solidity, we were becoming harder to beat and that certainly worked in our favour. I guess any significant changes now could knack us between now and the end of the season. If this is Pardew's view then I can understand it tbh.

 

In terms of the football we've played, it has been pretty at times and at other times, downright atrocious but sometimes a mix of a passing game and direct football can work to our benefit (see the Man U game at St. James'). From what we've heard, Pardew does have an attention-to-detail approach when it comes to deciding on the tactics and that can only be a good thing. Of course, he has got it completely wrong at times but with mistakes, comes experience and I hope Pardew is learning from them (he certainly learned from his mistakes from Stoke last season and set us up to a brilliant win this season).

 

I also really think that Pardew had different plans for us during pre-season. I actually do believe that he wanted us to pass and play this season but because our pre-season turned out to be a terrible one (Ben Arfa getting injured, Tiote's visa problems), I reckon Alan had little choice but to throw his initial plans out the window and to work on something else (which has gone well tbh). If the next pre-season goes well (and if we finish this season strongly of course), can see us playing a different type of game next season, one which I think will be much better than some of this season's showings.

 

Enjoyable read that sifu

[madras]

but he has changed quite often, you can't say jonas in the middle and best out left was conservative, even sticking with it after a heavy defeat.

[Sifu]

but he has changed quite often, you can't say jonas in the middle and best out left was conservative, even sticking with it after a heavy defeat.

 

Indeed. Though seeing as Ba (and Cissé) weren't available to Pardew (and thus his "preferred system" couldn't be properly used) think Alan wanted to experiment a bit there and see if such a system had some merit and guess he also did it because he wanted to somehow integrate Ben Arfa into the team. The signs were a bit promising (the QPR game and the first half in the Fulham game being key examples) but with two consecutive defeats (Fulham and Brighton) in such a system and with Best and Shola playing, Pardew probably thought that he should stick to Best's and Shola's "strengths" and play two upfront (and hence use his previous system).

[madras]

but he has changed quite often, you can't say jonas in the middle and best out left was conservative, even sticking with it after a heavy defeat.

 

Indeed. Though seeing as Ba (and Cissé) weren't available to Pardew (and thus his "preferred system" couldn't be properly used) think Alan wanted to experiment a bit there and see if such a system had some merit and guess he also did it because he wanted to somehow integrate Ben Arfa into the team. The signs were a bit promising (the QPR game and the first half in the Fulham game being key examples) but with two consecutive defeats (Fulham and Brighton) in such a system and with Best and Shola playing, Pardew probably thought that he should stick to Best's and Shola's "strengths" and play two upfront (and hence use his previous system).

preferred system or no the ploy of jonas in the middle with best wide left doesn't need 2 games. the QPR game we got the result, the performance had little to build a new startegy on.

[Sifu]

but he has changed quite often, you can't say jonas in the middle and best out left was conservative, even sticking with it after a heavy defeat.

 

Indeed. Though seeing as Ba (and Cissé) weren't available to Pardew (and thus his "preferred system" couldn't be properly used) think Alan wanted to experiment a bit there and see if such a system had some merit and guess he also did it because he wanted to somehow integrate Ben Arfa into the team. The signs were a bit promising (the QPR game and the first half in the Fulham game being key examples) but with two consecutive defeats (Fulham and Brighton) in such a system and with Best and Shola playing, Pardew probably thought that he should stick to Best's and Shola's "strengths" and play two upfront (and hence use his previous system).

preferred system or no the ploy of jonas in the middle with best wide left doesn't need 2 games. the QPR game we got the result, the performance had little to build a new startegy on.

 

I really thought Jonas did well in the middle. It gave him a free licence to roam around which meant he had more influence on the game imo. Certainly linked up well with Ben Arfa.

[madras]

he shadowed ben arfa, little else vQPR. V fulham he had one or two MotD touches and that was all.

[Guest Dontooner]

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.

 

I definitely think this is true. There is that argument that if you change a formula that has served you so well for most of the season then why change it? Such an argument has substance really - at the start of the season, with the emphasis being on defensive solidity, we were becoming harder to beat and that certainly worked in our favour. I guess any significant changes now could knack us between now and the end of the season. If this is Pardew's view then I can understand it tbh.

 

In terms of the football we've played, it has been pretty at times and at other times, downright atrocious but sometimes a mix of a passing game and direct football can work to our benefit (see the Man U game at St. James'). From what we've heard, Pardew does have an attention-to-detail approach when it comes to deciding on the tactics and that can only be a good thing. Of course, he has got it completely wrong at times but with mistakes, comes experience and I hope Pardew is learning from them (he certainly learned from his mistakes from Stoke last season and set us up to a brilliant win this season).

 

I also really think that Pardew had different plans for us during pre-season. I actually do believe that he wanted us to pass and play this season but because our pre-season turned out to be a terrible one (Ben Arfa getting injured, Tiote's visa problems), I reckon Alan had little choice but to throw his initial plans out the window and to work on something else (which has gone well tbh). If the next pre-season goes well (and if we finish this season strongly of course), can see us playing a different type of game next season, one which I think will be much better than some of this season's showings.

 

Too many assumptions tbh. Even with the current formation and safe tactics we are employing right now, there is alot of space for improvement. Even for the typical crossing game, we can look more dangerous and efficient. Maybe there are improvements since the beginning of the season but i just dont see the translation on the pitch.

[Sifu]

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.

 

I definitely think this is true. There is that argument that if you change a formula that has served you so well for most of the season then why change it? Such an argument has substance really - at the start of the season, with the emphasis being on defensive solidity, we were becoming harder to beat and that certainly worked in our favour. I guess any significant changes now could knack us between now and the end of the season. If this is Pardew's view then I can understand it tbh.

 

In terms of the football we've played, it has been pretty at times and at other times, downright atrocious but sometimes a mix of a passing game and direct football can work to our benefit (see the Man U game at St. James'). From what we've heard, Pardew does have an attention-to-detail approach when it comes to deciding on the tactics and that can only be a good thing. Of course, he has got it completely wrong at times but with mistakes, comes experience and I hope Pardew is learning from them (he certainly learned from his mistakes from Stoke last season and set us up to a brilliant win this season).

 

I also really think that Pardew had different plans for us during pre-season. I actually do believe that he wanted us to pass and play this season but because our pre-season turned out to be a terrible one (Ben Arfa getting injured, Tiote's visa problems), I reckon Alan had little choice but to throw his initial plans out the window and to work on something else (which has gone well tbh). If the next pre-season goes well (and if we finish this season strongly of course), can see us playing a different type of game next season, one which I think will be much better than some of this season's showings.

 

Too many assumptions tbh. Even with the current formation and safe tactics we are employing right now, there is alot of space for improvement. Even for the typical crossing game, we can look more dangerous and efficient. Maybe there are improvements since the beginning of the season but i just dont see the translation on the pitch.

 

There's always room for improvement really. I just think that, having thought it about it quite a bit, the "safe tactics" has somewhat worked wonders for us this season and I reckon we'll continue to reap the benefits from it imo. With the position we're in atm (and with our aim higher now than it was at the start of the season), I guess it's the case of "it's better to be safe than sorry".

[Dr Venkman]

At what point did long balls start to be called crosses?

[Guest hatem garrincha]

The main quality of Pardew seems to be his ability to motivate and transcend his players with slogans such as solidarity, "pride in the jersey", fight etc.

Ben Arfa maybe the only player who didn't get "the message".

[Mick]

At what point did long balls start to be called crosses?

 

When they come from out wide rather than hoofing it up the middle.

[Guest Dontooner]

I haven't seem to quite coin the term yet, but here we go again "Hoof and Cross Pardew". Till he improves,otherwise it will remain my opinion of his seamless preparation and his good passing football.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

The major difference between Pardew and Sir Bobby is their footballing philosophies are totally different. Sir Bobby was a positive forward thinking kind of manager who wanted his sides to play attacking, exciting football, at pace and with lots of energy. His signings and the football we played in general demonstrated this. Pardew is far more negative and more defensive. He believes in stats more, giving extra importance to minor details and in general playing a percentages kind of game, relying on individuals and team spirit to see us through.

 

To be fair it is working for Pardew and his side, but only just. There is no plan B though and no other way, style or strategy so when plan A doesn't work, we are basically defeated. What stands out for me is that Sir Bobby had this almost encylepedia like knowledge of all kinds of systems, players, strategies and tactics yet his philopshy was simple and straight forward. Pick your best players and give them the confidence and freedom to express themselves to play attacking football and more often than not it worked, at several levels.

 

Going back to Carl Cort, I think Sir Bobby considered him a long-term replacement for Shearer or a back-up to him, i.e. an all-round type of centre-forward. To be fair, he had the ability and at Wimbledon he looked really promising, but injuries and other issues impeded that potential.

 

Bobby was a canny manager as well in terms of spotting things. He knew Shearer's mobility wasn't getting any better but there was no way he could drop a player still capable of scoring 30 goals in a season in all competitions and nor could we afford a mobile 30 a year striker, so he brought in Bellamy to play alongside Shearer and Robert to fire in the crosses. We already had Solano on the other flank. In midfield he had Dyer playing a kind of free role with Speed sitting and protecting. But we were so good going forward, Speed often grabbed himself a few goals too.

 

Bobby tried several times to change the way we played too, he bought Hugo Viana because he thought we didn't keep possession enough and bought Jenas to eventually replace Speed or rather his role in the side. That didn't quite work out but Bobby had the ability to change the way we played. I doubt pardew has that ability nor even the inclination to see our game changed or adapted.

 

We pretty much play the same kind of game as we did last season under him, only we have better players so results are improving. Performances aren't though and that's a worry, a massive worry, because as Sir Bobby himself said when once asked how he knew his side was improving or his players... its all in the performance. Forget league position or stats. They can be false. Performances cannot however. Ba's performances show he is the real deal, that he is a top top striker. Colo likewise in defence. Krul between the sticks.

 

In reverse, Shola's performances, Obertan's... they prove these players are simply not good enough, not to start anyway yet still they do - while players like Ben Arfa sit on the bench collecting splinters.

 

Sir Bobby would have him in his side 9 times out of 10 and give him the confidence and freedom to express himself to the best of his considerable ability.

 

And that's why he was a top manager and probably why Pardew will never ever be a top manager himself.

[Ryan]

Brilliant post that, agree with it all really

[Guest BooBoo]

The vast majority of managers will always compare poorly to Bobby. A pretty unfair comparison really.

[JH]

For those that can't be bothered to read it:

 

Bobby Robson > Alan Pardew.

 

Not that we didn't know that already

[timeEd32]

Not really sure why Pardew (or any NUFC manager) has to be compared to SBR. I don't think anyone is claiming Pardew is a better manager. Pardew should be judged on what he's doing with the current team. Right now, he's a rousing success.

 

If you really want to compare to past managers, how about we include Allardyce, Roeder, Souness, etc. as well instead of just putting him up against one of the greatest ever British managers.