Davide Santon (now retired)

[summerof69]

Similar to Ben Arfa in France, aswell.

[Colos Curls]

To think players can find relative peace in the goldfish bowl, isn't it ironic.

 

 

On topic I think santon can become a good player here, no real expectations so he can play worry free hopefully.

[geordie jamie]

I thought Santon was the Italian U21 captain? If he is seems strange why he would be on the bench unless he is not fit.

[Parky]

There's either something wrong with him or Pardew is dithering.

[Broadsword]

Enrique started the same with a extended period on the bench. Didn't turn out to bad in the end.  He will come good I'm sure.

[JH]

R.Taylor and defence play well = Santon on bench. Simple, really.

[Tiresias]

Pardew doesn't take people off if they;re playing well, don't think it's anything to do with Santon. It'll tale a bit for Santon to get the same understanding with the defensive line, wonder if Pardew is waiting for a run of easier games to bring him in

[abertoon]

My guess would be Pardews trying to establish a rule by where players aren't automatically displacing other players on good form just because of their reputation.. Keeps the players in the team playing well knowing that a dip in form could see them benched... we'll soon find out if there's any truth to this come the next game, should be a straight swap with Raylor and his shirt to lose, hopefully!

 

[Guest BlacknWhiteArmy]

There's either something wrong with him or Pardew is dithering.

 

Or the obvious one.

[Cajun]

My guess is we had the best defence in the league so thought it would be the right thing not to change it. No problem imo.

[Dr Venkman]

My guess is we had the best defence in the league so thought it would be the right thing not to change it. No problem imo.

 

yep, I doubt he'll even change it for Man U, but then it does beg the question what has ho happen for Santon to get a chance. I suppose a couple of games against lesser teams conceding a few would do it.

[Cajun]

It's a difficult job but one thing i think the media have been spot on about is having such a consistent back 5 is more important than trying to blood in more naturally talented players. Raylor has his faults, makes mistakes like yesterday but I don't buy this 'liability, waiting for mistakes to happen' business, he hasnt been infallible but he has played his part in our massively impressive start. If he becomes a problem make changes but for me, so far he isn't a problem.

 

That's from someone who would have left him leave for free in the summer fwiw.

[Hanshithispantz]

It's times like yesterday that he should be getting 15-20 minutes. 3-0 down against Man City and we're bringing on Lovenkrands, Perch and Gosling (the latter fair enough). He could have even came onto the right wing ahead of Sammy if Pardew was scared of conceding more.

[colinmk]

Yeah something doesn't seem right. We should have seen him have more minutes on the pitch by now.

[Ketsbaia]

When he has played, he's looked good. He hasn't Ryan Taylor'd anything yet.

[womblemaster]

Pardew is dithering.

 

sounds right.  imo his decisions are too soft at times. Think hes too used to charming everyone, and cant play the bastard, like ferguson or other `great` managers.

[Dave]

It's times like yesterday that he should be getting 15-20 minutes. 3-0 down against Man City and we're bringing on Lovenkrands, Perch and Gosling (the latter fair enough). He could have even came onto the right wing ahead of Sammy if Pardew was scared of conceding more.

 

[Optimistic Nut]

Or possibly we knew the game was lost, so stick players in who are expendible and don't care if they pick up an unnecessary knock or booking (Lovenkrands, Perch).

 

Look at the stick he got by many on here when he stuck Tiote on at Stevenage when the game was pretty much lost.

[Nobody]

I thought, at the time, that bringing Tiote on against Stevenage made a lot of sense.

[/tinhat]

[Cajun]

About time we started making up additional payments per game clauses isn't it?

[Hanshithispantz]

Or possibly we knew the game was lost, so stick players in who are expendible and don't care if they pick up an unnecessary knock or booking (Lovenkrands, Perch).

 

Look at the stick he got by many on here when he stuck Tiote on at Stevenage when the game was pretty much lost.

Tiote didn't need games though. The critisism I seem to remember from the cup games is that he was pushed off the ball and lost the 50/50s, this won't improve from the stands, he needs to get a taste of the "physicality of the Premier League" /cringe

 

I am aware that any opinion I have is slightly void like, Pardew obviously knows a lot more behind the scenes than we do.

 

EDIT: Also we cannot just not play anyone incase they get injured or sent off.

[powellnufc]

I assumed he was giving Raylor a chance to redeem himself, given that the game was lost. If he had just taken him off and then not started him next match his confidence would be knocked even worse. At least Pardew showed him that he has faith in him by giving him until the end of the match to try and improve. This allows him to give Santon a chance without damaging Raylor morale too much.

[Beren]

R.Taylor and defence play well = Santon on bench. Simple, really.

 

That logic seems faulty to me, but appears to be in line with Pardew's thinking.

 

Explains why Ben Arfa has struggled to get into the team (other than for CC outings) until Best got injured. It's dithering in my mind. The dialysis is as follows, IMO:

 

Cons:

We lose the continuity of having a solid and settled back four in the short-term.

We lose having a "known" quantity at left back.

We lose some set piece ability (but with Cabaye around now, not as big a loss)

We lose a really committed player who throws his body on the line (often to crucial effect)

 

Pros:

We gain a better footballer at left-back long term.

We get back to having the continuity of a solid back four quicker (once Santon is settled in his role)

We free up Jonas Gutierrez to doing the job of one man again.

We play better football from the back, which is of benefit to our forwards who generally won't prosper from long balls.

 

Four points each, but the weight of the "Pro" points dwarf the "Cons" for me. The sooner we move onto Santon the better. Raylor is a man and a well paid professional. He should have no problem dropping to the bench. It's laudable that he'd want to start, and long may it continue, but Pardew's care of duty is to the team playing good, winning football - not playing happy families.

[David28]

R.Taylor and defence play well = Santon on bench. Simple, really.

 

That logic seems faulty to me, but appears to be in line with Pardew's thinking.

 

Explains why Ben Arfa has struggled to get into the team (other than for CC outings) until Best got injured. It's dithering in my mind. The dialysis is as follows, IMO:

 

Cons:

We lose the continuity of having a solid and settled back four in the short-term.

We lose having a "known" quantity at left back.

We lose some set piece ability (but with Cabaye around now, not as big a loss)

We lose a really committed player who throws his body on the line (often to crucial effect)

 

Pros:

We gain a better footballer at left-back long term.

We get back to having the continuity of a solid back four quicker (once Santon is settled in his role)

We free up Jonas Gutierrez to doing the job of one man again.

We play better football from the back, which is of benefit to our forwards who generally won't prosper from long balls.

 

Four points each, but the weight of the "Pro" points dwarf the "Cons" for me. The sooner we move onto Santon the better. Raylor is a man and a well paid professional. He should have no problem dropping to the bench. It's laudable that he'd want to start, and long may it continue, but Pardew's care of duty is to the team playing good, winning football - not playing happy families.

 

Agree with that. Probably the right time for Santon now.

 

Would be a bit scared of the prospect of facing Ryan Taylor against Nani, Valencia or Young next weekend.

[JH]

R.Taylor and defence play well = Santon on bench. Simple, really.

 

That logic seems faulty to me, but appears to be in line with Pardew's thinking.

 

Explains why Ben Arfa has struggled to get into the team (other than for CC outings) until Best got injured. It's dithering in my mind. The dialysis is as follows, IMO:

 

Cons:

We lose the continuity of having a solid and settled back four in the short-term.

We lose having a "known" quantity at left back.

We lose some set piece ability (but with Cabaye around now, not as big a loss)

We lose a really committed player who throws his body on the line (often to crucial effect)

 

Pros:

We gain a better footballer at left-back long term.

We get back to having the continuity of a solid back four quicker (once Santon is settled in his role)

We free up Jonas Gutierrez to doing the job of one man again.

We play better football from the back, which is of benefit to our forwards who generally won't prosper from long balls.

 

Four points each, but the weight of the "Pro" points dwarf the "Cons" for me. The sooner we move onto Santon the better. Raylor is a man and a well paid professional. He should have no problem dropping to the bench. It's laudable that he'd want to start, and long may it continue, but Pardew's care of duty is to the team playing good, winning football - not playing happy families.

 

And I agree totally now. I wouldn't have said the same this time yesterday though.