wormy Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Taylor was useless tonight defensively and also limited us going forward. Santon couldn't have done any worse. He could have. He's never played in the PL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 So it's more logical to play someone who is and always has been completely s****, not to mention out of position, just because he's always played in England, rather than a young lad with bags of potential and who's already played at the highest level? Fierce amount of s**** being talked on here tonight like, proper baffling. Erm, yes purely because of how little time Santon has been given to prepare for the game... Aye, and if we signed Messi I still would have prefered Obertan to start this match simply because he's lived in England more than a month. What a horse-s*** comparison :lol: Just like the one about Evra. How? He was thrown in far too early, hence being subbed at half-time of his debut. SWP was on fire tonight, was a throwback to how he was pre-Chelsea. Imagine what it would have done for his confidence, the fans kneejerk opinions of him, etc had that been him after just one training session in England? Because it did fuck all damage to Evra. Terrible comparison, at least pick someone who had a shocking debut, was hauled off and was never any good as a result, then you could apply the same reasoning to Santon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Snrub Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 So it's more logical to play someone who is and always has been completely s****, not to mention out of position, just because he's always played in England, rather than a young lad with bags of potential and who's already played at the highest level? Fierce amount of s**** being talked on here tonight like, proper baffling. Erm, yes purely because of how little time Santon has been given to prepare for the game... Aye, and if we signed Messi I still would have prefered Obertan to start this match simply because he's lived in England more than a month. What a horse-s*** comparison :lol: Just like the one about Evra. How? He was thrown in far too early, hence being subbed at half-time of his debut. SWP was on fire tonight, was a throwback to how he was pre-Chelsea. Imagine what it would have done for his confidence, the fans kneejerk opinions of him, etc had that been him after just one training session in England? ffs, the only reason he was 'on fire' was because our left back was non existant and he had acres of space every time he got the ball. If we played a far better player at left back who is also faster than SWP he wouldn't have got a quarter of the look in he got tonight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The general idea of giving a chance to someone whos recently scored some important goals and looked fairly decent defensively is a pretty normal/solid thing to do. Making players believe they can keep their place if they keep up performances is only a good thing. Pardew could have made earlier changes, thats about it. Doubt Taylor will start the next following this performance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The general idea of giving a chance to someone whos recently scored some important goals and looked fairly decent defensively is a pretty normal/solid thing to do. Making players believe they can keep their place if they keep up performances is only a good thing. Pardew could have made earlier changes, thats about it. Doubt Taylor will start the next following this performance. He's been very average to rubbish. He haven't played good enough to keep the place. People are just blinded by two great goals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 So it's more logical to play someone who is and always has been completely s****, not to mention out of position, just because he's always played in England, rather than a young lad with bags of potential and who's already played at the highest level? Fierce amount of s**** being talked on here tonight like, proper baffling. Erm, yes purely because of how little time Santon has been given to prepare for the game... Aye, and if we signed Messi I still would have prefered Obertan to start this match simply because he's lived in England more than a month. What a horse-s*** comparison :lol: Just like the one about Evra. How? He was thrown in far too early, hence being subbed at half-time of his debut. SWP was on fire tonight, was a throwback to how he was pre-Chelsea. Imagine what it would have done for his confidence, the fans kneejerk opinions of him, etc had that been him after just one training session in England? ffs, the only reason he was 'on fire' was because our left back was non existant and he had acres of space every time he got the ball. If we played a far better player at left back who is also faster than SWP he wouldn't have got a quarter of the look in he got tonight. Rubbish, SWP was on fire tonight. Taylor was shite but SWP like that is a match for anyone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 So it's more logical to play someone who is and always has been completely s****, not to mention out of position, just because he's always played in England, rather than a young lad with bags of potential and who's already played at the highest level? Fierce amount of s**** being talked on here tonight like, proper baffling. Erm, yes purely because of how little time Santon has been given to prepare for the game... Aye, and if we signed Messi I still would have prefered Obertan to start this match simply because he's lived in England more than a month. What a horse-s*** comparison :lol: Just like the one about Evra. How? He was thrown in far too early, hence being subbed at half-time of his debut. SWP was on fire tonight, was a throwback to how he was pre-Chelsea. Imagine what it would have done for his confidence, the fans kneejerk opinions of him, etc had that been him after just one training session in England? Because it did f*** all damage to Evra. Terrible comparison, at least pick someone who had a shocking debut, was hauled off and was never any good as a result, then you could apply the same reasoning to Santon. This decision didn't cost us 3 points like the one to pick Evra did...by hook or by crook. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Just stop, Nut. It was a horrible decision - that's all you need to know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VaVaVoom Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 So it's more logical to play someone who is and always has been completely s****, not to mention out of position, just because he's always played in England, rather than a young lad with bags of potential and who's already played at the highest level? Fierce amount of s**** being talked on here tonight like, proper baffling. Erm, yes purely because of how little time Santon has been given to prepare for the game... Aye, and if we signed Messi I still would have prefered Obertan to start this match simply because he's lived in England more than a month. What a horse-s*** comparison :lol: Just like the one about Evra. How? He was thrown in far too early, hence being subbed at half-time of his debut. SWP was on fire tonight, was a throwback to how he was pre-Chelsea. Imagine what it would have done for his confidence, the fans kneejerk opinions of him, etc had that been him after just one training session in England? ffs, the only reason he was 'on fire' was because our left back was non existant and he had acres of space every time he got the ball. If we played a far better player at left back who is also faster than SWP he wouldn't have got a quarter of the look in he got tonight. Rubbish, SWP was on fire tonight. Taylor was shite but SWP like that is a match for anyone. Dunno like....Had SWP come up against a decent LB he wouldnt have looked half as good. He was pretty poor through the middle in the second half. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The general idea of giving a chance to someone whos recently scored some important goals and looked fairly decent defensively is a pretty normal/solid thing to do. Making players believe they can keep their place if they keep up performances is only a good thing. Pardew could have made earlier changes, thats about it. Doubt Taylor will start the next following this performance. He's been very average to rubbish. He haven't played good enough to keep the place. People are just blinded by two great goals. Two clean sheets & wasnt much at fault in the fulham game. Then scores two goals to help us win two games. Yeah drop him we have a new player whos had much less time to train with us, great for team morale. Its hindsight nonsense, the choice to pick him was fine. Potentially it should have been changed, thats about it. Its Pardews job to show more faith in players than the fans do tbh. Fans perception of ability goes all over the place very quickly, as shown on here constantly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 So it's more logical to play someone who is and always has been completely s****, not to mention out of position, just because he's always played in England, rather than a young lad with bags of potential and who's already played at the highest level? Fierce amount of s**** being talked on here tonight like, proper baffling. Erm, yes purely because of how little time Santon has been given to prepare for the game... Aye, and if we signed Messi I still would have prefered Obertan to start this match simply because he's lived in England more than a month. What a horse-s*** comparison :lol: Just like the one about Evra. How? He was thrown in far too early, hence being subbed at half-time of his debut. SWP was on fire tonight, was a throwback to how he was pre-Chelsea. Imagine what it would have done for his confidence, the fans kneejerk opinions of him, etc had that been him after just one training session in England? ffs, the only reason he was 'on fire' was because our left back was non existant and he had acres of space every time he got the ball. If we played a far better player at left back who is also faster than SWP he wouldn't have got a quarter of the look in he got tonight. Rubbish, SWP was on fire tonight. Taylor was s**** but SWP like that is a match for anyone. Dunno like....Had SWP come up against a decent LB he wouldnt have looked half as good. He was pretty poor through the middle in the second half. When has SWP ever played through the middle? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The general idea of giving a chance to someone whos recently scored some important goals and looked fairly decent defensively is a pretty normal/solid thing to do. Making players believe they can keep their place if they keep up performances is only a good thing. Pardew could have made earlier changes, thats about it. Doubt Taylor will start the next following this performance. He's been very average to rubbish. He haven't played good enough to keep the place. People are just blinded by two great goals. Two clean sheets & wasnt much at fault in the fulham game. Then scores two goals to help us win two games. Yeah drop him we have a new player whos had much less time to train with us, great for team morale. Its hindsight nonsense, the choice to pick him was fine. Potentially it should have been changed, thats about it. Its Pardews job to show more faith in players than the fans do tbh. Fans perception of ability goes all over the place very quickly, as shown on here constantly. Stop going on about the clean sheets. It's all down to Coloccini and Steven Taylor being outstanding. Yes, he scored two goals - that shouldn't make him our f***ing left back. Of course we should drop a shitty player who have been average/rubbish. It has nothing with team morale to do. It's about winning games, not appease certain players. We had a speedy, talented, fit and in-form natural left back on the bench. Should be chosen 1000 out of 1000 times. Your post is rubbish from start to end. Absolute bollocks. Well, I give you that last one though - you should think about that one yourself. You and two-goal Raylor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The general idea of giving a chance to someone whos recently scored some important goals and looked fairly decent defensively is a pretty normal/solid thing to do. Making players believe they can keep their place if they keep up performances is only a good thing. Pardew could have made earlier changes, thats about it. Doubt Taylor will start the next following this performance. He's been very average to rubbish. He haven't played good enough to keep the place. People are just blinded by two great goals. Two clean sheets & wasnt much at fault in the fulham game. Then scores two goals to help us win two games. Yeah drop him we have a new player whos had much less time to train with us, great for team morale. Its hindsight nonsense, the choice to pick him was fine. Potentially it should have been changed, thats about it. Its Pardews job to show more faith in players than the fans do tbh. Fans perception of ability goes all over the place very quickly, as shown on here constantly. I'm sure it was pretty common knowledge that Santon, for £5m, and a dedicated full back, was being bought as first choice for left back, over a below average right midfielder playing at left back. Don't think it would've hurt morale that much, tbh. Fans' perception of ability has never gone all over the place for Raylor, like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The only way this lad can get used to the league is if he fkn plays in it, the ONLY reason Ryan Taylor is getting a game at LB is down to him being able to score from direct freekicks and as our goal threat is so piss poor Pards is to scared to drop him. Pardew needs to realise that we are suffering in or attacking play because of Taylor being at LB, its making us very uneaven and making Jonas play a lot deeper than he should be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The general idea of giving a chance to someone whos recently scored some important goals and looked fairly decent defensively is a pretty normal/solid thing to do. Making players believe they can keep their place if they keep up performances is only a good thing. Pardew could have made earlier changes, thats about it. Doubt Taylor will start the next following this performance. He's been very average to rubbish. He haven't played good enough to keep the place. People are just blinded by two great goals. Two clean sheets & wasnt much at fault in the fulham game. Then scores two goals to help us win two games. Yeah drop him we have a new player whos had much less time to train with us, great for team morale. Its hindsight nonsense, the choice to pick him was fine. Potentially it should have been changed, thats about it. Its Pardews job to show more faith in players than the fans do tbh. Fans perception of ability goes all over the place very quickly, as shown on here constantly. Stop going on about the clean sheets. It's all down to Coloccini and Steven Taylor being outstanding. Yes, he scored two goals - that shouldn't make him our f***ing left back. Of course we should drop a shitty player who have been average/rubbish. It has nothing with team morale to do. It's about winning games, not appease certain players. We had a speedy, talented, fit and in-form natural left back on the bench. Should be chosen 1000 out of 1000 times. Your post is rubbish from start to end. Absolute bollocks. Stop going on about us not conceding with him as part of the defence? Aye thats not relevant atall. Dangerous on set pieces in a manner that can win a side games? Definately not a potential benefit to be considered when picking any player. You're full of logic & definately not biased in any manner following what turned out to be a poor performance. Carry on getting riled up Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The general idea of giving a chance to someone whos recently scored some important goals and looked fairly decent defensively is a pretty normal/solid thing to do. Making players believe they can keep their place if they keep up performances is only a good thing. Pardew could have made earlier changes, thats about it. Doubt Taylor will start the next following this performance. He's been very average to rubbish. He haven't played good enough to keep the place. People are just blinded by two great goals. Two clean sheets & wasnt much at fault in the fulham game. Then scores two goals to help us win two games. Yeah drop him we have a new player whos had much less time to train with us, great for team morale. Its hindsight nonsense, the choice to pick him was fine. Potentially it should have been changed, thats about it. Its Pardews job to show more faith in players than the fans do tbh. Fans perception of ability goes all over the place very quickly, as shown on here constantly. I'm sure it was pretty common knowledge that Santon, for £5m, and a dedicated full back, was being bought as first choice for left back, over a below average right midfielder playing at left back. Don't think it would've hurt morale that much, tbh. Fans' perception of ability has never gone all over the place for Raylor, like. I didnt say he wasnt being brought in as first choice fullback. Its hardly ridiculous to continue playing a player who has been part of a relatively solid defense whilst Santon becomes involved in the team. My point about Pardew showing more faith in players than the fans need to, wasnt really specifically aimed at Raylor was it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The general idea of giving a chance to someone whos recently scored some important goals and looked fairly decent defensively is a pretty normal/solid thing to do. Making players believe they can keep their place if they keep up performances is only a good thing. Pardew could have made earlier changes, thats about it. Doubt Taylor will start the next following this performance. He's been very average to rubbish. He haven't played good enough to keep the place. People are just blinded by two great goals. Two clean sheets & wasnt much at fault in the fulham game. Then scores two goals to help us win two games. Yeah drop him we have a new player whos had much less time to train with us, great for team morale. Its hindsight nonsense, the choice to pick him was fine. Potentially it should have been changed, thats about it. Its Pardews job to show more faith in players than the fans do tbh. Fans perception of ability goes all over the place very quickly, as shown on here constantly. Stop going on about the clean sheets. It's all down to Coloccini and Steven Taylor being outstanding. Yes, he scored two goals - that shouldn't make him our f***ing left back. Of course we should drop a shitty player who have been average/rubbish. It has nothing with team morale to do. It's about winning games, not appease certain players. We had a speedy, talented, fit and in-form natural left back on the bench. Should be chosen 1000 out of 1000 times. Your post is rubbish from start to end. Absolute bollocks. Stop going on about us not conceding with him as part of the defence? Aye thats not relevant atall. Dangerous on set pieces in a manner that can win a side games? Definately not a potential benefit to be considered when picking any player. You're full of logic & definately not biased in any manner following what turned out to be a poor performance. Carry on getting riled up For the most part it's all down to our central defence being oustanding. Every half-brain is aware of that. Again, he's been average to shit, and shouldn't be our left back just because of his free kicks. Once again, rubbish post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The decision not to start him was understandable, if more than a little risky. For Santon not to get on at all, even after about five examples of Taylor being completely outplayed was just stupid. Pardew got very lucky there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 It may not be irrelevant completely, but if you can't see that, particularly tonight, we were very lucky that he wasn't at fault for not just one, but multiple goals, save for some horrendous finishing and last-ditch saves from other players at times, then you're blind. And I personally think that, despite scoring two crackers, the amount of chances he gets to try it, and the amount of times he pulls it off, isn't worth it. When you have a player that could potentially shore up our defence further and improve our general possession and attacking play, it's a more than worth it trade off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The general idea of giving a chance to someone whos recently scored some important goals and looked fairly decent defensively is a pretty normal/solid thing to do. Making players believe they can keep their place if they keep up performances is only a good thing. Pardew could have made earlier changes, thats about it. Doubt Taylor will start the next following this performance. He's been very average to rubbish. He haven't played good enough to keep the place. People are just blinded by two great goals. Two clean sheets & wasnt much at fault in the fulham game. Then scores two goals to help us win two games. Yeah drop him we have a new player whos had much less time to train with us, great for team morale. Its hindsight nonsense, the choice to pick him was fine. Potentially it should have been changed, thats about it. Its Pardews job to show more faith in players than the fans do tbh. Fans perception of ability goes all over the place very quickly, as shown on here constantly. Stop going on about the clean sheets. It's all down to Coloccini and Steven Taylor being outstanding. Yes, he scored two goals - that shouldn't make him our f***ing left back. Of course we should drop a shitty player who have been average/rubbish. It has nothing with team morale to do. It's about winning games, not appease certain players. We had a speedy, talented, fit and in-form natural left back on the bench. Should be chosen 1000 out of 1000 times. Your post is rubbish from start to end. Absolute bollocks. Stop going on about us not conceding with him as part of the defence? Aye thats not relevant atall. Dangerous on set pieces in a manner that can win a side games? Definately not a potential benefit to be considered when picking any player. You're full of logic & definately not biased in any manner following what turned out to be a poor performance. Carry on getting riled up For the most part it's all down to our central defence being oustanding. Every half-brain is aware of that. Again, he's been average to s***, and shouldn't be our left back just because of his free kicks. Once again, rubbish post. utter crap. like the first few games in the championship, it;s down to poor finishing by the oppo more than good defending. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I thought both full backs tonight looked poor in attack and in Taylor's case, poor in defence as well. At some stage, I hope we'll see Santon and Ferguson out there instead. 'Couldn't be worse' is a philosophy that often backfires, but we'd gain a lot going forward and surely wouldn't be much weaker in defence, if at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The general idea of giving a chance to someone whos recently scored some important goals and looked fairly decent defensively is a pretty normal/solid thing to do. Making players believe they can keep their place if they keep up performances is only a good thing. Pardew could have made earlier changes, thats about it. Doubt Taylor will start the next following this performance. He's been very average to rubbish. He haven't played good enough to keep the place. People are just blinded by two great goals. Two clean sheets & wasnt much at fault in the fulham game. Then scores two goals to help us win two games. Yeah drop him we have a new player whos had much less time to train with us, great for team morale. Its hindsight nonsense, the choice to pick him was fine. Potentially it should have been changed, thats about it. Its Pardews job to show more faith in players than the fans do tbh. Fans perception of ability goes all over the place very quickly, as shown on here constantly. Stop going on about the clean sheets. It's all down to Coloccini and Steven Taylor being outstanding. Yes, he scored two goals - that shouldn't make him our f***ing left back. Of course we should drop a shitty player who have been average/rubbish. It has nothing with team morale to do. It's about winning games, not appease certain players. We had a speedy, talented, fit and in-form natural left back on the bench. Should be chosen 1000 out of 1000 times. Your post is rubbish from start to end. Absolute bollocks. Stop going on about us not conceding with him as part of the defence? Aye thats not relevant atall. Dangerous on set pieces in a manner that can win a side games? Definately not a potential benefit to be considered when picking any player. You're full of logic & definately not biased in any manner following what turned out to be a poor performance. Carry on getting riled up For the most part it's all down to our central defence being oustanding. Every half-brain is aware of that. Again, he's been average to s***, and shouldn't be our left back just because of his free kicks. Once again, rubbish post. Yeah your personal opinion of things really proved the point there, welldone mate Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The decision not to start him was understandable, if more than a little risky. For Santon not to get on at all, even after about five examples of Taylor being completely outplayed was just stupid. Pardew got very lucky there. I can see why he made the three substitutions, even if the last two were too late. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The general idea of giving a chance to someone whos recently scored some important goals and looked fairly decent defensively is a pretty normal/solid thing to do. Making players believe they can keep their place if they keep up performances is only a good thing. Pardew could have made earlier changes, thats about it. Doubt Taylor will start the next following this performance. He's been very average to rubbish. He haven't played good enough to keep the place. People are just blinded by two great goals. Two clean sheets & wasnt much at fault in the fulham game. Then scores two goals to help us win two games. Yeah drop him we have a new player whos had much less time to train with us, great for team morale. Its hindsight nonsense, the choice to pick him was fine. Potentially it should have been changed, thats about it. Its Pardews job to show more faith in players than the fans do tbh. Fans perception of ability goes all over the place very quickly, as shown on here constantly. Stop going on about the clean sheets. It's all down to Coloccini and Steven Taylor being outstanding. Yes, he scored two goals - that shouldn't make him our f***ing left back. Of course we should drop a shitty player who have been average/rubbish. It has nothing with team morale to do. It's about winning games, not appease certain players. We had a speedy, talented, fit and in-form natural left back on the bench. Should be chosen 1000 out of 1000 times. Your post is rubbish from start to end. Absolute bollocks. Stop going on about us not conceding with him as part of the defence? Aye thats not relevant atall. Dangerous on set pieces in a manner that can win a side games? Definately not a potential benefit to be considered when picking any player. You're full of logic & definately not biased in any manner following what turned out to be a poor performance. Carry on getting riled up For the most part it's all down to our central defence being oustanding. Every half-brain is aware of that. Again, he's been average to s***, and shouldn't be our left back just because of his free kicks. Once again, rubbish post. Yeah your personal opinion of things really proved the point there, welldone mate Bore off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 No need for the hostility chaps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now