Jump to content

Alan Pardew


Dave

Recommended Posts

there was a little bit of the match when someone was down injured and all you could here was, i guess it was pardew "COLO...COLO...COLO...COLO...COLO...COLO....COLO...COLO...COLO...COLO....COLO" and i guess colo just thought "fack eem, eef I no go home I no leesen to eem"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why pick Shola?

 

To hold the ball up? No, he never does that as his second touch is usually an attempted tackle.

To make intelligent runs? No, he always wears lead boots it seems.

To dribble and skin defenders? Erm, no.

To win lots of headers? I must miss most of them, if so.

 

So why does Pardew pick him? There has to be a reason, but I can't see it. I have never had much time for Pardew and decisions like the reason for picking Shola just leaves me bewildered.

 

Was baffled by the decision but Shola did everything that was asked of him tonight. One of the very few times bringing the inclusion of Shola as a negative doesn't make sense.

 

What?? What threat did Shola offer?

 

Won the ball pretty much every time it was played to him, had a good shot deflected that went for a corner, put Sissoko through and possibly Cisse (can't remember but sure he did for the outside of the boot chance), some very nice little flicks and touches, scored the penalty.

 

If Cisse had put in the same performance we would have rightly had a collective tug. Shola just seems to start on -10 for some and has to work harder than anyone else to have his performance accepted as good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why pick Shola?

 

To hold the ball up? No, he never does that as his second touch is usually an attempted tackle.

To make intelligent runs? No, he always wears lead boots it seems.

To dribble and skin defenders? Erm, no.

To win lots of headers? I must miss most of them, if so.

 

So why does Pardew pick him? There has to be a reason, but I can't see it. I have never had much time for Pardew and decisions like the reason for picking Shola just leaves me bewildered.

 

Was baffled by the decision but Shola did everything that was asked of him tonight. One of the very few times bringing the inclusion of Shola as a negative doesn't make sense.

 

What?? What threat did Shola offer?

 

Won the ball pretty much every time it was played to him, had a good shot deflected that went for a corner, put Sissoko through and possibly Cisse (can't remember but sure he did for the outside of the boot chance), some very nice little flicks and touches, scored the penalty.

 

If Cisse had put in the same performance we would have rightly had a collective tug. Shola just seems to start on -10 for some and has to work harder than anyone else to have his performance accepted as good.

 

He had a shot, i remember that. One shot. Sorry, just didn't think he threatened much. FWIW, thought Cisse's wing performance was also ineffective.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why pick Shola?

 

To hold the ball up? No, he never does that as his second touch is usually an attempted tackle.

To make intelligent runs? No, he always wears lead boots it seems.

To dribble and skin defenders? Erm, no.

To win lots of headers? I must miss most of them, if so.

 

So why does Pardew pick him? There has to be a reason, but I can't see it. I have never had much time for Pardew and decisions like the reason for picking Shola just leaves me bewildered.

 

Was baffled by the decision but Shola did everything that was asked of him tonight. One of the very few times bringing the inclusion of Shola as a negative doesn't make sense.

 

What?? What threat did Shola offer?

 

Won the ball pretty much every time it was played to him, had a good shot deflected that went for a corner, put Sissoko through and possibly Cisse (can't remember but sure he did for the outside of the boot chance), some very nice little flicks and touches, scored the penalty.

 

If Cisse had put in the same performance we would have rightly had a collective tug. Shola just seems to start on -10 for some and has to work harder than anyone else to have his performance accepted as good.

 

He had a shot, i remember that. One shot. Sorry, just didn't think he threatened much. FWIW, thought Cisse's wing performance was also ineffective.

 

Was he given the service to do anything else?

 

Sorry but we blame lack of service for everyone else but when Shola is feeding off scraps he doesn't threaten enough? As said he has to do much more than the popular players to have his performances accepted. Don't remember him putting a foot wrong tonight and did as much as he could with every opportunity presented to him.

 

Also forgot at the start of the game where he went past a player and put a ball across the box that was just waiting for someone to get on the end of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

btw, can someone give me just 1 fair reason for playing cisse on the wing?

 

 

he could have played him next to shola....or better (if not on top) saved him tonight and kept him fresh for southampton. imo he is more or less our most important player for the rest of the season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest bimpy474

btw, can someone give me just 1 fair reason for playing cisse on the wing?

 

 

he could have played him next to shola....or better (if not on top) saved him tonight and kept him fresh for southampton. imo he is more or less our most important player for the rest of the season.

 

For me it's so he can switch to 4-4-2 early without the need of a sub.

Link to post
Share on other sites

btw, can someone give me just 1 fair reason for playing cisse on the wing?

 

 

he could have played him next to shola....or better (if not on top) saved him tonight and kept him fresh for southampton. imo he is more or less our most important player for the rest of the season.

 

For me it's so he can switch to 4-4-2 early without the need of a sub.

 

could be a reason....not sure it justifies the decision

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the comments on here tonight are unbelievable! When we lose it's because of Pardew and if we win it's in spite of Pardew - the same with Shola, anyone with any sense knows that Shola did exactly what he was told to do and put in a shift. as for going negative after scoring, do people not realise that they needed 2 goals and started to throw everything forward. If we hadn't dropped off, Pardew would be accused of being niaive - we nearly hit them on the break several times, but heh, don't let the facts get in the way of your anti Pardew and Shola inbred views.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Slippery Sam

Some of the comments on here tonight are unbelievable! When we lose it's because of Pardew and if we win it's in spite of Pardew - the same with Shola, anyone with any sense knows that Shola did exactly what he was told to do and put in a shift. as for going negative after scoring, do people not realise that they needed 2 goals and started to throw everything forward. If we hadn't dropped off, Pardew would be accused of being niaive - we nearly hit them on the break several times, but heh, don't let the facts get in the way of your anti Pardew and Shola inbred views.

 

Aye, classic counter attack stuff from us when they piled forward: pass the ball up to Shola who then holds it up. Hmmmm, must have missed that bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the comments on here tonight are unbelievable! When we lose it's because of Pardew and if we win it's in spite of Pardew - the same with Shola, anyone with any sense knows that Shola did exactly what he was told to do and put in a shift. as for going negative after scoring, do people not realise that they needed 2 goals and started to throw everything forward. If we hadn't dropped off, Pardew would be accused of being niaive - we nearly hit them on the break several times, but heh, don't let the facts get in the way of your anti Pardew and Shola inbred views.

 

This.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the comments on here tonight are unbelievable! When we lose it's because of Pardew and if we win it's in spite of Pardew - the same with Shola, anyone with any sense knows that Shola did exactly what he was told to do and put in a shift. as for going negative after scoring, do people not realise that they needed 2 goals and started to throw everything forward. If we hadn't dropped off, Pardew would be accused of being niaive - we nearly hit them on the break several times, but heh, don't let the facts get in the way of your anti Pardew and Shola inbred views.

 

Aye, classic counter attack stuff from us when they piled forward: pass the ball up to Shola who then holds it up. Hmmmm, must have missed that bit.

 

Disco and fiftynotout have mentioned this and I agree, they obviously needed to score 2 in a very short amount of time. It's absolutely no surprise they went all out and we were under pressure. It's lucky we have a keeper like Krul but we did what we needed to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the comments on here tonight are unbelievable! When we lose it's because of Pardew and if we win it's in spite of Pardew - the same with Shola, anyone with any sense knows that Shola did exactly what he was told to do and put in a shift. as for going negative after scoring, do people not realise that they needed 2 goals and started to throw everything forward. If we hadn't dropped off, Pardew would be accused of being niaive - we nearly hit them on the break several times, but heh, don't let the facts get in the way of your anti Pardew and Shola inbred views.

 

Good post. Can't see anything to be unhappy with tonight - job done and Shola was comfortably one of our better players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...