wormy Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Created because Stan Collymore requested it. Quality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 FFS just reminded of Stoke's creepy jacket guy now thanks to wormy's avvy, there's my dreams invaded Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 The beard is probably just some 'wont shave until we're out of the yuffa/safe in the league' shite. originally something to do with russian beards or some other bollox like that and keeping it for 2nd leg of anzhi game personally i think it suits him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 The thing is, he wouldn't have made any changes until we went behind, despite the fact we weren't really threatening their goal with the safety first option of Jonas on the left. He always needs to be forced into making any real attacking substitutions. Against Stoke, who have almost no attacking threat other than set pieces, did we really need Tiote and Jonas in the same midfield? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Most games in this league are tight and not many are won by a comfortable margin, and that's even when the mega rich sides are playing those that relatively haven't got a pot to piss in. And so invariably results are down to moments of individual brilliance, defensive mistakes or something a referee does or doesn't see. The manager can influence it by putting on and taking off players who will make a difference. This season AP has not always got his bit right but today he did get it right against a side whose sole purpose is to be hard to break down. Well done Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Tron just said it, at home against Stoke he chose to start Jonas and Tiote and not play Marv or Anita. Credit him all you like but if he didn't make these bullshit fear-based calls in the first place we might not be in holes that we have to dig ourselves out of. Results make people forget, not me. We were seconds away from 31 points with 9 games to play. Looks a lot healthier this morning but bearing in mind the opposition and importance of the game yesterday I found his approach baffling. Took them to score before we remotely livened up, albeit they were shit. But we were at home and needed the points more than them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Mojo, while we're playing the hypothetical game; if (by some miracle) we won the waffa cup, would you still be wanting Pards out (now, or even for the next few seasons)? I know that a few people were sceptical about last season's 5th placed finish and even more are reluctant to give him the benefit of the doubt for the more disappointing campaign that has followed. So if the 'achievements' of last season don't count for much in the immediate aftermath, how much of a grace period would a trophy bring? The record books don't record how well a team played, unless they're doing a Barca and smashing the goal-scoring records each season, so ultimately a club is judged on it's silverware (see: Arsenal 2006-present). Does Pardew have the possibility of 'immunity' if he wins the lottery of the Europa? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Said before I believe he should get next season anyway, WHEN he manages to keep us up that is. Waffa cup win would buy him more time in the eyes of many I'd imagine, personally I wouldn't let it sway me that much if we ended up in the same situation in the league next season. Parky is 100% right, he's a negative manager, and that will never change imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 I think the jury is still out over how negative he is - I think he's still finding his feet with the raised expectations at a much bigger club (all due respect to WHU) and knows ultimately that results > performances. This worked to a treat last season, with favourable circumstances; not so good this season but, despite all of that, he's still got himself in position to have a good finish to the season and go into the summer riding the crest of optimism. If he can get a cup win, or something to put the crowd firmly behind him*, then he's only going to feel more secure in the position and open to being more adventurous. His FA Cup team was a good side to watch, I wouldn't say no to having a more balanced version of that, would you? *bear in mind that last season's over-achievements only served to heighten the disappointment at the November/December results this season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 we're just not developing Stu, showing no signs of efforts towards reaching that goal...the only thing that developed this season was mike getting his wallet out and handing him better players in january or we'd be in deep, deep trouble (but let's not tread that path again) there's still no defined way of playing, we knock it about ok at times but it's directionless when they try it...like he's getting the players to pay lip service to attacking football 'cause that should be what we're doing with the quality of player we have, but he honestly just doesn't know how to do it in my opinion...i don't think a cup win would help this one bit, in fact maybe the opposite because if he can win a cup by being cautious and nicking results then he might keep it going in the league, we had one successful season of doing it in the league last year but i doubt it'll happen again i'm on board for some stability though, really, so not massively in favour of binning him now because if nothing else the players seem to like him and change might upset the applecart -which frankly hasn't been so good for a long time unless there are signs of development from the kick off next season though we need to bin him sooner rather than later, i'm sorry but we do Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Would you another season of 'rubbish' performances if we won the waffa or league cup by the end of 2013/14? Just curious if you're more fussed about watching 'attacking' football or wanting to win things. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 It's an interesting point Stu. I don't have an awful deal of faith in him and it's eroding a little bit more all the time, I'd most certainly take another season of rubbish performances (without relegation) if we could win something though, we need to break that duck asap. Not that I think we'll win the EL though to be honest, I just don't think we're good enough to win something at the minute. Tron's point about Jonas and Tiote is a good one I think, aye it was a good move to bring Marv on, and in isolation that's 3 points won, brilliant. The problem for me is that I don't see it changing anything going forwards because it never does, and for every one of those results there's at least two where Marv/Anita don't start and we don't come back to win the game due to our overly defensive manager. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Tron just said it, at home against Stoke he chose to start Jonas and Tiote and not play Marv or Anita. Credit him all you like but if he didn't make these bullshit fear-based calls in the first place we might not be in holes that we have to dig ourselves out of. Results make people forget, not me. We were seconds away from 31 points with 9 games to play. Looks a lot healthier this morning but bearing in mind the opposition and importance of the game yesterday I found his approach baffling. Took them to score before we remotely livened up, albeit they were s***. But we were at home and needed the points more than them. But for all this supposed negativity we dominated the game. Check out the stats on possession, shots, corners etc. That doesn't show a side sitting back, it shows a side taking the game on. My take was not that we were negative but that we could not convert our pressure into goals against a side who don't aim to do much other than sit back and adopt "spoiling" tactics. Possibly Marveaux for Jonas from the start might have given us a bit more creativity but Marveaux had game time in Moscow and was poor imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATB Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 We played at home against Stoke that has won 1 or 2 games away the whole season and is a team that will just defend. We have class, class players and still can´t create anything in the final third. But hey, we are great. Pardew is great. We will win PL next season. Hate this "hypochondria" that everything we do is great and anything others do such. Rodgers has been laughed at all season over his "we won the possession". Now I see a lot of us used it as a argument that we played well "we had 58 % of the ball" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATB Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Tron just said it, at home against Stoke he chose to start Jonas and Tiote and not play Marv or Anita. Credit him all you like but if he didn't make these bullshit fear-based calls in the first place we might not be in holes that we have to dig ourselves out of. Results make people forget, not me. We were seconds away from 31 points with 9 games to play. Looks a lot healthier this morning but bearing in mind the opposition and importance of the game yesterday I found his approach baffling. Took them to score before we remotely livened up, albeit they were s***. But we were at home and needed the points more than them. But for all this supposed negativity we dominated the game. Check out the stats on possession, shots, corners etc. That doesn't show a side sitting back, it shows a side taking the game on. My take was not that we were negative but that we could not convert our pressure into goals against a side who don't aim to do much other than sit back and adopt "spoiling" tactics. Possibly Marveaux for Jonas from the start might have given us a bit more creativity but Marveaux had game time in Moscow and was poor imo. Individually we are a much superior team then Stoke. That we won "the stat" doesn´t makes us having a good game. How many clear cut chances did we have? Not much considering the possession and shots we had, and thats what´s important. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 We played at home against Stoke that has won 1 or 2 games away the whole season and is a team that will just defend. We have class, class players and still can´t create anything in the final third. But hey, we are great. Pardew is great. We will win PL next season. Hate this "hypochondria" that everything we do is great and anything others do such. Rodgers has been laughed at all season over his "we won the possession". Now I see a lot of us used it as a argument that we played well "we had 58 % of the ball" I merely used the stats point to counter the argument that we were negative. I'm not saying we were great or that we will win the PL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Tron just said it, at home against Stoke he chose to start Jonas and Tiote and not play Marv or Anita. Credit him all you like but if he didn't make these bullshit fear-based calls in the first place we might not be in holes that we have to dig ourselves out of. Results make people forget, not me. We were seconds away from 31 points with 9 games to play. Looks a lot healthier this morning but bearing in mind the opposition and importance of the game yesterday I found his approach baffling. Took them to score before we remotely livened up, albeit they were s***. But we were at home and needed the points more than them. But for all this supposed negativity we dominated the game. Check out the stats on possession, shots, corners etc. That doesn't show a side sitting back, it shows a side taking the game on. My take was not that we were negative but that we could not convert our pressure into goals against a side who don't aim to do much other than sit back and adopt "spoiling" tactics. Possibly Marveaux for Jonas from the start might have given us a bit more creativity but Marveaux had game time in Moscow and was poor imo. Individually we are a much superior team then Stoke. That we won "the stat" doesn´t makes us having a good game. How many clear cut chances did we have? Not much considering the possession and shots we had, and thats what´s important. Gouffran missed a sitter first half, score first againts a team that parks the bus and the game changes irrevocably. Only 5 teams have conceded less goals than Stoke away from home this season (the Manchesters, Chelsea, Everton and Swansea) they lose but they don't lose "big". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Tron just said it, at home against Stoke he chose to start Jonas and Tiote and not play Marv or Anita. Credit him all you like but if he didn't make these bullshit fear-based calls in the first place we might not be in holes that we have to dig ourselves out of. Results make people forget, not me. We were seconds away from 31 points with 9 games to play. Looks a lot healthier this morning but bearing in mind the opposition and importance of the game yesterday I found his approach baffling. Took them to score before we remotely livened up, albeit they were s***. But we were at home and needed the points more than them. But for all this supposed negativity we dominated the game. Check out the stats on possession, shots, corners etc. That doesn't show a side sitting back, it shows a side taking the game on. My take was not that we were negative but that we could not convert our pressure into goals against a side who don't aim to do much other than sit back and adopt "spoiling" tactics. Possibly Marveaux for Jonas from the start might have given us a bit more creativity but Marveaux had game time in Moscow and was poor imo. Apply a bit of context, and some eyes, and it actually showed a team playing at home against an away team happy to surrender possession. We still didn't look like we knew how to break them down. Getting it wide and putting in crosses in wasn't working, most of the posters on this board could have told Pardew that it wouldn't work before kick off, we kept doing it though. Again this is a case of taking things game by game. Were we 'negative' in the way we played yesterday? No, because they let us have the ball so we spent most of the time 'attacking'. However I think the inability to break them down is due to an over arching negativity in the outlook of the manager, we constantly look like we don't know how to attack as a team (and have for the vast majority of Pardew's time here) and we simply didn't have an answer yesterday for 75 minutes, all we had was putting crosses in and Sissoko running from deep. If the team were coached in an attacking sense this might have been a bit better, and if he didn't persist with Tiote/Jonas no matter what. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 I agree with all that, our approach is all wrong, Pardew set our team up wrong. I just don't think it was that bad. If Gouffran had scored his early chance and Tiote hadn't given away that pen we'd probably all be thinking we should have slaughtered them but it was a perfectly acceptable win. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 I agree, it wasn't that bad in isolation, we got 3 points. Our play this season has been that bad though, that's why we're 13th and needed loads of new players to get a few wins. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 agree with venkman etc. - we weren't negative yesterday but we were allowed to play and didn't know how to cut them open even with the calibre of player we have, it's been largely the same pattern under pardew for quite a while now at home imo it's so strange, you can see they're not being taught that when 'player x' is in possession of the ball 'player y' has a specific role to open up play, get beyond, or make room for a pass in the channel or whatever tactical (attacking) nuances you want to look at start of the season when cabaye was awful our tactics were give to HBA or boot it to Ba see if they can make something happen, now cabaye is playing again and we have sissoko it's up to both of them to pull something out of the hat...that's not quality football man, that's bollocks and makes it painfully obvious why teams can come and defend at SJP...fortunately for pardew he'll have HBA back so his chances of someone winning the game with their individual skill will soon increase by one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 I agree, it wasn't that bad in isolation, we got 3 points. Our play this season has been that bad though, that's why we're 13th and needed loads of new players to get a few wins. And the apparently seamless integration of these "loads of new players" is down to who Personally I hope Pardew is our manager for the next 10 years, because for that to come to pass, we'll have to have been successful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 I agree with all that, our approach is all wrong, Pardew set our team up wrong. I just don't think it was that bad. If Gouffran had scored his early chance and Tiote hadn't given away that pen we'd probably all be thinking we should have slaughtered them but it was a perfectly acceptable win. I think a lot of the time it is easy to forget how different a game could be if one or two minor moments had been different. If Gouff has scored we might have forced Stoke to at least try to attack, and picked them off a couple more times on the break. It wasn't a great performance, but mainly because we chose the wrong options in attack. We never looked in danger of losing it except when Tiote had a brain freeze. I understand why people would find the game frustrating, because in theory we should have been able to murder Stoke. But in reality it's more difficult than that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 I agree with all that, our approach is all wrong, Pardew set our team up wrong. I just don't think it was that bad. If Gouffran had scored his early chance and Tiote hadn't given away that pen we'd probably all be thinking we should have slaughtered them but it was a perfectly acceptable win. I think a lot of the time it is easy to forget how different a game could be if one or two minor moments had been different. If Gouff has scored we might have forced Stoke to at least try to attack, and picked them off a couple more times on the break. It wasn't a great performance, but mainly because we chose the wrong options in attack. We never looked in danger of losing it except when Tiote had a brain freeze. I understand why people would find the game frustrating, because in theory we should have been able to murder Stoke. But in reality it's more difficult than that. I agree in principle Ian, particularly with the first paragraph, but when an awful lot of games involve us looking pretty clueless as an attacking force then who we're playing against becomes less relevant and who's in charge of it is more relevant, imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 I genuinely can't see how we've been 'clueless as an attacking force', since the end of January. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts