Alan Pardew

[toon25]

He has admitted that we're in a relegation fight, man.

 

When?

 

http://www.journallive.co.uk/nufc/newcastle-united-news/2012/12/31/newcastle-united-s-aim-now-is-simply-safety-61634-32519062/

 

Cheers. Missed this.

[Guest icemanblue]

The stick that he is getting for straight swapping Shola for Ba is way over the top.

 

He had prepared the formation all week to include Ba in the center and Cisse on the right, an hour before kick-off he can be forgiven for not wanting to switch too many player roles for this week.

If he cant switch things in a couple of hours what chance has he got during a game, explains his s*** subs etc

 

He could have changed it, but what about the players? Would they be comfortable with an entirely different set of instructions, for a different position, a couple of hours before a game? He made the right, if unpopular, call last night.

That's laughable, how long do you think it would have taken to tell and coach Cisse to play in his usual position?

 

Yeah, and the others?

 

What others? Sammy, Obertan or Marveaux would have played in Cisse's place. And?

 

Obertan had been playing on the left, in this formation. Marveaux had been playing as part of the midfield three. Sammy is Sammy. If we'd taken Marveaux out of the midfield three, someone would have had to replace him. That would have been Perch. But, wait, Perch was playing right back. So, who do we play there? Santon, and bring Fergie in? Who knows. My point is that Shola for Ba was a straight swap, and the work in training could be retained. If we'd went for Cisse up top, then we'd have had to make at least three other changes.

 

I'd agree that Shola was a straight swap for Ba had he been a player of similar quality. Being a big b****** doesn't justify the straight swap however. Shola's movement (lack of) up front dictated our forward play. The only time he got into a good position he fluffed his shot wide.

 

And?

 

Just because Shola has similar physical attributes to Ba doesn't mean could replace his quality forward play. I really can't see how making this straight swap benefited us in any way last night. It was a defeatist move by the manager. As soon as Chelsea's bid was made, Pardew should have had an arm around Cisse to tell him "right, it's your time son - get out there and do what you do best".

 

Probably ridiculous to say this in hindsight, but I'm pretty confident we'd have won last night if Cisse started in the middle. The amount of fouls and aimless headers by Shola was staggering and hindered us big style.

 

I've already said how I think the straight swap benefited us.

You can honestly say looking back at that game that we benefited from playing Shola upfront by himself?

 

The only times we looked like getting on the end of anything was when Cisse threw caution to the wind and dropped into the centre when we were attacking from the left.

 

I understand why we were set up this way. No, it probably wasn't the best system with the players available. I'm sure even Alan would admit to that. However, we'd obviously geared our whole gameplan around the formation and personnel in training. Shola for Ba was the change that would cause the least disruption to the rest of the team, and I can understand that.

 

Last time I'm typing any of that.

[Mr Logic]

Not only is the man a charlatan he doubles as a clown.

[johnnypd]

For a manager who regularly goes through 3 or 4 formation changes per game because he's set us up incorrectly to say that he couldn't  find a way at any point in the 90 minutes to have Cisse up front is completely laughable.

 

The excuses trotted out by some that we had to put Shola in there due to the way we'd prepared for the game in advance is fucking idiotic.

 

There were 3 spare days between the Arsenal and Everton games, and i imagine one was just resting after a hectic schedule. So that's two full days of training. And Ba met with fucking Chelsea the day after the Arsenal match for christ's sake so if Pardew's honestly preparing to use him during this game the man is off his rocker.

 

What's more, if he's looking to play 4-3-3 - guess what - we already have a perfect tailor made replacement ready who can play down the middle in that formation and score shedloads - his name is Papiss Cisse. He's played that role many, many times - the idea that he can't due to lacking preparation is nuts. Remember when he signed? Newly returned from ACON, and Pardew put Best in the starting lineup (lol), he got injured, Cisse came on with no preparation, looked the dog's bollocks and scored.

 

On top of that, while Shola has his uses as an impact sub, he's good for 25 minutes tops in a game - starting him and keeping him on til the end is madness.

 

The only slight glimmer of sense i can see to it is that he was brought in to cope with Everton's aerial prowess - in which case you've just picked your main striker as, let's face it, a goddamn defender, while keeping your best striker - one who has wished to play centrally all season - stuck out in purgatory on the wing. And if we're led to believe this horseshit theory about Ba intending to play that role - he was also planning to use him as a battering ram, another mis-use of his talents to go along with how he's wasted others or turned them into crap this season.

 

It's another one of those Souness-esque moments for me and there's been too many recently.

[Dokko]

Can't believe people are defending him for building his team around a player in talks with another club. 

 

That's some deeply entrenched fucked up shit right there. 

[Hanshithispantz]

The stick that he is getting for straight swapping Shola for Ba is way over the top.

 

He had prepared the formation all week to include Ba in the center and Cisse on the right, an hour before kick-off he can be forgiven for not wanting to switch too many player roles for this week.

If he cant switch things in a couple of hours what chance has he got during a game, explains his s*** subs etc

 

He could have changed it, but what about the players? Would they be comfortable with an entirely different set of instructions, for a different position, a couple of hours before a game? He made the right, if unpopular, call last night.

That's laughable, how long do you think it would have taken to tell and coach Cisse to play in his usual position?

 

Yeah, and the others?

 

What others? Sammy, Obertan or Marveaux would have played in Cisse's place. And?

 

Obertan had been playing on the left, in this formation. Marveaux had been playing as part of the midfield three. Sammy is Sammy. If we'd taken Marveaux out of the midfield three, someone would have had to replace him. That would have been Perch. But, wait, Perch was playing right back. So, who do we play there? Santon, and bring Fergie in? Who knows. My point is that Shola for Ba was a straight swap, and the work in training could be retained. If we'd went for Cisse up top, then we'd have had to make at least three other changes.

 

I'd agree that Shola was a straight swap for Ba had he been a player of similar quality. Being a big b****** doesn't justify the straight swap however. Shola's movement (lack of) up front dictated our forward play. The only time he got into a good position he fluffed his shot wide.

 

And?

 

Just because Shola has similar physical attributes to Ba doesn't mean could replace his quality forward play. I really can't see how making this straight swap benefited us in any way last night. It was a defeatist move by the manager. As soon as Chelsea's bid was made, Pardew should have had an arm around Cisse to tell him "right, it's your time son - get out there and do what you do best".

 

Probably ridiculous to say this in hindsight, but I'm pretty confident we'd have won last night if Cisse started in the middle. The amount of fouls and aimless headers by Shola was staggering and hindered us big style.

 

I've already said how I think the straight swap benefited us.

You can honestly say looking back at that game that we benefited from playing Shola upfront by himself?

 

The only times we looked like getting on the end of anything was when Cisse threw caution to the wind and dropped into the centre when we were attacking from the left.

 

I understand why we were set up this way. No, it probably wasn't the best system with the players available. I'm sure even Alan would admit to that. However, we'd obviously geared our whole gameplan around the formation and personnel in training. Shola for Ba was the change that would cause the least disruption to the rest of the team, and I can understand that.

 

Last time I'm typing any of that.

But we knew there was a big chance of Ba fucking off on Sunday, so even if it was absolutely vital that we caused as little disruption the set-up we had been working on in training, we still wasted 2 days basing our game plan around someone who potentially wasn't going to be here

 

And then this whole rigid and 'meticulous' process is contradicted when he starts making random substitutions in the 60th and 70th minutes.

[themanupstairs]

For a manager who regularly goes through 3 or 4 formation changes per game because he's set us up incorrectly to say that he couldn't  find a way at any point in the 90 minutes to have Cisse up front is completely laughable.

 

The excuses trotted out by some that we had to put Shola in there due to the way we'd prepared for the game in advance is f***ing idiotic.

 

There were 3 spare days between the Arsenal and Everton games, and i imagine one was just resting after a hectic schedule. So that's two full days of training. And Ba met with f***ing Chelsea the day after the Arsenal match for christ's sake so if Pardew's honestly preparing to use him during this game the man is off his rocker.

 

What's more, if he's looking to play 4-3-3 - guess what - we already have a perfect tailor made replacement ready who can play down the middle in that formation and score shedloads - his name is Papiss Cisse. He's played that role many, many times - the idea that he can't due to lacking preparation is nuts. Remember when he signed? Newly returned from ACON, and Pardew put Best in the starting lineup (lol), he got injured, Cisse came on with no preparation, looked the dog's bollocks and scored.

 

On top of that, while Shola has his uses as an impact sub, he's good for 25 minutes tops in a game - starting him and keeping him on til the end is madness.

 

The only slight glimmer of sense i can see to it is that he was brought in to cope with Everton's aerial prowess - in which case you've just picked your main striker as, let's face it, a goddamn defender, while keeping your best striker - one who has wished to play centrally all season - stuck out in purgatory on the wing. And if we're led to believe this horseshit theory about Ba intending to play that role - he was also planning to use him as a battering ram, another mis-use of his talents to go along with how he's wasted others or turned them into crap this season.

 

It's another one of those Souness-esque moments for me and there's been too many recently.

 

Fuck me. More eloquent and spot on than anything I could drum up in my posts.

 

[Varadi]

The only slight glimmer of sense i can see to it is that he was brought in to cope with Everton's aerial prowess - in which case you've just picked your main striker as, let's face it, a goddamn defender, while keeping your best striker - one who has wished to play centrally all season - stuck out in purgatory on the wing.

 

That's the point I made when I first saw the lineup - Shola was picking up Distin at set pieces (of which they had shitloads) and did a decent job - you've left him out to put Cisse up top and Bigi in midfield and you've got a big potential problem.

 

Could be an issue in a few games actually - looks like our preferred front 6 will be Anita, Cabaye, Tiote, Marv, Cisse and HBA - not much height there at all.

[Guest icemanblue]

The stick that he is getting for straight swapping Shola for Ba is way over the top.

 

He had prepared the formation all week to include Ba in the center and Cisse on the right, an hour before kick-off he can be forgiven for not wanting to switch too many player roles for this week.

If he cant switch things in a couple of hours what chance has he got during a game, explains his s*** subs etc

 

He could have changed it, but what about the players? Would they be comfortable with an entirely different set of instructions, for a different position, a couple of hours before a game? He made the right, if unpopular, call last night.

That's laughable, how long do you think it would have taken to tell and coach Cisse to play in his usual position?

 

Yeah, and the others?

 

What others? Sammy, Obertan or Marveaux would have played in Cisse's place. And?

 

Obertan had been playing on the left, in this formation. Marveaux had been playing as part of the midfield three. Sammy is Sammy. If we'd taken Marveaux out of the midfield three, someone would have had to replace him. That would have been Perch. But, wait, Perch was playing right back. So, who do we play there? Santon, and bring Fergie in? Who knows. My point is that Shola for Ba was a straight swap, and the work in training could be retained. If we'd went for Cisse up top, then we'd have had to make at least three other changes.

 

I'd agree that Shola was a straight swap for Ba had he been a player of similar quality. Being a big b****** doesn't justify the straight swap however. Shola's movement (lack of) up front dictated our forward play. The only time he got into a good position he fluffed his shot wide.

 

And?

 

Just because Shola has similar physical attributes to Ba doesn't mean could replace his quality forward play. I really can't see how making this straight swap benefited us in any way last night. It was a defeatist move by the manager. As soon as Chelsea's bid was made, Pardew should have had an arm around Cisse to tell him "right, it's your time son - get out there and do what you do best".

 

Probably ridiculous to say this in hindsight, but I'm pretty confident we'd have won last night if Cisse started in the middle. The amount of fouls and aimless headers by Shola was staggering and hindered us big style.

 

I've already said how I think the straight swap benefited us.

You can honestly say looking back at that game that we benefited from playing Shola upfront by himself?

 

The only times we looked like getting on the end of anything was when Cisse threw caution to the wind and dropped into the centre when we were attacking from the left.

 

I understand why we were set up this way. No, it probably wasn't the best system with the players available. I'm sure even Alan would admit to that. However, we'd obviously geared our whole gameplan around the formation and personnel in training. Shola for Ba was the change that would cause the least disruption to the rest of the team, and I can understand that.

 

Last time I'm typing any of that.

But we knew there was a big chance of Ba fucking off on Sunday, so even if it was absolutely vital that we caused as little disruption the set-up we had been working on in training, we still wasted 2 days basing our game plan around someone who potentially wasn't going to be here

 

And then this whole rigid and 'meticulous' process is contradicted when he starts making random substitutions in the 60th and 70th minutes.

 

As recently as Tuesday, he'd been saying that Ba would play against Everton. If it was that likely he wasn't going to be available, I don't think he'd have been saying that. The general feeling on here was that Chelsea had been put off by Demba's agent posse.

 

Substitutions are what they are. Reactive changes based on the needs of the team at that point in the game. I don't really think they can be entirely planned for in advance, although teams may have a 'go to' substitution for when they're losing, or winning and want to shut up shop. Obviously, these are entirely dependent on the personnel available.

[B-more Mag]

Last year, then, was just the case of having enough good players who were able to stay healthy long enough and were played in comfortable enough positions to paper over Pardew's faults? That what it seems like now. I can only hope that we get enough good players in this window to pull off a similar trick to keep us up.

[Flip]

Doesn't matter does it? Cisse hasn't worked on the right for half a season why play him there again then? Might as well ahve benched him for Everton if we had been practicing the 4-3-3.

 

Pardew lost the plot last night and we lost yet another game because of his mistakes.

[Flip]

Oh and I called Pardew a lesser version of Sven-Göran Eriksson last season but got loads of stick. The man is a replica, when everything is going well he's very good but he can't change a match. He doesn't have that ability, just like Sven.

[Darth Crooks]

For a manager who regularly goes through 3 or 4 formation changes per game because he's set us up incorrectly to say that he couldn't  find a way at any point in the 90 minutes to have Cisse up front is completely laughable.

 

The excuses trotted out by some that we had to put Shola in there due to the way we'd prepared for the game in advance is f***ing idiotic.

 

There were 3 spare days between the Arsenal and Everton games, and i imagine one was just resting after a hectic schedule. So that's two full days of training. And Ba met with f***ing Chelsea the day after the Arsenal match for christ's sake so if Pardew's honestly preparing to use him during this game the man is off his rocker.

 

What's more, if he's looking to play 4-3-3 - guess what - we already have a perfect tailor made replacement ready who can play down the middle in that formation and score shedloads - his name is Papiss Cisse. He's played that role many, many times - the idea that he can't due to lacking preparation is nuts. Remember when he signed? Newly returned from ACON, and Pardew put Best in the starting lineup (lol), he got injured, Cisse came on with no preparation, looked the dog's bollocks and scored.

 

On top of that, while Shola has his uses as an impact sub, he's good for 25 minutes tops in a game - starting him and keeping him on til the end is madness.

 

The only slight glimmer of sense i can see to it is that he was brought in to cope with Everton's aerial prowess - in which case you've just picked your main striker as, let's face it, a goddamn defender, while keeping your best striker - one who has wished to play centrally all season - stuck out in purgatory on the wing. And if we're led to believe this horseshit theory about Ba intending to play that role - he was also planning to use him as a battering ram, another mis-use of his talents to go along with how he's wasted others or turned them into crap this season.

 

It's another one of those Souness-esque moments for me and there's been too many recently.

 

Fuck me. More eloquent and spot on than anything I could drum up in my posts.

 

 

...and boom goes the dynamite.

[NewJerseyMag]

For a manager who regularly goes through 3 or 4 formation changes per game because he's set us up incorrectly to say that he couldn't  find a way at any point in the 90 minutes to have Cisse up front is completely laughable.

 

The excuses trotted out by some that we had to put Shola in there due to the way we'd prepared for the game in advance is f***ing idiotic.

 

There were 3 spare days between the Arsenal and Everton games, and i imagine one was just resting after a hectic schedule. So that's two full days of training. And Ba met with f***ing Chelsea the day after the Arsenal match for christ's sake so if Pardew's honestly preparing to use him during this game the man is off his rocker.

 

What's more, if he's looking to play 4-3-3 - guess what - we already have a perfect tailor made replacement ready who can play down the middle in that formation and score shedloads - his name is Papiss Cisse. He's played that role many, many times - the idea that he can't due to lacking preparation is nuts. Remember when he signed? Newly returned from ACON, and Pardew put Best in the starting lineup (lol), he got injured, Cisse came on with no preparation, looked the dog's bollocks and scored.

 

On top of that, while Shola has his uses as an impact sub, he's good for 25 minutes tops in a game - starting him and keeping him on til the end is madness.

 

The only slight glimmer of sense i can see to it is that he was brought in to cope with Everton's aerial prowess - in which case you've just picked your main striker as, let's face it, a goddamn defender, while keeping your best striker - one who has wished to play centrally all season - stuck out in purgatory on the wing. And if we're led to believe this horseshit theory about Ba intending to play that role - he was also planning to use him as a battering ram, another mis-use of his talents to go along with how he's wasted others or turned them into crap this season.

 

It's another one of those Souness-esque moments for me and there's been too many recently.

 

f*** me. More eloquent and spot on than anything I could drum up in my posts.

 

 

...and boom goes the dynamite.

 

How much preparation would it have taken to play Shola on the right and Cisse down the middle?

 

About two sentences........ are we THAT inflexible?

[Guest firetotheworks]

There's a trend with all of the shit managers we've had...they've all botted Shola.

[KaKa]

Oh and I called Pardew a lesser version of Sven-Göran Eriksson last season but got loads of stick. The man is a replica, when everything is going well he's very good but he can't change a match. He doesn't have that ability, just like Sven.

 

My Lord ... what an insult to Sven-Göran Eriksson.

 

[Skeletor]

There's a trend with all of the shit managers we've had...they've all botted Shola.

 

Allardyce was shit but he knew the score with Shola.

[Ronaldo]

Allardyce to his credit wanted nowt to do with Shola. Same with Keegan.

[Guest Eggenberger]

Like saying Santon is like Lahm,  good going forward but suspect defensively.

[NG32]

For a manager who regularly goes through 3 or 4 formation changes per game because he's set us up incorrectly to say that he couldn't  find a way at any point in the 90 minutes to have Cisse up front is completely laughable.

 

The excuses trotted out by some that we had to put Shola in there due to the way we'd prepared for the game in advance is f***ing idiotic.

 

There were 3 spare days between the Arsenal and Everton games, and i imagine one was just resting after a hectic schedule. So that's two full days of training. And Ba met with f***ing Chelsea the day after the Arsenal match for christ's sake so if Pardew's honestly preparing to use him during this game the man is off his rocker.

 

What's more, if he's looking to play 4-3-3 - guess what - we already have a perfect tailor made replacement ready who can play down the middle in that formation and score shedloads - his name is Papiss Cisse. He's played that role many, many times - the idea that he can't due to lacking preparation is nuts. Remember when he signed? Newly returned from ACON, and Pardew put Best in the starting lineup (lol), he got injured, Cisse came on with no preparation, looked the dog's bollocks and scored.

 

On top of that, while Shola has his uses as an impact sub, he's good for 25 minutes tops in a game - starting him and keeping him on til the end is madness.

 

The only slight glimmer of sense i can see to it is that he was brought in to cope with Everton's aerial prowess - in which case you've just picked your main striker as, let's face it, a goddamn defender, while keeping your best striker - one who has wished to play centrally all season - stuck out in purgatory on the wing. And if we're led to believe this horseshit theory about Ba intending to play that role - he was also planning to use him as a battering ram, another mis-use of his talents to go along with how he's wasted others or turned them into crap this season.

 

It's another one of those Souness-esque moments for me and there's been too many recently.

 

f*** me. More eloquent and spot on than anything I could drum up in my posts.

 

 

...and boom goes the dynamite.

 

How much preparation would it have taken to play Shola on the right and Cisse down the middle?

 

About two sentences........ are we THAT inflexible?

 

The only reason i can think of playing Cisse on the right and Shola in the middle..is Shola hasn't got the legs to get back and help the full back out.  Cisse was helpling out at the back way to much, good on the lad fopr the effort but Id rather see him on the half way line keeping their centrebacks worried about a break away.

 

never mind

[Guest neesy111]

Shola should be 4th choice maximum, the fact he's now 2nd in the pecking order speaks volumes about our current predicament.

[Guest reefatoon]

Shola should be 4th choice maximum, the fact he's now 2nd in the pecking order speaks volumes about our current predicament.

 

Shola shouldn't be anywhere near a team playing European football.  When you look back at it.  Ipswich sniffed around but the useless twat failed a medical and he was on loan at Stoke (who didn't even play him!)  That's about the stamp of the useless fucker.

[Mr Logic]

 

The excuses trotted out by some that we had to put Shola in there due to the way we'd prepared for the game in advance is fucking idiotic.

 

There were 3 spare days between the Arsenal and Everton games, and i imagine one was just resting after a hectic schedule. So that's two full days of training. And Ba met with fucking Chelsea the day after the Arsenal match for christ's sake so if Pardew's honestly preparing to use him during this game the man is off his rocker.

 

What's more, if he's looking to play 4-3-3 - guess what - we already have a perfect tailor made replacement ready who can play down the middle in that formation and score shedloads - his name is Papiss Cisse. He's played that role many, many times - the idea that he can't due to lacking preparation is nuts. Remember when he signed? Newly returned from ACON, and Pardew put Best in the starting lineup (lol), he got injured, Cisse came on with no preparation, looked the dog's bollocks and scored.

 

On top of that, while Shola has his uses as an impact sub, he's good for 25 minutes tops in a game - starting him and keeping him on til the end is madness.

 

The only slight glimmer of sense i can see to it is that he was brought in to cope with Everton's aerial prowess - in which case you've just picked your main striker as, let's face it, a goddamn defender, while keeping your best striker - one who has wished to play centrally all season - stuck out in purgatory on the wing. And if we're led to believe this horseshit theory about Ba intending to play that role - he was also planning to use him as a battering ram, another mis-use of his talents to go along with how he's wasted others or turned them into crap this season.

 

It's another one of those Souness-esque moments for me and there's been too many recently.

 

Love that post.

[Guest firetotheworks]

With the current players that we have, I honestly think that he puts Shola and Cisse on some kind of par, but with different attributes.

[Hanshithispantz]

I think Anita in Cisse's position and Bigi back in the centre would have been how I would have lined up, it obviously isn't ideal but it would have gave us some better protection against their left which, again, cut us to shreds.