Guest tollemache Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 The Cabaye one doesn't even warrant discussion. He's injured, wants to come off, so you take him off. The fact that there was any booing whatsoever, from anyone, at that point beggars belief. It was very, very blatantly a fitness issue. Reminds me of when we had people complaining on here about Ben Arfa coming off against Fulham, like there was any chance whatsoever it was a tactical change. The Marveaux sub on the other hand was genuinely weird. I guess if the Cabaye one was unexpected, rather than a planned withdrawal, then the Marveaux one is a bit unlucky. If Cabaye had lasted we might not be having this discussion. If the Cabaye sub was just because he's generally not up to speed, then the Marv one is crazy. I thought he felt his groin and asked to come off? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 The Cabaye one doesn't even warrant discussion. He's injured, wants to come off, so you take him off. The fact that there was any booing whatsoever, from anyone, at that point beggars belief. It was very, very blatantly a fitness issue. Reminds me of when we had people complaining on here about Ben Arfa coming off against Fulham, like there was any chance whatsoever it was a tactical change. The Marveaux sub on the other hand was genuinely weird. I guess if the Cabaye one was unexpected, rather than a planned withdrawal, then the Marveaux one is a bit unlucky. If Cabaye had lasted we might not be having this discussion. If the Cabaye sub was just because he's generally not up to speed, then the Marv one is crazy. I thought he felt his groin and asked to come off? Yeah, some reports suggest he did. In which case I suppose Pardew was unlucky to have already subbed Marveaux. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledGeordie Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 We started to go more 'direct' after about 60 mins. No idea why as it just gave them the ball. Then the Marveaux sub just said to them that we're not attacking anymore. Was ridiculous. As was leaving Shola on (compounding the mistake of starting him). Was it not just that our passing game wasn't as fluent without Cabaye running it? Before the Marveaux sub we started punting it over his head a little too often. To no effect whatsoever. Yeah I don't understand after playing it around 1st half that we just started knocking long balls forward bypassing the midfield. Bonkers stuff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Reading stood off us the whole 1st half, that's what allowed our passing game to work. Soon as they started to press us we went long as usual. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tollemache Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/jan/20/newcastle-alan-pardew-reading Looks like he was unlucky in that Cabaye decided his groin might go almost immediately after Marveaux went off. You can look at that in a few ways - perhaps with Marveaux off the pitch but Cabaye involved in the game, we'd have been fine. It's still a slightly weird change to make so early on, at home, at 1-0 though. Pardew said he thought Marveaux had drifted out of the game, but then the obvious thing to do would be to bring on someone like Obertan and keep the pressure on. I don't know - I don't remember if our shape changed for those few minutes between subs, for example. Was Cabaye noticeably further forward? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/jan/20/newcastle-alan-pardew-reading Looks like he was unlucky in that Cabaye decided his groin might go almost immediately after Marveaux went off. You can look at that in a few ways - perhaps with Marveaux off the pitch but Cabaye involved in the game, we'd have been fine. It's still a slightly weird change to make so early on, at home, at 1-0 though. Pardew said he thought Marveaux had drifted out of the game, but then the obvious thing to do would be to bring on someone like Obertan and keep the pressure on. I don't know - I don't remember if our shape changed for those few minutes between subs, for example. Was Cabaye noticeably further forward? Ah interesting, I hadn't seen that. Basically it upgrades the Marveaux decision from absolutely terrible to just a bit too conservative. Sheds some light on the situation anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Someone should dig up Pardew's quotes from a few days ago that were praising the fans, just to show how quickly the man will use something as an excuse. Yeah, somebody should dig up everything Pardew's ever said and dissect it to a microscopic degree without any context so they can whinge on about it. Oh hang on, that's already happened. Car crash. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tollemache Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 B A C K F O U R Anita Cabaye Ameobi Marveaux Jonas Cisse B A C K F O U R Anita Perch Ameobi Cabaye Jonas Cisse Nothing necessarily wrong with that if you're working on the assumption that Cabaye will stay on and influence the game more than Marveaux had been doing. It just thrusts Cabaye further forward and hopefully sees him take control. I still think it was a weird decision so early on, but I can understand it I think. I don't remember noticing that Marveaux had really gone off the boil though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Cisse scored after 11 minutes against Norwich last season and we then defended that for the rest of the game. That's what he does, that's how he plays. No change in gameplan - that is the gameplan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 The thing that the media don't seem to grasp, or are ignoring is: 1. We were booing Pardew, not the players. 2. The Marveaux sub was booed because it was telling in that we were going to hold on to 1-0, with something like 30 minutes to go, at home, to fucking Reading. 3. The Cabaye sub was booed in isolation for the same reason as above. Except this time, most tellingly, it was done at 1-1 as what was seen as a result of taking Marveaux off, and it also removed all of our creativity, thus removing any logical thinking in taking Marveaux off. 4. Pardew complained that he shouldn't have had to play the midfield that he did against Brighton and said that Tiote had been out of form. He then proceeded to change the midfield that was 1-0 up at home to Reading to the one that lost 2-0 away to Brighton. The man is a fucking moron and there is exactly no excuse for the specific and systematically pillaging way in which he fucked up on Saturday. It is comfortably the worst managerial performance I have seen from any Newcastle manager and he is getting worse and worse and worse. If that is fickle, then I'm fickle as fuck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 The Cabaye one doesn't even warrant discussion. He's injured, wants to come off, so you take him off. The fact that there was any booing whatsoever, from anyone, at that point beggars belief. It was very, very blatantly a fitness issue. Reminds me of when we had people complaining on here about Ben Arfa coming off against Fulham, like there was any chance whatsoever it was a tactical change. The Marveaux sub on the other hand was genuinely weird. I guess if the Cabaye one was unexpected, rather than a planned withdrawal, then the Marveaux one is a bit unlucky. If Cabaye had lasted we might not be having this discussion. If the Cabaye sub was just because he's generally not up to speed, then the Marv one is crazy. I thought he felt his groin and asked to come off? Yeah, some reports suggest he did. In which case I suppose Pardew was unlucky to have already subbed Marveaux. 'Some reports'? How about from Cabaye himself, in almost every paper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Ultimately the booing yesterday was a good thing. If Pardew stays it's the slap in the face he needed tbh. He'll at least think twice in future before those stupid subs he makes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 The Cabaye one doesn't even warrant discussion. He's injured, wants to come off, so you take him off. The fact that there was any booing whatsoever, from anyone, at that point beggars belief. It was very, very blatantly a fitness issue. Reminds me of when we had people complaining on here about Ben Arfa coming off against Fulham, like there was any chance whatsoever it was a tactical change. The Marveaux sub on the other hand was genuinely weird. I guess if the Cabaye one was unexpected, rather than a planned withdrawal, then the Marveaux one is a bit unlucky. If Cabaye had lasted we might not be having this discussion. If the Cabaye sub was just because he's generally not up to speed, then the Marv one is crazy. I thought he felt his groin and asked to come off? Yeah, some reports suggest he did. In which case I suppose Pardew was unlucky to have already subbed Marveaux. 'Some reports'? How about from Cabaye himself, in almost every paper. Yeah, fine, I hadn't seen them. As I said above, the Guardian report sheds more light on it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Ultimately the booing yesterday was a good thing. If Pardew stays it's the slap in the face he needed tbh. He'll at least think twice in future before those stupid subs he makes. Do you not think it makes any difference that he thought Cabaye would be able to stay on? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Ultimately the booing yesterday was a good thing. Those changes and subs would had been swept under the carpet if the booing wasn't done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Ultimately the booing yesterday was a good thing. Those changes and subs would had been swept under the carpet if the booing wasn't done. I still disagree with the subs in general too, but do you not think it makes a difference that he thought Cabaye would be able to finish the game? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Pardew has said that Cabaye told him he was struggling at half time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Pardew said he thought Cabaye was capable of playing the whole game. Then despite him saying the player told him he was struggling at half time, sent him back out and subbed him just after he attempted an overhead kick, and after having taken Marveaux off first, and after we'd conceded the equaliser. To claim it was obvious the crowd shouldn't have expressed anger at that decision is ridiculous. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledGeordie Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Yeah this is what makes the Marv sub even more ridiculous. If Cabaye had told Pardew at half time that he was struggling a bit why would you bring Marveaux off before Cabaye? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Ultimately the booing yesterday was a good thing. Those changes and subs would had been swept under the carpet if the booing wasn't done. I still disagree with the subs in general too, but do you not think it makes a difference that he thought Cabaye would be able to finish the game? If Cabaye was injured then he should had been subbed off ASAP especially what happened with Ben Arfa at Fulham. Also I think the booing happened as some players like Jonas and Shola were still on the pitch when they clearly didn't deserve to be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tollemache Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Go on, I'll have a go The thing that the media don't seem to grasp, or are ignoring is: 1. We were booing Pardew, not the players. Still changing the atmosphere to one that is full of boos and not very nice to play in. I think to a certain extent a booing is a booing and none of the players will have enjoyed it. 2. The Marveaux sub was booed because it was telling in that we were going to hold on to 1-0, with something like 30 minutes to go, at home, to fucking Reading. See above diagram. I don't think it necessarily says that, if you assume it'd mean Cabaye playing further forward. 3. The Cabaye sub was booed in isolation for the same reason as above. Except this time, most tellingly, it was done at 1-1 as what was seen as a result of taking Marveaux off, and it also removed all of our creativity, thus removing any logical thinking in taking Marveaux off. There is no reason to boo the Cabaye sub at all if he's injured. If it's a question almost of re-booing the Marveaux sub and pointing out how foolish that had been, then there is something to it but if Cabaye had apparently been ok to play 90 minutes at that point, it looks a lot less bad / negative. 4. Pardew complained that he shouldn't have had to play the midfield that he did against Brighton and said that Tiote had been out of form. He then proceeded to change the midfield that was 1-0 up at home to Reading to the one that lost 2-0 away to Brighton. ...but it was supposed to be that midfield with Cabaye in it. My opinion now kind of rests on how the team was set up between those first two subs I think Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Pardew has said that Cabaye told him he was struggling at half time. Oh, I didn't read that, in the Guardian he just says he decided to come off at about 60 minutes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tollemache Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Pardew has said that Cabaye told him he was struggling at half time. ...well that swings things way back over to it being extremely daft not at least to consult him BEFORE bringing Marveaux off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Pardew said he thought Cabaye was capable of playing the whole game. Then despite him saying the player told him he was struggling at half time, sent him back out and subbed him just after he attempted an overhead kick, and after having taken Marveaux off first, and after we'd conceded the equaliser. To claim it was obvious the crowd shouldn't have expressed anger at that decision is ridiculous. Sure, at the time I was raging as well. But it seems the situation is a bit more complicated than Pardew just wanting to take all our creative players off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Ultimately the booing yesterday was a good thing. If Pardew stays it's the slap in the face he needed tbh. He'll at least think twice in future before those stupid subs he makes. Do you not think it makes any difference that he thought Cabaye would be able to stay on? Regardless of what he was thinking for the subs on Saturday, I just know that in future he will think a bit harder before making his subs, which are often silly. That can only be a good thing. He needed a wake up call. Think the fans at the game on Saturday should be applauded. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts