Guest icemanblue Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Nice of Cabaye to say that (after the game presumably), but that's not what I saw. Could be wrong though. He'll have been told to say that by our beloved manager as he didn't mention any of this straight after the game. Come on, boys. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Who doesn't understand the Cabaye sub? jack apparently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Er... I watched the game? I was baffled when Marveaux went off, pretty f***ing upset when Cabaye went off and horribly unsurprised when they scored, just like anyone else supporting Newcastle but not necessarily sitting in the stadium. But it was immediately, like instantly, obvious to me that Cabaye must've been injured so I saw that as a stroke of awful luck, not related to the weird Marveaux substitution. As I've said in this thread (in the many posts since the one you picked out, over the course of which my opinion has evolved. Read them?), I think he f***ed up his subs. That point you highlighted was just that, no matter how disappointing it was, Cabaye going off could only ever be interpreted as a fitness issue so to interpret it as an actual decision of Pardew's would be crazy. Over the course of the thread, I've learned that Cabaye flagged up his injury at half time, which makes it seem substantially worse, but we didn't know that at the time. As I say, I've modified my position on this one as the thread's gone on but you don't seem to have read any of that You've got every right to hold your own opinion, you've got absolutely no right to tell others how they should or shouldn't react to any given situation. Things happen which builds up frustration and people vent that frustration. You've got every right to express frustration if you're frustrated. Where did I tell people how they should react, as opposed to just giving my opinion? I said I couldn't believe people booed that change. If you interpret that as me ordering you about then I think you're being a bit sensitive. You said it was 100% certain people knew cabaye was being taken off because of injury. That wasn't certain and it didn't look like that from where I was. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 isn't he saying that cabaye was injured and the crowd reacted as if it was tactical and the marveaux sub was a mystery to him aswell ? Again context, he's just taken off Marveaux for Perch and how was anybody in the crowd supposed to know why Cabaye had been taken off considering he was showing no signs of distress. Both substitutions were negative and both looked as if they were because we were trying to hold on to, firstly 3 points then a point. Both substitutions were for players who could attack being replaced with players who are more suited to defending and they weren't needed. Pardew could have swapped Marveaux or Cabaye for Ranger, Obertan or Sammy if he wanted us to go forward. Pardew had options even if he refuses to acknowledge that. the cabaye , the player has said himself he wanted/needed to come off. has anyone defended the marveaux sub ? I don't think that can be defended, really. It was a bizarre decision, no doubt prompted by the manager being nervous and desperate to get a win. The fact it had the opposite effect, to nobodies surprise, is the worry. To be fair, Pardew did say post match that it was the wrong choice. Irrespective of that, however, it's also a worry that he was willing to play Yohan the full 90. He needs to be wrapped in cotton wool for the next couple of weeks, at least. Hopefully he'll learn from this. given cabaye's quotes what would have happened if he'd broke down later in the game, pardew would've been slated for that. i understand cabaye's sub, didn't at the time. marveauxs is still a bloody mystery, especially in light of the need to take cabaye off. edit, what can pardew learn in relation to cabye, all he can do is play him and go by what the player says. Eh? Not sure if you've misread my post or if you're looking for an argument that isn't there? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 the cabaye , the player has said himself he wanted/needed to come off. has anyone defended the marveaux sub ? perch for shola with marveaux pushing further up would've been the more obvious move. defensive mid for a forward but given the pwersonnel involved it would've been a morre balanced and attacking side also in readiness for cabaye to come off. Are you going out of your way to try and be awkward? The Cabaye substitution can't be taken on it's own, we made two substitutions which involved attacking players being replaced by defensive players. I couldn't care less what Cabaye has said because people reacted to what they saw and couldn't have known Cabaye was injured. What people knew and reacted to was negative changes which changed the game and took it away from us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beren Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Who of you would try an overhead kick with a groin injury man? Absolute balls. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Who doesn't understand the Cabaye sub? jack apparently. Me? I understand it but it couldn't have been handled worse, both during and after the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Who doesn't understand the Cabaye sub? jack apparently. Me? I understand it but it couldn't have been handled worse, both during and after the game. Not so arsed about the "after" bit, but the circumstances during the game were a joke. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Because it's just so so obvious that you don't take off your best player and only remaining creative force unless you really have to. I don't see how you could draw any other conclusion other than he must be unable to continue. I agree that a more attacking player should've come on mind - Obertan for me. It should be obvious that you "don't take off your best player and only remaining creative force unless you really have to" but in reality with Pardew it isn't. Marveaux was probably our 2nd best attacking threat yet he was the first player to go off so how should anything that Pardew does be obvious? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Who of you would try an overhead kick with a groin injury man? Absolute balls. This is scraping the barrell, like. He said his groin was tight, not that he was injured. Still, he's the kind of player I'd expect to give his all until he comes off the pitch. It can't really disputed when the player confirms what the manager was thinking. Pardew has said he intended to play him the full 90 based on the work he'd done in training that week. That's the scary part. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 the cabaye , the player has said himself he wanted/needed to come off. has anyone defended the marveaux sub ? perch for shola with marveaux pushing further up would've been the more obvious move. defensive mid for a forward but given the pwersonnel involved it would've been a morre balanced and attacking side also in readiness for cabaye to come off. Are you going out of your way to try and be awkward? The Cabaye substitution can't be taken on it's own, we made two substitutions which involved attacking players being replaced by defensive players. I couldn't care less what Cabaye has said because people reacted to what they saw and couldn't have known Cabaye was injured. What people knew and reacted to was negative changes which changed the game and took it away from us. i was actually thinking it was you being awkward. i'd said enough times if cabayes quotes are to believed he had to come off but the replacements and marveaux sub were baffling at best. i've also said that at the time i didn't think cabaye was taken off due to injury, more just a plan for him not to play the full game as he was just returning from a while out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 isn't he saying that cabaye was injured and the crowd reacted as if it was tactical and the marveaux sub was a mystery to him aswell ? Again context, he's just taken off Marveaux for Perch and how was anybody in the crowd supposed to know why Cabaye had been taken off considering he was showing no signs of distress. Both substitutions were negative and both looked as if they were because we were trying to hold on to, firstly 3 points then a point. Both substitutions were for players who could attack being replaced with players who are more suited to defending and they weren't needed. Pardew could have swapped Marveaux or Cabaye for Ranger, Obertan or Sammy if he wanted us to go forward. Pardew had options even if he refuses to acknowledge that. Because it's just so so obvious that you don't take off your best player and only remaining creative force unless you really have to. I don't see how you could draw any other conclusion other than he must be unable to continue. I agree that a more attacking player should've come on mind - Obertan for me. It's equally as obvious that you don't take off your only other creative force if you're main creative force has just come back from injury. Things being obvious sense don't apply here, this is the bloke that starts Shola on the wing, leaves him and Jonas on for 90 mins, starts Cisse on the wing, abandons our best formation to keep Ba happy. Do I need to list anything else? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Nice of Cabaye to say that (after the game presumably), but that's not what I saw. Could be wrong though. He'll have been told to say that by our beloved manager as he didn't mention any of this straight after the game. ...and this one. http://www.nufc.co.uk/articles/20130119/goal-but-no-glory-for-comeback-cab_2281670_3046871 No mention of injury. It's very amusing to see the same people desperately defending Pardew at every chance Like clockwork. Pardew? I'm defending Cabaye on this one. It's an odd mixture of depressive bemused amusement to me that your first though is that Cabaye has been forced to spin a line. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic 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. Can only assume you've missed my point, otherwise you're just having a pop for no reason. The point was that only last week Pardew was praising the fans for their patience and support and this week he's implying there's often a poisonous atmosphere that negatively affects the team. In that sense those quotes are worth digging up to have a look at. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Who doesn't understand the Cabaye sub? Quite a few it seems. Beren in particular. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Who doesn't understand the Cabaye sub? Quite a few as it happens. i understand taking him off, i don't understand the replacement and tactics nor those surrounding the marveaux sub whih imo didn't need to be made (he should've stayed on, shola should've went off) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo 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. Can only assume you've missed my point, otherwise you're just having a pop for no reason. The point was that only last week Pardew was praising the fans for their patience and support and this week he's implying there's often a poisonous atmosphere that negatively affects the team. In that sense those quotes are worth digging up to have a look at. I was more commenting on the general level of insane scrutiny that every Pardew quote is subjected to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tollemache Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Because it's just so so obvious that you don't take off your best player and only remaining creative force unless you really have to. I don't see how you could draw any other conclusion other than he must be unable to continue. I agree that a more attacking player should've come on mind - Obertan for me. It should be obvious that you "don't take off your best player and only remaining creative force unless you really have to" but in reality with Pardew it isn't. Marveaux was probably our 2nd best attacking threat yet he was the first player to go off so how should anything that Pardew does be obvious? I suppose I just put taking Cabaye off just a few minutes later purely out of choice in such a stratospherically bizarre category that I immediately knew it must be injury. I mean... nobody, but nobody, would ever do that, no matter who. No manager in the universe. It would never, ever happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beren Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Who of you would try an overhead kick with a groin injury man? Absolute balls. This is scraping the barrel, like. He said his groin was tight, not that he was injured. Still, he's the kind of player I'd expect to give his all until he comes off the pitch. It can't really disputed when the player confirms what the manager was thinking. Pardew has said he intended to play him the full 90 based on the work he'd done in training that week. That's the scary part. Wouldn't be the first or last time a player has protected their under-fire manager. It's not "tin foil hat" stuff really. I saw no indication of tightness, and whilst I agree Yohan is the type of full throttle player who would give it his all, I don't believe him to be an idiot who would jeopardise his comeback if he'd already felt something was amiss and had already indicated to the dugout he wanted to come off. Not going to argue in circles about it though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 i was actually thinking it was you being awkward. i'd said enough times if cabayes quotes are to believed he had to come off but the replacements and marveaux sub were baffling at best. i've also said that at the time i didn't think cabaye was taken off due to injury, more just a plan for him not to play the full game as he was just returning from a while out. I've been going on about the crowd reaction and what they reacted to, you've said yourself that you didn't know why Cabaye went off so how was anybody else at the ground supposed to know? Knowing now that Cabaye asked to go off doesn't change what people were reacting to just after 5pm on Saturday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 i was actually thinking it was you being awkward. i'd said enough times if cabayes quotes are to believed he had to come off but the replacements and marveaux sub were baffling at best. i've also said that at the time i didn't think cabaye was taken off due to injury, more just a plan for him not to play the full game as he was just returning from a while out. I've been going on about the crowd reaction and what they reacted to, you've said yourself that you didn't know why Cabaye went off so how was anybody else at the ground supposed to know? Knowing now that Cabaye asked to go off doesn't change what people were reacting to just after 5pm on Saturday. i was talking more about the decisions themselves than the crowd reaction as the converstaion was going that way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Who doesn't understand the Cabaye sub? Quite a few it seems. Beren in particular. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tollemache Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Who of you would try an overhead kick with a groin injury man? Absolute balls. This is scraping the barrel, like. He said his groin was tight, not that he was injured. Still, he's the kind of player I'd expect to give his all until he comes off the pitch. It can't really disputed when the player confirms what the manager was thinking. Pardew has said he intended to play him the full 90 based on the work he'd done in training that week. That's the scary part. Wouldn't be the first or last time a player has protected their under-fire manager. It's not "tin foil hat" stuff really. I saw no indication of tightness, and whilst I agree Yohan is the type of full throttle player who would give it his all, I don't believe him to be an idiot who would jeopardise his comeback if he'd already felt something was amiss and had already indicated to the dugout he wanted to come off. Not going to argue in circles about it though. You don't think there's a good chance going for the overhead kick was one of the things that set off the tightness in his groin? Whenever I've triggered a groin strain it's always been a shot or a firmly hit sidefoot pass that does it. I don't really go for overhead kicks anymore Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Who of you would try an overhead kick with a groin injury man? Absolute balls. This is scraping the barrel, like. He said his groin was tight, not that he was injured. Still, he's the kind of player I'd expect to give his all until he comes off the pitch. It can't really disputed when the player confirms what the manager was thinking. Pardew has said he intended to play him the full 90 based on the work he'd done in training that week. That's the scary part. Wouldn't be the first or last time a player has protected their under-fire manager. It's not "tin foil hat" stuff really. I saw no indication of tightness, and whilst I agree Yohan is the type of full throttle player who would give it his all, I don't believe him to be an idiot who would jeopardise his comeback if he'd already felt something was amiss and had already indicated to the dugout he wanted to come off. Not going to argue in circles about it though. Didn't he actually signal to the bench to come off? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tollemache Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 God that's taken me back to school... I had a near-permanent groin strain. Struggle around school with really heavy bag, straight into a game of football, twannnggg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts