Alan Pardew

[Away Toon]

The first half was atrocious, and we were lucky they weren't a couple of goals up. It was just negative, awful and the atmosphere from what was a fantastic crowd was lost. Once we decided to attack with HBA and Marveaux anything looked possible. Anita should have gone to RB to replace Simpson as he's an excellent attacking fullback at the same time. Has Pardew ever started HBA and Marveaux together? I don't think so and he's not likely to.

 

Get this negative minded percentage playing dinosaur out of my club please.

[merlin]

What is ridiculous and childish about the Pardew debate is the fact that some of those who are firmly in his camp start accusing those of us who are not as being 'haters'.

 

This is pathetic nonsense - how can anyone hate a person unless they know them personally and have had bad experiences with them ? I couldn't give a toss about Pardew as a person and don't have any personal feelings towards him one way or the other but I DO care about his performances as manager of NUFC.

In that respect, I think he is lacking in the qualities necessary to bring any sort of success - and that especially includes entertaining football - to the club.

 

I believe him to be a lower PL/upper Championship manager who has demonstrated his limitations not just at this club, but at the others where he was employed - that is the ONLY basis on which I judge him and I suspect that most of us who are not fans feel the same way.

 

If the board are happy to see us middle/lower part of the table most years and scraping results through negative football, then he'll stay - whether many fans will put up with that over an extended period is another question...

We still need 4 points to be reasonably safe from relegation - if we achieve that it will be interesting to see what happens in the summer both on the transfer front and the manager's position...if we were by any chance to go down, he's out..end of.

 

My ONLY fear about his being sacked is the board's intentions afterwards but I believe that they have done enough in January to allay at least some of the questions a prospective manager would have. They have also given him enough rope to hang himself with the new players......

 

We shall see, but this thread needs to revert to an adult debate about a serious question.

[mrmojorisin75]

didn't see the match but it seems to be me as usual pardew had the idea right (don't over-commit too early or we might get picked off and be out before we know it) but got the execution wrong again, as he so often does

[Mick]

didn't see the match but it seems to be me as usual pardew had the idea right (don't over-commit too early or we might get picked off and be out before we know it) but got the execution wrong again, as he so often does

 

We did some things better than usual, I was quite impressed with some of our passing and attacking.  We actually looked as if we'd done some work on both.

[alpal78]

Disappointed he didn't gamble from the start but I see why. Really needed a creative spark as a result but defended the clean sheet. Pardew still thinks we can play defensively and grind out a result, we can't. This tactic is ironically more of a gamble than attacking one.

 

Surely this negative tactic only drags down the confidence in our defence. Makes it look like he has no confidence in our defenders to get the job done if we play attractive competitive football.

 

I'm not really ranting about pardew today I understand his reasoning for starting a more defensive line up. With fitness levels of marv and benarfa not likely to last the full game we would have been in the s*** had we conceded being hit on the break, but who knows if we had stuck early they might have folded.

 

Pardew has created a culture within the squad that genuinely plays for the shirt, fans and each other. I think the club is closer to the fans than it has been in a long time (definately safe house needed for that comment).A new manager is at risk of losing that..but pardew clearly has no tactical clue and I blame the coaching set up aswell as him.

 

I hope he gets replaced but I am scared at what would follow. At the bare minimum we need a tactical coach to work with pardew carver et al are obviously not up to it.

 

 

I don't think he'd have set up this way had we had Coloccini/Taylor and Santon fit. I think a lot of his thinking was not having a particularly strong back four, and not having his "door openers" available to play much more than half an hour each.

 

Haven't we set up the same way (defensive and hoping to grind out results) pretty much the whole season?

 

We see weaker squads play better football every week. It's all about psychology and inspiring players to push themselves to play better. Just because we have alot of international class professionals doesn't mean they don't need inspiration to push them from time to time or that arm around them to help.

 

That said the players are clearly united with pardew and have bought into what he feeds them. For me it just looks like it's easier for him to play defensive than try to inspire his players mentally to step up.

 

 

If Swansea play the way they do against someone like Benfica next season, I think they'd get ripped apart tbh. I think our best chance of winning the tie tonight with the players available, was the way we set out.

 

That, imho, is bollocks. Swansea may well get seen off for a variety of reasons but because they have the ball a lot more than the other team won't be one of them.

 

And if the only chance we had of winning the game tonight was the way it panned out, 10 mins of pressure out of 90, then we just had no chance, simple as.

 

That's bollocks like. No chance? When Cisse scored there wasn't a person in the ground who wasn't fairly confident we would win it. We were incredibly close.

 

Not for me. ON is of the opinion that the way we approached the game was the best tactically that we could have done. Don't agree with that and my point was, if that was the best approach possible then we weren't ever really in it.

 

Tell me how we could have been better tactically?

 

I wouldn't have started Bigi in the first 45 mins. Sissoko out wide and either Marveaux or Shola would have given us far more bite IMO.

 

I think it's clear Marveaux wasn't fit...and this place had Shola started.

 

Marveaux looked plenty fit to me - and Pardew really shouldn't give a toss about what this place would think about Shola starting tbh.

 

Pardew said post-match that Marveaux struggles with a lot of games in a short space of time, which is why he didn't start tonight.

 

Fine. But why replace him with an inexperienced defensive central midfielder? Do you think teams with no threat going forward are going to worry a team with a poor defence?

 

We didn't want to worry them in the first half ffs. Why poke the bear with a stick when you can get to the hour and try and shoot it instead?

 

What a s*** analogy.

 

We clearly didn't have enough time to beat them in that time, there was a lot of huff and puff and they looked a bit rattled but don't go on like we were unlucky.

 

I wouldn't say we were unlucky necessarily, they were really rattled for a good 15 minutes or so but we picked the wrong ball too often and made too many sloppy passes in good positions. I wasn't interested in being the better side tonight, only in getting through and I thought we gave ourselves the best chance of doing so by playing the way we did.

 

Scoring on 70 minutes was almost scripted, it fitted so perfectly. 2-0 up on 70 minutes with Benfica camped in our half, I'd have written us off, 1-0 up though with the onus on us, I really thought we would nick it late again and I bet so did everyone else. We needed to keep the ball in our court for as long as we could.

 

Although I can sort of see your logic Wullie, coming from you, it is really surprising, that you'd rather be 1-0 up than 2-0 up with 20 minutes to play. To me this reflects that you've  lost all faith in Pardew being able to organize a team to get the right result. If we were 2-0 up, why couldn't we sit deep with fast counter attacks through HBA and Marveux? Plus as many have said, I don't see why we can't defend and still attack at the same time, there has to be a balanced approach not an all or nothing. Had we attacked earlier, we could have got the first goal earlier say in the first half, which would have then given us more time to get the second goal. I don't quite get how anyone can think that the chances of getting a goal in 20 minutes is greater than doing so in 45 minutes. In terms of first half, we wasted the opportunity to attack and get the first goal early. It is also interesting to note that they only hit us on the counter when we were going all out in injury time. I have not seen anyone on this forum saying that we should have gone all out attack in similar fashion from the first minute.

 

Ultimately if this was such a great strategy, it's odd to me that I can't seem to remember any other teams losing 0-2 playing the way we did in the second leg, not in Europa and not in CL. For those defending this strategy, do you think that Pardew just uncovered a masterpiece strategy that eluded the other top managers before him who faced the same position?

[mrmojorisin75]

didn't see the match but it seems to be me as usual pardew had the idea right (don't over-commit too early or we might get picked off and be out before we know it) but got the execution wrong again, as he so often does

 

We did some things better than usual, I was quite impressed with some of our passing and attacking.  We actually looked as if we'd done some work on both.

 

before the introduction of ben arfa/marveaux?

[Stu]

didn't see the match but it seems to be me as usual pardew had the idea right (don't over-commit too early or we might get picked off and be out before we know it) but got the execution wrong again, as he so often does

 

are you deliberately stirring the pot?

 

"Sorry officer, I didn't see the crime but I know he's done previous so he's probably guilty"

 

We fashioned opportunities to get the second, someone else mentioned the poor decision making in the final third...would probably agree with that although it seems a little harsh on the players.

 

Despite going out to a very good side, it seems as though there are people who genuinely expected them to roll over at SJP and that we could go gung-ho from the off (and keep them from scoring one, or more, for 90minutes). The plan to shorten the game to 20-30minutes and go gung-ho was the smart option and sadly we fell short of the target.

 

Pleased that we made it back to the quarter-finals at our first attempt; would have been pretty tough to have gone out before Xmas.

[Stu]

didn't see the match but it seems to be me as usual pardew had the idea right (don't over-commit too early or we might get picked off and be out before we know it) but got the execution wrong again, as he so often does

 

We did some things better than usual, I was quite impressed with some of our passing and attacking.  We actually looked as if we'd done some work on both.

 

before the introduction of ben arfa/marveaux?

 

[Mick]

didn't see the match but it seems to be me as usual pardew had the idea right (don't over-commit too early or we might get picked off and be out before we know it) but got the execution wrong again, as he so often does

 

We did some things better than usual, I was quite impressed with some of our passing and attacking.  We actually looked as if we'd done some work on both.

 

before the introduction of ben arfa/marveaux?

I thought we played the ball around well until Shola came on and then after the two you've mentioned came on. The better attacking was with Ben Arfa and Marveaux.

[Stu]

Watched 70 minutes of bilge to add to the hundreds and thousands and minutes of bilge I've watched this season, a normal person would understand that frustation - however you're not a normal person, you're a very strange person who feels the need to feel superior to people at every opportunity.

 

I've got no desire to feel less or more superior than anyone else, so I'm not sure how you've gleamed that from my guff; I'm surprised that someone like yourself would have an issue with people being different from each other. It'd make for a very grey board if we were all sheep.

 

I'd love for us to play exciting, attacking, vibrant football that wins us trophies and plaudits.

 

However, I don't think it's going to happen anytime soon.

 

If we're going to have a period of cutting our cloth accordingly, I don't see why we need to make a song and dance about it every time we don't play cutting edge football.

 

[mrmojorisin75]

didn't see the match but it seems to be me as usual pardew had the idea right (don't over-commit too early or we might get picked off and be out before we know it) but got the execution wrong again, as he so often does

 

We did some things better than usual, I was quite impressed with some of our passing and attacking.  We actually looked as if we'd done some work on both.

 

before the introduction of ben arfa/marveaux?

I thought we played the ball around well until Shola came on and then after the two you've mentioned came on. The better attacking was with Ben Arfa and Marveaux.

 

that's good to know like, how much of it is down to the opposition do you think? (and you Stu)

 

seems to me some of the best football we've played this season has been against teams who are more open and like to play, we struggle horrendously against teams set up to restrict us  /statingtheobvious

[alpal78]

didn't see the match but it seems to be me as usual pardew had the idea right (don't over-commit too early or we might get picked off and be out before we know it) but got the execution wrong again, as he so often does

 

are you deliberately stirring the pot?

 

"Sorry officer, I didn't see the crime but I know he's done previous so he's probably guilty"

 

We fashioned opportunities to get the second, someone else mentioned the poor decision making in the final third...would probably agree with that although it seems a little harsh on the players.

 

Despite going out to a very good side, it seems as though there are people who genuinely expected them to roll over at SJP and that we could go gung-ho from the off (and keep them from scoring one, or more, for 90minutes). The plan to shorten the game to 20-30minutes and go gung-ho was the smart option and sadly we fell short of the target.

 

Pleased that we made it back to the quarter-finals at our first attempt; would have been pretty tough to have gone out before Xmas.

 

Sorry have not seen anyone advocate that we go "gung-ho from the off". That's just a misrepresentation. Instead I see quite a few saying that we should have adopted a more balanced approach of keeping our shape yet showing some attacking intent to the extent that we used more than just the 20-30 minutes at the end to get the two goals we needed. I'm not sure why this is such a hard concept to grasp and why so many is buying into that if we attack we will surely concede. We only conceded when we went all out in injury time, not when we became more offensive from the 70 minute mark. In fact if anything, once we started attacking, they were pinned back and was less of a threat to us compared to the first half when we sat back and invited pressure. 

[ohmelads]

What is ridiculous and childish about the Pardew debate is the fact that some of those who are firmly in his camp start accusing those of us who are not as being 'haters'.

 

This is pathetic nonsense - how can anyone hate a person unless they know them personally and have had bad experiences with them ? I couldn't give a toss about Pardew as a person and don't have any personal feelings towards him one way or the other but I DO care about his performances as manager of NUFC.

In that respect, I think he is lacking in the qualities necessary to bring any sort of success - and that especially includes entertaining football - to the club.

 

I believe him to be a lower PL/upper Championship manager who has demonstrated his limitations not just at this club, but at the others where he was employed - that is the ONLY basis on which I judge him and I suspect that most of us who are not fans feel the same way.

 

If the board are happy to see us middle/lower part of the table most years and scraping results through negative football, then he'll stay - whether many fans will put up with that over an extended period is another question...

We still need 4 points to be reasonably safe from relegation - if we achieve that it will be interesting to see what happens in the summer both on the transfer front and the manager's position...if we were by any chance to go down, he's out..end of.

 

My ONLY fear about his being sacked is the board's intentions afterwards but I believe that they have done enough in January to allay at least some of the questions a prospective manager would have. They have also given him enough rope to hang himself with the new players......

 

We shall see, but this thread needs to revert to an adult debate about a serious question.

 

Tricky season to judge him on, since we have had our best XI in 1 or 2 games (if at all?) We began the season with a seriously under-strength squad which wasn't his fault and by the time he got the players in the season was gone. The new players also didn't have a pre-season yet some expect them to be playing their best football right away. There are so many examples of top players who took a while to get going after a January transfer, yet people blame this all on Pardew "making them worse" which seems equally childish to me. Much of the criticism for our problems should be directed at the board, who completely f*cked up last summer. I think any manager would have struggled to some extent with that squad, with that many fixtures, and that many injuries.

 

Last season was incredible, with a good slice of luck, and that perhaps landed more praise at his door than was due. But this season has gone the other way; much of it has not been his fault, and I'm not sure all of the criticism is deserved.

 

One excellent season and one terrible one. The jury is still out in my mind. Honestly though, changing manager is a major gamble. Could we do better? Yes. Could we do worse? Definitely. There are loads of iffy managers out there like Souness, Allardyce etc who would be lining up for the post. How many in that line would really be able to take us forwards? Keeping in mind they will be working with the same board who in my view are to blame for most of the current mess.

 

Long story short I think he's worth another season based on his track record, but I am not blind to his shortcomings (negative tactics etc). I just don't think sacking him is worth the gamble, having seen some of the managers we've had in the last 10 years.

[Stu]

Obviously not reading the same threads as me. There were several people whining before the match about Pardew's comments of "keeping it tight until 70mins", apparently this was his "cowardly" way of giving up the tie before we'd even kicked off...

 

Benfica seemed to be set up to try and hit us on the counter (perhaps expecting us to do the 'British' tactic of pouring men forward at home to get level on the tie), they only introduced the 'better' offensive minded players once we'd scored (Cardozo, etc) so who is to say that if we had pushed to score earlier in the game, they wouldn't have brought out the 'big guns' sooner and made our task even more difficult? (either working harder to contain better players from scoring or working harder to score another goal or two if they score)

 

For all of the faults Pardew has, he's done reasonably well in these two legs and in the latter stages of the competition. Lets pick the bones from his carcass when he does things like Brighton (a) x2, rather than when he does a decent job.

[Stu]

What is ridiculous and childish about the Pardew debate is the fact that some of those who are firmly in his camp start accusing those of us who are not as being 'haters'.

 

This is pathetic nonsense - how can anyone hate a person unless they know them personally and have had bad experiences with them ? I couldn't give a toss about Pardew as a person and don't have any personal feelings towards him one way or the other but I DO care about his performances as manager of NUFC.

In that respect, I think he is lacking in the qualities necessary to bring any sort of success - and that especially includes entertaining football - to the club.

 

I believe him to be a lower PL/upper Championship manager who has demonstrated his limitations not just at this club, but at the others where he was employed - that is the ONLY basis on which I judge him and I suspect that most of us who are not fans feel the same way.

 

If the board are happy to see us middle/lower part of the table most years and scraping results through negative football, then he'll stay - whether many fans will put up with that over an extended period is another question...

We still need 4 points to be reasonably safe from relegation - if we achieve that it will be interesting to see what happens in the summer both on the transfer front and the manager's position...if we were by any chance to go down, he's out..end of.

 

My ONLY fear about his being sacked is the board's intentions afterwards but I believe that they have done enough in January to allay at least some of the questions a prospective manager would have. They have also given him enough rope to hang himself with the new players......

 

We shall see, but this thread needs to revert to an adult debate about a serious question.

 

Tricky season to judge him on, since we have had our best XI in 1 or 2 games (if at all?) We began the season with a seriously under-strength squad which wasn't his fault and by the time he got the players in the season was gone. The new players also didn't have a pre-season yet some expect them to be playing their best football right away. There are so many examples of top players who took a while to get going after a January transfer, yet people blame this all on Pardew "making them worse" which seems equally childish to me. Much of the criticism for our problems should be directed at the board, who completely f*cked up last summer. I think any manager would have struggled to some extent with that squad, with that many fixtures, and that many injuries.

 

Last season was incredible, with a good slice of luck, and that perhaps landed more praise at his door than was due. But this season has gone the other way; much of it has not been his fault, and I'm not sure all of the criticism is deserved.

 

One excellent season and one terrible one. The jury is still out in my mind. Honestly though, changing manager is a major gamble. Could we do better? Yes. Could we do worse? Definitely. There are loads of iffy managers out there like Souness, Allardyce etc who would be lining up for the post. How many in that line would really be able to take us forwards? Keeping in mind they will be working with the same board who in my view are to blame for most of the current mess.

 

Long story short I think he's worth another season based on his track record, but I am not blind to his shortcomings (negative tactics etc). I just don't think sacking him is worth the gamble, having seen some of the managers we've had in the last 10 years.

 

[Yorkie]

He needs his signings through the door asap tgis summer , and he needs to sort out pre-season. I still think many of our problems this season have come from another God-awful.pre-season.

[mrmojorisin75]

didn't see the match but it seems to be me as usual pardew had the idea right (don't over-commit too early or we might get picked off and be out before we know it) but got the execution wrong again, as he so often does

 

are you deliberately stirring the pot?

 

"Sorry officer, I didn't see the crime but I know he's done previous so he's probably guilty"

 

We fashioned opportunities to get the second, someone else mentioned the poor decision making in the final third...would probably agree with that although it seems a little harsh on the players.

 

Despite going out to a very good side, it seems as though there are people who genuinely expected them to roll over at SJP and that we could go gung-ho from the off (and keep them from scoring one, or more, for 90minutes). The plan to shorten the game to 20-30minutes and go gung-ho was the smart option and sadly we fell short of the target.

 

Pleased that we made it back to the quarter-finals at our first attempt; would have been pretty tough to have gone out before Xmas.

 

Sorry have not seen anyone advocate that we go "gung-ho from the off". That's just a misrepresentation. Instead I see quite a few saying that we should have adopted a more balanced approach of keeping our shape yet showing some attacking intent to the extent that we used more than just the 20-30 minutes at the end to get the two goals we needed. I'm not sure why this is such a hard concept to grasp and why so many is buying into that if we attack we will surely concede. We only conceded when we went all out in injury time, not when we became more offensive from the 70 minute mark. In fact if anything, once we started attacking, they were pinned back and was less of a threat to us compared to the first half when we sat back and invited pressure. 

 

yeah this is what i meant, from everything i read and hear about the first half he got the balance wrong but as stated i didn't see it

[mrmojorisin75]

Obviously not reading the same threads as me. There were several people whining before the match about Pardew's comments of "keeping it tight until 70mins"

 

not me, totally the right tactic as i said but seemingly the balance wasn't right in the first half at all as from what i understand if they could finish the tie should have been over before 70 mins arrived

[Stu]

Obviously not reading the same threads as me. There were several people whining before the match about Pardew's comments of "keeping it tight until 70mins"

 

not me, totally the right tactic as i said but seemingly the balance wasn't right in the first half at all as from what i understand if they could finish the tie should have been over before 70 mins arrived

 

Probably rode our luck/allowed them a few too many clear chances for a team trying to kill a game off for an hour but, lets be honest, if we could finish then the away tie would have been 2-0/3-1 before Santon's lapse.

 

We're playing in the quarter finals of a European competition. For many of our players, this was the first (and possibly the last) time they've reached this stage - the experience will do the squad the world of good and give them a taste of what they're playing for next season.

 

Felipao suggested playing Marveaux for Bigi in the starting XI but the inference is that Marveaux wasn't fit enough to start (or at least play a full half) - how would we have set up otherwise?

[Yorkie]

I thought his gameplan made a lot of sense, I just thought we should have turned the screw sooner than we did. I also would have had Jonas and Anita as FBs a lot sooner than they actually were (if at all). The majority of our attacks were coming from the right, and Simpson's limitations held us back, even though he put in a decent shift. I was really annoyed when Anita went off, cos the ultra-attacking FBs were huge to us against Fulham. I also thought Bigi's inclusion on the right was needless and a hiding to nothing.

[Yorkie]

 

Felipao suggested playing Marveaux for Bigi in the starting XI but the inference is that Marveaux wasn't fit enough to start (or at least play a full half) - how would we have set up otherwise?

 

I know he's unpopular but I can't fathom why Obertan wasn't even on the bench. I'd have started him instead of Bigi if Marveaux want fit. They were vulnerable to pace in both legs.

[mrmojorisin75]

how the fuck can marveaux not be fit to start a game man?

 

are we talking match fitness here or does he have a slight injury or something?

[Stu]

how the fuck can marveaux not be fit to start a game man?

 

are we talking match fitness here or does he have a slight injury or something?

 

He looked like he'd picked up a knock at the end on Sunday (along with Cabaye) and there was talk in one of the threads that he's not able to handle multiple games in a week. Not sure if that's related to his current knock or just a product of missing such a long time with his muscle injuries but it would stand to reason, rather than Pardew deliberately starting a teenager who hasn't been on the pitch for a while.

[mrmojorisin75]

fair enough, by the way not everything is a dig at pardew you know?  i just wondered rather than assumed pardew chose not to start him

[Wullie]

Disappointed he didn't gamble from the start but I see why. Really needed a creative spark as a result but defended the clean sheet. Pardew still thinks we can play defensively and grind out a result, we can't. This tactic is ironically more of a gamble than attacking one.

 

Surely this negative tactic only drags down the confidence in our defence. Makes it look like he has no confidence in our defenders to get the job done if we play attractive competitive football.

 

I'm not really ranting about pardew today I understand his reasoning for starting a more defensive line up. With fitness levels of marv and benarfa not likely to last the full game we would have been in the s*** had we conceded being hit on the break, but who knows if we had stuck early they might have folded.

 

Pardew has created a culture within the squad that genuinely plays for the shirt, fans and each other. I think the club is closer to the fans than it has been in a long time (definately safe house needed for that comment).A new manager is at risk of losing that..but pardew clearly has no tactical clue and I blame the coaching set up aswell as him.

 

I hope he gets replaced but I am scared at what would follow. At the bare minimum we need a tactical coach to work with pardew carver et al are obviously not up to it.

 

 

I don't think he'd have set up this way had we had Coloccini/Taylor and Santon fit. I think a lot of his thinking was not having a particularly strong back four, and not having his "door openers" available to play much more than half an hour each.

 

Haven't we set up the same way (defensive and hoping to grind out results) pretty much the whole season?

 

We see weaker squads play better football every week. It's all about psychology and inspiring players to push themselves to play better. Just because we have alot of international class professionals doesn't mean they don't need inspiration to push them from time to time or that arm around them to help.

 

That said the players are clearly united with pardew and have bought into what he feeds them. For me it just looks like it's easier for him to play defensive than try to inspire his players mentally to step up.

 

 

If Swansea play the way they do against someone like Benfica next season, I think they'd get ripped apart tbh. I think our best chance of winning the tie tonight with the players available, was the way we set out.

 

That, imho, is bollocks. Swansea may well get seen off for a variety of reasons but because they have the ball a lot more than the other team won't be one of them.

 

And if the only chance we had of winning the game tonight was the way it panned out, 10 mins of pressure out of 90, then we just had no chance, simple as.

 

That's bollocks like. No chance? When Cisse scored there wasn't a person in the ground who wasn't fairly confident we would win it. We were incredibly close.

 

Not for me. ON is of the opinion that the way we approached the game was the best tactically that we could have done. Don't agree with that and my point was, if that was the best approach possible then we weren't ever really in it.

 

Tell me how we could have been better tactically?

 

I wouldn't have started Bigi in the first 45 mins. Sissoko out wide and either Marveaux or Shola would have given us far more bite IMO.

 

I think it's clear Marveaux wasn't fit...and this place had Shola started.

 

Marveaux looked plenty fit to me - and Pardew really shouldn't give a toss about what this place would think about Shola starting tbh.

 

Pardew said post-match that Marveaux struggles with a lot of games in a short space of time, which is why he didn't start tonight.

 

Fine. But why replace him with an inexperienced defensive central midfielder? Do you think teams with no threat going forward are going to worry a team with a poor defence?

 

We didn't want to worry them in the first half ffs. Why poke the bear with a stick when you can get to the hour and try and shoot it instead?

 

What a s*** analogy.

 

We clearly didn't have enough time to beat them in that time, there was a lot of huff and puff and they looked a bit rattled but don't go on like we were unlucky.

 

I wouldn't say we were unlucky necessarily, they were really rattled for a good 15 minutes or so but we picked the wrong ball too often and made too many sloppy passes in good positions. I wasn't interested in being the better side tonight, only in getting through and I thought we gave ourselves the best chance of doing so by playing the way we did.

 

Scoring on 70 minutes was almost scripted, it fitted so perfectly. 2-0 up on 70 minutes with Benfica camped in our half, I'd have written us off, 1-0 up though with the onus on us, I really thought we would nick it late again and I bet so did everyone else. We needed to keep the ball in our court for as long as we could.

 

Although I can sort of see your logic Wullie, coming from you, it is really surprising, that you'd rather be 1-0 up than 2-0 up with 20 minutes to play. To me this reflects that you've  lost all faith in Pardew being able to organize a team to get the right result. If we were 2-0 up, why couldn't we sit deep with fast counter attacks through HBA and Marveux? Plus as many have said, I don't see why we can't defend and still attack at the same time, there has to be a balanced approach not an all or nothing. Had we attacked earlier, we could have got the first goal earlier say in the first half, which would have then given us more time to get the second goal. I don't quite get how anyone can think that the chances of getting a goal in 20 minutes is greater than doing so in 45 minutes. In terms of first half, we wasted the opportunity to attack and get the first goal early. It is also interesting to note that they only hit us on the counter when we were going all out in injury time. I have not seen anyone on this forum saying that we should have gone all out attack in similar fashion from the first minute.

 

Ultimately if this was such a great strategy, it's odd to me that I can't seem to remember any other teams losing 0-2 playing the way we did in the second leg, not in Europa and not in CL. For those defending this strategy, do you think that Pardew just uncovered a masterpiece strategy that eluded the other top managers before him who faced the same position?

 

Not really arsed about what other teams have or haven't done, most of them probably haven't got a load of injuries and a Tyne Wear derby on Sunday meaning extra time would have been extremely bad news (and probably fruitless anyway).

 

Why couldn't we sit deep and counter? Because we can't, we're hopeless at it, we sit deep and leather it as far from goal as we can when we lead. When a team really wants to get a goal, Pardew knows very few ways to stop a barrage of attacks because we can't retain possession. I'm not claiming I've had an epiphany here, simply that given the circumstances, annihilating the game in the first half was the right thing to do.