Guest strongbow69 Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 shola headed the ball forward when cisse was behind him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 The way I see it is as simple as this. Legless Ben Arfa> Shola Ameobi. We could do with Hatem next week, don't you think? Wrap him head to toe in cotton wool AND bubble wrap, for me. What's the difference between this week and next week? We need to win yesterday. We played him for 65 mins today, and he was f***ed. He was more likely to get injured, or concede possession cheaply, than create or score a goal. Take him off and we go again next week with him in the team. Canny simple. No. Just, no. Explain what you believe is wrong in what I've said. I think everything that you've said is incorrect. Even if you were right, which I don't think you are at all, the other player was Shola Ameobi who is always, always going to provide the same, or less. I've said nowt about who he was replaced with, but he needed to come off. He's our best chance of winning next week, and the risk of that not happening by leaving him on was too great. He'd been easily dispossessed and left Simpson exposed at least a couple of times before he was taken off. They were getting an increasing amount of joy from Jarvis down that side. The fact that the sub didn't change that is testament to our wonderful manager, but that's not what I'm arguing. Taking him off was the right thing to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 The way I see it is as simple as this. Legless Ben Arfa> Shola Ameobi. We could do with Hatem next week, don't you think? Wrap him head to toe in cotton wool AND bubble wrap, for me. What's the difference between this week and next week? We need to win yesterday. We played him for 65 mins today, and he was f***ed. He was more likely to get injured, or concede possession cheaply, than create or score a goal. Take him off and we go again next week with him in the team. Canny simple. No. Just, no. Explain what you believe is wrong in what I've said. I think everything that you've said is incorrect. Even if you were right, which I don't think you are at all, the other player was Shola Ameobi who is always, always going to provide the same, or less. I've said nowt about who he was replaced with, but he needed to come off. He's our best chance of winning next week, and the risk of that not happening by leaving him on was too great. He'd been easily dispossessed and left Simpson exposed at least a couple of times before he was taken off. They were getting an increasing amount of joy from Jarvis down that side. The fact that the sub didn't change that is testament to our wonderful manager, but that's not what I'm arguing. Taking him off was the right thing to do. They got even more joy when he went off Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Next paragraph, Hans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 I probably should have read your next sentence like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Next paragraph, Hans. Aye, that was horrific on my part like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 The way I see it is as simple as this. Legless Ben Arfa> Shola Ameobi. We could do with Hatem next week, don't you think? Wrap him head to toe in cotton wool AND bubble wrap, for me. What's the difference between this week and next week? We need to win yesterday. We played him for 65 mins today, and he was f***ed. He was more likely to get injured, or concede possession cheaply, than create or score a goal. Take him off and we go again next week with him in the team. Canny simple. No. Just, no. Explain what you believe is wrong in what I've said. I think everything that you've said is incorrect. Even if you were right, which I don't think you are at all, the other player was Shola Ameobi who is always, always going to provide the same, or less. I've said nowt about who he was replaced with, but he needed to come off. He's our best chance of winning next week, and the risk of that not happening by leaving him on was too great. He'd been easily dispossessed and left Simpson exposed at least a couple of times before he was taken off. They were getting an increasing amount of joy from Jarvis down that side. The fact that the sub didn't change that is testament to our wonderful manager, but that's not what I'm arguing. Taking him off was the right thing to do. It really wasn't like. Next week, this week. It's the same result that's needed and he definitely wasn't tired imo. The replacement negates the 'need' to bring a player off anyway imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 He was more likely to get injured, or concede possession cheaply, than create or score a goal. Pure conjecture stemming from your unrelenting agenda. I'm just not even going to entertain posts like this anymore. Lifting patter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Taking him off was 100 per cent not the right thing to do and I don't know how you can even say that, Inochi. It's just total bollocks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Why not just rest Ben Arfa until the Arsenal game? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 So in his own words we have to win at QPR. If he takes Ben Arfa off when we need a goal in the second half then he deserves death. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 The way I see it is as simple as this. Legless Ben Arfa> Shola Ameobi. We could do with Hatem next week, don't you think? Wrap him head to toe in cotton wool AND bubble wrap, for me. What's the difference between this week and next week? We need to win yesterday. We played him for 65 mins today, and he was f***ed. He was more likely to get injured, or concede possession cheaply, than create or score a goal. Take him off and we go again next week with him in the team. Canny simple. No. Just, no. Explain what you believe is wrong in what I've said. I think everything that you've said is incorrect. Even if you were right, which I don't think you are at all, the other player was Shola Ameobi who is always, always going to provide the same, or less. I've said nowt about who he was replaced with, but he needed to come off. He's our best chance of winning next week, and the risk of that not happening by leaving him on was too great. He'd been easily dispossessed and left Simpson exposed at least a couple of times before he was taken off. They were getting an increasing amount of joy from Jarvis down that side. The fact that the sub didn't change that is testament to our wonderful manager, but that's not what I'm arguing. Taking him off was the right thing to do. It really wasn't like. Next week, this week. It's the same result that's needed and he definitely wasn't tired imo. The replacement negates the 'need' to bring a player off anyway imo. Hmm. There's no positive resolution to this, so best to just leave it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 The way I see it is as simple as this. Legless Ben Arfa> Shola Ameobi. We could do with Hatem next week, don't you think? Wrap him head to toe in cotton wool AND bubble wrap, for me. What's the difference between this week and next week? We need to win yesterday. We played him for 65 mins today, and he was f***ed. He was more likely to get injured, or concede possession cheaply, than create or score a goal. Take him off and we go again next week with him in the team. Canny simple. No. Just, no. Explain what you believe is wrong in what I've said. I think everything that you've said is incorrect. Even if you were right, which I don't think you are at all, the other player was Shola Ameobi who is always, always going to provide the same, or less. I've said nowt about who he was replaced with, but he needed to come off. He's our best chance of winning next week, and the risk of that not happening by leaving him on was too great. He'd been easily dispossessed and left Simpson exposed at least a couple of times before he was taken off. They were getting an increasing amount of joy from Jarvis down that side. The fact that the sub didn't change that is testament to our wonderful manager, but that's not what I'm arguing. Taking him off was the right thing to do. It really wasn't like. Next week, this week. It's the same result that's needed and he definitely wasn't tired imo. The replacement negates the 'need' to bring a player off anyway imo. Hmm. There's no positive resolution to this, so best to just leave it. Didn't look tired to me and even if he was he's more use than the lump who came on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Taking him off was 100 per cent not the right thing to do and I don't know how you can even say that, Inochi. It's just total bollocks. I've given my reasons why, so it's not 'total bollocks'. I worry for anyone who couldn't appreciate the sense in taking off someone who hasn't played 90 minutes in god knows how long, when we have the most important game in our recent history the week after. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnes23 Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Never been so fuming at a game, almost left after 80 mins cos I was just ranting absolute venom. What was the mood like amongst our fans at the game, particularly the attitude towards Pardew? Thought I heard some boos when Ben Arfa was coming off and at the end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 The way I see it is as simple as this. Legless Ben Arfa> Shola Ameobi. We could do with Hatem next week, don't you think? Wrap him head to toe in cotton wool AND bubble wrap, for me. What's the difference between this week and next week? We need to win yesterday. We played him for 65 mins today, and he was f***ed. He was more likely to get injured, or concede possession cheaply, than create or score a goal. Take him off and we go again next week with him in the team. Canny simple. No. Just, no. Explain what you believe is wrong in what I've said. I think everything that you've said is incorrect. Even if you were right, which I don't think you are at all, the other player was Shola Ameobi who is always, always going to provide the same, or less. I've said nowt about who he was replaced with, but he needed to come off. He's our best chance of winning next week, and the risk of that not happening by leaving him on was too great. He'd been easily dispossessed and left Simpson exposed at least a couple of times before he was taken off. They were getting an increasing amount of joy from Jarvis down that side. The fact that the sub didn't change that is testament to our wonderful manager, but that's not what I'm arguing. Taking him off was the right thing to do. It really wasn't like. Next week, this week. It's the same result that's needed and he definitely wasn't tired imo. The replacement negates the 'need' to bring a player off anyway imo. Hmm. There's no positive resolution to this, so best to just leave it. Tbf mate. Even if I agreed that he was tired, in that situation I wouldn't have taken him off for anyone bar maybe Marveaux or possibly Sissoko. I wouldn't take him off for Ameobi at all, ever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfmag Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 There were a few boos and definitely some Pardew haters but a million times less vitriol towards him in games than on here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Taking him off was 100 per cent not the right thing to do and I don't know how you can even say that, Inochi. It's just total bollocks. I've given my reasons why, so it's not 'total bollocks'. I worry for anyone who couldn't appreciate the sense in taking off someone who hasn't played 90 minutes in god knows how long, when we have the most important game in our recent history the week after. You're worried about me? I think I'll get over that, what you're saying is, again, total bollocks when we're in the midst of a relegation battle. He was our main threat until the minute he went off. And then we had no attacking threat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IvanDrago Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Taking him off was 100 per cent not the right thing to do and I don't know how you can even say that, Inochi. It's just total bollocks. I've given my reasons why, so it's not 'total bollocks'. I worry for anyone who couldn't appreciate the sense in taking off someone who hasn't played 90 minutes in god knows how long, when we have the most important game in our recent history the week after. Sorry to chip in mate, but three points against West Ham is worth precisely the same as three points against QPR. West Ham were there for the taking and HBA was a genuine threat at the time. Horrible, horrible decision to take him off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 There were a few boos and definitely some Pardew haters but a million times less vitriol towards him in games than on here. Yep. Thanks largely to the rib-showing wankers that sing songs in worship of Jonas and Ameobi. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 The way I see it is as simple as this. Legless Ben Arfa> Shola Ameobi. We could do with Hatem next week, don't you think? Wrap him head to toe in cotton wool AND bubble wrap, for me. What's the difference between this week and next week? We need to win yesterday. We played him for 65 mins today, and he was f***ed. He was more likely to get injured, or concede possession cheaply, than create or score a goal. Take him off and we go again next week with him in the team. Canny simple. No. Just, no. Explain what you believe is wrong in what I've said. I think everything that you've said is incorrect. Even if you were right, which I don't think you are at all, the other player was Shola Ameobi who is always, always going to provide the same, or less. I've said nowt about who he was replaced with, but he needed to come off. He's our best chance of winning next week, and the risk of that not happening by leaving him on was too great. He'd been easily dispossessed and left Simpson exposed at least a couple of times before he was taken off. They were getting an increasing amount of joy from Jarvis down that side. The fact that the sub didn't change that is testament to our wonderful manager, but that's not what I'm arguing. Taking him off was the right thing to do. It really wasn't like. Next week, this week. It's the same result that's needed and he definitely wasn't tired imo. The replacement negates the 'need' to bring a player off anyway imo. Hmm. There's no positive resolution to this, so best to just leave it. Tbf mate. Even if I agreed that he was tired, in that situation I wouldn't have taken him off for anyone bar maybe Marveaux or possibly Sissoko. I wouldn't take him off for Ameobi at all, ever. This. You'd never take him off given the other options. There's a week til the next game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 I've given my reasons why, so it's not 'total bollocks'. I worry for anyone who couldn't appreciate the sense in taking off someone who hasn't played 90 minutes in god knows how long, when we have the most important game in our recent history the week after. Next week is only so important because we didn't win today and he's been back in training for weeks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Taking him off was 100 per cent not the right thing to do and I don't know how you can even say that, Inochi. It's just total bollocks. I've given my reasons why, so it's not 'total bollocks'. I worry for anyone who couldn't appreciate the sense in taking off someone who hasn't played 90 minutes in god knows how long, when we have the most important game in our recent history the week after. You worry for me? The feeling's mutual tbf. You seem to have the same tomorrow will do attitude that Pardew has. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Never been so fuming at a game, almost left after 80 mins cos I was just ranting absolute venom. What was the mood like amongst our fans at the game, particularly the attitude towards Pardew? Thought I heard some boos when Ben Arfa was coming off and at the end. Brilliant away support today, there was mild discontent with substitutions but we never shut up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts