colinmk Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Totally agree with Wullie about Jonas there. His good attributes are screaming out for him to be used in that role rather than a winger. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Jonas offers absolutely nothing in an attacking sense, central midfield would be best, hassling and getting it back would be his game now. Just not in our team thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 At anybody who misunderstands the liabilities we have as NUFC the club and Mike Ashley the sole shareholder. Then that wouldn't be me, please refrain from randomly quoting people and throwing s*** out there as the waters are muddied enough already on this subject. I believe you posted this "So you want us in debt, like under shepherd?" Just reminding you, as NUFC under Shepherd or Ashley we are in debt. There is no difference. Not interest free debt, not debt that saw us owe money on players not even at the club and partial season tickets mortgaged for the ground expansion. Like I say, your post at me just muddies things, doesn't clarify anything, if anything you should be asking Wullie about the debt we owe Ashley and why that doesn't count when looking at what debt we are in. Because he can choose not to call that debt in when we need players desperately like we do now. Do you think debt is just debt? Sorry like but it simply isn't. A debt to your mam is not the same as debt to Barclays, just like a debt to our owner puts us in no financial danger whatsoever, not the slightest bit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Totally agree with Wullie about Jonas there. His good attributes are screaming out for him to be used in that role rather than a winger. He hasn't got the ball retention ability to play there imo. His passing is terrible. Put him there and goals like the first Mackem one last season will be far more common . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 At anybody who misunderstands the liabilities we have as NUFC the club and Mike Ashley the sole shareholder. Then that wouldn't be me, please refrain from randomly quoting people and throwing s*** out there as the waters are muddied enough already on this subject. I believe you posted this "So you want us in debt, like under shepherd?" Just reminding you, as NUFC under Shepherd or Ashley we are in debt. There is no difference. Not interest free debt, not debt that saw us owe money on players not even at the club and partial season tickets mortgaged for the ground expansion. Like I say, your post at me just muddies things, doesn't clarify anything, if anything you should be asking Wullie about the debt we owe Ashley and why that doesn't count when looking at what debt we are in. Because he can choose not to call that debt in when we need players desperately like we do now. Do you think debt is just debt? Sorry like but it simply isn't. A debt to your mam is not the same as debt to Barclays, just like a debt to our owner puts us in no financial danger whatsoever, not the slightest but. And this is why Dontooner needs a word with you, not me. That debt is still on the books if and when we are sold. It doesn't just disappear, I'm sure you mam wouldn't hold it against you if you never paid her back, Ashley will want every penny. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 "One moment of magic from the 26-year-old can turn any match in United's favour and Pardew said" That old moment of magic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Jonas offers absolutely nothing in an attacking sense, central midfield would be best, hassling and getting it back would be his game now. Just not in our team thanks. I would actually want to see him starting in a midfield 3, as the one that links play between Sissoko and Cabaye. I'd have him ahead of Tiote, and since Anita's not getting a look-in, might as well. I think he would actually do very well for us there should we play the 433 consistently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Totally agree with Wullie about Jonas there. His good attributes are screaming out for him to be used in that role rather than a winger. He hasn't got the ball retention ability to play there imo. His passing is terrible. Put him there and goals like the first Mackem one last season will be far more common . Yes, i think it's more of a, where he's least crap. Than where he's best tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 It's sad that as a fanbase so many of us care so much about the finances of the club these days. There's so little else to cling to, it's pathetic. 'But at least we make a profit!' Fuck me. What about the football? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 At anybody who misunderstands the liabilities we have as NUFC the club and Mike Ashley the sole shareholder. Then that wouldn't be me, please refrain from randomly quoting people and throwing s*** out there as the waters are muddied enough already on this subject. I believe you posted this "So you want us in debt, like under shepherd?" Just reminding you, as NUFC under Shepherd or Ashley we are in debt. There is no difference. Not interest free debt, not debt that saw us owe money on players not even at the club and partial season tickets mortgaged for the ground expansion. Like I say, your post at me just muddies things, doesn't clarify anything, if anything you should be asking Wullie about the debt we owe Ashley and why that doesn't count when looking at what debt we are in. Because he can choose not to call that debt in when we need players desperately like we do now. Do you think debt is just debt? Sorry like but it simply isn't. A debt to your mam is not the same as debt to Barclays, just like a debt to our owner puts us in no financial danger whatsoever, not the slightest but. And this is why Dontooner needs a word with you, not me. That debt is still on the books if and when we are sold. It doesn't just disappear, I'm sure you mam wouldn't hold it against you if you never paid her back, Ashley will want every penny. I never said it disappeared, in fact I specifically said it didn't disappear so he needn't be desperately trying to claw it back to the detriment of this season's football team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Fuck the money, show me some football that gives me a hard on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Totally agree with Wullie about Jonas there. His good attributes are screaming out for him to be used in that role rather than a winger. He hasn't got the ball retention ability to play there imo. His passing is terrible. Put him there and goals like the first Mackem one last season will be far more common . Completely disagree there tbh. He can retain the ball in tight situations where he has to release it quick. It's when he has long stretches of grass on the wing, and has to provide some kind of end product that he's useless. His short passing isn't bad at all! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 It's sad that as a fanbase so many of us care so much about the finances of the club these days. There's so little else to cling to, it's pathetic. 'But at least we make a profit!' Fuck me. What about the football? Maybe the fans just aren't as thick as they once were? Ignorance a redeeming feature now in football? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 It's sad that as a fanbase so many of us care so much about the finances of the club these days. There's so little else to cling to, it's pathetic. 'But at least we make a profit!' Fuck me. What about the football? Because Leeds. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 At anybody who misunderstands the liabilities we have as NUFC the club and Mike Ashley the sole shareholder. Then that wouldn't be me, please refrain from randomly quoting people and throwing s*** out there as the waters are muddied enough already on this subject. I believe you posted this "So you want us in debt, like under shepherd?" Just reminding you, as NUFC under Shepherd or Ashley we are in debt. There is no difference. Not interest free debt, not debt that saw us owe money on players not even at the club and partial season tickets mortgaged for the ground expansion. Like I say, your post at me just muddies things, doesn't clarify anything, if anything you should be asking Wullie about the debt we owe Ashley and why that doesn't count when looking at what debt we are in. Because he can choose not to call that debt in when we need players desperately like we do now. Do you think debt is just debt? Sorry like but it simply isn't. A debt to your mam is not the same as debt to Barclays, just like a debt to our owner puts us in no financial danger whatsoever, not the slightest but. And this is why Dontooner needs a word with you, not me. That debt is still on the books if and when we are sold. It doesn't just disappear, I'm sure you mam wouldn't hold it against you if you never paid her back, Ashley will want every penny. I never said it disappeared, in fact I specifically said it didn't disappear so he needn't be desperately trying to claw it back to the detriment of this season's football team. If he doesn't he'll never sell. You want him for life? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Away Toon Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I think that Jonas could play the Tiote role, it would be worth trying anyhow, or should have been tried in pre season. As a defensive wideman he also serves a purpose, doubling up with the fullback against someone like Navas for example. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 At anybody who misunderstands the liabilities we have as NUFC the club and Mike Ashley the sole shareholder. Then that wouldn't be me, please refrain from randomly quoting people and throwing s*** out there as the waters are muddied enough already on this subject. I believe you posted this "So you want us in debt, like under shepherd?" Just reminding you, as NUFC under Shepherd or Ashley we are in debt. There is no difference. Not interest free debt, not debt that saw us owe money on players not even at the club and partial season tickets mortgaged for the ground expansion. Like I say, your post at me just muddies things, doesn't clarify anything, if anything you should be asking Wullie about the debt we owe Ashley and why that doesn't count when looking at what debt we are in. Because he can choose not to call that debt in when we need players desperately like we do now. Do you think debt is just debt? Sorry like but it simply isn't. A debt to your mam is not the same as debt to Barclays, just like a debt to our owner puts us in no financial danger whatsoever, not the slightest but. And this is why Dontooner needs a word with you, not me. That debt is still on the books if and when we are sold. It doesn't just disappear, I'm sure you mam wouldn't hold it against you if you never paid her back, Ashley will want every penny. I never said it disappeared, in fact I specifically said it didn't disappear so he needn't be desperately trying to claw it back to the detriment of this season's football team. If he doesn't he'll never sell. You want him for life? Not really but I'm infinitely more arsed about this season's/next season's/the season after's team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I think that Jonas could play the Tiote role, it would be worth trying anyhow, or should have been tried in pre season. As a defensive wideman he also serves a purpose, doubling up with the fullback against someone like Navas for example. Just, No. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Haris Vuckic Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 It's sad that as a fanbase so many of us care so much about the finances of the club these days. There's so little else to cling to, it's pathetic. 'But at least we make a profit!' f*** me. What about the football? Because Leeds. That doesn't justify the extreme & negligent austerity Ashley has placed on the clubs recruitment policy. But I'm not suggesting you're saying it does... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Away Toon Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Well if he's fit he will be on Monday whether we like it or not, and Santon is going to need all the help he can. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Well if he's fit he will be on Monday whether we like it or not, and Santon is going to need all the help he can. But this is the point. We can't afford to have a player in a wide position who offers the grand total sum of nowt in attack, just to protect Santon. It's this very attitude that Pardew has that loses these types of games before a ball has been kicked. We are NUFC, a top flight outfit ffs. It's not as if we are 4 divisions below Man City. We should never go into games with this fear in mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 At anybody who misunderstands the liabilities we have as NUFC the club and Mike Ashley the sole shareholder. Then that wouldn't be me, please refrain from randomly quoting people and throwing s*** out there as the waters are muddied enough already on this subject. I believe you posted this "So you want us in debt, like under shepherd?" Just reminding you, as NUFC under Shepherd or Ashley we are in debt. There is no difference. Not interest free debt, not debt that saw us owe money on players not even at the club and partial season tickets mortgaged for the ground expansion. Like I say, your post at me just muddies things, doesn't clarify anything, if anything you should be asking Wullie about the debt we owe Ashley and why that doesn't count when looking at what debt we are in. Because he can choose not to call that debt in when we need players desperately like we do now. Do you think debt is just debt? Sorry like but it simply isn't. A debt to your mam is not the same as debt to Barclays, just like a debt to our owner puts us in no financial danger whatsoever, not the slightest but. And this is why Dontooner needs a word with you, not me. That debt is still on the books if and when we are sold. It doesn't just disappear, I'm sure you mam wouldn't hold it against you if you never paid her back, Ashley will want every penny. I never said it disappeared, in fact I specifically said it didn't disappear so he needn't be desperately trying to claw it back to the detriment of this season's football team. If he doesn't he'll never sell. You want him for life? Not really but I'm infinitely more arsed about this season's/next season's/the season after's team. We all do, and as I said yesterday we all want the same don't we? Just I've given up on us doing anything meaningful while he's here and any move which puts him closer to the door is a step in the right direction for me. I'm close to taking another relegation, only I'm not entirely sure he'd leave then either (like last time) The goal is to stay in the division, for year i fought that opinion on here, i though we had a slither of ambition but we don't, its so fucking obvious now I'm ashamed i never saw it, so in the meantime 12-17th placed finishes and early exits in cups till around 2020 is what we've got to look forward to, hopefully by then we owe him nothing and all its about is him getting his initial outlay back. I'm 100% certain if he said I want £150m for the club, no debts, clean sale we'd be sold within a week but with nearly the same again added on in loans to him no one is going to go near us, that's almost what Liverpool cost a global brand on a different scale to us in world football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I think that Jonas could play the Tiote role, it would be worth trying anyhow, or should have been tried in pre season. As a defensive wideman he also serves a purpose, doubling up with the fullback against someone like Navas for example. Just, No. Agreed but that's exactly what he'll be doing Monday night. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dontooner Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 At anybody who misunderstands the liabilities we have as NUFC the club and Mike Ashley the sole shareholder. Then that wouldn't be me, please refrain from randomly quoting people and throwing s*** out there as the waters are muddied enough already on this subject. I believe you posted this "So you want us in debt, like under shepherd?" Just reminding you, as NUFC under Shepherd or Ashley we are in debt. There is no difference. Not interest free debt, not debt that saw us owe money on players not even at the club and partial season tickets mortgaged for the ground expansion. Like I say, your post at me just muddies things, doesn't clarify anything, if anything you should be asking Wullie about the debt we owe Ashley and why that doesn't count when looking at what debt we are in. Ashley owns the 100% of the Shares of the club and the debt as well. How could increasing interest liabilities for his own asset be any good for him. He is not going write the debt off with goodwill like most companies do with bad debt or bad acquisitions. The hobbied billionaires are doing is for Chelsea, ManCity etc. When we sell the club, we might not owe "debt that saw us owe money on players not even at the club and partial season tickets mortgaged for the ground expansion" but we will still be in other kinds debts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Haris Vuckic Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 He played his best game last season at full back mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts