Jump to content

Alan Pardew


Mike

Recommended Posts

Guest icemanblue

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

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 :lol:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest firetotheworks

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

Guest icemanblue

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

Guest icemanblue

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

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

Guest icemanblue

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

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

Guest firetotheworks

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

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.

 

:lol: 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

Guest IvanDrago

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

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

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

 

 

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

Guest firetotheworks

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

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...