Howaythelads Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 trust me,with roeder he will play moore as cb the first game he is back.. If it meant Moore coming in for Ramage, and Ramage replacing Baba as the left-back - and i'd be OK with that. We've got enough firepower from midfield to not need another sprightly wing-back... Ramage is good from a defensive side of things. Far better than Babayaro. (Nobby --- Taylor --- Moore --- Ramage) Ramage has proven to be totally inept at LB. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 After Mourinho brought in 3 first teamer subs, should we surrender our working formula and try to win a game with more offensive play? Course we fucking should. I want to see us win the game, not sit back and watch them attack us. They had won the moment Drogba entered the field while we had no fresh legs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 trust me,with roeder he will play moore as cb the first game he is back.. If it meant Moore coming in for Ramage, and Ramage replacing Baba as the left-back - and i'd be OK with that. We've got enough firepower from midfield to not need another sprightly wing-back... Ramage is good from a defensive side of things. Far better than Babayaro. (Nobby --- Taylor --- Moore --- Ramage) Ramage has proven to be totally inept at LB. From an attacking point of view, yes. But he is far superior defensively to Baba - which is what i feel is the most important thing. We need our four best defenders in our defense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karjala Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 Played the wrong formation - shuda gone 4-4-2 and played as Everton did at them at the weekend, didnt look at all like scoring in the 2nd half, almost like we were playing for the nil nil After about 55 mins i was thinking "we are playing for pens" then i spent 10mins trying to convince myself, we couldnt be as there was 35mins left, plus 30mins Extra Time (possibly over an hour), but it still looked like we were playing for pens, barring that Dyer half chance, there were no shots on a very dodgy keepr. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gemmill Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 After Mourinho brought in 3 first teamer subs, should we surrender our working formula and try to win a game with more offensive play? Course we fucking should. I want to see us win the game, not sit back and watch them attack us. They had won the moment Drogba entered the field while we had no fresh legs. We had fuck all on the bench tbh mate. Their bench pissed all over what we had on the pitch never mind what we had on the bench. It was less to do with fresh legs than it was to do with quality. Might have give us a slight lift, but realistically we were never scoring tonight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikon Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 Why the F*** didn't we get a pen for the f***ing blatent push on Sib as well. You think that should of been a penalty? No way in hell that was a penalty...If you meant that situation when he got pushed in the back and threw himself on the ground..Was it Carvalho who pushed him a "little" ?? But when you consider what free-kicks they got... yes i agree that they got many silly freekicks. But if we would of got a penalty for the push against sibierski it would of been an even worser decision by the referee than those freekicks chelsea got all the time..Thrust me, i was pissed of wit the ref. But it still shouldn't been a penalty for that little push Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 After Mourinho brought in 3 first teamer subs, should we surrender our working formula and try to win a game with more offensive play? Course we f***ing should. I want to see us win the game, not sit back and watch them attack us. They had won the moment Drogba entered the field while we had no fresh legs. I said the same at 0-0. He should have taken Parker off early in the second half (given that he'd selected him) for Sibierski and gone 4-4-2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 trust me,with roeder he will play moore as cb the first game he is back.. If it meant Moore coming in for Ramage, and Ramage replacing Baba as the left-back - and i'd be OK with that. We've got enough firepower from midfield to not need another sprightly wing-back... Ramage is good from a defensive side of things. Far better than Babayaro. (Nobby --- Taylor --- Moore --- Ramage) Ramage has proven to be totally inept at LB. From an attacking point of view, yes. But he is far superior defensively to Baba - which is what i feel is the most important thing. We need our four best defenders in our defense. I don't think he is, mate. When I say inept, I mean inept. He is hopeless at LB. Completely hopeles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 After Mourinho brought in 3 first teamer subs, should we surrender our working formula and try to win a game with more offensive play? Course we f***ing should. I want to see us win the game, not sit back and watch them attack us. They had won the moment Drogba entered the field while we had no fresh legs. We had F*** all on the bench tbh mate. Their bench pissed all over what we had on the pitch never mind what we had on the bench. It was less to do with fresh legs than it was to do with quality. Might have give us a slight lift, but realistically we were never scoring tonight. Disagree. Sibierski would have been a good impact player. He has been playing very good football of late, and he woul dhave given Martins a partner - which he so desperately needed. We were effectively playing with 10 men in the swecond half, because Martins could do absolutely nothing. There was Rossi aswell, who would certainly injected us with something, as he so has done whenever i've seen him play. I thought he would have been perfect to come on for Dyer, who was invisible. Absolutely nothing was happening for us in that second half - we needed something to reignite the spark. I dare say Rossi (or Rossi and Sibi) would have done that. I don't actually think it was the quality that mattered. It's the fact that players like Sibierski make a team. He ain't great - but he just makes us click at times. He should definitely have been brought on by the 60th minute or so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 After Mourinho brought in 3 first teamer subs, should we surrender our working formula and try to win a game with more offensive play? Course we f***ing should. I want to see us win the game, not sit back and watch them attack us. They had won the moment Drogba entered the field while we had no fresh legs. We had F*** all on the bench tbh mate. Their bench pissed all over what we had on the pitch never mind what we had on the bench. It was less to do with fresh legs than it was to do with quality. Might have give us a slight lift, but realistically we were never scoring tonight. Bollocks. We had Luque, didn't we? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nazza06 Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 if i had been Roeder tonight i would have taken dyer off for Rossi, put rossi on the left and Milner on the right, brought sibierski on for Parker and shoved him upfront. I wouldn't have left it til the 86th minute neither, i would have done it on about 60minutes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Morph Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 jus got back. GG to all the lads up in lvl 7, great atmosphere and variety of chants. Have to get myself up there more often! As for the game, just me, or did Robben dive? And Martins shot was awesome, shame the linesman was well behind play. Well played Newcastle. Now we can concentrate on the league. Oh and as for the Chelsea fans, Jesus Christ. What a bunch of fags. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 if i had been Roeder tonight i would have taken dyer off for Rossi, put rossi on the left and Milner on the right, brought sibierski on for Parker and shoved him upfront. I wouldn't have left it til the 86th minute neither, i would have done it on about 60minutes. Exactly my thoughts come the 61st minute or so, until the end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 It made 1 thing dam clear, Martins needs much closer support! A 4-3-3 may use 3 strikers but they are to wide spread, a 4-4-2 is by far our better formation with a man much closer to Martins. Emre could have played wide left with ease with Milner wide right and Butt holding CM with Parker pushing on. Dyer and Martins or Sib and Martins uptop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delima Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 Course we f***ing should. I want to see us win the game, not sit back and watch them attack us. They had won the moment Drogba entered the field while we had no fresh legs. They attacked us yes, but their attacks were largely ineffective, due to the doubl shield of Butt and Parker. It is insane if you think we have smaller chance to lose the game with the likes of Drogba, Lampard and Ballack on the field. It's not easy to win a game against Chelsea. And it's just silly if we lose the game by naively trying to win the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newcastle Fan Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 FFS he couldve thrown luque on,at least rest a first team player and try him,we were heading one way wich is defeat,we never looked like scoring,maybe he couldve done something,ANYTHING Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 It's not easy to win a game against Chelsea. And it's just silly if we lose the game by naively trying to win the game. Trying to win a game. I agree - how naive can you get? :roll: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest smoggeordie Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!! http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/2373/vlcsnap189521iw9.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leazes1986 Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 I would have more faith in Pattison doing something than Luque. Thankfully Luque will be a long way away in a months time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Geordie Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 4-5-1 was never gonna work tonight - clearly Sibierski must have been carrying a knock, otherwise he would have started/come on earlier. Our limited options cost us tonight, but in saying that - the back 4 were excellent I feel. We have a long-term partnership in the making here, with Taylor and Ramage. They should be given a chance to develop further, even when Bramble and Moore become fit again. They are surely earning their chance ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 It's a cup tie. I'd sooner we lose while trying to win than lose playing for a draw. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 What good would it have been playing for a draw, some may not rate Roeder but he is not stupid enough to have wanted a 0-0 at FT, to have then had to play an extra 30 mins, not with the schudule we have over the crimbo period. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delima Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 Trying to win a game. I agree - how naive can you get? :roll: Naively trying to win the game. Read properly. You should recognise the word NAIVE. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikon Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!! http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/2373/vlcsnap189521iw9.jpg The hole ball needs to be over (or?)..And that one was not, not going by that picture anyway.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 Is the whole ball has to be over or more than half the ball ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now