Cajun Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 is it 3-3 ? I realise the bigger picture is beyond you ..... Aye because we really should have to score 4 goals to win a game :lol: :lol: Don't expect that one to register. No, he can see the bigger picture. The one where we win games 5-4 I explained the shape of the team. Keep possession first. I'm not surprised you don't understand. Oh right so our defence wasn't shit today and we dont need new defenders... lets see now, we were possibly the better team until the first goal went in, then missed a penalty ....... This sort of thing didn't happen when we had Shearer and Bellamy, still we have replaced them haven't we ? So we didn't concede 4 goals because of the defence? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Just give up Jon. You're wasting your time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bellers Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 is it 3-3 ? I realise the bigger picture is beyond you ..... Aye because we really should have to score 4 goals to win a game :lol: :lol: Don't expect that one to register. No, he can see the bigger picture. The one where we win games 5-4 I explained the shape of the team. Keep possession first. I'm not surprised you don't understand. Oh right so our defence wasn't shit today and we dont need new defenders... lets see now, we were possibly the better team until the first goal went in, then missed a penalty ....... This sort of thing didn't happen when we had Shearer and Bellamy, still we have replaced them haven't we ? So we didn't concede 4 goals because of the defence? FFS lads we're wasteful up front and piss-poor at the back, we need to strengthen one area as much as the other... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Just give up Jon. You're wasting your time. Just trying to work out why Manchester United with their great attacking players like Giggs, Beckham, Scholes, Ronaldo, Rooney, Saha, Van Nistlerooy etc bothered to spend so much on the defence when they clearly didnt need to? Maybe Ferguson is a mug all along! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Just give up Jon. You're wasting your time. What he said. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Just give up Jon. You're wasting your time. As I said, it didn't happen when we had Shearer and Bellamy up front. Care to explain how not ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Just give up Jon. You're wasting your time. As I said, it didn't happen when we had Shearer and Bellamy up front. Care to explain how not ? They use their magic powers..? So Chelsea conceeding and struggling now is nothing to do with the fact that they have lost John Terry even though Drogba is still there? I think I will give up, its like trying to explain to a kid that the teenage mutant ninja turtles arent real "but but i saw them on that film bluecry.gif " Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 9 defenders for 4 positions is actually plenty of defenders. We're having exceptional injuries right now. 3 strikers ( one of whom isn't PL standard anyway ) for 2 positions looks more than slightly thinner resources to me. As has been said time and time again, it's easier to get players to fill in at the back than it is to get someone to score goals. So you ignored my point including Dyer et all but you will include Bernard who hasn't and isn't likely to play for us this season or ever again? What a joke! Eh? Ignored? WFT is the matter with you, man? Dyer is NOT a forward. Bernard IS a defender. You can argue against that all you like....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Tbh, our loss today can't be blamed on the fact that we weren't clinical enough in front of goals. We didn't have ONE clear cut chance, bar the penalty that is. We had a few chances here and there but never one that you would expect one of our attackers to score, again excluding the penalty. We just didn't create one clear cut chance. We were passing the ball in their half, true, but couldn't create the chance. Whether that's to be blamed on the lack of movement from our strikers, lack of vision/patience from our midfielders, lack of support from our midfielders, I don't know. Could be a number of factors. Fact is, however, we couldn't defend from the set-pieces. That can only be improved through organization and communication. Even the shittiest of defenders can be coached to defend a set-piece (see Bolton) and the best of defenders can be shite at defending them (see Liverpool last season). It's just down to coaching in this case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 9 defenders for 4 positions is actually plenty of defenders. We're having exceptional injuries right now. 3 strikers ( one of whom isn't PL standard anyway ) for 2 positions looks more than slightly thinner resources to me. As has been said time and time again, it's easier to get players to fill in at the back than it is to get someone to score goals. So you ignored my point including Dyer et all but you will include Bernard who hasn't and isn't likely to play for us this season or ever again? What a joke! Eh? Ignored? WFT is the matter with you, man? Dyer is NOT a forward. Bernard IS a defender. You can argue against that all you like....... He is as much a forward as Huntington is a left back, Bernard will not ever play for us so how the hell can you include him in your list? I may aswell include Shearer as a striker, he has more chance of playing for us any time soon than Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 He is as much a forward as Huntington is a left back, Bernard will not ever play for us so how the hell can you include him in your list? I may aswell include Shearer as a striker, he has more chance of playing for us any time soon than Bernard Give up, lifes too short. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 is it 3-3 ? I realise the bigger picture is beyond you ..... Aye because we really should have to score 4 goals to win a game :lol: :lol: Don't expect that one to register. No, he can see the bigger picture. The one where we win games 5-4 I explained the shape of the team. Keep possession first. I'm not surprised you don't understand. Oh right so our defence wasn't shit today and we dont need new defenders... lets see now, we were possibly the better team until the first goal went in, then missed a penalty ....... This sort of thing didn't happen when we had Shearer and Bellamy, still we have replaced them haven't we ? So we didn't concede 4 goals because of the defence? So you understand ( correctly, surprisingly ) that better fullbacks would give us a better attacking flow to our game which may result in us scoring more goals, yet you blame the conceding of goals purely on the defenders.... Good one, even for you, Jon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 is it 3-3 ? I realise the bigger picture is beyond you ..... Aye because we really should have to score 4 goals to win a game :lol: :lol: Don't expect that one to register. No, he can see the bigger picture. The one where we win games 5-4 I explained the shape of the team. Keep possession first. I'm not surprised you don't understand. Oh right so our defence wasn't shit today and we dont need new defenders... lets see now, we were possibly the better team until the first goal went in, then missed a penalty ....... This sort of thing didn't happen when we had Shearer and Bellamy, still we have replaced them haven't we ? So we didn't concede 4 goals because of the defence? So you understand ( correctly, surprisingly ) that better fullbacks would give us a better attacking flow to our game which may result in us scoring more goals, yet you blame the conceding of goals purely on the defenders.... Good one, even for you, Jon. Well did our full backs (left back especially) give us an attacking flow or did we get raped down the left side? So is this a problem with defence? Yeah I thought so. We can't defence set pieces, attacker problem tbh! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 9 defenders for 4 positions is actually plenty of defenders. We're having exceptional injuries right now. 3 strikers ( one of whom isn't PL standard anyway ) for 2 positions looks more than slightly thinner resources to me. As has been said time and time again, it's easier to get players to fill in at the back than it is to get someone to score goals. So you ignored my point including Dyer et all but you will include Bernard who hasn't and isn't likely to play for us this season or ever again? What a joke! Eh? Ignored? WFT is the matter with you, man? Dyer is NOT a forward. Bernard IS a defender. You can argue against that all you like....... He is as much a forward as Huntington is a left back, Bernard will not ever play for us so how the hell can you include him in your list? I may aswell include Shearer as a striker, he has more chance of playing for us any time soon than Bernard Sigh Read the post above yours from XVentura. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 is it 3-3 ? I realise the bigger picture is beyond you ..... Aye because we really should have to score 4 goals to win a game :lol: :lol: Don't expect that one to register. No, he can see the bigger picture. The one where we win games 5-4 I explained the shape of the team. Keep possession first. I'm not surprised you don't understand. Oh right so our defence wasn't shit today and we dont need new defenders... lets see now, we were possibly the better team until the first goal went in, then missed a penalty ....... This sort of thing didn't happen when we had Shearer and Bellamy, still we have replaced them haven't we ? So we didn't concede 4 goals because of the defence? So you understand ( correctly, surprisingly ) that better fullbacks would give us a better attacking flow to our game which may result in us scoring more goals, yet you blame the conceding of goals purely on the defenders.... Good one, even for you, Jon. Well did our full backs (left back especially) give us an attacking flow or did we get raped down the left side? So is this a problem with defence? Yeah I thought so. We can't defence set pieces, attacker problem tbh! FFS Yes, we have problems in defence, we need better defenders, nobody has said we don't. But we need strikers more, we need to put more pressure on the opposition to stop THEM putting too much pressure on ours. It is EASIER to get someone to fill in at LB than it is to get someone to put the ball into their net. What is hard to understand about that? Teams that don't score goals end up getting relegated, scoring goals is the most difficult thing in the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 If you show me where I said we don't need strikers then I will agree I was wrong, the fact NE5 claims we have plenty of defenders is where I need to laugh and the fact that there are posts trying to claim if we had Shearer and Bellamy we wouldnt have conceeded 4 today made me laugh a little more, trying to absolve blame from our defence Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 If you show me where I said we don't need strikers then I will agree I was wrong, the fact NE5 claims we have plenty of defenders is where I need to laugh and the fact that there are posts trying to claim if we had Shearer and Bellamy we wouldnt have conceeded 4 today made me laugh a little more, trying to absolve blame from our defence :roll: Whether you rate them or not, believe they will play or not, the fact is the staff list of Newcastle United PLC shows that the club employs plenty of defenders and not many strikers. I listed them earlier. We have injuries across the squad, but the defence is currently hit hardest in terms of numbers. It takes injuries to more defenders to give us a problem than it does to strikers. Michael Owen is the clubs only proven quality PL striker, Martins looks as though he will turn out to be a second, but those two are all we have. The main backup, Ameobi is also crocked long term. With just Owen being injured we have struggled for goals all season, if Martins is injured we will struggle even more to score goals. Teams that don't score goals get relegated. I will tell you again that it is easier to fill gaps at the back than it is to get someone to score goals. After saying that I do realise that the predicament in our defence today is extreme. We need a quality striker first, we also need a LB and then another striker imo. Depending now on the injury to Ramage and the recovery status of the injured defenders we may need a CB as well. The money is not unlimited but the Board will once again do their best at backing the manager, I'm sure. If we don't bring in strikers in January in favour of spending all of the money on defenders the club is gambling on the fitness of Martins for the rest of the season. This may be ok with you, but it's a gamble nevertheless and I don't like it. Don't slag the Board if they do this and then Martins is injured. We could always put Parker up front, eh. Despite what people may want to believe I rarely become annoyed by what I read on this forum, it's more of an amusement to me than an annoyance. With respect to you, I think your posts are normally funny but you're pissing me off now with this shit you're posting and I've got other things to do that are more important than try to explain the obvious to you. Again. You can have the last word because I'm off oot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 If we don't buy a forward and Martins gets injured then the board are wide open to criticism, they are the ones who splashed £17million on an injury prone Owen, they are the ones who splashed £8million on Boumsong, they are the ones who splashed £9.5million on Luque who currently rots in the reserves And before the managers get the blame for this, they appointed the managers and they signed the cheques. You reap what you sow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Ahhh pity you didn't explain where I said we didn't need a striker though... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Ahhh pity you didn't explain where I said we didn't need a striker though... It's in your head you mong, you were thinking it. bluebiggrin.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Ahhh pity you didn't explain where I said we didn't need a striker though... It's in your head you mong, you were thinking it. bluebiggrin.gif Thank you, thats all I wanted, an answer! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Ahhh pity you didn't explain where I said we didn't need a striker though... It's in your head you mong, you were thinking it. bluebiggrin.gif Thank you, thats all I wanted, an answer! I'm just glad that I could help. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Ahhh pity you didn't explain where I said we didn't need a striker though... Ahhh pity you didn't explain where I said you said we didn't need a striker though... I understand your position to be that you think new defenders is a priority, unless all this banging on and on and on you've been doing about fullbacks means you don't think we need to sign any. Correct me if that's wrong and in fact you want the shit Board to buy an entire new back four and new strikers. I have said a new striker is a priority, followed by a LB then another striker. I think that's pretty clear. I live in the real world, so I understand that the money is not unlimited and that a buying a quality striker may leave us short of funds to strengthen at the back. You don't appear to appreciate that if the club puts defenders first they may be unable to bring in any new strikers of the quality required, given that they generally cost more than defenders. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 So Mick was right. We need a new striker but we should try to get someone like Viduka in because he will be cheap and it will possibly leave us with some money for a defender or 2. We shouldn't be going out and spending all of our budget on someone who will kick up a fuss as soon as they have to spend time on the bench. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 So Mick was right. We need a new striker but we should try to get someone like Viduka in because he will be cheap and it will possibly leave us with some money for a defender or 2. We shouldn't be going out and spending all of our budget on someone who will kick up a fuss as soon as they have to spend time on the bench. :roll: 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