Guest optimistic nit Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 my opinion we've got a fucking good first team in every position bar left back and centre back who are god awful and passable in that order. our problem is in the back rooms, something that is much more difficult to rectify. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bramble OG Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Keep: Given Harper Krul Solano Taylor Gooch Edgar Huntington Milner Emre Butt N'zogbia Pattison Dyer Owen Martins Ameobi Sell: Bramble Moore Babayaro Carr Parker Duff Sell DUFF and PARKER but keep PATTISON? ok Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest optimistic nit Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 the man has a point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Harper - lacks ambition, makes life easy for Shay, not even that good of a 'keeper, would rather put a youngster on his wages, at least he'd show more ambition. Carr - fat parasite Babayaro - another parasite Ramage - shite Bramble - fuck for brains Butt - getting on now, will be on big wages, pretty shite tbh Emre - headless chicken who creates nowt and doesn't score many, awful free-kicks and corners, big wages, always crocked, and a racist mutherfucker Dyer - massive wages, always a risk of breaking down, goes missing in the big games, or whenever he opens his big fat gob prior to a match Luque - hasn't had any luck, Roeder clearly hates him, deserves a better club, wants out anyway Pattison - shite O'Brien - shite Duff - shite, massive wages Sibierski - shite, getting on now Owen - crock, massive wages, unsure as to whether he would work with Martins Get rid of them all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nguyen Van Falk Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Keep: Given Harper Krul Solano Taylor Gooch Edgar Huntington Milner Emre Butt N'zogbia Pattison Dyer Owen Martins Ameobi Sell: Bramble Moore Babayaro Carr Parker Duff Sell DUFF and PARKER but keep PATTISON? ok Pattison is 20 and on a low wage. You could probably have 30 Pattisons for Parkers wage! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bramble OG Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Harper - lacks ambition, makes life easy for Shay, not even that good of a 'keeper, would rather put a youngster on his wages, at least he'd show more ambition. Carr - fat parasite Babayaro - another parasite Ramage - s**** Bramble - f*** for brains Butt - getting on now, will be on big wages, pretty s**** tbh Emre - headless chicken who creates nowt and doesn't score many, awful free-kicks and corners, big wages, always crocked, and a racist mutherfucker Dyer - massive wages, always a risk of breaking down, goes missing in the big games, or whenever he opens his big fat gob prior to a match Luque - hasn't had any luck, Roeder clearly hates him, deserves a better club, wants out anyway Pattison - s**** O'Brien - s**** Duff - s****, massive wages Sibierski - s****, getting on now Owen - crock, massive wages, unsure as to whether he would work with Martins Get rid of them all. Agree with all but Dyer and Owen, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest triggy99 Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 luque deserves a better club? hes rubbish and shud be playin for a team like sunderland Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bramble OG Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Keep: Given Harper Krul Solano Taylor Gooch Edgar Huntington Milner Emre Butt N'zogbia Pattison Dyer Owen Martins Ameobi Sell: Bramble Moore Babayaro Carr Parker Duff Sell DUFF and PARKER but keep PATTISON? ok Pattison is 20 and on a low wage. You could probably have 30 Pattisons for Parkers wage! Id rather have no Pattison and no wages. Agree with Parker and Duff just seemed a strange decision. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nguyen Van Falk Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Keep: Given Harper Krul Solano Taylor Gooch Edgar Huntington Milner Emre Butt N'zogbia Pattison Dyer Owen Martins Ameobi Sell: Bramble Moore Babayaro Carr Parker Duff Sell DUFF and PARKER but keep PATTISON? ok Pattison is 20 and on a low wage. You could probably have 30 Pattisons for Parkers wage! Id rather have no Pattison and no wages. Agree with Parker and Duff just seemed a strange decision. Well I didn't point out what role he would play. Obviously not a first teamer by any standards. Would pretty much get rid of anyone on a high wage they don't earn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Harper - lacks ambition, makes life easy for Shay, not even that good of a 'keeper, would rather put a youngster on his wages, at least he'd show more ambition. I can't see any problem with Harper, he's done very little wrong and has been unlucky that Given has walked straight back into the team when free from injury. Having moved away from home (the area) I can understand him not wanting to go to another club, it doesn't mean he has no ambition, it means he doesn't want to move away. Even bringing a kid in with ambition means nothing if he's not good enough. We are well off in the keeper department, we don't need any work on it for a few years yet. I've got loads of opportunities where I am but I'd come home tomorrow if given the chance yet I'm still ambitious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Harper - lacks ambition, makes life easy for Shay, not even that good of a 'keeper, would rather put a youngster on his wages, at least he'd show more ambition. I can't see any problem with Harper, he's done very little wrong and has been unlucky that Given has walked straight back into the team when free from injury. Having moved away from home (the area) I can understand him not wanting to go to another club, it doesn't mean he has no ambition, it means he doesn't want to move away. Even bringing a kid in with ambition means nothing if he's not good enough. We are well off in the keeper department, we don't need any work on it for a few years yet. I've got loads of opportunities where I am but I'd come home tomorrow if given the chance yet I'm still ambitious. I have zero respect for people with zero ambition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matty_Lash Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Its not even as though Harper is better than Krul. Krul needs experience so when Given is out why not throw him in. Yea it might destory his confidence or it might just bring out the best in him (palermo). all keepers go through a crap spell at some stage it wouldnt matter if it was now, its how they come back from that spell. actor in the fact that harper is on an expensive contract to compensate for his loyalty(or lack of ambition?!) then its easy to see why people would get rid of harper, especially if we could sneak a million or so for him! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 I have zero respect for people with zero ambition. You don't know that he has zero ambition, how do you measure it? You could say that every single player at our club has no ambition, if they did then they would want to be at Man U or Chelsea. Not every player wants to go to these clubs but it doesn't mean that they lack ambition. Harper might only be ambitious to win something with Newcastle, different people have different ambitions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Invicta_Toon Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Harper - lacks ambition, makes life easy for Shay, not even that good of a 'keeper, would rather put a youngster on his wages, at least he'd show more ambition. I can't see any problem with Harper, he's done very little wrong and has been unlucky that Given has walked straight back into the team when free from injury. Having moved away from home (the area) I can understand him not wanting to go to another club, it doesn't mean he has no ambition, it means he doesn't want to move away. Even bringing a kid in with ambition means nothing if he's not good enough. We are well off in the keeper department, we don't need any work on it for a few years yet. I've got loads of opportunities where I am but I'd come home tomorrow if given the chance yet I'm still ambitious. I have zero respect for people with zero ambition. there's more to life than football FFS Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Its not even as though Harper is better than Krul. Krul needs experience so when Given is out why not throw him in. Yea it might destory his confidence or it might just bring out the best in him (palermo). all keepers go through a crap spell at some stage it wouldnt matter if it was now, its how they come back from that spell. actor in the fact that harper is on an expensive contract to compensate for his loyalty(or lack of ambition?!) then its easy to see why people would get rid of harper, especially if we could sneak a million or so for him! That's baseless, he's played one game. He might become better but I can't see how it can be argued that he's better now, not on one game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 I have zero respect for people with zero ambition. You don't know that he has zero ambition, how do you measure it? You could say that every single player at our club has no ambition, if they did then they would want to be at Man U or Chelsea. Not every player wants to go to these clubs but it doesn't mean that they lack ambition. Harper might only be ambitious to win something with Newcastle, different people have different ambitions. If he had any ambition or desire to make something of his career, he would move from Newcastle, where he is always going to be and has been, an understudy to Shay Given, even if Shay gets injured, as soon as he's fit again, Harper will make way. But he's comfortable at Newcastle, good wages, settled, and doesn't really want to forsake that for a career. The way I look at is Harper is a direct wall infront of Krul, and his wages could be saved and put to better use. I'd rather promote a young 'keeper from the academy to take Krul's place, and push Krul into Harper's place, behind Shay. Nowt against him personally, just would rather have players here with a desire to play football ahead of a comfortable living, we have too many at the club like that as it is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Harper - lacks ambition, makes life easy for Shay, not even that good of a 'keeper, would rather put a youngster on his wages, at least he'd show more ambition. I can't see any problem with Harper, he's done very little wrong and has been unlucky that Given has walked straight back into the team when free from injury. Having moved away from home (the area) I can understand him not wanting to go to another club, it doesn't mean he has no ambition, it means he doesn't want to move away. Even bringing a kid in with ambition means nothing if he's not good enough. We are well off in the keeper department, we don't need any work on it for a few years yet. I've got loads of opportunities where I am but I'd come home tomorrow if given the chance yet I'm still ambitious. I have zero respect for people with zero ambition. there's more to life than football FFS I'm talking about football ambition here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 If he had any ambition or desire to make something of his career, he would move from Newcastle, where he is always going to be and has been, an understudy to Shay Given, even if Shay gets injured, as soon as he's fit again, Harper will make way. But he's comfortable at Newcastle, good wages, settled, and doesn't really want to forsake that for a career. The way I look at is Harper is a direct wall infront of Krul, and his wages could be saved and put to better use. I'd rather promote a young 'keeper from the academy to take Krul's place, and push Krul into Harper's place, behind Shay. Nowt against him personally, just would rather have players here with a desire to play football ahead of a comfortable living, we have too many at the club like that as it is. I know what you're getting at but I think we can save more money elsewhere by getting rid of players who have less to offer. I don't see Harper staying as lack of ambition, it could be but it could also be that he's comfortable playing close to his roots, that's something I can understand. You see him as blocking Krull, I see him as being a buffer while Krull learns the game, he's probably got 15 years left in the game, playing behind our shite defence isn't going to give him much confidence, Given let 5 in against Birmingham, what would that do to Krull? He's got plenty of time in the game and a lot to learn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 If he had any ambition or desire to make something of his career, he would move from Newcastle, where he is always going to be and has been, an understudy to Shay Given, even if Shay gets injured, as soon as he's fit again, Harper will make way. But he's comfortable at Newcastle, good wages, settled, and doesn't really want to forsake that for a career. The way I look at is Harper is a direct wall infront of Krul, and his wages could be saved and put to better use. I'd rather promote a young 'keeper from the academy to take Krul's place, and push Krul into Harper's place, behind Shay. Nowt against him personally, just would rather have players here with a desire to play football ahead of a comfortable living, we have too many at the club like that as it is. I know what you're getting at but I think we can save more money elsewhere by getting rid of players who have less to offer. I don't see Harper staying as lack of ambition, it could be but it could also be that he's comfortable playing close to his roots, that's something I can understand. You see him as blocking Krull, I see him as being a buffer while Krull learns the game, he's probably got 15 years left in the game, playing behind our shite defence isn't going to give him much confidence, Given let 5 in against Birmingham, what would that do to Krull? He's got plenty of time in the game and a lot to learn. Fair enough Mick, I know I'm being harsh (me taking last night out on things I guess), and I know we can't just get rid of this player and that player, if I had my own way though everyone I've listed above would be peddled. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Fair enough Mick, I know I'm being harsh (me taking last night out on things I guess), and I know we can't just get rid of this player and that player, if I had my own way though everyone I've listed above would be peddled. I'm pissed off about last night, it was so predictable, I wouldn't dare vent my feelings on here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matty_Lash Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 I can definately see your side aswell Mick and perhaps krul would be better off for the next season say as 3rd choice so that he can play in the reserves etc rather than just warming the first team bench. The kid just looks so damn good, the foot movement the reflexes, we really need to hold on to him for as long as wecan. And the best part is he is only going to get better and better with experience. So weve concluded that we are ok in the keeper department, more than ok maybe! But how do you see the rest of it going especially the defence? My main fear is that we go out in the summer and theres not much quality available so we just bid for the best of a bad bunch. As I said about gooch, theres no point bringing in somebody whos no better than what youve already got, the squad needs improving not just filling! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 I can definately see your side aswell Mick and perhaps krul would be better off for the next season say as 3rd choice so that he can play in the reserves etc rather than just warming the first team bench. The kid just looks so damn good, the foot movement the reflexes, we really need to hold on to him for as long as wecan. And the best part is he is only going to get better and better with experience. So weve concluded that we are ok in the keeper department, more than ok maybe! But how do you see the rest of it going especially the defence? My main fear is that we go out in the summer and theres not much quality available so we just bid for the best of a bad bunch. As I said about gooch, theres no point bringing in somebody whos no better than what youve already got, the squad needs improving not just filling! Our defence is shite but could be totally revamped with two players coming in. We need somebody who can fit straight in on the left and we could do with somebody coming into the middle, somebody who will organise and bring Taylor on as he's stagnating. We could/should have sorted this out by now, we've screwed up two transfer windows and that is shocking for a club of our size. When did we last have a good transfer window? My guess is that it was the year we brought in Bellamy and Robert, that's the last time we really spent money and had players who changed our season, we need that now. Having said that, I don’t think Roeder would get the best out of the players, he doesn’t come across to me as being very inspirational, he bores the tits off me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matty_Lash Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 ai they were two dynamic players who drastically changed not only the way we played football but the entire mentality of the club. Of course a left back is a must, but we are crying out for a leader at the back . not only somebody who can defend but someone who can put rockets up a few arses and organise the lads at the back. ideally this guy would be captain material as i have heard that the players , well lets just say 'dont relate' to scotty parker very well. Of course the huge problem is how the hell do you find a player like that, and I for one dont have the answer. Obviously hindsight is a wonderfull thing and campbell would have been perfect for the role, but at the time glenn aswell as myself I must say didnt think he was worth the gamble. I admit weve been proved wrong and its now too late but I think that is the type of player we should be going for. Its all very well going for promising talent but our defence needs a leader. Is woodgate the answer? Could we tempt him back? I doubt it and I am struggling to think of alternatives Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Fair enough Mick, I know I'm being harsh (me taking last night out on things I guess), and I know we can't just get rid of this player and that player, if I had my own way though everyone I've listed above would be peddled. I'm pissed off about last night, it was so predictable, I wouldn't dare vent my feelings on here. I was OK last night, it was today, meeting mates and talking to others who watched the match, I tore into them today like , we all did, even my non footy fan mate, who is actually a Geordie. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
koven Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 In my opinion some ridiculous posts. We have a paper thin squad as it is and people want to get rid of 6 - 13 players. Crazy. Until we have a larger squad we can't afford to get riid of players. At this point I would only get rid of Carr and Bernard. If we signed other players then of course there are others I want to see out like Baba but until that happens there is little point. The money we would get from selling players like Carr, Baba, Moore, Bramble, Pattison, etc is negligible. As is the wage reduction as a result. All that would happen is fans would be a little happier and as soon a few players got injured we'd be stuck. And as for people wanting to seel Emre, Dyer, Owen, et al. Well, I despair tbh. Edit: forgot Luque lol, I think it goes without saying that he should be sold like. 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