Guest NUFCnutter Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 I get bloody sick of this whole "Harper lacks ambition" shit If you worked somewhere for a canny wage, doing the job you want to do, its local to where you live and when you do get to show what you can do people seem to appreciate it, would you want to move. I don't see Harper's staying at Newcastle as a lack of ambition, I see it as a loyalty to a club. There are many people who would love to play for the toon, Harper deserves to have his loyalty applauded rather than his ambition questioned. You want to applaud somebody that has sat on there arse and picked up a good wage for the best part of 10 years? Madness. In the 10 or more years Harper has been at the toon I bet he has cost us less in wages than Michael Owen has in his two. Owen at Watford looked disinterested before Fatty knocked him out, DISINTERESTED on £110,000 a week? I ask you! Maybe Harper does lack ambition but maybe he is just happy to be at the toon? Maybe he knows that he isnt good enough to get a sniff of the bench anywhere else? So then its HIS fault that Newcastle pay him then? For God's sake, leave the lad alone. There have been far worse than him play for the toon in the last 10 years..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUFC06 Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 True legend Will play until he is 35-36 imo Will become the player with most appearances for Newcastle United Football Club ever. My only hope is that he will win some silverware with us. He deserves this for his loyalty towards the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 Harper's fucking shit like. It's got to be said. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nguyen Van Falk Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 True legend Will play until he is 35-36 imo Will become the player with most appearances for Newcastle United Football Club ever. My only hope is that he will win some silverware with us. He deserves this for his loyalty towards the club. Can see him going on till he's about 38. Lack of injuries and all that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 A 38 year old Shay Given playing for Newcastle can only be a bad thing. Personally, I'd say that he peaked last season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcjmc Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 A 38 year old Shay Given playing for Newcastle can only be a bad thing. Personally, I'd say that he peaked last season. I would like Krul to start establishing himself within two-three seasons and dropping shay to back up Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUFC06 Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 38 is a little bit more even for a goalkeeper imo Im sure that at 35-36 he'll be able to play at high level though How old were Shmeichel and Seaman when they retired? About 40 i think so Shay will be able to play around that age,maybe less Time will tell Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nguyen Van Falk Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 A 38 year old Shay Given playing for Newcastle can only be a bad thing. Personally, I'd say that he peaked last season. Didn't say in what form Could be back up, and look at David James anyway Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Douga Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 10 years too long Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcjmc Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 10 years too long how you recon that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Douga Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 wud rather hav any other keeper i nthe prem tbh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 David James has always had a physical advantage over Shay Given though. Also, you get the impression that James isconstantly improving himself, whereas I've never seen that with Given. Given has a set of outstanding, natural attributes, but there are numerous flaws to his game which have meant that he'll never play for one of the best teams in the country. He's had chances to improve his flaws, but he hasn't. Because of this, these natural abilities are going to wane over time, and he'll become a mediocre keeper. Meanwhile, Krul is at the perfect age and potential ability to allow us to smoothly switch keepers a couple of years down the line. Keepers are hard to replace, and we appear to have a solution. It would be idiotic to keep Given in the team and lose Krul, as it could have bad implications for several years. Would rather have a not-quite-as-good-as-Given keeper in goal for a couple of years (assuming Krul continues to develop in to a good player after hemade the starting lineup), than lose Krul, have Given in goal for a couple of extra years, and then have no good keepers for the next 15 years. 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