Thespence Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Going through the press today it seems the Hammers are hell bent on trying to out dwarf our midfield, today they are linked with Richardson (Man Utd), Barton (Man City) & SWP (Chelsea) If the get that LITTLE lot & we play our small crew, people who have tickets/swipe card for seats in level 7 for the West Ham game may as well not come.May as well get the subbuteo pitch out Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shevfa Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 I wish West Ham had relegated Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Interesting quote from Joey Barton. "What Sam Allardyce achieved at Bolton without a big budget was fantastic." "Newcastle United are a big club and who know's what he can achieve there? The future looks very exciting." It's almost as if he's trying to get himself a move to another club or something... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest smoggeordie Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Interesting quote from Joey Barton. "What Sam Allardyce achieved at Bolton without a big budget was fantastic." "Newcastle United are a big club and who know's what he can achieve there? The future looks very exciting." It's almost as if he's trying to get himself a move to another club or something... Nah, just think he's a genuine nice fella. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Parka Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Interesting quote from Joey Barton. "What Sam Allardyce achieved at Bolton without a big budget was fantastic." "Newcastle United are a big club and who know's what he can achieve there? The future looks very exciting." It's almost as if he's trying to get himself a move to another club or something... Nah, just think he's a genuine nice fella. Gold. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Still not left? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Still not left? Still needs to agree terms and have a medical I think. Read somewhere (Ronnie?) that the fee is closer to £8m rather than the £7m we all thought it was. Could be bollocks like... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 I'd take £4m plus Neill like or a direct swap for Benyoun. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Phil K Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 I believe Parker was treated shoddily by a pack of halfwit followers amongst us. The fact he and Butt could not play together was obvious to all but f*****g Roeder. Parker played well when not encumbered by Butt and vise versa. The same shitbags who booed Parker where the same dumbclucks that whined that Shearer was "past it"for his last two seasons..... To get to Brain-dead Ars*hole level they'd need a promotion..... Good luck to Scotty - I wish him well, and hope that he finishes high up the league with West Ham - just as long as it's well below us... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Shearer was "past it" for his last 2 seasons though... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shak Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Shearer was past it for his last two years like. And we got our best production from CM when Parker was absent and Butt and Emre played together. Roeder should get a lot of the blame for it as he was the one who set out the tactics, but to say Parker was anything other than completely useless this season is wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Shearer was past it for his last season, wouldn't disagree. But it wasn't his fault that he had to play every single game. Season before that, 04/05, he did alright - 19 goals wasn't bad for someone who was 'past it'. He should have been used more sparingly in the Premier League, though - but again - he was forced into the side thanks to constant injuries. He himself had a 3-month on the sidelines aswell, if i remember correctly. Anyhow, Parker has had an utterly fruitless season - we were a better team when he wasn't in it. He didn't pick himself, though. And although it was largely his doing, it wouldn't surprise me if he was one of many who fell victim to a shite managerial set-up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Shearer was past it for his last season, wouldn't disagree. But it wasn't his fault that he had to play every single game. Season before that, 04/05, he did alright - 19 goals wasn't bad for someone who was 'past it'. He should have been used more sparingly in the Premier League, though - but again - he was forced into the side thanks to constant injuries. He himself had a 3-month on the sidelines aswell, if i remember correctly. Anyhow, Parker has had an utterly fruitless season - we were a better team when he wasn't in it. He didn't pick himself, though. And although it was largely his doing, it wouldn't surprise me if he was one of many who fell victim to a shite managerial set-up. Yeah, because he was always happy to be dropped, wasn't he. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Shearer was past it for his last season, wouldn't disagree. But it wasn't his fault that he had to play every single game. Season before that, 04/05, he did alright - 19 goals wasn't bad for someone who was 'past it'. He should have been used more sparingly in the Premier League, though - but again - he was forced into the side thanks to constant injuries. He himself had a 3-month on the sidelines aswell, if i remember correctly. Anyhow, Parker has had an utterly fruitless season - we were a better team when he wasn't in it. He didn't pick himself, though. And although it was largely his doing, it wouldn't surprise me if he was one of many who fell victim to a s**** managerial set-up. Would love to see Shearer's goals per minute ratio in the 2004-5 season compared to Kluivert's. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Shearer was past it for his last season, wouldn't disagree. But it wasn't his fault that he had to play every single game. Season before that, 04/05, he did alright - 19 goals wasn't bad for someone who was 'past it'. He should have been used more sparingly in the Premier League, though - but again - he was forced into the side thanks to constant injuries. He himself had a 3-month on the sidelines aswell, if i remember correctly. Anyhow, Parker has had an utterly fruitless season - we were a better team when he wasn't in it. He didn't pick himself, though. And although it was largely his doing, it wouldn't surprise me if he was one of many who fell victim to a s**** managerial set-up. Would love to see Shearer's goals per minute ratio in the 2004-5 season compared to Kluivert's. goals (from open play) per minute ratio especially but, like Taylor's stats, swept right under the carpet Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Shearer was past it for his last season, wouldn't disagree. But it wasn't his fault that he had to play every single game. Season before that, 04/05, he did alright - 19 goals wasn't bad for someone who was 'past it'. He should have been used more sparingly in the Premier League, though - but again - he was forced into the side thanks to constant injuries. He himself had a 3-month on the sidelines aswell, if i remember correctly. Anyhow, Parker has had an utterly fruitless season - we were a better team when he wasn't in it. He didn't pick himself, though. And although it was largely his doing, it wouldn't surprise me if he was one of many who fell victim to a shite managerial set-up. Yeah, because he was always happy to be dropped, wasn't he. I said that because the only other alternative to Shearer and Ameobi, was Chopra. Not because he should or should not have been dropped. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Shearer was past it for his last season, wouldn't disagree. But it wasn't his fault that he had to play every single game. Season before that, 04/05, he did alright - 19 goals wasn't bad for someone who was 'past it'. He should have been used more sparingly in the Premier League, though - but again - he was forced into the side thanks to constant injuries. He himself had a 3-month on the sidelines aswell, if i remember correctly. Anyhow, Parker has had an utterly fruitless season - we were a better team when he wasn't in it. He didn't pick himself, though. And although it was largely his doing, it wouldn't surprise me if he was one of many who fell victim to a s**** managerial set-up. Would love to see Shearer's goals per minute ratio in the 2004-5 season compared to Kluivert's. Kluivert, like Shearer, scored the vast majority of his goals in the cup competitions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Shearer was past it for his last season, wouldn't disagree. But it wasn't his fault that he had to play every single game. Season before that, 04/05, he did alright - 19 goals wasn't bad for someone who was 'past it'. He should have been used more sparingly in the Premier League, though - but again - he was forced into the side thanks to constant injuries. He himself had a 3-month on the sidelines aswell, if i remember correctly. Anyhow, Parker has had an utterly fruitless season - we were a better team when he wasn't in it. He didn't pick himself, though. And although it was largely his doing, it wouldn't surprise me if he was one of many who fell victim to a s**** managerial set-up. Would love to see Shearer's goals per minute ratio in the 2004-5 season compared to Kluivert's. IIRC 7 were in the Prem, the rest against part-time farmers (they only milk the cows in the morning) in the Intertoto and UEFA. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Shearer was past it for his last season, wouldn't disagree. But it wasn't his fault that he had to play every single game. Season before that, 04/05, he did alright - 19 goals wasn't bad for someone who was 'past it'. He should have been used more sparingly in the Premier League, though - but again - he was forced into the side thanks to constant injuries. He himself had a 3-month on the sidelines aswell, if i remember correctly. Anyhow, Parker has had an utterly fruitless season - we were a better team when he wasn't in it. He didn't pick himself, though. And although it was largely his doing, it wouldn't surprise me if he was one of many who fell victim to a s**** managerial set-up. Would love to see Shearer's goals per minute ratio in the 2004-5 season compared to Kluivert's. IIRC 7 were in the Prem, the rest against part-time farmers (they only milk the cows in the morning) in the Intertoto and UEFA. Think Kluivert scored seven goals in the Prem, aswell. And btw, the Intertoto season was his last season - the one where i agreed that he was past it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Are you talking about Shearer or Kluivert there? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Yeah. think they both scored 7 in the league. EDIT - Shearer = 7 in 26 apps. Kluivert = 6 in 25. 10 of Kluivert's were as a sub as well. (Soccerbase is the nuts) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Kluivert should have played more, wouldn't disagree there. But by the end of it, he couldn't give a shit and he was injured half the time anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 I believe Parker was treated shoddily by a pack of halfwit followers amongst us. The fact he and Butt could not play together was obvious to all but f*****g Roeder. Parker played well when not encumbered by Butt and vise versa. The same shitbags who booed Parker where the same dumbclucks that whined that Shearer was "past it"for his last two seasons..... To get to Brain-dead Ars*hole level they'd need a promotion..... Good luck to Scotty - I wish him well, and hope that he finishes high up the league with West Ham - just as long as it's well below us... Not much truth in this at all..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newcastle Fan Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Kluivert should have played more, wouldn't disagree there. But by the end of it, he couldn't give a s*** and he was injured half the time anyway. He should've played more because the Kluivert-Bellamy partnership was class.. But i think any manager in the world would've picked Shearer ahead of him, for the same reason Raul is still the first name on Madrid's team sheet. 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