José Enrique

[Chicken Dancer]

Well Sunderland did show interest in him and so did Chelsea (IIRC) last season in the championship during January. Right?

 

Aye but probably paper talk. Let's face it, since relegation he's been fantastic, the best left back in my memory anyway. But regardless if how good he is, if he wants away there is really nothing we can do; as fans, as a club. His agent will have turned his head no doubt, because he has often spoke about how happy he is here etc. WHEN he goes, probably to Liverpool, I won't boo him but I won't appluad him either and I really hope he lives to regret it.

[Dinho lad]

http://Meanwhile, the Sunday Sun can reveal that Jose Enrique’s agent is scheduled to meet club secretary Lee Charnley this week as United step up their efforts to cling onto the left-back.

 

 

Club secretary?  

[TheGuv]

I've got it on good authority he's as good as gone. His agent is touting him all over the place. Bayern Munich is looking the most likely atm

[Jack Flash]

Well Sunderland did show interest in him and so did Chelsea (IIRC) last season in the championship during January. Right?

 

“I don’t care about Sunderland. Even if the newspapers said Chelsea, I wouldn’t care. I worry for my team – I love the city, I love the club and I don’t care about signing for another team.

 

“I don’t read the papers because I don’t understand English that well! Some players were joking with me about what it said. I want to go back to the Premier League, that is true, but I want to go back to the Premier League with Newcastle. This is a big, big, big club in England and it is important that it gets back into the Premier League.”

[Dinho lad]

I've got it on good authority he's good. His agent is touting him all over the place. Bayern Munich is looking the most likely atm

 

[Tooj]

I've got it on good authority he's good. His agent is touting him all over the place. Bayern Munich is looking the most likely atm

 

He's canny like. 

[David28]

I've got it on good authority he's good. His agent is touting him all over the place. Bayern Munich is looking the most likely atm

 

Bayern won't buy him.

[TheGuv]

Sorry i was typing on my phone. That's what i've been told.

 

We'll just have to wait and see

[David28]

Sorry i was typing on my phone. That's what i've been told.

 

We'll just have to wait and see

 

And who did tell you so?

[Robster]

Sorry i was typing on my phone. That's what i've been told.

We'll just have to wait and see

I wonder if the move is Jose driven or agent driven.

[TheGuv]

Tuunel Sergeant at the match.

 

He's getting sacked for cost cutting measures. The club will save a whopping 4k a year, he said he'd do it for free and they still said no! So there will only be a club official there with no powers to arrest etc.

 

 

[Wallace]

I get a little tired of people talking about Enrique being loyal because he stayed after relegation. I don't recall teams tripping over themselves to come sign him. The guy was on pretty substantial wages (and really hadn't played up to that level yet), so of course he was going to stay.

 

The same goes for Colo, Barton and Nolan.

 

None of them asked to leave though, regardless of interest.

 

Because no-one would have wanted them, especially at the wages they are on here.

 

I personally don't buy the argument that the players stayed because no-one wanted them.  IMO it was by accident rather than design that they all ended up staying.  Ashley basically abandoned the club during the Summer as he wanted to sell it and they took the stance that they could not make any decisions on players (or anything for that matter) because that would be down to the new owners.  Agents were saying that they had interest in players but there was no-one at the club who they could speak to.  By the time Ashley realised that he would have to start making some decisions as the new season was almost upon them, previously interested clubs had probably moved on to others targets and they just ran out of time.  (Wages would have been an issue but with enough time, compromises could probably have been reached).  I am convinced that if Ashley had decided at the outset that he would not be selling the club and had brought a manager in at that point, that most of those players would have been sold and we might not have been promoted.  Some of them might have been hard to shift because of wages but I am sure quite a few more would have gone.  In retrospect, I think the players are now glad they stayed and have no regrets because they learnt how to play English football, improved their form, enhanced their reputations, are praised for their loyalty and created a great camaraderie between each other but I am sure if given the opportunity at the time, that they would have been off without a second thought.

[Dokko]

What a load of absolute rubbish. 

 

We sold other players when we went down, the players that were left had either high wages, poor form or too much baggage.

 

We had an offer for Colo, it's was around £2m but the team wanted us to cover some of his wages. Enrique was seen as another foreign flop when we went down, the media hammering while we all knew of his quality.

 

It worked in our favour because these players were harder to shift, all of the have redeemed themselves in their own way. You not remember when Hughton left and the message was 'thanks for believing in us when no one else would' ? Says it all IMO.

 

 

[80]

I don't think relegation affected our status this season. I think we're where we are when Ashley took over.

 

We were ahead before we sacked Hughton, we've been behind since we sold Carroll.

 

What a convenient and self serving way of measuring our position. Let me try, we were behind before we sacked Hughton and we are now ahead after we appointed Pardew, bought HBA and gave Tiote a new contract. This is fun!

 

I don't remember the rest of the country saying we were consolidating our reputation as a stable, sensible club where players can concentrate on improving their games when we swapped Hughton for Pardew, and I don't remember the rest of the country saying we were heading upward to our traditional position in natural order of things as a leading club when we sealed the second Tiote contract in 6 months, but ok.

 

That's the point, my measurement is as subjective as yours, they are both designed to fit our predetermined conclusion/position.

 

Social status is a subjective thing, that's obvious, but measurement of the actual attitudes towards something can be pretty straightforward. It's not just a case of making random statements you can't back up and assuming you won't get pulled up on them.

 

Not sure what my predetermined conclusion is supposed to be - if church bells had rung declaring how savvy we were for hiring Pardew, I would have just thought people are stupid, and said as much. I wouldn't have pretended they actually agreed with me, or changed my opinion to fit in with them, which logically you seem to be implying.

 

Unless you are going to start producing some statistics, your "measurement of actual attitude" is equally subjective. Let me simplify my language for you, you have used measurement of when we were "ahead" and "behind" subjectively to nicely fit into your position and believe vis a vis Hughton and Pardew. It's fine if that is your believe, but that is just your subjective assessment (which makes it as valid as my own subjective assessment whether you agree with it or not). It is not  an objective measurement of actual attitude as your put it.

 

Regarding your first sentence, you make a valid, but in my view nigh on worthless point. The trouble is sticking rigidly to only the highest standards of evidence, even to the point of refusing caveating, means that shy of us all running large-scale controlled studies whenever we want to analyse something and make a contribution to a subject that isn't res ipsa loquitur, we're gagged and refused permission to say anything. And so nothing useful is said, and whatever problem that exists will continue without prospect of remedy.

 

This attitude removes agency from people - everyone - who I think can still and should be agents. I don't like it when people with your approach try to kill discussions by saying that because neither you nor the person you're debating with know with absolute certainty that, say, something will take place next summer, that neither of you should say anything and anything that is said is of equal intellectual merit. The resultant situation you're arguing for is one I've previously consistently witnessed - no one is allowed to adopt a position on something until there's no point in them adopting one because the thing has already happened, and so they must again wait until they're allowed to adopt a position on yet another yet-to-be-conclusively-understood issue.

 

There is no logical problem in this thread, you just don't like people like me attempting to make judgements. Likewise, I don't like your lack of judgement. Shy of me trying to convert you from your mode of thought to my own so the world will be slightly less stymied by anal-retentiveness, I think this part ends around here.

 

Now, with regards my original post in response to ON, it's ironic that I also honestly couldn't give a shit as to its convenience. Whether I approve of things that happened re: Hughton and Carroll is redundant to the discussion that had started on our 'status' in the minds of other people, in fact it should be quite obvious that the reverse relationship is more pertinent (i.e. other people's reactions help inform whether I think those moves are going to make it harder for the club to succeed in the future). Furthermore, I dare say it's inconvenient that popular opinion is in tune with my own as it means I can't strut around posing as an outsider intellectual who's one of the few far removed enough from the crowd to objectively assess the situation and 'call it as it is'.

 

Having said that, it's just occurred to me there's a small chance you've been trying to say my original post was about stirring an argument by dragging a status discussion onto Ashley etc. If so, no, I was originally just intending to back up ON in his disagreement with Prophet over whether 'Ashley getting us relegated' was responsible for a fall in respect.

[Ketsbaia]

A nice reception for him, then we impress him with this imminent international midfielder, then he comes to the table to negotiate. By this point, his wages are putting other teams off. He then concedes defeat and signs a new contract with us.

 

Thats really our only hope

[The Prophet]

I must admit it would cushion the pain a bit if he moved abroad.

[Adam]

Long as he doesn't go to Liverpool

[Pilko]

I hope this early signing Pardew is talking about makes him think about staying.

[Optimistic Nut]

Watch it be Mbengue.

[Skeletor]

Watch it be Mbengue.

 

Not a midfielder bro.

[Robster]

A nice reception for him, then we impress him with this imminent international midfielder, then he comes to the table to negotiate. By this point, his wages are putting other teams off. He then concedes defeat and signs a new contract with us.

Thats really our only hope

Assuming it wasn't all sorted weeks/months ago.

[alpal78]

I don't think relegation affected our status this season. I think we're where we are when Ashley took over.

 

We were ahead before we sacked Hughton, we've been behind since we sold Carroll.

 

What a convenient and self serving way of measuring our position. Let me try, we were behind before we sacked Hughton and we are now ahead after we appointed Pardew, bought HBA and gave Tiote a new contract. This is fun!

 

I don't remember the rest of the country saying we were consolidating our reputation as a stable, sensible club where players can concentrate on improving their games when we swapped Hughton for Pardew, and I don't remember the rest of the country saying we were heading upward to our traditional position in natural order of things as a leading club when we sealed the second Tiote contract in 6 months, but ok.

 

That's the point, my measurement is as subjective as yours, they are both designed to fit our predetermined conclusion/position.

 

Social status is a subjective thing, that's obvious, but measurement of the actual attitudes towards something can be pretty straightforward. It's not just a case of making random statements you can't back up and assuming you won't get pulled up on them.

 

Not sure what my predetermined conclusion is supposed to be - if church bells had rung declaring how savvy we were for hiring Pardew, I would have just thought people are stupid, and said as much. I wouldn't have pretended they actually agreed with me, or changed my opinion to fit in with them, which logically you seem to be implying.

 

Unless you are going to start producing some statistics, your "measurement of actual attitude" is equally subjective. Let me simplify my language for you, you have used measurement of when we were "ahead" and "behind" subjectively to nicely fit into your position and believe vis a vis Hughton and Pardew. It's fine if that is your believe, but that is just your subjective assessment (which makes it as valid as my own subjective assessment whether you agree with it or not). It is not  an objective measurement of actual attitude as your put it.

 

Regarding your first sentence, you make a valid, but in my view nigh on worthless point. The trouble is sticking rigidly to only the highest standards of evidence, even to the point of refusing caveating, means that shy of us all running large-scale controlled studies whenever we want to analyse something and make a contribution to a subject that isn't res ipsa loquitur, we're gagged and refused permission to say anything. And so nothing useful is said, and whatever problem that exists will continue without prospect of remedy.

 

This attitude removes agency from people - everyone - who I think can still and should be agents. I don't like it when people with your approach try to kill discussions by saying that because neither you nor the person you're debating with know with absolute certainty that, say, something will take place next summer, that neither of you should say anything and anything that is said is of equal intellectual merit. The resultant situation you're arguing for is one I've previously consistently witnessed - no one is allowed to adopt a position on something until there's no point in them adopting one because the thing has already happened, and so they must again wait until they're allowed to adopt a position on yet another yet-to-be-conclusively-understood issue.

 

There is no logical problem in this thread, you just don't like people like me attempting to make judgements. Likewise, I don't like your lack of judgement. Shy of me trying to convert you from your mode of thought to my own so the world will be slightly less stymied by anal-retentiveness, I think this part ends around here.

 

Now, with regards my original post in response to ON, it's ironic that I also honestly couldn't give a s*** as to its convenience. Whether I approve of things that happened re: Hughton and Carroll is redundant to the discussion that had started on our 'status' in the minds of other people, in fact it should be quite obvious that the reverse relationship is more pertinent (i.e. other people's reactions help inform whether I think those moves are going to make it harder for the club to succeed in the future). Furthermore, I dare say it's inconvenient that popular opinion is in tune with my own as it means I can't strut around posing as an outsider intellectual who's one of the few far removed enough from the crowd to objectively assess the situation and 'call it as it is'.

 

Having said that, it's just occurred to me there's a small chance you've been trying to say my original post was about stirring an argument by dragging a status discussion onto Ashley etc. If so, no, I was originally just intending to back up ON in his disagreement with Prophet over whether 'Ashley getting us relegated' was responsible for a fall in respect.

 

Well at least that sounds like an intelligent response. I have no issues with anyone passing a judgement and of course people can adopt whatever position they want, what is not logical is for you (or anyone) to claim that your judgement is more meritorious than mine without corroborating the statement against an external (preferably independent) measurement. It's called legitimacy to claim.

 

If we were negotiating the sale-purchase of a house, you (the seller) can make a judgement that the value of the house is $400k and I the seller make a judgement that the value is only $200k. Our valuation of course incorporates our bias of what we would consider a favorable outcome for ourselves in the deal. We could use position bargaining and compromise on $300k. The better way to resolve that is to refer to the actual market price as a legitimate reference point. You can name whatever price you want and make whatever judgement you feel like making, but you can't tell me that your price is more legitimate than mine unless you show me something more than just your words. Anything else is logically flawed which  unfortunately seems to be the approach that you are taking in this debate.

[Mistle17]

His left sock was lower than his right one for the first 15mins or so. There's no doubt he wants to leave now.

[alpal78]

There is no way Enrique would stay after that joke of a performance. If anything surrendering a 3 goal lead against West Brom would just reinforce his views that we are a useless team!

[oldtype]

Come on body language experts who are at the stadium watching the lap of honour, get on your iphones and give us some analysis.