manc-mag

How did it go? he ran out of 10p's

The pub where I watched it was rammed with Toon like. A bizarre mix of Geordie student rah's back for uni piping down and looking sheepish due to a transit van full of the cast of auf wiedersehn pet on some roofing job, stood in front of their table with a 12-man relay system to the bar.

If we're losing games because of Fulham's stadium then we ought to pack up and go home now 'Fortunately' you don't have to look to the acoustics for an explanation of last night.

Spot on. Looking at it from another perspective (ie ignoring how we manage to put the ball in the back of the net for a second), it might also have the added bonus of making us harder to break down. Which probably can't be overstated in terms of importance because a run of defeats would be fucking dreadful given the sense of hopelessness after that window. It might just convert some overstretched defeats where we're trying to find futile through balls and leaving ourselves exposed into ground out draws. Depressing as that is to type. That's part of my thinking really. If we were in any doubt before Carroll left we now know with absolute certainty that the rest of the season is about accumulating enough points to stay up. It's absolutely criminal that we didn't get someone on loan upfront. Losing Shola can't even be considered to be that unlucky given the frequency with which he breaks down anyway (I know the nature of the injury was unusual but the point still stands imo). Aye. Depending on who's available and who we're playing, I'd be tempted to go two up front at home against certain opposition, but other than that I'd probably opt for the midfield shut out you're on about. We can't go to Anfield etc with Ranger/Lovenkrands Best/Ranger Shola(?)/....... taking up two starting places up top, it's just an afternoon off for their back four and doubles the workload for our midfield (zero retention of possession from any forward pass).

Spot on. Looking at it from another perspective (ie ignoring how we manage to put the ball in the back of the net for a second), it might also have the added bonus of making us harder to break down. Which probably can't be overstated in terms of importance because a run of defeats would be fucking dreadful given the sense of hopelessness after that window. It might just convert some overstretched defeats where we're trying to find futile through balls and leaving ourselves exposed into ground out draws. Depressing as that is to type.

Ireland is going to have to come good playing slightly off a sole striker tbh because what we have is basically dog shit. Not his position, but the alternative of lining up with two poor strikers uptop is psychologically damaging from the moment you see a team sheet, never mind the soul sapping process of trying to find them balls from midfield all game that are just going to get wasted. Ireland/Barfa is going to have to link it up and thats my only hope for the rest of the season. You can't start any game with two shit strikers, you might as well not bother turning up.

In part this seems to pre-suppose a Saudi/Chinese billionaire replacement spunking their own money about, because Newcastle deserve that because we're a 'big' club. I don't know how realistic that is tbh. One things for sure, it can't be done on the back of debt finance like in past times. I'd like to see the back of him more on principle simply because he's a lying, piss taking cunt. I don't necessarily see that as pre cursor to an inevitable upturn in our fortunes however, it's just that I can't stand his or Llambias' shit eating grins.

They've lost a better striker like. Not that he wanted to play for them anymore. None of which makes me feel any better either way.

It was a great season up until the Hughton sacking....then Pardew turned out to be lucky. It's pretty much fucked now though IMO. [skysports] "Geordie's would prefer to watch a good game of football than a 1-0 win. And ideally they'd prefer not to win either" [skysports/]

Who are ya, who are ya?

Get rastamouse watched you bastards.

Rastamouse is where it's at these days if you want to know "wagwaan" with the kids. Irie.

For me its now all about the summer. It we dont spend a lot then we finally will have no doubt about his intentions. To be fair there's only you and Skidmark that don't see the guy for what he is. Fuckin' hell. Ive always seen him for what he is. Don't believe Leazes' posts when he tells you what my stance is. I haven't told anybody you prawn, they have seen for themselves. You were posting yesterday asking if I still believed if Mike Ashley would bring us Champions League football. Therefore people read this and think that I thought that. I did ask you to provide quotes but you fucked off and ignored your stupidity instead of admitting the errors of your ways, because you're a fucking stupid old cunt.

Rosenkrands Lovenkrands?

Stevie's construction industry I think mate.

The more telling discrepancy for me is saying on the one hand Mike Ashley doesnt need the money and then on the other hand Newcastle United can't afford to offer that sort of money. It makes incomings sound like a personal slush fund for Mike Ashley and outgoings sound like a burden that Newcastle United has to finance.

Spotted this on .com. Slight discrepancy between the two bits in bold iyam. Fucking toilet paper innit, he's literally not arsed what kind of shit comes out of his mouth. It's actually quite intriguing to watch someone who is as far detached from any form of accountability as he is just because of how bizarre it is.

Li3nZ is lurking...... Blaydon to be along shortly?

Which part of the quote said it would be used to fund wages for players? And which quote are you referring to?

I spoke to one who was honest enough to say pretty early on in the conversation "If I do get you a job what's the name of the person I need to speak to about getting them a replacement". Well that's not on, but never lose sight of the fact we're in it for the money, I take it you think we should just be some sort of charity service? Nah it's a service like any other and it's right you charge a fee, don't have any problem with it at all. I wouldn't do my job for the fun of it. Just appreciate a bit of straight talk that's all, same as in most aspects of life. Anyway I don't imagine you're one of the ones that gets it a bad name.

I think you have to look at both sides of the story and, even giving the club the benefit of the doubt (not sure why you could reasonably expect honesty from them though given their track record), you'd have to say the truth lies somewhere in the middle of the two tales. With that in mind the club were more than happy to take the money on offer and they'd have known that they'd have to increase Carroll's current salary if they expected him to stay. I suspect they weren't prepared to take the chance on his worth never being as high again and let the player know they wanted to sell him. Summed up. And like many others I wouldn't have had horrendous problems with them taking that position if the money was getting ploughed back in. It's the re-investment that simply won't materialise that matters. Particularly as you really could make real and meaningful improvements to the team with that sort of cash in the right market.

Aye, that's it for me like. I find myself far more amenable if the conversation never strays from that point. If they go on a big sell about how great a client firm is or what quality of work they can offer there that I cant do in my current role it makes me think they must assume I'm some sort of idiot who can't make those assessments for myself, or that I wouldn't have already applied to them myself directly if that's what interested me about them. Any patter about career enhancement etc Jesus....do I imagine them to be sat there fretting away after I've taken the job hoping that my career is in fact being enhanced to the maximum? Fuck off, it's about their fee and nothing else-which is 100% fine-but let's have it straight so we can talk straight.

I would agree with you but for the fact that he signed a new deal just three months ago. As I have said before the length of time ago the contract was signed is irrelevant. His worth was redefined by Liverpool's wage offer and valuation The three months has some relevance imo-that contract had only just been agreed. Equally if he or any other player goes through a shit patch and their value drops, should we approach them to negotiate their salaries downwards? Obviously not. I've got a real world view on this so I do take the general point-I realise that there are instances where you've got to re-visit contracts etc while they are still current in order to reflect significant increases to the valuation placed on assets and to fend of competitors, but I don't think that was what was in issue with this deal. It's been said before but the deal suited Liverpool, Carroll and Ashley. We clearly wanted the fee, Carroll will have known this and why be at a club that wants to cash in on you? So the salary issue alone is a bit of a red herring. If he'd been on a massive salary and Liverpool had agreed to match it, he'd have been away as long as Liverpool were waving £35 million under Ashley's snout. The broader point though-ie how this all boils down to money-is clearly valid.

Tbh they're great if they've got something decent to offer you and they're a nuisance if they haven't-that's the bottom line-and in fairness to them a lot of the time they're not going to necessarily know one way or another whether the thing will hold any appeal for you until they've asked the right questions and got to know you a bit. So it's a two way street. The line's crossed when they're persistant that you should go for something you're not showing any enthusiasm for (who would want to send someone to a client who clearly didnt want to be there-what does that say about them as an agent?). And I don't think I'd go quite as far as to say they're 'here to help you' as it's not that type of industry. It's solely about commissions rather than any benevolent interest in a persons career progression at the end of the day so it'd be a bit daft to lose sight of that. That said, some of the most impressive and knowledgeable people (in terms of the industry sector) I've spoken to have been in recruitment. Some of them have been more professional than the sector they serve. The genuinely bad ones are few and far between I reckon and I've a sneaking suspicion they don't last long because I've never been troubled by the same one twice. I'm sure Stevie's the opposite of that because you can sense his frustration at the bad one's being the ones that people remember.