manc-mag

Has he given up reading his book then ffs?

these constant references to Freddie Shepherd runnning the club single handed, and appointing managers all on his own, are far worse than that. No wonder people laugh at Geordies. Such rubbish gives us all a bad name. Are you daring to suggest that Shepherd wasn't in the least bit autocratic? It's beside the point anyway though. It's because he's got this bee in his bonnet about it being Shepherd AND Hall as opposed to just Shepherd (when anyone refers to just Shepherd alone). Like anyones arsed about the distinction or it means anything; they're just using 'Shepherd' as shorthand for 'Shepherd AND Hall'. It's all to do with some sort of bum love he has to protect Shepherd at all costs, but it doesnt actually mean anything as far as the overall debate goes. It's due to the fact he's obsessed with the personality issue of it (Shepherd v Ashley) and can't move on from that. It means absolutely nowt to any other bugger though.

Exactly.

Shepherd never owned the club mate. Wait and see if your man even qualifies for europe and the Champions League half as much as the Halls and Shepherd before you make daft comparisons, and he is 4 years down already. He was the Chairman therefore he was "in charge" day to day, his shareholding is completely and utterly irrelevant. Can't believe he persists with this one after it's been pointed out to him a million times, but then at the same time I can't understand what point he thinks he's making anyway in saying it. Don't imagine he'll try to explain it like because he obviously can't. This is the level of stupidity you have to sink to to operate at his level and 'debate' though. Fuck that.

Aye, greatest workrate=luckiest team. Even in spite of my absolute hatred of them I've had to concede that. As a rightminded person, intent on keeping my sanity you have to. That's what we've done-work harder, due to better attitudes of professionalism. Pundits have remarked on it. We're not used to seeing it as fans so that's why we're a bit taken aback by the luck we've witnessed. It's a by product of it though. Even when we're under the cosh and the weaker team in the contest, shots on target are still pressed more, so they're not the same easy chances we're accustomed to seeing being walked in without any pressure by marauding attackers. Simpson is clearing them off the line where they'd usually just be nestling in the back of the net cos nobody could be arsed busting a gut. 'Luck' is just disrespectful to the work ethic, which is there for all to see.

I saw this thread title and I saw the name of the thread starter and honestly, my heart just sank. Anyone else have the same reaction? No need for this sort of shit in all honesty.

Do you ever ask the question, where did the cash come from? When we were making losses, year after year. I'm not arsed about Hall and Shepherds dividends fwiw, (contrary to what he's said in the past), I view it as a fact of footballing life and the excesses of the professional game. In fact I wouldn't expect millionaires to work for free even if they did enjoy it. But his failure to attack Shepherd and Hall for their dividends if that could have alternatively been viewed as 'money for players' shows just how much of a spoon the man is. As much a stranger to logic as he is agenda crazed. The two have to go hand in hand though I spose if you want to live that deluded life.

Very reasonable approach to it iyam. Well put.

Anyway, unless theres more TV evidence/witness evidence elsewhere I reckon he's getting off. Perhaps there is though, we'll see.

Agree on the whole, but on this particular occasion I think that's a bit harsh. He'll get off on the evidence (or lack of it). In fact, it's worth bearing in mind he's been charged with the offence precisely because he's a footballer (ie there are few other scenarios where there'd be that level of scrutiny/footage, if it was an ordinary bloke on the street it would have come to nothing) so he's actually been held to a higher standard of probity. Not saying that makes him a victim, because equally its that same higher level of scrutiny (ie live commercial football) that has made him a multi millionaire and as such it's fair enough, I'm just saying those are the facts and that's the complete context. Aye. Why though has it gone to court and gone this far if there isnt enough evidence? Like whats been said, maybe there is other evidence other than whats on youtube, i.e witness on the pitch etc. Basically the reason I alluded to in my response to Gemmill. There is evidence (and moreover it's of the 'offending' words) but it's not conclusive. It's been broadcast live and they've got a complainant in Ferdinand who is clearly alleging that's what he did say. In addition to the footage, presumably, will be Ferdinands own testimony where he refers to the original incident that goes beforehand and that Terry seems to be responding to on the telly. ie Ferdinand seems to think he's been called a black cunt (off cam), raises this with Terry, and Terry is presumably seen repsonding to that allegation on cam. So as long as Ferdinand is still emphatic about the original incident thats part of the evidence. It's not as strong evidence as video footage however and Terry's defence will argue that it was a mishearing, as 'supported' by the video evidence, which shows him correcting Ferdinand's understanding of what had been said.

The CPS would have charged him on the basis of that footage alone I would imagine purely because there is clear evidence of him saying the words "black cunt". That would mean there was a case to answer. His answer to it lies in the area of doubt created by the bit of footage that gets obscured by Ashley Cole. The CPS will just take the view that's for a tribunal of fact to establish and let it go to court. I've said it before but criminal law is a right pile of old shite btw. Dead easy, so never let anyone calling themself a criminal lawyer talk down to you. The wigs and gowns need to go, fucking dressing up for grown ups.

Agree on the whole, but on this particular occasion I think that's a bit harsh. He'll get off on the evidence (or lack of it). In fact, it's worth bearing in mind he's been charged with the offence precisely because he's a footballer (ie there are few other scenarios where there'd be that level of scrutiny/footage, if it was an ordinary bloke on the street it would have come to nothing) so he's actually been held to a higher standard of probity. Not saying that makes him a victim, because equally its that same higher level of scrutiny (ie live commercial football) that has made him a multi millionaire and as such it's fair enough, I'm just saying those are the facts and that's the complete context.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfoaoQImtaI&feature=related Apologies, it was "fucking black cunt", not bastard. Thing is though, he definitely does seem to say "Yeah yeah yeah. I..(something something ??) just as Ashley Cole obscures the footage of his mouth, and then ends: "..fucking black cunt! Fucking nobhead" It does seem to be dismissive language, even if it is with his trademark hate face. Then he offers another insult at the end, which he'll no doubt argue was redundant if he had actually already insulted him. It's whether it's plausible he's fitted the missing five syllables into the bit when Cole jogs across the screen. He's getting off with it iyam.

Is he honestly doing it chapter by chapter like as those quotes suggest? The fucking daft jumped up arsehole that he is! As if we can't wait for a final summary, if he absolutely must insist on giving one at all.

Good luck with that one.

On the bright side, with all this reading his index finger will be fucked, so his posting might drop off a bit.

...international class at any rate.

Aye, this ones a million miles from plain sailing tbh. They're ordinary as owt in most departments but they can score if they get the ball to them two. We need to be pressing them with the Demba's back to take the wind out of their sails. Remind them of how poor they are as a team rather than bypass both midfields. Ben Arfa for me.

Might have found his 'niche'/justification to exist (at this level anyway). Championship defender, but can play a restrictive containing midfield role in the Prem as long as he has no other duties allied to that. Which is handy as Pardew is keen to opt for this when he's trying to shut a game down. Shows above all else this isnt a worldbeaters role-and although he's not in the same league as Tiote, Parker etc-why you need to make sure you focus on the position/system first and foremost without getting horrendously over pre-occupied with certain players being irreplacable. It's pivotal, but theres actually more players capable of playing there than people suppose, because it's a massively uncomplicated brief and doesnt take much footballing ability. Box-to-box is a different species altogether and the two types of player don't compare in any way, shape or form. We've done well this season by having midfielders with clearly defined roles that actually assist the defence. It's unusual (for us) but every successful club understands this is important, so I'm glad we've woken up to it too.

Went there with just about the weakest midfield, forward line (and therefore not unsurprisingly, bench) we've assembled this season for me so 2-0 is a great result. Performance was always going to be secondary to the result itself, but we overall improved as the game progressed, with substitutions etc, so that has to be seen as a good thing, as it's one of the things Pardew usually takes a slating for. For all the talk about Blackburn being hopeless in front of goal and not taking their myriad chances (which is indisputable, albeit we had a couple of creditable defensive performances ourselves in amongst that), they're a bottom of the table side and theres more of them shit sides than there are the clinically ruthless sides who would have 'punished us any other day'. A Modeste strikeforce with much to be modest about. So you can say we had luck but it has to be in that context. Theres loads of teams capable of missing those chances and we do it ourselves when we haven't got our best strikers on the pitch. In fact our second string is so bad they don't even create the chances to start with. Bit of perspective needed tbh. Teams that win the majority of their matches don't always dominate and create a dozen times as many chances as their opponents per fixture won. You have to find ways of winning when you're below par. That's the first time we've done the double over Blackburn since 1991 apparently; an utterly horrendous statistic we should be thoroughly embarrassed about as a club, despite the '5th best for 15 years' rhetoric. It shows how consistent we've been for all but a couple of seasons in the top flight. What was most gratifying was we didnt chuck it away at the end having got ourselves in a position to take all three points. Disappointing to see the latent criticism of Ben Arfa lurking in CT's posts etc (plain as day iyam). Basically, anyone Norwegian who thought he would run every game was comically naive, but at the same time it's beyond stupid to write his toon career off on the back of a couple of poor games as CT obviously wants to do while also heralding Obertan on the back of half a season's shit, just because he bagged a goal yesterday in the last minute when Blackburn were no longer defending. Ben Arfa will win matches and do things only he can do and at the same time will be utterly appalling and counter productive for us this season. It is 100% about getting his deployment in games spot on and getting the good performances to outweigh the bad. That takes managerial judgment. A couple of Norwegians calling Pardew a mong just because he doesnt play him doesnt change that fact. So far Pardew's neither succeded or failed in that judgment, it's been a real mixed bag, but I hope we've at least heard the end of the Norwegian mong chorus. Football is simple when you're a team of world beaters, but if you're not it takes a lot more thought. Touted for relegation at the start of the season, still a wafer thin squad, but 5th in Feb. Lets try and re-establish ourselves with results before we start demanding to be on a par with Tottenham, 5 points off top spot. Blackburn and Bolton who we're allegedly competing with are 20 points behind us btw.

'Insane in the dickbrain'. How old is he again, 56?

Not sure of the machinations behind it all but I wouldn't be surprised if you're onto something like. I just used it as an example of one deal which adds massive value to Wolves. Odd for us that we didnt seem to be talking loans at all this window really though, targets seemed to be outright purchases or nowt overall.

The Mariappa thing says a lot to me. They obviously see Mariappa as someone who can play well for Newcastle, yet they didn't value him at £2.5m?!?! That's all we needed to pay, it's fucking peanuts. Pardew's crack yesterday pissed me off, "if the deaw dowwnt goww froou todie, we'ww be lookin at avva opshuns in the samma". That to me says signing him would be settling for second best now through sheer desperation. We had 5 weeks to sort some cunt oot, clearly the target is Vertongen but maybe Ajax wanted to retain him to get in the CL even so, totally pathetic we haven't got someone sorted. Aye, disappointing on that score I have to say. That said, the broader context of this window is that nobody really bought owt apart from us, because clubs are skint/are now choosing not to buy in Jan. Bassong on loan to Wolves can only have been good business though, I'd definitely have taken that as a stop gap bolstering.