Jump to content

ChocChip

Members
  • Posts

    547
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ChocChip

  1. All i can say about Shearer these days is that he must have a tremendous amount of charisma or the ability to instill respect/fear in everyone because so many people seem kiss his arse, Souness, Shepherd, all the BBC pundits. He's not winning these accolades based upon his footballing ability anymore and it can't be just because he used to be good. Weird.
  2. I've said it before but i think one of the most important traits our possible new manager must have is that he likes the current group of players. For all we know Hitzfeld has been approached and said yes conditional to bringing in all of the players he wants. It's got to work with this lot plus a couple of cheap additions inthe summer.
  3. I think we need a forward who'll be good in the air.
  4. First of all, thanks to the Geordie lads who kindly sold me and my friends they're spare tickets for Fulham (a). They also insisted we didn't pay full price as we were 'doing them a favour.' True gentlemen. The game.....................well, er, crap! Players: Given = Top man. Carr = Thought he played well tbh. Baba = Thought he covered their diagonal ball (from LBM to farpost) well. He's not popular but he's not bad on the ball, teams know this and always close him down more than the RB. This is because he'll always try and play his way out of trouble so can make bad decisions imo, as opposed to Elliott who just lumps it. Baba gets in trouble because the midf don't show for the ball and our forwards (on the day) don't work the channels. Boum = Looked comfortablish, should do against Mcbride though. Ramage = Played intelligently most of the time, timed his jumps well but tended to drift to the right in the 1st half despite Boum telling him not to and so left a very big gap between the 2. Easy for Fulham to exploit because they have MOVEMENT. Clark = Committed, very slow though, in fact, incredilbly slow. Bowyer = Run around a lot at least. Didn't deserve the criticism from the stands. Solano = Doesn't do enough flair play to make up for his non-athleticism imo. Zoggy = Should've played wide left i think, no space in the middle and he was forced to run with the ball as their wasn't often a player making a run to pass to. Shearer = Was never gonna win much in the air today so i have no idea why we lumped to him repeatedly, much, much better with ball to feet. Luque = 1st time i've seen him in the flesh. Clearly had no idea what the game plan was, the rest didn't look as uncomfortable because they're obviously used to this loose preparation for games. On the whole i saw enough promise, better in the air than i imagined. He played a great ball blind behind their back 2 with absolutely no Toon player running onto it, he'll have to learn to cut out the clever football at NUFC because he'll make himself look worse. Same complaint Pedro made at Hartlepool or where ever he played (i forget). Souness = Nothing. Ridiculous tactics, i can guess the team talk, 'launch to the BIG MAN and Bowyer and Zoggy will collect the knock downs', or 'give it to Luque, he's expensive.' A flair player cannot shine if the rest have NO idea what they're doing, and clearly they don't. Also, it struck me that the Toon players looked heavy legged at the BEGINNING. Moody. Chopra and O'Brien made an impact, so much of one i had to wonder why they weren't introduced earlier. Also, why take off Zoggy and Luque? F**king bewildering! The Fans = Great songs and cheering, some funny comments though. The repeated booing of Luque and the guy next to me saying he hated Luque and that Luque was a cancer at the club who's holding us back, yeah, sure buddy. Was a shame to see confrontations amongst the fans regarding booing Souness, everyone was frustrated i guess. Fulham = Couldn't see their goal but on the whole they were terrible, they're only advantage they had was that their players clearly practice passing and moving.
  5. Left back at the training ground while Lens went off to play i think
  6. He doesn't. He has played well with a big target man, doesn't mean his entire game is based on that. Both Bellamy and Baros have done well with big target men (Shearer and Koller) but you wouldn't say, especially with Bellamy, that he needs a big target man to be a good player. 76332[/snapback] Played alongside Kovacevic when they nearly won the league a couple of years ago I think.... 76438[/snapback] I know, but that doesn't mean that he has to play with a big man, like Mark suggested. 76441[/snapback] I know it's adolescent (and so am i) but that bit's funny
  7. What's that supposed to mean? Just answer a question, it's pretty easy. Who identifies the players to bring to the club in order to build a team? 76120[/snapback] The scouts! OK, pedency apart, it's Souness, but then I've never disputed that! Answer this simple one then in return: Who has the final say-so by slapping his signature on the cheque and has the power to say "not on your life am I buying that piece of shit!"? 76361[/snapback] This is something a manager would say should a club have a Chairman who is involved in team affairs when he shouldn't be. 76367[/snapback] 76370[/snapback] The final refuge. Obviously you believe a Chairman should be saying those words to a manager when in disagreement with the manager's decision on a team affairs issue, which means you are in favour of interference in team affairs by a Chairman. Wouldn't mind you telling me how any Chairman is supposed to convince ANY manager to join any club under those circumstances. 76389[/snapback] Sorry to get involved but i think this point of view is a kind of riposte to Leazes Mag. LM (i believe) has frequently stated that if you back Souness then you must, by inference back all of his decisions including getting rid of Bellamy and Robert. LM's support of Freddie was then felt to be hypocritical by some (me included) as by those standards LM must clearly back the appointment of Souness in the first place, and his continued employment. I think i'm right in this (regarding other people's opinions) but i most humbly apologise if i'm wrong. Also, i have no wish to re-open that debate with LM, i respect his stance and we've all discussed it to death which probably accounts for Craig's reluctance. 76430[/snapback] I can't see your point chocchip, I've said that I what I think of FS appointing Souness, but also one bad appointment doesn't make a bad chairman. It doesn't change the fact that FS is a good chairman because all the other managers he has appointed have been welcomed by the majority of the clubs support, as they were all successful, and built good teams, and left good sets of players at their previous clubs. Isn't this the same criteria we are all seeing when we are looking at Hitzfeld and Hiddink ? FS also backs his managers to the hilt, to the level of Newcastle United financially, and allows them the freedom to do their jobs. That, to coin a phrase, is a "proper" chairman. i can say this, because i said from the start i wasn't happy with Souness, but everyone who supported Souness to be successful, by saying give him time, are in no position to slag off freddie for appointing Souness because they agreed with it ! Souness getting rid of Bellamy is different, because i didn't support him. And I didn't support because he always has been, and always will be, a shit manager. If anything, his treatment of Bellamy proved to me conclusively that I had judged him correctly. By the same token, Bobby Robson sold Solano, but that didn't make him a bad manager either. 76432[/snapback] LM, apologies if my post seemed to be a criticism of your views. I was presuming the perception of your views was the basis for Craig's stance with HTL. I'm more than aware of your opinions . I don't necessarily agree with all of them but i listen to what you have to say. Didn't mean to start a debate with you in the middle of HTL and Craig's discussion.
  8. I agree, loads of skill. Never quite fulfilled his potential though. 76403[/snapback] Yeah, i always thought he was a good player. Bit slow and a bit short though.
  9. What's that supposed to mean? Just answer a question, it's pretty easy. Who identifies the players to bring to the club in order to build a team? 76120[/snapback] The scouts! OK, pedency apart, it's Souness, but then I've never disputed that! Answer this simple one then in return: Who has the final say-so by slapping his signature on the cheque and has the power to say "not on your life am I buying that piece of shit!"? 76361[/snapback] This is something a manager would say should a club have a Chairman who is involved in team affairs when he shouldn't be. 76367[/snapback] 76370[/snapback] The final refuge. Obviously you believe a Chairman should be saying those words to a manager when in disagreement with the manager's decision on a team affairs issue, which means you are in favour of interference in team affairs by a Chairman. Wouldn't mind you telling me how any Chairman is supposed to convince ANY manager to join any club under those circumstances. 76389[/snapback] Sorry to get involved but i think this point of view is a kind of riposte to Leazes Mag. LM (i believe) has frequently stated that if you back Souness then you must, by inference back all of his decisions including getting rid of Bellamy and Robert. LM's support of Freddie was then felt to be hypocritical by some (me included) as by those standards LM must clearly back the appointment of Souness in the first place, and his continued employment. I think i'm right in this (regarding other people's opinions) but i most humbly apologise if i'm wrong. Also, i have no wish to re-open that debate with LM, i respect his stance and we've all discussed it to death which probably accounts for Craig's reluctance.
  10. 75071[/snapback] I knew someone would bring that up
  11. Was talking to my dad about some people's views that Luque is too light-weight for the english game and he said that when Bergkamp first went to Arsenal he looked completely unsuited to the style here but did adapt in time with good coaching and a bit of beefening up.
  12. So basically, no one knows where he is or what injury he might have or that he might have fallen out with The Lottery Boy...... OK.
  13. oh dear, this is where we are for backing Souness 74090[/snapback] Shepherds the only important person to have backed him.
  14. In his time here he scored and created more goals than the rest of the midfield combined. 74089[/snapback] Can't argue but his time had passed imo.
  15. Robert's time was long over, shame we didn't something for him. Bellamy was clearly worth £4m because that's all a club was prepared to pay, it's the only way you can give a monetary value to it. Our squad is weaker for Bellamy's absense though he has been injured a lot i think.
  16. We won't go down. Given's too good.
  17. We've been tinkering with the defence for years to no avail. Shearer, Ameobi, Chopra, Luque (????). Hmmm, without a striker being bought in I think we may get relegated. 74067[/snapback] We will get relegated if continue to concede goals. You've always got a chance to score but if you defence is so abysmal you may need 2 or 3 goals to draw or win which isn't something we could manage even if we bought Anelka and Nihat.
  18. He certainly didn't help the sale of shirts in the Black community either
  19. I really think it will be Shearer and the end of the season.
  20. For the umpteenth time: I said that Souness needed time to prove himself one way or the other. He's used that time to prove that he isn't good enough. Which doesn't make me wrong because he still needed that time to prove his inadequacy in his role as manager of Newcastle United (not Liverpool, Blackburn, or any other club he may have been at in the past). It was simply the true, 100% correct statement that "A new manager needs time to prove himself" that makes me RIGHT and not WRONG. FACTARAMA. 73891[/snapback] Gemmill, you were wrong because you thought he was the man for the job when he came here. That is all I am saying, just admit you were wrong on that aspect and I will never bring it up again. 73902[/snapback] If the choice was Bruce, Souness or O'Leary (Big Sam turned us down) and someone picked Souness i wouldn't vilify them for it.
  21. I agree with the gist of your reply (Especially on morale) but he did wheel and deal a bit getting rid of Goma for example who I thought was a good player. Playing Devil's advocate he made no attempt to get on with/improve the situation of Marcelino - not a popular view I know but when you consider how he fell out with Nobby and Elliot to an extent later on I'd say to try and make out that Bobby was the perfect opposite to Souness is just a tad biased. On a similar note see Keegan with Venison/Clark/Cole. 73840[/snapback] Bobby Robson took over a club that needed a re-build and restoration of morale, Souness took over a team that didn't need that, the situation is totally different. He sold players he shouldn't have sold, and has failed to man manage players, and has created his own problems. These are the same things which have followed him through his whole managerial career. Where was there any basis for thinking he was going to change just because he became manager of Newcastle ? You can't compare Bobby Robsons track record and standing in the game to Souness. 73876[/snapback] I think i might disagree with that. Bobby's team were underperforming, he played certain players regardless of form and certain other players were clearly taking the p*ss regarding their importance to the team. I think we needed someone to nudge us back in the right direction (SBR got us there in the 1st place) and to freshen up the squad. Of course, Souness hasn't managed to do that, i do think however that he has sorted out club discipline though i am more than aware to what cost.
  22. I think people tend to believe that if they convinced other forum members to agree with them about sacking Souness immediatley/quickly that it would have actually made a difference to the opinion of the Board/Freddie. Nothing could be further from the truth imo. The Board couldn't give a f**k about what we say on here. Someone on here saying Souness deserved time doesn't actually account for anything in the real world.
  23. The most important aspect of the new manager (if we get one) is that he genuinely believes he can get what he needs out of the current squad with perhaps the addition of a bit of cover. The last thing we need is someone to come in who decides he needs a new first 11.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.