ChezGiven

Looking at absolutes is irrelevant, the game is a competition so strength is measured in relative terms to competitors. To Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea, obviously not much change. To Liverpool, Everton, Spurs, Southampton, West Ham, Man City, Swansea and Stoke, we are relatively weaker than where we were in 2007. Either due to investments or club development. There was a time after relegation where relative progress was being made for a couple of seasons but that's stopped. So we might be financially stronger but so are 7 other clubs who weren't competing for the title 7 years ago.

Well that's what it sounds like to me! Nah in all seriousness I am intrigued by why he didn't leave in the summer when Parish sounded him out. The timing reasons you and Happy Face provided made the same sense then too.

The opportunity was there before in the summer. Are you saying we won't sell Sissoko?

You have it points 1 to 4 but only made 2, one of which is simple (money) which is true for any job change and the second one contrives some sort of point about him knowing he is a charlatan or something. Sissoko is going and he won't be replaced. I reckon he has had enough.

The Man U comparison is nonsense. The brunt of the impact of Vidic and Ferdinand no longer being any good was borne by the team under Ferguson's last season and then under Moyes.

Yes. In terms of their relative impact. I also included Remy in what I was saying to make the comparison more complete.

The reason he decided to leave was because he knew we planned to sell Sissoko and spend a quarter of the money on someone who may or may not be a similar player. Final straw basically. Don't get me wrong, an happy he is going and would have gladly seen him sacked after the start of the season. Not a moment of hope or a reason to celebrate though, that would be pathetically naive.

Last season when Remy and Cabaye were starting every week, we were challenging the top 6. Cabaye gets sold and Remy gets injured and plays another 4 or 5 games where he isn't jnterested. The drop off in our performances was from top 7 to bottom 3 which is exactly the same fall Rodgers has experienced at Liverpool without Suarez and Sturridge. Except for us we didn't get the money from Cabaye to re-invest whereas Rodgers did. The argument that losing Cabaye should not have led to a massive decline in performance has been well and truly destroyed by Liverpool's relative decline this season. One player IS that important. I don't see the first half of last season as under-achieving and the second half, yes agreed but with multiple caveats.

The intense criticism of Pardew is not completely consistent with the established view that Ashely only equips the club with a squad capable of just surviving in the premier league and no more. I think that's about as clear as I can make it.

Koeman and Martinez have both got better squads than Pardew had. Koeman also has the chance to invest £50m on his own players in the summer to fit his style. We've got some good players and an average squad. Pardew's performance with that average squad is average when you account for the Ashley effect.

I understand your confusion Fish, it's normal. You hold both opinions so of course in your view it's reasonable. It isn't though. Ashley has not equipped Pardew with a squad that can compete with the top 6. He equipped him with a squad that can compete with the middle tranche of the league. Meaning he could fluke a good finish or end up near the relegation spots, depending on the vagaries of the season. Ashley has invested less than any other club outside of some of the newly promoted clubs. He got rid of our 3 best players last season. Pardew's performance as a manager has been undermined massively by Ashley. So aye, he could have done better but if you can't work out that criticising the owner is an automatic giving of slack to the manager, then you are suffering from a form of dissonance. Dummett, Alnwick, Williamson, Haidara, Rivière, Armstrong, Tiote even. Not top 8 players (as of today). All involved today. The way you were talking earlier in the thread it would appear you think our squad is capable of challenging the top 6, rather than mixing it in the mediocre second group of clubs. We should be of course but we don't have the players to do so. If you're not in that top group you are anywhere from 7 to bottom 4.

Most people wrote off the season we came 5th as a fluke because we played shit football. Not sure what it means for the question but I think it supports the point that you can do well in the league playing unattractive football. I agree with Salsa's main point which is that Pardew has never been given the resources to flourish as a manager under Ashley. You can't, as Fish did earlier in this thread, argue that Ashley doesn't invest properly in the club AND at the same time argue Pardew had a bunch of players who were capable of performing at a much higher level than he achieved with them. If Pardew's squad was good enough, then Ashley's investments were worthy of commendation. If Ashley has failed to invest and sold our best players (etc) then Pardew's squad was not good enough. I think people find it difficult to reconcile these two legitimate points of view. There is a general dissonance amongst our support about Ashley and Pardew which is understandable ultimately as singing 'get out of our club' to the fat bastard was inevitably going nowhere as a piece of collective constructive criticism. The ire that was directed at Pardew was imbued with a lingering and deeply felt frustration with the owners lack of ambition. In short, Pardew bore the brunt of the fans frustration with the club as a whole. And possibly football itself.

Let it go! Let it go! Somebody shoot me. 4 kids under 5, 100 presents and 2 tantrums later (not mine) am ready for a kip. Merry Xmas!!

Works well for Mourinho though.

It would be funny if one of them tweeted "We're dicks! We're reckless, arrogant, stupid dicks. And the Film Actors Guild are pussies. And Kim Jong Un is an asshole...."

I assume the US just asked The Saudis to increase supply enough to tip the price. It's why the US has that relationship with them in any case.

Pink frilly collars by the sounds of things, the poor buggers.

When you're the king you can do anything. If they previously agreed and its in the books as you not working then they're being cunts. If the possibility of you taking the day off has just come up now and they are not playing ball, then work out how to be more like Pardew in the future.

Henry VIII arguably the biggest culprit.

Triple Fitz witz. Wunderbar.

If you sign up for membership, then the only way you won't get a ticket is if the game is over-subscribed by members with loyalty points. Leicester away is also a game with some historical resonance for us so it may well be full of misty-eyed middle-aged types with nagging prostates and a few stories to tell. In which case, without doubt do everything you can to get in the away end.

Crushed garlic, finely diced shallots and a splash of olive oil?

Ben Arfa just back off holiday?

Agree on Aarons. Sounds like Sammy will get the nod ahead of Cabella.