Emmanuel Rivière

[Christmas Tree 3997]

 

Because we don't have a problem when we bring in new bodies and Pardew's not had the time to take the edge off them. Remy came in and scored 10 goals in 14 games. But Pardew doesn't maintain standards. Ever.

 

 

 

So surely its in our interest to get points on the board and avoid relegation before he ruins them??????

[Happy Face 29]

The Cardiff game was where the protests were last season so the evidence is that protests don't lead to defeat.

 

Some hair-raising Blaydon Races' and that at that game. Inspirational stuff.

 

Course CT says the protest was barely noticeable, so I'm not sure what he's worried about.

[Happy Face 29]

 

 

So surely its in our interest to get points on the board and avoid relegation before he ruins them??????

 

Protest doesn't cost points though. Pardew does.

[Meenzer 13967]

 

Protest doesn't cost points though. Pardew does.

 

[The Fish 8949]

 

 

Na, it's the striker situation for me. The costliest players to buy, the position we've needed filling the most for a couple of years now, and the position we constantly skimp out out. We can buy all the flair midfielders in the world but with shite up front we'll be toothless.

 

Skimping or getting a bargain?

 

Ba, Cisse, Remy (on loan) have all scored a decent amount of goals for us, came with little fanfare (except maybe Remy as we'd seen him light up the Premier League) and we got all three for less than £10m in fees. £4.3m, £2.7m and c£5m on wages respectively.

 

Soldado cost £26m or £4.3m a goal

Sturridge cost less than half that (c£12m) or £307k a goal

Benteke cost £7m or £205k a goal

Cisse cost £346k a goal.

 

My point is that the fee doesn't necessarily reflect their value. I couldn't give a shit if the striker that comes in costs ten million or ten pounds, as long as he's scoring.

Edited July 17, 2014 by The Fish

[ClubSpinDoctor 0]

 

Skimping or getting a bargain?

 

Ba, Cisse, Remy (on loan) have all scored a decent amount of goals for us, came with little fanfare (except maybe Remy as we'd seen him light up the Premier League) and we got all three for less than £10m in fees. £4.3m, £2.7m and c£5m on wages respectively.

 

Soldado cost £26m or £4.3m a goal

Sturridge cost less than half that (c£12m) or £307k a goal

Benteke cost £7m or £205k a goal

Cisse cost £346k a goal.

 

My point is that the fee doesn't necessarily reflect their value. I couldn't give a shit if the striker that comes in costs ten million or ten pounds, as long as he's scoring.

 

 

Skimping. Because otherwise we'd occasionally pay the going rate for a forward that would improve us. Skimping, because often when we need more than one, we only get one. Like the summer we signed Ba when we needed at least one more. We skimped and played the long game until January when we signed Cisse. It worked out because Ba carried us. They won't always be so lucky. Skimping because when we sold Carroll we didn't buy anybody because there was no 'bargains' about. Skimping because when we sold Ba, we didn't sign anyone because there was no 'bargains' about. We hadn't signed a striker last summer and we didn't get Remy till August. If he'd gone somewhere else what would have happened? Would we have gone and paid the going rate for an equally capable player? No.

 

I agree, I don't mind getting bargains when they're available. It's the not signing anyone when there's no bargains available that pisses me off. And one of these days we'll need a couple of forwards, only sign one, and he'll be a De Jong instead of a Remy or Ba. And we'll be fucked.

[The Fish 8949]

 

 

Skimping. Because otherwise we'd occasionally pay the going rate for a forward that would improve us. Skimping, because often when we need more than one, we only get one. Like the summer we signed Ba when we needed at least one more. We skimped and played the long game until January when we signed Cisse. It worked out because Ba carried us. They won't always be so lucky. Skimping because when we sold Carroll we didn't buy anybody because there was no 'bargains' about. Skimping because when we sold Ba, we didn't sign anyone because there was no 'bargains' about. We hadn't signed a striker last summer and we didn't get Remy till August. If he'd gone somewhere else what would have happened? Would we have gone and paid the going rate for an equally capable player? No.

 

I agree, I don't mind getting bargains when they're available. It's the not signing anyone when there's no bargains available that pisses me off. And one of these days we'll need a couple of forwards, only sign one, and he'll be a De Jong instead of a Remy or Ba. And we'll be fucked.

But given the noises coming out of the club are that we're after another senior striker, why are you adamant that we're definitely not getting one in?

 

I still can't work out how you took Pardew's quote as proof that we're not getting another player?

 

as an aside, it could be that we've signed two attacking midfielders because it might be thought the goals will come from that area, rather than a striker? (I'm not saying that is the case, but I'm certainly more confident of goals from that area, than previously).

[David Kelly 1115]

Skimping. Because otherwise we'd occasionally pay the going rate for a forward that would improve us. Skimping, because often when we need more than one, we only get one. Like the summer we signed Ba when we needed at least one more. We skimped and played the long game until January when we signed Cisse. It worked out because Ba carried us. They won't always be so lucky. Skimping because when we sold Carroll we didn't buy anybody because there was no 'bargains' about. Skimping because when we sold Ba, we didn't sign anyone because there was no 'bargains' about. We hadn't signed a striker last summer and we didn't get Remy till August. If he'd gone somewhere else what would have happened? Would we have gone and paid the going rate for an equally capable player? No.

 

I agree, I don't mind getting bargains when they're available. It's the not signing anyone when there's no bargains available that pisses me off. And one of these days we'll need a couple of forwards, only sign one, and he'll be a De Jong instead of a Remy or Ba. And we'll be fucked.

I think this is a fairly accurate assement. The previous regime spent big on strikers (Cole, Beardsley, Ferdinand, Asprilla, Shearer, Owen) and most of the time it paid off (Luque being the only one who didn't really come off at all and Owen certainly wasn't value for money but he did score goals).

Under Ashley we have, so far, tried to do it on the cheap. It's not hurt us too bad so far but has this just been luck?

[ClubSpinDoctor 0]

But given the noises coming out of the club are that we're after another senior striker, why are you adamant that we're definitely not getting one in?

 

I still can't work out how you took Pardew's quote as proof that we're not getting another player?

 

as an aside, it could be that we've signed two attacking midfielders because it might be thought the goals will come from that area, rather than a striker? (I'm not saying that is the case, but I'm certainly more confident of goals from that area, than previously).

 

 

What noises? If they had a priority 'senior' striker lined up you'd think they'd have already moved for him. Pardew's quotes to me translate to him being happy with his forward options, I'm not saying that they definitely translate to not getting one. I'm saying I've seen us fail to sufficiently strengthen our strikeforce in many windows because they're expensive and we're tight, and I'm fairly confident we won't see a decent one come in. I might be wrong but that's my prediction. I've seen it all before. If we haven't signed a proper striker because we're replying on goals from midfield then we're in trouble.

Edited July 17, 2014 by ClubSpinDoctor

[The Fish 8949]

 

 

What noises? If they had a priority 'senior' striker lined up you'd think they'd have already moved for him. Pardew's quotes to me translate to him being happy with his forward options, I'm not saying that they definitely translate to not getting one. I'm saying I've seen us fail to sufficiently strengthen our strikeforce in many windows because they're expensive and we're tight, and I'm fairly confident we won't see a decent one come in. I might be wrong but that's my prediction. I've seen it all before. If we haven't signed a proper striker because we're replying on goals from midfield then we're in trouble.

 

Well we've tried to sign; Grenier, Gomis, Remy, Coman, Aubemyang... This says to me we're after a senior striker. This Reviere has been spoken of as "one for development", indicating he's not thought of as the first choice immediately.

 

I'm not saying we're definitely going to go and sign a top rate striker for huge spondoolies, but I just genuinely look at the business we've done as evidence of an effort to strengthen the 1st team and one are we're clearly very weak is forwards. That we haven't signed one yet doesn't mean that it's not a priority, it could be a whole heap of reasons. The player we were courting may have been at the world cup (as Cabella was), the player might only be available once his selling club has found a replacement, it could be that we're unsettling him and waiting for him to request a transfer a la Grenier...

 

I'm not going to panic until the final week of the window.

[ClubSpinDoctor 0]

 

Well we've tried to sign; Grenier, Gomis, Remy, Coman, Aubemyang... This says to me we're after a senior striker. This Reviere has been spoken of as "one for development", indicating he's not thought of as the first choice immediately.

 

 

Where's he been talked as as "one for development"? We 'tried' to sign those players, failed (shock) and then signed alternatives. Reviere is our alternative striker, imo. Time will tell though.

 

Edit: Also, not getting any of that list of 'priority' targets should answer your 'skimping or bargain' question too

Edited July 17, 2014 by ClubSpinDoctor

[ChezGiven 0]

 

Because we don't have a problem when we bring in new bodies and Pardew's not had the time to take the edge off them. Remy came in and scored 10 goals in 14 games. But Pardew doesn't maintain standards. Ever.

 

I do like your theory, particularly because it was developed through some analysis. You've mistaken that process for a proof though. All theories come from data gathering. To then say the theory is true because it fits the data is self-fulfilling.

 

Cabaye continued to develop and improve during his time with us. Debuchy got better an better, Ba was top class. Sissoko and Anita have improved but maybe less consistently. Remy's goal record might have been better if his appearances and interest had remained at the original level. I imagine he thought 'fuck this' last January too, like the rest of us.

 

The Pardew effect on players is bollocks because the fans say the opposite. The fans say we sell our best players. We sell them for profit because they develop with us into proven premiership players. So the Pardew effect can't be true. At least as many as have turned shite under us anyway. If you want to argue that 3 or 4 players were so good they were an exception to the rule then you don't have an argument really.

 

As I said, a nice analysis led to a nice theory but it doesn't stand up to the valuation of the players on the market as a metric of their development.

[Happy Face 29]

Pardew doesn't necessarily turn players to shit. He clearly fails to organize them in a system that is effective for any length of time though.

 

He relies entirely on individuals and chance in the final third, rather than a system of attack that breaks down the opposition.

 

This is more effective when players are fresh and enthusiastic with a point to prove.

[Park Life 70]

Pardew doesn't necessarily turn players to shit. He clearly fails to organize them in a system that is effective for any length of time though.

 

He relies entirely on individuals and chance in the final third, rather than a system of attack that breaks down the opposition.

 

This is more effective when players are fresh and enthusiastic with a point to prove.

That's it in a nutshell. After the sheen wears off and they get a few tonkings they start to lose heart. The squad being very thin also means they can't have a rest or be replaced.

[Park Life 70]

I do like your theory, particularly because it was developed through some analysis. You've mistaken that process for a proof though. All theories come from data gathering. To then say the theory is true because it fits the data is self-fulfilling.

 

Cabaye continued to develop and improve during his time with us. Debuchy got better an better, Ba was top class. Sissoko and Anita have improved but maybe less consistently. Remy's goal record might have been better if his appearances and interest had remained at the original level. I imagine he thought 'fuck this' last January too, like the rest of us.

 

The Pardew effect on players is bollocks because the fans say the opposite. The fans say we sell our best players. We sell them for profit because they develop with us into proven premiership players. So the Pardew effect can't be true. At least as many as have turned shite under us anyway. If you want to argue that 3 or 4 players were so good they were an exception to the rule then you don't have an argument really.

 

As I said, a nice analysis led to a nice theory but it doesn't stand up to the valuation of the players on the market as a metric of their development.

Cabaye didn't get better he began to acclimatise to the pace of the PL and was also heartened when his bumchum appeared on the scene.

 

Ba played out of his skin cause he was scanning the horizon for a big payday.

 

Sissoko has gone downhill since the early hiatus and scoring and everything.

 

Remy see Ba.

 

Debuchy I'll give you. But he started off that bad almost anything would look like an improvement.

 

Williamson I'd say is clear cut. Improved no end under Pards.

Edited July 17, 2014 by Park Life

[ChezGiven 0]

Pardew doesn't necessarily turn players to shit. He clearly fails to organize them in a system that is effective for any length of time though.

 

He relies entirely on individuals and chance in the final third, rather than a system of attack that breaks down the opposition.

 

This is more effective when players are fresh and enthusiastic with a point to prove.

Or 'losing Cabaye fucked us' which also explains massive amounts of the data. Simpler.

[ChezGiven 0]

Cabaye didn't get better he began to acclimatise to the pace of the PL and was also heartened when his bumchum appeared on the scene.

 

Ba played out of his skin cause he was scanning the horizon for a big payday.

 

Sissoko has gone downhill since the early hiatus and scoring and everything.

 

Remy see Ba.

 

Debuchy I'll give you. But he started off that bad almost anything would look like an improvement.

 

Williamson I'd say is clear cut. Improved no end under Pards.

So loads of exceptions to the rule. Sissoko was good for 3 games then nothing, last season he was increasingly effective.

 

Anita looked lost then looked good then looked poor when the whole team was switched off.

 

Pardew is an average manager but the 'Pardewed' shite is the worst example of selectively fitting data to a view of the world. This is not a defence of his abilities, just a look at players whose values have increased under him. Cabaye, Debuchy, Ba, Remy, Sissoko have all increased in value whilst playing for him. Some have decreased too.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

It's laughable how stats are used. I would still prefer a better manager than Pardew but here is a bloke that against lots of odds, has taken us to fifth and also had us competing for a champions league spot only months ago, prior to the star player being sold.

[Happy Face 29]

Losing 14 in 20 is just stats now.

 

Ok

[Happy Face 29]

Or 'losing Cabaye fucked us' which also explains massive amounts of the data. Simpler.

Aye, Cabaye was an individual he relied on more than most. That doesn't alter my point at all.

[Dr Gloom 19736]

You know when you've been pardewed

[ChezGiven 0]

It's an elegant theory and based on a very good analysis. I shouldn't sound like I am trying to argue against some of the finer points you have been making, especially on the inability to break sides sides down in the final third. Some of what you say crosses over into the simplistic view that Pardew is so inept he destroys otherwise brilliant players. I think this nonsense.

 

Anyway, given a lot of what you said, on that basis we should be looking forward to a very good start to next season. Look forward to seeing how it plays out later on.

[BLACKANDWHITEGEORDIE 0]

Pardew does not have a clue how to handle talented, skilful, ball players like HBA, Marveaux, MYM, Cabaye . His idea of a footballer is someone who will run for the whole 90 minutes every game, no matter what position they are playing. One example is when the opposition get a corner and we bring back 11 players in the box. If we manage to retain the ball after the corner there is no one up field to take advantage. He has turned Cisse from a player who loved scoring all types of goals to a zombie. He keeps trying with the likes of Obertan and Sammy A who will never make the grade. He can't see that Hiadara is a much better LB than Dummett. He can't see that MYM and Colo should never play together as they both like the left side of defence. Sissoko played in the WC as he did in his first 2/3 games for us. Why is that? I would love to know when or if our coaches go on any 'refresher' courses?

[The Fish 8949]

I do like your theory, particularly because it was developed through some analysis. You've mistaken that process for a proof though. All theories come from data gathering. To then say the theory is true because it fits the data is self-fulfilling.

 

Cabaye continued to develop and improve during his time with us. Debuchy got better an better, Ba was top class. Sissoko and Anita have improved but maybe less consistently. Remy's goal record might have been better if his appearances and interest had remained at the original level. I imagine he thought 'fuck this' last January too, like the rest of us.

 

The Pardew effect on players is bollocks because the fans say the opposite. The fans say we sell our best players. We sell them for profit because they develop with us into proven premiership players. So the Pardew effect can't be true. At least as many as have turned shite under us anyway. If you want to argue that 3 or 4 players were so good they were an exception to the rule then you don't have an argument really.

 

As I said, a nice analysis led to a nice theory but it doesn't stand up to the valuation of the players on the market as a metric of their development.

 

Could the interest from other clubs not simply be because they've proven they're capable of playing in the Premier League and/or proven they aren't the injury risk they were supposed to be?

 

So while Pardew's tactics may neuter them in terms of results, goals, assists etc., their ability/potential is made more evident? There have been times when it's clear that Cabaye was the best player on the park and Newcastle have neither scored, nor won?

 

It would be hard, if not impossible to prove that, but rather than saying Pardew has coached the quality out of them, couldn't it be said that Pardew's tactics restrict the players' product, yet still allow their ability to be scouted by interested parties?

 

Or would looking at the player's performances before and after Pardew's Newcastle be a better measure of the effect his tactics and Newcastle's coaching have had on them?

[Park Life 70]

There are other factors here. Wenger only saw Cabaye as a back up player and refused to bid up and it was fortunate for us and Cabaye that PSG were under pressure to buy more French players and saw Cabaye as a quick fix...He wasn't an instant starter when he arrived. Historically players arriving in the PL from abroad take a season or so to play their best football and the elite clubs monitor such players. Us and those teams around us have become proving grounds of sorts for untried arrivals.