The Fish

They've had some shite and not a lot of shine, haven't they. I mean, Bent and Phillips were good goalscorers, Henderson has become a good player, Johnson's talent is wiped out by his nonce sense, but aside from them I can't think of many real standout players. And bear in mind they're in the top 10 spenders in the Premier League, so it's not like they've been penny pinching. Forget about us, look at the players that have turned out for Everton, Spurs, Villa, even Middlesbrough ffs.

Fuck... have we cursed it?

One of the lads keeps suggesting it for Mbemba and it bothers me. Haven't had a proper cocktail in ages, probably Old Fashioned or a Tom Collins?

Except he didn't.

Hatem Ben Murphy

No, I don't think youngsters play their entire careers in one position. I do think young players' attributes lend themselves to one area of the pitch and the best players specialise in that area, there are rare exceptions but mostly the 21yr old who makes his debut at left wing will usually stay there. I also think that experienced centrebacks who've played most if not their entire professional career in that position should probably stick to that position in their twilight years. No problem with a certain type of striker moving back to attacking midfielder, then central mid, then deep lying playmaker as their movement and pace dwindle but their creativity, technique and vision can still be of use. I don't think that a centreback should move forward into a busy area which would have highlighted his weaknesses and ignored his strengths. I've seen it said about Albert, Woodgate, Mbemba, and Coloccini. In fact any centre back that isn't in the John Terry mould. It is daft.

I've been busy arguing that Super Hero movies are mint as fuck.

Yeah that's what I'm worried about too.

In other news, Armstrong has gone out on loan to Championship Bolton. Needs game time I suppose

Aye, and Fox's "acting" and fucking terrible quips were on a par with Schwarzenegger's in Batman Forever.

Neither of the last two had Venom in it. Last two were Andrew Garfield, who was ok as a wise cracking Spidey, but way too confident and frankly good looking to be Peter Parker. His Spider Man fought Rhys Ifans' Lizard first, then Jamie Fox's Electro and Dan DeHaan's Green Goblin in the 2nd movie. Oh and Paul Giamatti's Rhino for the last 30 seconds of the movie. They were more campy, more crash-bang-whallop, but Tobey Maguire's were decent for the time, when they were still eschewing any links to a broader "universe" and as such needn't try to be as semi-grounded as, say, Iron Man. I know that sounds daft with things like Thor and Dr Strange kicking about, but the Sony Spider Man movies have their own internal science and logic, the latest one has to abide by the MCU science and logic. So, no organic webshooters for example. A lot of the tech this Spider Man uses is Stark tech, the bad guy is using alien tech from the Avenger Assemble movie. Ruffalo's Banner is a famous scientist in this world. Sony just need to give up any and all control of future Spider Man movie promotion. They don't seem to know how to tease without revealing. If Marvel trailers are a burlesque show, Sony is just a flasher. Tobey's 2nd was probably the best Spider Man movie, mostly because he had 1 villain to fight and that villain was done well.

Like being snidey on the internet

Oh, it's not his surname, those are first and middle names.

Tried to teen the story about a teenager in high school, a story that is essentially about puberty? Top Parkying Parky

Enjoyed that and the episode sets up a few things for characters heading towards different locations.

fwiw I enjoyed the Spiderman film, but it was spoiled by way too much given away in the trailers. Each action scene was teased in the trailers, so there were few moments that really popped. Good to have a decent villain in a Spider Man film though, Keaton was much more menacing than all but Molina's Doc Ock. And like Molina's villain, I actually felt a degree of sympathy for his motivations. He wasn't just evil baddy that is evil because Spider Man is good. Holland was good at both Peter PArker/Spider Man. The comedy bits were well timed and delivered, although Flash was a bit shit. He's supposed to be the school bully, but turned out a bit lame. Seemed like he'd be the type of kid who'd be bullied or be the bully's sycophant pal. The cameo's from the other established Marvel stable members were appropriate and the chemistry between Stark and Parker worked for me too. No huge CGI destruction porn sequence, the CGI was mostly unnoticed in fact. Plot skips along at a good pace and there weren't any glaring plot holes I spotted. Less for the casual movie goer to get thrilled about, especially if you've watched the trailers. If you enjoy Super Hero movies and are a bit of a fan then it's certainly worth a watch, if you don't then it's not worth going to the cinema for. Liked Donald Glover's appearance, and his character is a nod to another character from the comics. But then I like Donald Glover in everything he's done thus far.

Morning mate, Nice work from the lad, maybes have him do a bit more stuff to camera before and after the game to bookend it? Predictions for and review after? What do you lads think of Cathro? He came to Newcastle with a good reputation, and was the only member of the 1st team coaching staff kept on by Rafa after the McClaren debacle. Your #11 apparently looked good, what's he like? What did you think of our lads? Fans?

Well, that's perfect.

Mate of mine just called her newborn baby boy "Harry Blake Hunter" "Blake Hunter" FFS Edit: There's no familial reasons for those names either.

? Why the Hell would you think that a man who played his entire career in one position, in various leagues and at international level, would have been better in another? Just a daft thing people say about CBs who can trap, control and pass a ball 10 yards.

I've a good feeling in my bones about this week.