PaddockLad

Obviously not as it's a text based football forum, not a oral conversation. Newcastle United hasnt been a PLC for about 2 years now fuck off you half witted mackem cretin

Only really used that (in terms of the national team) for the first time in 2002 I think and that was pretty 'European' way of playing with two DMs and the emphasis on Cafu and Roberto Carlos getting foward in the wing back position. Fair enough, it allowed Ronaldinho, Ronaldo and Rivaldo to play in attacking roles but the classic Brazilian teams with attacking flair always had four at the back. When Carlos Alberto scored his famous goal in the 1970 world cup final he did it whilst playing in what would be called today a "wing back" system, alongside 3 centre backs....the next time anyone says "who's ever won anything with 3 at the back?" just tell them probably the greatest team in football history I was under the impression that they played 4-3-3 in that tournament. I thought 3-5-2 with wing-backs came about via Argentina in '86. I suppose different people will theorise differently about these things as the best / most effective formations are fluid rather than rigid. You're probably right mate.....I've not got to that chapter in the book, but I did hear Rodney Marsh say it on the box once

Only really used that (in terms of the national team) for the first time in 2002 I think and that was pretty 'European' way of playing with two DMs and the emphasis on Cafu and Roberto Carlos getting foward in the wing back position. Fair enough, it allowed Ronaldinho, Ronaldo and Rivaldo to play in attacking roles but the classic Brazilian teams with attacking flair always had four at the back. When Carlos Alberto scored his famous goal in the 1970 world cup final he did it whilst playing in what would be called today a "wing back" system, alongside 3 centre backs....the next time anyone says "who's ever won anything with 3 at the back?" just tell them probably the greatest team in football history

How many others have won the title with two different clubs? Clough. Any more? Herbert Chapman won it with Huddersfield then Arsenal. Different era but his formation was revolutionary iirc, moving away from 2-3-5 to the 'W M' with a deep lying centre-half. "Inverting the Pyramid"? Is that like the Xmas Tree as used by Venables on occasion? Anyway, WM was a flat back 3 with two midfielders in front on them then another two attacking midfielders / deep-lying inside forwards ahead of them and three up front (i.e. two wingers and a centre-forward). No, it's the name of a book on football tactics down the years that I've been reading http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/....do?sku=6340692 I think the phrase refers to the overall change in formations over the years from having the narrow tip of the "pyramid" at the back (i.e. the defence consisting of only 2 fullbacks) when football began to be played with some thought to formation and tactics in the late 1800s to what we have at present where the base of the "pyramid" is at the back and many of the top teams play with only one striker at the tip. We have seen in the last four or five years a very significant devlopment in formations with this idea, the long accepted 4-4-2 becoming less and less prevelent.

How many others have won the title with two different clubs? Clough. Any more? Herbert Chapman won it with Huddersfield then Arsenal. Different era but his formation was revolutionary iirc, moving away from 2-3-5 to the 'W M' with a deep lying centre-half. "Inverting the Pyramid"?

Thats ok, we'll insult the inbred fuckin trogs for you, it's our pleasure and in answer to your question, they finsihed a big 2 points clear of the worst run club in the known universe......and they'll soon be down here beside us,in their natural habitat....

Yeah all you tennis fans can now go back to shouting for the frightfully English sounding Alex Bogdanovich

Did that other spurs halfwit get banned then?.....is this his annoying little brother? or is it the same person? Would he care to explain why they played a major cup semi final with large parts of their ground empty last season?

Talksport are reporting that Michael Owen is talking to Man Utd

Me and my brother and sister can barely be arsed to send a txt let alone a voucher to each other on birthdays but we get on very well.....also I've never ever celebrated fathers day in anyway shape or form (which the current gf couldnt beleive a week or so back) but I'm closer to my father than anyone else in my family....never forget mothers day or the old girls birthday mind.....I'd get my knackas cut off for that!

what particular golden era are you talking about here - the 1960's, 70's, 80's, 90's or current era ? Or when we qualified regularly for europe........with one of the best teams in the country and bought top quality footballers and filled the stadium every week. Doesn't sound like a badly run club to me. If you mean the 1950's, we may have won 3 FA Cups but we still got relegated and the club was run by a bunch of twats who creamed off as much as they could. Further than that, you are looking at when we last won the league.... Sadly we weren't living within ours means by doing it, and Shepherd comitted footballing hari kari around that time by listening to the boo boys and subsequently undermining then sacking Sir Bob. Fair enough, reach for the stars you say, but sadly we're still seeing them whilst we are here lying in the gutter. Perhaps some prudence around 04-05 may have been in order, after all one of Shep's chief public criticisms of Sir Bob was bad value for money in transfer dealings (Bassedas and Cort were mentioned, but there were others.) So why entrust a manager who was variously anywhere between 4th to 10th choice for the job the funds buy the likes of Boumsong, leaving aside the chairmans own vanity signings of Owen and Luque? What about a bit of throttling back, taking a longer view, a bit of consolidation,see how Souness was panning out? Then maybe kick on a bit if Shep felt he was doing an ok job? You can be sure that this was the turning point for many of Shepherds more vocal detracors, and this is where a lot of the debt that Ashley wouldnt and couldnt handle come from. He caused the present mess, Ashley didnt look at the books and is now personally paying the price for the Shepherd years. I feel since the credit crunch kicked in we would be in a similar mess whether the Halls had seen this coming and forced Shepherds hand or not. If Shep does come back he should thank his lucky stars for the Halls having the good business sense to get their loot out of the club at just the right time and selling to the worlds only lucky billionaire. nobody doubts that Souness was a turning point in fortunes, but the previous years weren't so bad were they ? When do you think they will be repeated ? I don't care about PR gaffes. Quite interesting though that lots of people were wanking themselves about Ashley buying pints for people in pubs [blatantly courting good grace and feeling when he knew he didn't have the footballing ambition which I posted at the time] and tangoing around the boardroom when we beat the mackems, among other things. They had to back Souness, he was their appointment. What is the point in not backing your appointment ? Do you think that alternatively, they shouldn't have appointed anybody ? Also, if you look around you, you will see that Being in the premiership with a desire to succeed = debts. Unless of course you want to run the club like the Charltons etc of this world, which appeared to be Ashleys "plan". aWe're a decade away from challenging for the champs lge, minimum, and thats if all miraculously goes well from now on. Ashley should never have been anywhere near the Bigg Market, similarly he shouldve been in the directors box in a suit. Shepherd proved himself to be as clueless as Ashley in the managerial department when he sacked Sir Bob with no one lined up. I was plaesed when KK was appointed, but that doesnt alter the fact that Allardyce shouldve been given the season. I've already posted how I think Souness shouldve been handled, they couldve backed him or nsacked him after his first full season,not after he was brought in after others had turned us down in a season where he appeard to be taking Blacburn under.Just an eye on the longterm rather than appeasing the gobshites among us, lest they turned on Shepherd himself. It is weakness in leadership in things like this that causes me to think very little of his time at the club. I actually agree with a lot of what you say in a way, it wasn't all bad under Shepherd and visiting Turin,Milan and Barcelona in the space of a few months and watching the lads playing there was something I'm as chuffed as nuts to have had the oppurtunity to do. But getting the big decisions wrong after this period of relative success is why we're in divi 2 now imo and coupled with the various disasters he presided over before Sir Bob fell into his lap then I'm very dubious about his motivation and intentions this time around. I'm sure he does have feelings for the club but in a way thats the last thing we need at the moment. A couple of seasons here and there where we did act like Charlton and not Man Utd may have done us well in the long run, as we are finding to our cost now.

what particular golden era are you talking about here - the 1960's, 70's, 80's, 90's or current era ? Or when we qualified regularly for europe........with one of the best teams in the country and bought top quality footballers and filled the stadium every week. Doesn't sound like a badly run club to me. If you mean the 1950's, we may have won 3 FA Cups but we still got relegated and the club was run by a bunch of twats who creamed off as much as they could. Further than that, you are looking at when we last won the league.... Sadly we weren't living within ours means by doing it, and Shepherd comitted footballing hari kari around that time by listening to the boo boys and subsequently undermining then sacking Sir Bob. Fair enough, reach for the stars you say, but sadly we're still seeing them whilst we are here lying in the gutter. Perhaps some prudence around 04-05 may have been in order, after all one of Shep's chief public criticisms of Sir Bob was bad value for money in transfer dealings (Bassedas and Cort were mentioned, but there were others.) So why entrust a manager who was variously anywhere between 4th to 10th choice for the job the funds buy the likes of Boumsong, leaving aside the chairmans own vanity signings of Owen and Luque? What about a bit of throttling back, taking a longer view, a bit of consolidation,see how Souness was panning out? Then maybe kick on a bit if Shep felt he was doing an ok job? You can be sure that this was the turning point for many of Shepherds more vocal detracors, and this is where a lot of the debt that Ashley wouldnt and couldnt handle come from. He caused the present mess, Ashley didnt look at the books and is now personally paying the price for the Shepherd years. I feel since the credit crunch kicked in we would be in a similar mess whether the Halls had seen this coming and forced Shepherds hand or not. If Shep does come back he should thank his lucky stars for the Halls having the good business sense to get their loot out of the club at just the right time and selling to the worlds only lucky billionaire.

Fuckin Sunday lunchtime in Cardiff......what a bunch of fuckin cunts......and the club itself are only making a comparative pittance in tv money. I thought a day on the piss in Cardiff letting the train take the strain would be canny, but it looks like we'll have to go Saturday now

I've filled in and sent back the away ST direct debit mandate with a note saying as and when the club changes hands then I'll renew depending on who buys the club.......but I'm almost certain to anyway.......as long as Ashley has fucked off

Didn't somebody post the other day that Sir John Hall has chucked his hat in with some consortium or other?.....if true its just as likely to be the one Shepherd is involved with as any of the others said to be interested. Two things....Shep will never get as lucky ever again in his entire life than when Sir Bob accepted a relative pittance to save us from the drop in 99. And,assuming we get back up in the next couple of years, whether the banks will let him finance a similar spending spree to get us challenging for the top 6, incurring the debt that Ashley couldnt and wouldnt handle. One thing we may all have to accept is NUFC will have to live within its means for the next few years...whether Shep will accept that?.....I have grave doubts

If theres anything in this and we do end up with Shep at the helm again, does anyone think he'll have learnt a single fuckin thing from his first ten years?....personally I'm not holding my breath

For the true Grand Daddys of Punk, dare I suggest The Monks? Bunch of GIs in Germany around 1963/64. Check out Black Monk Time. Mental. In a similar vein to mid 60s origins, 'You Really Got Me' is quite "pop-punkish" thats interseting.....someone once claimed to me that Ray Davies had actually invented heavy metal with that song.....the short, choppy gutitar chords, left hanging in mid air etc, but as you say it is more reminiscent of punk...

May 89 also saw the release of this, the finest "lp" recording that I personally have ever heard

Terry Hall didn't look like he was enjoying it......kept his eyes shut most of the time and generally looked like he would rather be somewhere else. They still sound brilliant though.....and they've released more dates for the autumn. Maybe Terry will look a bit more relaxed when he's not playing to 40k drugged ravaged student types most of whom weren't born when "Ghost Town" came out....

Theres some shite in there mind......Hootie and the fuckin Blowfish..........26 million?!

Goody was a media invention, on the other hand Jacko invented the pop video, some legendary work. First black artist to get rotation on daytime MTV iirc. He invented the excessively expensive pop video to prop up a mediocre song maybe. What does 'rotation on daytime MTV ' mean, is that a significant achievement? And what work do you regard as legendary? Well, its been said this morning that him and Quincy Jones pulled together R & B,pop and Rock music in a way that had never been done before. I think that is pretty unarguable. Whether you liked it of course is entirely subjective. In a way he did a sort of reverse Elvis...he was (then) a black man using elements of popular music which were at the time seen as traditionally the preserve of white audiences and mixed them with what he was brought up with (R & B/Motown) to produce in the eighties two of the (and in fact the) biggest selling albums of all time. That was a huge acheivement for someone who had been up till then mostly performing in the hugely ghettoised black music industry.Motown, the home of the Jackson 5, was very successful,but mainly sold to only black kids. MTV was starting up at the time and he and his record company could see the value of huge flashy videos to promote his music to a huge new audience in what could be termed "middle America". In this, him and Quincy Jones changed the face of popular music. Excellent post. It was also a time when MTV was quite keen to keep black and 'white' music apart in the schedules. "Bad" stopped all that shit in its tracks. True. In a way he was a revolutionary artist. Pity about the way he went in his later years, but he means a lot to absoloutely millions of people who were brought up with his music. Of course he was revolutionary that is without doubt and at a time there was a lot of things holding black music back. As I said earlier an artist can only hope to release 2/3 great works in their time and Thriller and Bad were that. IMO two of the greatest pop albums ever made. I actually prefer Off the Wall, I think Thriller is let down by too much involvement with McCartney, the scouse cunt . Bad left me a bit cold too, but there were a cople of belting tracks on that. I think I was more interested in getting off my tits at the time it came out, yes I'm that old

Goody was a media invention, on the other hand Jacko invented the pop video, some legendary work. First black artist to get rotation on daytime MTV iirc. He invented the excessively expensive pop video to prop up a mediocre song maybe. What does 'rotation on daytime MTV ' mean, is that a significant achievement? And what work do you regard as legendary? Well, its been said this morning that him and Quincy Jones pulled together R & B,pop and Rock music in a way that had never been done before. I think that is pretty unarguable. Whether you liked it of course is entirely subjective. In a way he did a sort of reverse Elvis...he was (then) a black man using elements of popular music which were at the time seen as traditionally the preserve of white audiences and mixed them with what he was brought up with (R & B/Motown) to produce in the eighties two of the (and in fact the) biggest selling albums of all time. That was a huge acheivement for someone who had been up till then mostly performing in the hugely ghettoised black music industry.Motown, the home of the Jackson 5, was very successful,but mainly sold to only black kids. MTV was starting up at the time and he and his record company could see the value of huge flashy videos to promote his music to a huge new audience in what could be termed "middle America". In this, him and Quincy Jones changed the face of popular music. Excellent post. It was also a time when MTV was quite keen to keep black and 'white' music apart in the schedules. "Bad" stopped all that shit in its tracks. True. In a way he was a revolutionary artist. Pity about the way he went in his later years, but he means a lot to absoloutely millions of people who were brought up with his music.

Goody was a media invention, on the other hand Jacko invented the pop video, some legendary work. First black artist to get rotation on daytime MTV iirc. He invented the excessively expensive pop video to prop up a mediocre song maybe. What does 'rotation on daytime MTV ' mean, is that a significant achievement? And what work do you regard as legendary? Well, its been said this morning that him and Quincy Jones pulled together R & B,pop and Rock music in a way that had never been done before. I think that is pretty unarguable. Whether you liked it of course is entirely subjective. In a way he did a sort of reverse Elvis...he was (then) a black man using elements of popular music which were at the time seen as traditionally the preserve of white audiences and mixed them with what he was brought up with (R & B/Motown) to produce in the eighties two of the (and in fact the) biggest selling albums of all time. That was a huge acheivement for someone who had been up till then mostly performing in the hugely ghettoised black music industry.Motown, the home of the Jackson 5, was very successful,but mainly sold to only black kids. MTV was starting up at the time and he and his record company could see the value of huge flashy videos to promote his music to a huge new audience in what could be termed "middle America". In this, him and Quincy Jones changed the face of popular music.

anyone got their bairns names tattooed on their forearms?...my brothers had it done...what the fuck is that all about?