Peter Ramage

[Guest alex]

At least when Ramage heads the ball it doesn't just go straight up in the air every single time.

 

But please don't get me started on O'Brien!

If we say they're both shit, can we call it even?

[TOPTOON 0]

Our new young defence was being big time praised only a few weeks ago, now a few bad results and many want some panic buys in. This is not the way forward imo.

 

Our best CB's in my opinion are (in order):

 

*Birmingham was a freaky game everyone bar Milner was unbelivably shite, so unfair to single out individuals on this one.

 

Taylor - Awesome player. Will get better and better with experience.

Edgar - Debut filling in at LB against Man u was awesome, we need to see more of this lad.

Hunty - Big lad at 6'3 with real potential.

Ramage - Not particularly good at LB, but different story at CB, did very well until had a few poor games against Everton and west ham.

Moore - Very experienced, reads the game well, but on his way out now and slow which is a huge minus in the Prem.

Shambles - by name shambles by nature, not the laughing stock of the Prem with out very good reason. A clown of a defender, who has proved this season in season out.

 

 

THE WAY FORWARD: We should keep faith in Taylor and find out who is his best (out of Hunty, Edgar and Ramage) partner. At the moment Ramage is out with a hamstring so its up to Roeder to try out Hunty and Edgar. |I like edgar alot personally but Hunty has good potential too.

 

THE WAY BACKWARDS: panic buy an expensive flop or pick Bramble and/or Moore over Hunty, Edgar and maybe Ramage to deny them the experience they desperately need to prove they can become top players.

 

p.s. O'brien worse than Shambles!!

 

p.s.s. I understand why some are anti Ramage, he's been poor lately and is deservedly a scapegoat at the moment. In my opinion its a little too early to completely write him off yet though.

Edited January 23, 2007 by TOPTOON

[Guest alex]

Our new young defence was being big time praised only a few weeks ago, now a few bad results and many want some panic buys in. This is not the way forward imo.

 

Our best CB's in my opinion are (in order):

 

*Birmingham was a freaky game everyone bar Milner was unbelivably shite, so unfair to single out individuals on this one.

 

Taylor - Awesome player. Will get better and better with experience.

Edgar - Debut filling in at LB against Man u was awesome, we need to see more of this lad.

Hunty - Big lad at 6'3 with real potential.

Ramage - Not particularly good at LB, but different story at CB, did very well until had a few poor games against Everton and west ham.

Moore - Very experienced, reads the game well, but slow which is a huge minus in the Prem.

Shambles - by name shambles by nature, not the laughing stock of the Prem with out very good reason. A clown of a defender, who has proved this season in season out.

 

p.s. O'brien worse than Shambles!!

 

THE WAY FORWARD: We should keep faith in Taylor and find out who is his best (out of Hunty, Edgar and Ramage) partner. At the moment Ramage is out with a hamstring so its up to Roeder to try out Hunty and Edgar. |I like edgar alot personally but Hunty has good potential too.

 

THE WAY BACKWARDS: panic buy an expensive flop or pick Bramble and Moore over Hunty, Edgar and Ramage to deny them the experience they desperately need.

Who is advocating that btw?

[David Kelly 1224]

At least when Ramage heads the ball it doesn't just go straight up in the air every single time.

 

But please don't get me started on O'Brien!

If we say they're both shit, can we call it even?

Ok then

[Gemmill 44495]

Taylor - Awesome player.

 

TOPTOON - Easily pleased.

[Gemmill 44495]

By the way, Toptoon, you're basically saying that we've got a collection of players that aren't good enough, along with some young lads who may or may not make it one day, plus the "awesome" Steven Taylor, and that we should just stick with them. And you're saying the only alternative to this is panic buying an expensive flop.

 

However I try to look at your argument it just looks like a load of bollocks to me.

[Guest alex]

I love this straw man shit like. Many people are saying this *ridiculous concept* is the way forward. They are wrong however. I'm not going to be able to quote them though, as no one was actually saying that in this thread.

[Isegrim 9737]

By the way, Toptoon, you're basically saying that we've got a collection of players that aren't good enough, along with some young lads who may or may not make it one day, plus the "awesome" Steven Taylor, and that we should just stick with them. And you're saying the only alternative to this is panic buying an expensive flop.

 

However I try to look at your argument it just looks like a load of bollocks to me.

Probably too busy thinking about our line up against Watford, so he can't concentrate on logic as well...

[David Kelly 1224]

I think Taylor has been doing really well in recent weeks and is showing he has the potential to be a good premiership player. But like any young player he is prone to making mistakes and will continue to do that until he matures as a player.

Which is why I think Roeder is foolish looking at players like Anton Ferdinand and Curtis Davies who are both going to have the same problems and will have the same problem here that Bramble has had (i.e. no older experienced player to learn from).

[Gemmill 44495]

I think Taylor has been doing really well in recent weeks and is showing he has the potential to be a good premiership player. But like any young player he is prone to making mistakes and will continue to do that until he matures as a player.

Which is why I think Roeder is foolish looking at players like Anton Ferdinand and Curtis Davies who are both going to have the same problems and will have the same problem here that Bramble has had (i.e. no older experienced player to learn from).

 

Aye, to most people, it's plainly obvious that with promising young players at the club, you need an old head playing alongside them for them to learn from, and to allow them to develop at a reasonable pace. For some reason the fucking divvy in charge seems to want to assemble a back 4 with an average age of around 21.

[David Kelly 1224]

I think Taylor has been doing really well in recent weeks and is showing he has the potential to be a good premiership player. But like any young player he is prone to making mistakes and will continue to do that until he matures as a player.

Which is why I think Roeder is foolish looking at players like Anton Ferdinand and Curtis Davies who are both going to have the same problems and will have the same problem here that Bramble has had (i.e. no older experienced player to learn from).

 

Aye, to most people, it's plainly obvious that with promising young players at the club, you need an old head playing alongside them for them to learn from, and to allow them to develop at a reasonable pace. For some reason the fucking divvy in charge seems to want to assemble a back 4 with an average age of around 21.

Robson seemed to want to do the same thing too!

[Isegrim 9737]

I think Taylor has been doing really well in recent weeks and is showing he has the potential to be a good premiership player. But like any young player he is prone to making mistakes and will continue to do that until he matures as a player.

Which is why I think Roeder is foolish looking at players like Anton Ferdinand and Curtis Davies who are both going to have the same problems and will have the same problem here that Bramble has had (i.e. no older experienced player to learn from).

 

Aye, to most people, it's plainly obvious that with promising young players at the club, you need an old head playing alongside them for them to learn from, and to allow them to develop at a reasonable pace. For some reason the fucking divvy in charge seems to want to assemble a back 4 with an average age of around 21.

Robson seemed to want to do the same thing too!

But Woodgate was despite his age a natural leader at the back. So it isn't just a question of age. It's just that experience can make up for a lack of talent. I'm not convinced that any of the current targets as they are talked about in public falls in the same category as Woodgate.

[David Kelly 1224]

Aye fair point, I forgot about Woody. Mind you players of his calibre don't often come along!

[TOPTOON 0]

By the way, Toptoon, you're basically saying that we've got a collection of players that aren't good enough, along with some young lads who may or may not make it one day, plus the "awesome" Steven Taylor, and that we should just stick with them. And you're saying the only alternative to this is panic buying an expensive flop.

 

However I try to look at your argument it just looks like a load of bollocks to me.

 

Gemmill do you even have an argument/a point/thoughts/a brain ?

 

Easy to sit back and try (unsuccessfully i might add) to pick holes in someone else's argument without offering positive thoughts on a route forward yourself.

 

My point is simply this:

 

1. We are not going to be able to sign a John Terry or a Rio.

2. We 've paid big money for the likes of Boumsong, Shambles and have even brought in experienced Full backs in Car and baba and it hasn't worked out, (failed miserably in fact).

 

Should we 'A' panic and sign another big money defender i.e. Curtis for £9m who may well turn out to be another flop like Shambles or Boum or should we 'B' let pearson work with the very promising potential, crop of youngster defenders and mould them into quality players? Taylor is our future in defence build round him.

 

When i put it like this, surely even Gemmill can figure out the right move.

Edited January 23, 2007 by TOPTOON

[rebellious 0]

By the way, Toptoon, you're basically saying that we've got a collection of players that aren't good enough, along with some young lads who may or may not make it one day, plus the "awesome" Steven Taylor, and that we should just stick with them. And you're saying the only alternative to this is panic buying an expensive flop.

 

However I try to look at your argument it just looks like a load of bollocks to me.

 

Agree with you Gemmil.

 

Especially when you look at the fact we have conceeded 25 goals since Bramble has been injured in the last 13 games and 9 goals in the previous 13 he played. It proves to me even if you want to say those 9 conceeded with him the team were all down to him which they weren`t he is a better defender. I`m not saying the young ones won`t develop into better defenders ( apart from ramage) but at this moment he is our most experienced.

 

How have you got Edgar above Huntington amazes me also.

Edited January 23, 2007 by rebellious

[Guest alex]

By the way, Toptoon, you're basically saying that we've got a collection of players that aren't good enough, along with some young lads who may or may not make it one day, plus the "awesome" Steven Taylor, and that we should just stick with them. And you're saying the only alternative to this is panic buying an expensive flop.

 

However I try to look at your argument it just looks like a load of bollocks to me.

 

Gemmill do you even have an argument/a point/thoughts/a brain ?

 

Easy to sit back and try (unsuccessfully i might add) to pick holes in someone else's argument without offering positive thoughts on a route forward yourself.

 

My point is simply this:

 

1. We are not going to be able to sign a John Terry or a Rio.

2. We 've paid big money for the likes of Boumsong, Shambles and have even brought in experienced Full backs in Car and baba and it hasn't worked out, (failed miserably in fact).

 

Should we 'A' panic and sign another big money defender i.e. Curtis for £9m who may well turn out to be another flop like Shambles or Boum or should we 'B' let pearson work with the very promising potential, crop of youngster defenders and mould them into quality players? Taylor is our future in defence build round him.

 

When i put it like this, surely even Gemmill can figure it out the right move.

Ideally, we should buy or loan an experienced defender to help the younger ones develop imo. Or, even better, sign an old head now and get another (quality centre-half) in the summer. I'm not sure which ones will make it but (I haven't seen enough of Huntingdon or Edgar yet) but I think Taylor might have what it takes (he sin't outstanding yet) and I don't think Ramage will ever be good enough.

Btw, I don't see anyone saying we should panic buy x, y or z but I'm all for us buying quality players. Just because previous managers have bought shite that isn't a reason to stop looking at good players. No top or half-decent side ever relies purely on inexperienced youngsters for very long (especially across the whole of the back four), it's asking for trouble. Also, Roeder fucked up bigstyle by not getting Campbell (reportedly willing to come here) and I thought that when he was still available.

Edited January 23, 2007 by alex

[Isegrim 9737]

By the way, Toptoon, you're basically saying that we've got a collection of players that aren't good enough, along with some young lads who may or may not make it one day, plus the "awesome" Steven Taylor, and that we should just stick with them. And you're saying the only alternative to this is panic buying an expensive flop.

 

However I try to look at your argument it just looks like a load of bollocks to me.

 

Gemmill do you even have an argument/a point/thoughts/a brain ?

 

Easy to sit back and try (unsuccessfully i might add) to pick holes in someone else's argument without offering positive thoughts on a route forward yourself.

 

My point is simply this:

 

1. We are not going to be able to sign a John Terry or a Rio.

2. We 've paid big money for the likes of Boumsong, Shambles and have even brought in experienced Full backs in Car and baba and it hasn't worked out, (failed miserably in fact).

 

Should we 'A' panic and sign another big money defender i.e. Curtis for £9m who may well turn out to be another flop like Shambles or Boum or should we 'B' let pearson work with the very promising potential, crop of youngster defenders and mould them into quality players? Taylor is our future in defence build round him.

 

When i put it like this, surely even Gemmill can figure out the right move.

Are you really thinking a club like Newcastle which should (financially has to ) compete for European qualification can afford trying to mould some youngsters with questionable talent over a long time into Premierleague players.

 

Edited January 23, 2007 by Isegrim

[Gemmill 44495]

By the way, Toptoon, you're basically saying that we've got a collection of players that aren't good enough, along with some young lads who may or may not make it one day, plus the "awesome" Steven Taylor, and that we should just stick with them. And you're saying the only alternative to this is panic buying an expensive flop.

 

However I try to look at your argument it just looks like a load of bollocks to me.

 

Gemmill do you even have an argument/a point/thoughts/a brain ?

 

Easy to sit back and try (unsuccessfully i might add) to pick holes in someone else's argument without offering positive thoughts on a route forward yourself.

 

My point is simply this:

 

1. We are not going to be able to sign a John Terry or a Rio.

2. We 've paid big money for the likes of Boumsong, Shambles and have even brought in experienced Full backs in Car and baba and it hasn't worked out, (failed miserably in fact).

 

Should we 'A' panic and sign another big money defender i.e. Curtis for £9m who may well turn out to be another flop like Shambles or Boum or should we 'B' let pearson work with the very promising potential, crop of youngster defenders and mould them into quality players? Taylor is our future in defence build round him.

 

When i put it like this, surely even Gemmill can figure it out the right move.

 

I don't know how you dare accuse me of having no brain, with some of the thick as pigshit stuff you spout on here. "Let's stick with the current defenders that we have. They might just come good."

 

Have you heard of C. Sign an experienced centre-half? Or are you only allowing yourself the two options, you fucking numbskull.

[ChezGiven 0]

You just said what I said earlier I think the word you are struggling to find is stakeholder by the way Your cardigan is ashamed of you

 

No, you thought that buying a ticket was buying a share. I dont.

 

By calling a fan a stakeholder you dont change the nature of what was exchanged in the market. All fans are stakeholders, even ones who stream the games off the net for nowt and contribute to forums but add no revenue to the club.

Nonsense. I said nothing of the sort about shares and tickets.

 

 

I said "You pay to watch the spectacle as a form of entertainment (sic). The exchange of cash for ticket entitles you to enter the ground and view the game. Nowt else. Wages are a contract between employer and employee and does not involve 'customers' tbqfh."

 

You said you pay the players wages to counter that and to suggest that you are entitled to a voice within the club. Thats why we are talking about shares and tickets tbh.

 

And stop googling to back your shite arguments up

 

BTW do you have bad coffee breath and sweaty pits? Most teachers do tbh.

Youre resorting to making this up Chez. I said that indirectly - note the use of the word throughout - we pay the players wages. It is an unwise economist that is quite so literal and I have grave doubts about your academic claims. As for googling? Hardly sunshine. The fact that you feel that is necessary when nothing has been noted beyond GCSE economics level tells its own story tbf.

 

As for coffee breath and sweaty pits? Well the NUT make it compulsory and I have been with them since they gave me the best pencil case during my teacher training many moons ago!

 

I made a point about buying a ticket entitling you to nothing more than entering the ground. You disagreed so i reiterated this disagreement for you. Simpleton.

 

All you've then said is that you doubt i have any qualifications, denied spuriously googling and admitted you've got bad breath. Not the greatest comeback i've seen.

 

I've said once what my credentials were. I accept you are a schoolteacher too. I dont doubt you are telling the truth.

As you are unable to recall the evidence of this discussion I am afraid I seriously doubt yours. I have reiterated several times that in the literal sense then of course the fans dont pay the players wages. Without them, however, there is no market and hence no need for a wage. I am sure you can work the rest out. Its GCSE stuff man. Get a grip. You appear to have some evidence of this googling which is amusing when your performance here is more Peter Ramage than Peter Drucker

WTF are you arguing about then? I said 'fans dont pay wages' (which you've just agreed with) and 'buying a ticket entitles you to a seat and nowt else' (which you have been unable to address as you know nothing of the exchange of property rights, via a price signal - WTP basically). I cant see where you have said anything intelligent in response to these two points.

 

If ticket sales are falling and players wages are rising, how are the two connected directly?

 

You are reducing the argument to a simplistic level saying that money out of the pockets of the fans ends up in the clubs coffers and these are used to pay the fans hence 'fans pay the players wages'.

 

That statment is of such enormous retardedness for someone who teaches economics, you can only be taking the piss.

 

Try responding to my points next time you post instead of shit attempts at comedy too.

[TOPTOON 0]

By the way, Toptoon, you're basically saying that we've got a collection of players that aren't good enough, along with some young lads who may or may not make it one day, plus the "awesome" Steven Taylor, and that we should just stick with them. And you're saying the only alternative to this is panic buying an expensive flop.

 

However I try to look at your argument it just looks like a load of bollocks to me.

 

Gemmill do you even have an argument/a point/thoughts/a brain ?

 

Easy to sit back and try (unsuccessfully i might add) to pick holes in someone else's argument without offering positive thoughts on a route forward yourself.

 

My point is simply this:

 

1. We are not going to be able to sign a John Terry or a Rio.

2. We 've paid big money for the likes of Boumsong, Shambles and have even brought in experienced Full backs in Car and baba and it hasn't worked out, (failed miserably in fact).

 

Should we 'A' panic and sign another big money defender i.e. Curtis for £9m who may well turn out to be another flop like Shambles or Boum or should we 'B' let pearson work with the very promising potential, crop of youngster defenders and mould them into quality players? Taylor is our future in defence build round him.

 

When i put it like this, surely even Gemmill can figure out the right move.

Are you really thinking a club like Newcastle which should (financially has to ) compete for European qualification can afford trying to mould some youngsters with questionable talent over a long time into Premierleague players.

 

 

Yes Taylor is a natural leader for starters. Nobby as RB and we need a good LB more than we need a 7th CB.

 

Who do you propose we realisticallty get in now then?

 

I totally agree that Roeder should have got Campbell in when we could have. Big mistake, but its spilt milk we are not likely to get him, so what now then???

 

I'd be happy with Taylor, Hunty, Edgar, Ramage + 1 experienced defender like Campbell. But unbelievably we've given Shambles a new contract plus we've got the very experienced, nearly over the hill and slow Moore already till the end of the season.

 

My proposal would be to give the youngsters the chance till the end of the season, we have 6 CB's, then if needs be we get rid of Shambles if we can, Moore's probably going anyway and we get a more experienced CB in at the end of the season. No one seems willing to part with quality CB's at the moment without paying way over the top prices.

Edited January 23, 2007 by TOPTOON

[TOPTOON 0]

By the way, Toptoon, you're basically saying that we've got a collection of players that aren't good enough, along with some young lads who may or may not make it one day, plus the "awesome" Steven Taylor, and that we should just stick with them. And you're saying the only alternative to this is panic buying an expensive flop.

 

However I try to look at your argument it just looks like a load of bollocks to me.

 

Gemmill do you even have an argument/a point/thoughts/a brain ?

 

Easy to sit back and try (unsuccessfully i might add) to pick holes in someone else's argument without offering positive thoughts on a route forward yourself.

 

My point is simply this:

 

1. We are not going to be able to sign a John Terry or a Rio.

2. We 've paid big money for the likes of Boumsong, Shambles and have even brought in experienced Full backs in Car and baba and it hasn't worked out, (failed miserably in fact).

 

Should we 'A' panic and sign another big money defender i.e. Curtis for £9m who may well turn out to be another flop like Shambles or Boum or should we 'B' let pearson work with the very promising potential, crop of youngster defenders and mould them into quality players? Taylor is our future in defence build round him.

 

When i put it like this, surely even Gemmill can figure it out the right move.

 

I don't know how you dare accuse me of having no brain, with some of the thick as pigshit stuff you spout on here. "Let's stick with the current defenders that we have. They might just come good."

 

Have you heard of C. Sign an experienced centre-half? Or are you only allowing yourself the two options, you fucking numbskull.

 

OOOooo don't let me get to you Gemmy baby

 

 

And who exactly would you have us sign? Give an example?

 

P.s. Not a bad sugestion though for you, who did you steal it off?

Edited January 23, 2007 by TOPTOON

[Guest alex]

It's hardly our job to identify loan/permanent signing targets for the club is it though? It's tough to get players in during January, yes. Given the injury crisis and the summer debacle (I still think that's what it was) we should have been trying to get people on loan for months now. I bet we haven't been though.

[TOPTOON 0]

alex Posted Today, 11:50 AM

" It's hardly our job to identify loan/permanent signing targets for the club is it though? It's tough to get players in during January, yes. Given the injury crisis and the summer debacle (I still think that's what it was) we should have been trying to get people on loan for months now. I bet we haven't been though. "

 

 

Very speculative, here's some more.

 

Maybe just maybe its a bit harder than you think. I'd personally bet Glenn has/did have targets but either:

 

1. Their club didn't want to let them go or not till the end of the season.

2. They didn't want to come here.

3. their club will let them come but only if we pay way over the top type of money.

etc

etc

 

 

There maybe players who want to come but are not good enough.

Edited January 23, 2007 by TOPTOON

[Gemmill 44495]

By the way, Toptoon, you're basically saying that we've got a collection of players that aren't good enough, along with some young lads who may or may not make it one day, plus the "awesome" Steven Taylor, and that we should just stick with them. And you're saying the only alternative to this is panic buying an expensive flop.

 

However I try to look at your argument it just looks like a load of bollocks to me.

 

Gemmill do you even have an argument/a point/thoughts/a brain ?

 

Easy to sit back and try (unsuccessfully i might add) to pick holes in someone else's argument without offering positive thoughts on a route forward yourself.

 

My point is simply this:

 

1. We are not going to be able to sign a John Terry or a Rio.

2. We 've paid big money for the likes of Boumsong, Shambles and have even brought in experienced Full backs in Car and baba and it hasn't worked out, (failed miserably in fact).

 

Should we 'A' panic and sign another big money defender i.e. Curtis for £9m who may well turn out to be another flop like Shambles or Boum or should we 'B' let pearson work with the very promising potential, crop of youngster defenders and mould them into quality players? Taylor is our future in defence build round him.

 

When i put it like this, surely even Gemmill can figure it out the right move.

 

I don't know how you dare accuse me of having no brain, with some of the thick as pigshit stuff you spout on here. "Let's stick with the current defenders that we have. They might just come good."

 

Have you heard of C. Sign an experienced centre-half? Or are you only allowing yourself the two options, you fucking numbskull.

 

OOOooo don't let me get to you Gemmy baby

 

 

And who exactly would you have us sign? Give an example?

 

Not my job to give examples. It's up to the club to establish a scouting network that does this for them. Sticking with the current back line on the off-chance that Edgar and Huntington just might make it as Premiership players is crazy though. How many goals have we conceded in January alone? And you want to persevere with this defence.

 

Interesting as well that in your team for Villa you've selected Duff at left-back. Good way of demonstrating your faith in the defenders you say we should be sticking with.

[Isegrim 9737]

No, Taylor isn't a natural leader for me. He isn't organising the defence. His own anticipation and positioning isn't good enough yet, which makes him rushing into too many needless challenges. Making him the head of the defence would rather spoil his talent than nurture it. Even the likes of John Terry had someone like Desailly et al next to him.

 

As I said in another thread just looking at things here in Jormany there are a couple of players who I think could do a decent job and which could be available for decent prices compared to the over-inflated fees in England. Hofland from Wolfsburg, Simunic from Berlin, Friedrich from Mainz. A bigger risk (because of his injuries) would be someone like Metzelder whose contract is running out. At Bayern Ismael is probably only second/third choice.