Roeder to nowhere

[Paul 0]

Newcastle flop is no surprise

Premiership | Newcastle United

by Phil McNulty - BBC Sport 16 March 2007

 

 

Newcastle can chalk off another year without a trophy after their wretched, spineless Uefa Cup exit against AZ Alkmaar.

 

Glenn Roeder's desperately negative and naive game-plan was a cast-iron guarantee that it would be 38 years and counting since the distant black and white memories of the Inter Cities Fairs Cup win against Újpest Dózsa.

 

Newcastle supporters have not been short on suffering, and the alarm bells signalling another inevitable disappointment must have been ringing when Roeder proclaimed before the game that a goalless draw would do his side nicely.

 

And once the game started, their worst fears were confirmed. Roeder, with a two-goal cushion, sent Newcastle to their demise.

 

Roeder is only too keen to paint himself as a shrewd, street-smart tactician when Newcastle win, but he should have known Alkmaar, under the vastly superior coaching of Louis van Gaal, do not do goalless draws.

 

So timid Newcastle sat back and almost accepted their fate like frightened men, hoping to scrape a goal or somehow hang on against a side that looked full of goals and attacking intent.

 

Roeder shifted some of the blame on to the referee and a lot of the blame on to his defenders.

 

Strangely enough, not too much of the blame appeared to land at his door.

 

Sorry Glenn, this one rotted from the top down and you must take your share as well.

 

True enough, Newcastle were without Michael Owen, as they have been for virtually 15 months, but does one serious injury have such a debilitating effect?

 

Roeder talks of bringing in defenders, but he has had plenty of time to do that and this is a classic case of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.

 

And why was James Milner, a positive influence and arguably Newcastle's best player this season, left on the bench when Roeder surely knew a goal would pile almost insurmoutable pressure on Alkmaar?

 

Even Emre was thrown into the fray before him, a move that was hardly a raging success.

 

What would a warrior like Alan Shearer have made of Newcastle's pathetic approach in Holland, seemingly stripped of positive intent and cowering their way out of the cup?

 

Newcastle play in a big city with big support, but the question remains about whether they are a big club.

 

They have certainly acted like a big club.

 

And chairman Freddy Shepherd - for all the criticism - could never be accused of not thinking big in the transfer marker.

 

The big signings have arrived on a regular basis, namely superstar captures like Shearer and Owen, but trophies have the same effect on Newcastle as kryptonite did on Superman.

 

Newcastle will only be a truly big club when they have a recent history to speak of and trophies to parade.

 

Big clubs win silverware on a much more regular basis than Newcastle.

 

Not every year maybe, but they tend to trouble the trophy room cleaners rather more than once every 40 years.

 

The fans will continue to turn up, as they invariably do.

 

But they can no longer rely on boasting about a history no-one can actually remember, the amount of supporters who turn out to greet new signings, or the year they threw the Premiership away because Kevin Keegan started pointing and shouting live on telly.

 

Newcastle United is currently a middle of the road club that has not won a trophy for 38 years. These are the facts.

 

And now questions will be asked about whether Roeder is the man who can actually ends this period in the wilderness.

 

On the evidence of what was little more than a surrender against Alkmaar, that is a question that needs to be pondered very seriously.

 

Pretty much spot on IMO

Edited March 16, 2007 by Paul

[tinofbeans 91]

yep, he's written a good piece.

[Asprilla 96]

All rather obvious to be fair.

 

I'll recap.

 

 

Roeder is a decent manager but nowhere near great. He is doing nothing terribly wrong and doing some things absolutely right (being cautious with the club's money for one..something the last few managers haven't troubled themselves with).

 

The fact is, Shepherd appointed the obvious choice at the time. After steadying the ship he deserved that much. He's a decent man and his prescence at the club is no bad thing...although I'd prefer him to be back at the youth academy with a top manager in charge.

 

 

...but where are they??

 

Big name mangers demand big transfer chests...in other words, money we don't have.

 

 

It's easy to write heavy hearted "woe are the fans" pieces. We all see the same stuff written every year. The trouble is, it's much harder to ACTUALLY win something, than to write about NOT winning something.

 

 

We can all see where are troubles are on the pitch, but unearthing cheap decent players is hardly like falling off a log, it's ridiculously difficult.

[Dr. Richard Kimble 0]

Horribly true. Roeder just doesn't have the charisma to be helming us.

[Isegrim 9676]

All rather obvious to be fair.

 

I'll recap.

 

 

Roeder is a decent manager but nowhere near great. He is doing nothing terribly wrong and doing some things absolutely right (being cautious with the club's money for one..something the last few managers haven't troubled themselves with).

 

The fact is, Shepherd appointed the obvious choice at the time. After steadying the ship he deserved that much. He's a decent man and his prescence at the club is no bad thing...although I'd prefer him to be back at the youth academy with a top manager in charge.

 

 

...but where are they??

 

Big name mangers demand big transfer chests...in other words, money we don't have.

 

 

It's easy to write heavy hearted "woe are the fans" pieces. We all see the same stuff written every year. The trouble is, it's much harder to ACTUALLY win something, than to write about NOT winning something.

 

 

We can all see where are troubles are on the pitch, but unearthing cheap decent players is hardly like falling off a log, it's ridiculously difficult.

I don't think, Roeder was the "obvious" choice. He was the easy choice in the hope it would work out by accident. I honestly hoped the board would have put a bit more thought into it. Roeder's shortcomings are and were obvious imho.

 

I also still disagree about this "no money" thing. Roeder had plenty of money to his disposal last summer. Failing to address the problems in the squad and making things difficult is only his fault.

Of course, unearthing cheap players is difficult. But looking on the last two transfer windows it doesn't look to me like Roeder is really interested in it, but rather going for the young, overhyped and overpriced category...

 

Anyway, it boring without having Patrokles around for this kind of positive spin...

Edited March 16, 2007 by Isegrim

[luckyluke 2]

Apart from the half arsed and illogical kryptonite/trophies analogy, that article is spot on, and depressingly, nothing we don't already know.

[Baggio 0]

The article is spot on, we like to act like a big club when it comes to transfers but on a day to day basis we're ran like the Worlds biggest pub team.

[Tom 14011]

The article is spot on, we like to act like a big club when it comes to transfers but on a day to day basis we're ran like the Worlds biggest pub team.

 

 

 

True like

[Tino asprilla 0]

answer......shearer

[Jimbo 172]

answer......shearer

result......relegation

[TheMoog 0]

answer......shearer

result......relegation

 

I'm not so sure, for all we know Shearer could be the reason Rodent did so well prior to being offered the manager position fully from being a caretaker. To be honest out of the two I'd rather have Shearer in charge, at least he has some passion and authority about him.

[Fop 1]

answer......shearer

result......relegation

 

I'm not so sure, for all we know Shearer could be the reason Rodent did so well prior to being offered the manager position fully from being a caretaker. To be honest out of the two I'd rather have Shearer in charge, at least he has some passion and authority about him.

 

Shearer and Robson together for a few years and then Shearer I'd have jumped at, but Shearer is unproven (he might be excellent he might not be), but the real issue is I doubt he'd be daft enough to come (now anyway) as a permanent manager.

[ewerk 30159]

answer......shearer

result......relegation

 

I'm not so sure, for all we know Shearer could be the reason Rodent did so well prior to being offered the manager position fully from being a caretaker. To be honest out of the two I'd rather have Shearer in charge, at least he has some passion and authority about him.

 

Exactly what we lacked last night and something I agree Shearer would bring to the job.

[tinofbeans 91]

true enough but to pitch him in at aclub where you have a lot of overpaid do-nothing imbeciles in the first team would be a bit of a test.

 

better than the current incumbent however.

[Fop 1]

true enough but to pitch him in at aclub where you have a lot of overpaid do-nothing imbeciles in the first team would be a bit of a test.

 

better than the current incumbent however.

 

 

It might also be difficult as he still played with many of them, although some would be able to respect that and his new role, maybe some wouldn't (although I guess the way he handled his Captaincy would help in that respect).

 

Keane found that out quickly at Sunderland and that's probably partially what's helped him do well.

[Bombadil 0]

I used to be against the idea of Shearer coming here as an unproven manager, but I'd take him now.