Jump to content

The new manager thread


Polarboy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Schar is an absolute liability as well, has been since he's been here. Looks great at times then bang, he puts the opposition away with a great opportunity from nowhere. The best defender I've seen us have but with an uncanny ability to chuck it away with a mega-brainfart was Bramble. Could be amazing all game then become Terry Fuckwit in a heartbeat. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Howmanheyman said:

Schar is an absolute liability as well, has been since he's been here. Looks great at times then bang, he puts the opposition away with a great opportunity from nowhere. The best defender I've seen us have but with an uncanny ability to chuck it away with a mega-brainfart was Bramble. Could be amazing all game then become Terry Fuckwit in a heartbeat. 

 

Didn't Parky use to claim that was because Bramble's cock was so big that if he got half a semi his brain ran out of blood?

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sonatine said:

Read somewhere that the last time we spent big (by our standards) money on a defender was when we bought Coloccini, 13 years ago :lol: :jesuswept:

 

I'd have another Colo here in a heartbeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there is truth in this, then either he has insanely bizarre expectations/ambitions, or we are quite simply nowhere near looking to become this dominant new force in football that we gleefully (unrealistically) hoped for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So this fella is trying to imply that Staveley is too fond of the limelight to hire a DOF? That sounds like absolute nonsense. It doesn't even make any logical sense. Amanda could have a spread in Hello magazine every week if she wanted, and park the DOF in the basement to get on with his actual job is if she wanted. So aye, I agree with Paddock, Emenalo has likely got a pet lip because he didn't get the job, and this journalist is facilitating his tantrum. If that is the case maybe we're better off without him, despite his very impressive CV. Emenalo himself of course seems pretty fond of publicity with his features in the Guardian about him being a social justice activist. Which of course on the face of it can be a very worthy pursuit, but the well has been poisoned somewhat by Twitter activists, celebrities etc, many of which clearly see it as a way to enhance their own profile and power above anything else.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everton have proven only too well that you can spend £500m and get absolutely nowhere.

If he's turned up with some plans for a big bang turnaround, and been told that we want to be a bit more measured, I don't particularly mind that. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye I can see the owners maybe wanting a slower turnaround than he might want, then it would make sense imo. It also makes sense those saying he might have lost the chance at the job and this Journo is his pal since Law is a fairly Chelsea focused journalist. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think we should entirely dismiss the idea that we may not be intending to become the superclub that we have all assumed we're aiming to be though. No one has outright said we're aiming for total dominance in the style of City or PSG.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wykikitoon said:

So City and Liverpool don't challenge?  They just get it 

 

Liverpool and City challenge each year, and sometimes they win it. It would be quite possible for them to challenge each year without winning it though - see us in the 90s as a reference.

 

All I'm saying is that there is a clearly defined semantic difference between saying we're challenging for honours and that we intend to win them. Maybe that difference is too much for this guy. I would imagine West Ham see their goal as challenging for the title btw.  Doesn't mean they're ever going to win it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

I don't think we should entirely dismiss the idea that we may not be intending to become the superclub that we have all assumed we're aiming to be though. No one has outright said we're aiming for total dominance in the style of City or PSG.

I don’t really see Saudi Arabia investing in a club that competes in the same league as a club owned by the UAE and be content with it being a shit mid table side while the UAE owned side dominates. Same goes with owning one on the same continent as a Qatari club. It just wouldn’t make any sense to me, what would be in it for them to turn us into a steady mid table side? It’s basically cost them £1.3B to buy us if you factor in the payment to settle the BeOut issue, so they’re never making a profit (especially if we are just destined to be a mid table side). 
 

I know the media are licking their chops at any sign/mention of a lack of ambition from the owners, and constantly spinning any player linked/any imagined link that ‘turns Newcastle down’ as evidence the owners have some weird ambition of buying a football club to watch it stagnate in mid table. As Gemmill says the only things the owners have said about the matter are discussions about competing at that level/challenging for titles, they can’t exactly come out and say we are going to spend £5b on players and be the best side in the footballing world as the reaction from the other clubs would be even larger as they try anything to stop it, better to play their cards closer to their chests. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.