Alanh

Crazy idea to sell one of our better players. We have three decent central mids who play differently to each other - JWP, Romeu and Diallo. That give Ralph options to select the team that best suits the opponent and gives us scope to cover injuries and or suspensions without having to put S Armstong or Moi into CM. We haven't done it yet, but I could see us playing all three in a 4-3-3.

We all see things differnetly I suppose, but to me last week he was brought on to maintain some pace in our pressing game and I thought that was exactly what he did. He made loads of short sprints to close down opponents and kept it difficult for them to get out of our press. OK, he's not the player he was in his prime, but he can still do a job for us on occasion.

I'm expecting a game more like the Wolves one. Last weekend Leeds open style contributed massively to how we were able to play. Burnely will try to play two solid banks of four and will be happy to let us have the ball for large parts. We will need to move the ball quickly and try to get behind their full backs - Perraud is crucial to being able to do this. The longer it stays 0-0 the more hope they will have of hitting us on the break or with a setpiece. Could be a frustrting afternoon unless we can get an early goal to force them to open up a bit.

Don't know if you were at the match but I'd be amazed if you thought it was ever 4141 if you were there. 433 a possibility, but essentially it was our regular 4222 with Redmond having a very free roaming role.

Assuming you are referring to the quote 'raping and pillaging the club financially'. With the exception of last year when COVID hit all clubs profitability, Newcastle regularly make a profit ie. pretax profit to year ending July 2019 was £41M. I have heard a total profit over the last 3 years of approx £100M. That is money which could have gone on the squad or facilities.

In simple terms FPP rules limitthe amount a club can lose over a 3 year period to approx £100M. That means a club can spend £33.3M each year more than they make. That money would have to come from their owner. Newcastle have made a profit of approx £100M over the last 3 years so they have the potential to specd £200M pretty much immediately if they wanted to. There's more to it but that's a rough guide.

Most of the EPL money goes on wages so that's not going to fund a new striker. The cost of our new left back and striker were covered by selling Ings. Assuming we kept INgs this season, who do you think we could sell next summer who would both cover their replacement and also a new striker?

You're probably right about him playing to the best of his ability, but what would we have done next summer when he would have left for nothing and we didn't have any money to replace him? A club like ours isn't going to turn down £30M for a player with one year left on their contract.

The bit in red - aren't you saying the same thing as those people who want to give him time. You aren't writing him off and think he could improve, and so are they. The bit in blue - We didn't sign him to replace JV in the squad, we signed him to be 4th choice with Salisu moving up to be first choice - effectively replacing JV in the CB pecking order. Utter rubbish suggesting people should be furious.

I think I know how this one goes. Someone offer Turkish evidence, he doesn't accept it, ridicules it, picks up on tiny points to diminish it's value and then deflects the conversation rather than prove his version of events / opinion. If he does find some evidence he will hold that above all others as unequivocal proof. The bit about Stamford Bridge initially being an athletics stadium and offered to Fulham is right - https://www.chelseafc.com/en/history/stadium-history - but there doesn't seem to be any evidence of a link between that and the song.

Loads of evidence online. Links if you are interested in finding out more about it: https://liverpooloffside.sbnation.com/2021/8/30/22648994/unpacking-song-chant-chelsea-liverpool-anfield-homophobia-lgbt-rent-boys-chant-explanation

Completely disagree that Redmond playing in his most regular wide left position could be easily interchanged with Broja in the same position. Broja is clearly a big centre forward, not someone who will take on a full back or play the sort of throughballs into strikers in the box. Redmond isn't the best but in our squad you would replace him with S Armstrong, Walcott or Tella before Broja. To take it slightly off tangent, Ralph's big challenge in the next couple of months is finding out which combination of A Armstrong, Adams and Broja works best in attack when we play 4-2-2-2, and how to keep the defensive resiliance that we saw with the 4-1-4-1 formation on Saturday.

First question - no, not at all, racist behaviour has been condemned for ages with varying degrees of 'cut-through' in the mainstream consciousness. Second question - yes, I think it has helped to create a culture in which the amount and strength of condemnation of racist behaviour has increased.

This is the perfect answer. Next time this discussion occurs on here please copy and paste this post.

I think there are valid occasions for inflammatory gestures to be used to raise the profile of an issue. I think the knee gesture falls into that category. If it is generating a response that the 'Kick it out' type campaigns didn't achieve then it is being productive. The gesture on it's own won't defeat racism and to think that it will is naive, but if it helps to create a culture where racist behaviour is hilighted and condemned then over time that type of overt behaviour will become less acceptable and less likely to occur.

Last post for the day, so not interested in or able to have a prolonged discussion. I think you know why some transfers are exceptions to the concept of 'buying to develop'. We needed a starting quality LB after Bertrand left and we had zero options coming through the ranks hence Perraud, we needed a starting quality RB at the time KWP was brought in as Cedric had left and Valery wasn't up to it. We needed at staring striker after Ings left as neither Obafemi or Nlundulu were up to it so we brought in Armstrong. The club obviously think Bednarek and Stephens good enough to be part of the 4 CBs in the squad so decided to bring in another player to join the CB group. Lyanco might turn out to be more Lovren than Forren, we'll just have to wait and see.

I get it, but it's not what we do. I'd have liked Saints to sign a CB better than Vestergaard to partner Salisu, but our strategy is generally to promote from within and buy replacements who have to prove themselves. IMO in the CB rankings Salisu has been promoted to replace Vestergaard, Stephens and Bendarek are in the same places in the rankings as they were last season and Lyanco is probably bottom of the pile at the moment. If he proves to be better than Stephens or Bednarek then he moves up the ranking. We might be better at CB overall if Salisu can be better than Vestergaard. I reckon that's possible over the whole season.

Disagree. We have four centre backs. Salisu is IMO first choice for left sided role, Stephens and Bednarek are in a battle for the right sided role. Stephens has the shirt at the moment, so Bendarek is going to have to fight for it. The competition should push them both to perform better. Lyanco has to prove himself and if he does he competes for a place.

Not a big surprise really. We bought Salisu to develop and sell for a massive profit. To do that he's got to play regularly and be a great player for us. This new guy might be an upgrade on Bednarek but that would be a big askgiven that Bednarek has proven himself a dependable (not elite) CB for us. I'd like to think that the new guy will at least put pressue on Bednarek and Stephens.

I'd like to keep some of that money in reserve for January or next summer when we will need to buy a decent keeper and replace whoever else has left.

Just got mine. I'm sure a load will be delivered today and tomorrow.

I'm a big fan of having an on field leader at CB so experience plays a big part, but I can't get on board with Cahill being the answer. He only played in 20 league games for Palace last season so I can't see him playing more for another Premier league team this season. If we were to get him that would mean regular disruption to our CB line up, which I don't see as a good thing. Get experience that can play 30 plus games. not sure who that is - possibly Phil Jones if he will accept the right wages and can prove his fitenss.

IMO the first goal was a straightforward mix up between AM and MS. There might have been a call or they might both have been silent and left it to each other. I'm apportioning 50/50 blame for that one. The second goal is pretty much unstoppable. It's hit hard and right in the top corner. AM does well to get a fingertip on it if he did. The third is point blank AM has no time to react. It's a 50/50 chance for a save for a keeper of AM's quality. A better keeper does better but we don't have one of those. A better defence of the cross or more commanding play by Stephens is the only way to reduce the odds and neither happened.

Agreed, it's never been about telling people that racism exists, it's about exlicitly hilighting how significant a problem it is in some parts of society. However it seems to be viewed as an objectionable action. You have regularly objected to it. What should we as society do instead?

I think we have got to the point in this discussion where the main disagreement is over the scale of the response to the racially motivated abuse that has occurred. Pretty much everyone is entrenched in their viewpoint - You and Hypochondric (to just take two examples) - think that the media response has been disproportionately large and that it creates more divison than it heals. Some posters - me, Jimmy_D and Sadoldgit (to take 3 examples) - think that actions which hilight this issue raise it in the national consciousness and result in racial actions becoming less acceptable. My issue is with the bit in bold. If we know racism exists and racists know that they are in the wrong, then surely it follows that decent members of society have a responsibility to minimise racism. At the moment that is happening through taking the knee, calling out the Govt etc and the media coverage those acts are generating. If you feel that is a disproportionate way to address the issue, what think would be more effective that hasn't already been tried i.e. Kick it out?