derry

I doubt that Cortese interferes in football matters, but I wouldn't mind betting that if he and Markus aren't happy with some of the hoofball being played, leading to in their view, less than satisfactory results, they have made that point. It should also be remembered that Cortese has issued one statement and nothing else, all the sniping remarks have come from Pardew starting with the Guardian article and every week since. He would be better getting on with going for the playoffs and building bridges in private, otherwise he will be out.

They were, before Pardew gave the interview to the Guardian/Observer.

I think you need to start a week earlier Ron. The reaction after the Millwall game triggered the Observer / Guardian website interview with Pardew which early the next morning led to Cortese's statement being read out on BBC Solent. I think Pardew started this by going to the Guardian/Observer.

The problem here could be the Pardew interview, published in the Observer and on the Guardian website, which led to BBC Solent giving out a statement from Cortese, before 8am the next day, criticising the results and emphasising the importance of the league. Prior to that after the Millwall surrender it appears the Chairman was critical leading to the interview. From that day the pressure on Pardew became immense, now the danger for Pardew is that his relationship with his chairman could be damaged and it may be that unless he fulfills their aspirations he will eventually go. Yesterday we played good football, but before the match I was told that Lallana and Puncheon would play a free wide role and decide between themselves how/where they wanted to play. That undoubtably worked and provided the balance and width we have lacked giving the midfield and defence the passing options they have up to now lacked. However this appeared a strange decision from this manager or could it be that his tactics of tucked in wide men has been questioned?

If Schneiderlin has players out wide he will show his class, if we tuck the wide men in it cramps him up so he has no options and he looks hopeless.

For the first time this season we not only had good wide options allowing us to pass the ball, we were getting in flat crosses across the box which had Walsall in all sorts of trouble. Puncheon is a good player. He and Lallana were told to sort out the wide positions between them which led to the switching and worked well giving everybody the room to play. It was nice to see Pardew wasn't negative and let the passing game possession close out the game. The substitutions with Tuesday in mind were sensible. If he allows this team it's head and doesn't revert to negativism he could yet achieve his and Cortese's ambitions.

Canada Saint, now lives in Edmonton.

Before you start calling somebody a muppet, you should know that he played in the same Saints team as Mick Channon and knows what he is talking about.

I think the 18 months is a fair ballpark figure to commit to, provided the incumbent is achieving the current targets and more importantly seen as capable of achieving the next targets. If however at the end of the first season there is evidence that this isn't so continuing for the 18 months would not be sensible. If Cortese thinks that Pardew is the man to achieve next years targets then he should continue with him. If he doesn't then he should change at the end of this season. To allow a false start to next season would not be sensible. I believe that Cortese has a lot of money riding on our achieving assigned targets and he won't allow sentiment to get in his way.

I think we have reached the stage where just shuffling the pack week after week doesn't cut it. Pardew has to decide which 11 players give him the best balanced team which in my opinion isn't the best 11 players. He also has to stop tucking the wide players in, because it has been the basic problem all season. As leopards don't change their spots I can't see that happening. He talks a good game but his team set up and selections don't match up. I think Pardew is a two trick pony a thin 4-5-1 or an even thinner 4-4-2. I am sure he is aware that he is on borrowed time but his inbuilt pragmatism and inhibition, despite saying we have to take risks, will be his undoing. I think we are capable, whatever the formation we play, of winning quite a few games and not losing many, but still not doing enough or regularly playing the sort of football that will convince the owners.

I believe that it is the administrator acting in the best interests of the creditors. If the club can't continue which would happen if they flout League rules, the club wouldn't exist, therefore no transfer fees as the players all released, no ability to trade, no parachute payments therefore liquidated. One wonders however whether in the fullness of time whether the HMRC would challenge this practice in a court as not complying with the rules of administration being an expedient to keep the insolvent business intact.

It was already posted on the takeover thread in the lounge.

There is a lot of difference between a collection of good players which often provides a hit and miss team, and a balanced team that collectively performs better than the ability of the individual players. Sometimes to obtain the ideal team and match the players, talented players who don't blend have to be replaced with ones who do. Compromise in selection and pragmatism in style is holding up this process. In my opinion that is where we are at the moment, yet to discard the sacred cows and have a balanced team. If Pardew doesn't hurry up and sort it out because of the inbuilt inconsistency he won't be around long enough to do it.

I don't like trash football. If Pardew goes I don't care who it is, as long as their record is making teams better collectively than their players and playing passing football.

Ex Saint. I expect he'd walk here to be manager. Alan Knill.

75% of the unsecured creditors only!

This my view also. Well put.

His name came up in response to a hypothetical question. I mentioned managers that played passing football and he was one of them. With not a lot of money he set up a good footballing team at Burnley that was promoted. Atkins, O'Driscoll, Howe, Tisdale etc run teams that collectively perform better than they have a right to expect and try to play passing football. Something we would do well to copy.

The simple fact about Alan Pardew's continued employment is that as soon as Nicola Cortese decides he isn't achieving the targets he has set he will be gone. The way he sets up his teams and the amount of route one hoofball we play has convinced me he isn't the man to take us forward. We have bought some proper footballers and are misusing them. The measure of a good manager is to get the best out of the team, by no stretch of the imagination could Pardew ever be accused of doing that. If anything we are regularly underperforming.

Let's wait and see.

In administration the players contracts are a millstone. Even the loans are contracted to the end of the season. Their clubs won't want them back, probably couldn't play them so won't take them. The players on inflated contracts will be given away if they can find any takers. Probably all the players left are on inflated contracts in relation to the CCC and won't want to stay. The players will have to be paid, contracts paid up or made free agents by mutual agreements and how much is owed in image rights/bonuses a la Sol Campbell all to be paid in full.

S****horpe, Doncaster and even Norwich can't compete with our financial strength making us despite the league a very attractive proposition.

This pretty well sums us up and where we are.

I like his style, he is doing well as is Paul Tisdale. As Clifford said what is needed is a club style. In that case only managers that fitted that style would be employed. The style would run top to bottom through the club. A change of manager would then not be such a big deal. The style would be overseen by the DoF. I certainly think Atkins, O'Driscoll and Lambert would be good enough.

Which was the unrealistic answer to an impossible hypothetical question.