benjii

Can't see it. You'd surely play Stephens there ahead of either of those. It will be Djenepo at RWB and it will be a mess. Also, Redmond over Adams is a mistake.

This.

LOlz

Yeah, cracks me up. "I fast for 16 hours". I.e. I eat dinner at 8.00 pm and then have lunch at 12:00 but skip breakfast. Fucking magic fast, that. Almost Saintly.

We didn’t get the fanny though. 😔

You don't have to be a dick or be "nasty" to be a captain, you just have to be able to keep calm, communicate, set the tempo and keep doing the basic things well under pressure. I am not sure it is leadership, per se, that we miss, it is more mental toughness. The problem we have is that we have a number of players who are capable of doing really impressive things on their day, but regularly mis-execute simple actions when under pressure. They will play a ten yard pass just behind their team-mate, killing a move. They will take a sloppy second touch when they need to move the ball on. It manifests in different ways in different players. Romeu is "nasty" but that yellow card he picked up yesterday was stupid and an example of someone making a poor choice in a moment of pressure. He knew he was taking a yellow when he made that challenge but there was no need to do so; it wasn't a foul that needed to be made, it was early in the match and he was on a knife-edge for the rest of the match as a result. Redmond needed to play an easy 15 yard pass in front of Ings but chopped it too square. Adams has no composure on his left foot. Armstrong delays the pass for too long when carrying the ball laterally across the pitch. Djenepo's legs behave like he has just fallen out of a deer's fanny. Ditto Walcott often. Mental strength is about composure and consistency. You can achieve that whether you are "nice" or "nasty" but you need to set the example and you need to be consistent in your own application. The reason the best captains are the best captains is because they are dependable. Team mates look at them and they know exactly what they will get.

We could lose every match from now on and I think we would still finish above WBA and Sheff U and we'd probably also have about a 40% chance of finishing above Fulham too. Maybe we will lose 21 matches in a row and stay up.

He makes the simple look difficult.

Get Adams on for Redmond or Djenepo. It's another game there for the taking but our lack of quality in the final third is painful.

The only way to achieve sustained PL success is by spunking money as part of a vanity project, and for that you need multi-billionaires. That's just a fact. You are about to witness two of the most expensive mid-table mediocrity campaigns in history thanks to Everton and Villa. The best way to generate a return on an English football club is to do what Markus did and buy a lower league team with good infrastructure cheaply and then do what Kat did and get rid ASAP once in the PL. Frankly, any takeover financed through investments from private equity or similar is doomed to failure if it doesn't flip the club on to someone else within a few years and whether that happens to plan or not will be more down to luck than judgment. Plans to create an international web of clubs sound nice - and I guess it's an upgrade on Gao's "vision", which is non-existent - but won't create any kind of meaningful brand and won't have a direct impact on the first team. Unless we spaff significant amounts of money on the first team we will be a mid-table club who might occasionally have a good season but may also get relegated the next. I don't rate Gao at all, as an owner, but he does at least have skin in the game. I would rather him than a cabal of people with less to lose as individuals being spun meaningless visions by a Yank who probably doesn't really understand the game in England at all. I'd actually be up for a ramshackle, "fan on the board", fans co-op structure for a few years. Won't happen, but would be a laugh and would connect the club back to the community. It would lead to relegation, but that will happen sooner or later anyway.

Indeed. Thursday night is absolutely the worst time to give him his debut after all this time. He's on a hiding to nothing in a one-off event. Stick with Vest and Bednarek. Jan will be keen to make amends. Give Salisu a go at the weekend. With KWP back, Diallo, Walcott and Armstrong out then the team pretty much picks itself. The only real decision is what side to play Djenepo and Redmond. As a complete wild card, I guess a youngster could play in one of those positions, Tella, maybe.

Plus all the other better clubs, with more money, not wanting him as well. Apart from all that, could happen.

Absolutely mental.

Boomers doing boomer things.

Seen quite a bit of criticism of Ings recently, people alleging he is way off his best etc. I think it's unfair. Against Villa he single-handedly created the penalty [that we obviously should have been awarded] and he stuck the ball in the net. Had the officials done their job properly, he could well have won us the match. Yesterday we looked pretty good going forwards and his effort that came back off the post was a very decent effort in the circumstances. He could well have had three more goals (let's assume he scores the penalty against Villa) from our last three games with very fine margins / decisions going against him. He's still a very good striker and arguably too good for a bog-standard mid-table team. Very unlikely that we will find anyone as good as him for £20m or less and, as we all know, that's the market we will be looking for a replacement in. If it wasn't for him and JWP we would be struggling massively.

Just watched a replay about 1,000 times then got the red card out.

That's pathetic all round. Terrible free kick. Then they give it back to us. Instead of attacking Redmond goes back pointlessly. Then we do that with it.

Unfortunately, if you think the current set of vaccines are going to spell the complete end of restrictions any time soon, and via some sort of "back to normal, it's all over" big-bang announcement, I think you will be sadly disappointed. It will be a long time before any of these things happen: - we have a clear view on the effectiveness of vaccines in stopping transmission - we have a clear view on the extent to which transmission is driving mutations which are less susceptible to the vaccine - we have a clear view on the long-term non-fatal damage done by the virus - enough people around the world are vaccinated with a proven vaccine for seamless inter-continental travel to return It feels to me as though there are bound to be relaxing and reimposing of various restrictions - perhaps on a localised basis - for another couple of years. Whilst I'm sure every effort will be made to allow people to meet each other and go to bars / restaurants etc. I think the days of packed venues and carefree travel, other than to a small number of niche locations that can't afford not to have tourists (e.g. Maldives), are over for the foreseeable future. It absolutely sucks and please, for goodness sake, we have to hope the UK government has learnt some lessons from this and will implement them so when this happens again we can get proper track, trace and containment processes in place. That said, I want to go the pub with a bunch of friends I haven't seen for ages, I want to attend some live-music and sporting events, and I want to be able to travel internationally without the hassle of possible border closures etc. whilst there.

Good news if KWP and Rom are back. I doubt we will rush Vest straight back in now we know Bednarek is available. Shame about Armstrong but at least we have other options in wide mid. I reckon it'll be: McCarthy KWP, Stephens, Bednarek, Bertrand JWP, Romeu Minamino, Redmond Adams, Ings

Very hard to figure out how to set up for this, assuming Bednarek can't play. I doubt we will win the appeal because they can find a way to justify the decision the way the law is written and I don't think they will be reviewing whether it was a foul or not. But, will the appeal be concluded in time? If not, presumably he can play at the weekend and we might be able to time the suspension alongside Vestergaard returning? Anyways, without Diallo, Romeu and Jankewitz, JWP has to play in midfield so that means Ramsey must play. I don't think it's fair to throw Tchaepchat in - he didn't look ready the other night and if we play too many youngsters again we might get stuffed which would be pretty embarrassing considering Newcastle are one of the dourest attacking teams in the league. I quite fancy switching to a back 3 as others have suggested. Ramsay, Stephens and Bertrand. It does mean playing two of Redmond, Armstrong or Djenepo as wing backs but at least they are senior players and not youngsters being rushed through. It also means we would be vulnerable to long diagonals towards a target man but there's not a lot we can do about that. I'd go with the following, on the basis that Djenepo is a bit of a defensive liability when starting and should be kept as far up the pitch as possible - he can't tackle or press without constantly giving fouls away. -----------------McCarthy------------------ -----Ramsay----Stephens------Bertrand--- Armstrong--------JWP------------Redmond ------------Djenepo----Minamoto--------- -----------Adams--------Ings------------- If we can keep the ball there's plenty in that XI to cause some damage. Important not to give away cheap free kicks because we look pretty weak in the air.

The law on handball taken from the FA website, states as follows (my emphasis added). * * * * * * * * * * It is an offence if a player: deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper after the ball has touched their or a team-mate’s hand/arm, even if accidental, immediately: scores in the opponents’ goal creates a goal-scoring opportunity touches the ball with their hand/arm when: the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.Except for the above offences, it is not an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm: directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot) directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body * * * * * * * * * The words "except for the above offences" make it quite clear that the criteria which are set out in the final four bullet points are not intended to apply to mitigate an offence listed in the first set of bullet points. In the case of Cash, he seemed to deliberately handle the ball (his arm actually moved towards the ball with a small swiping action at the last moment) but in any event he clearly made his body unnaturally bigger by sticking his arm out to form a barrier above his head and that element of the foul does not require any intent. So, in a nutshell, the grazing of the ball on some short fibres should not have mattered. The Bundesliga guidance page on this makes the point clearly: https://www.bundesliga.com/en/bundesliga/news/rule-changes-2019-20-handball-penalties-sustitutions-wall-free-kick-4824 The page says (my emphasis added again): "Many in the game believe greater clarity is needed for referees when it comes to handballs, therefore the IFAB has re-worded a number of rules. It stresses that a deliberate handball remains an offence but that the following scenarios will result in a free-kick even if accidental: if the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand or arm a player gains control/possession of the ball after it touches their hand/arm and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity a ball touches a player’s hand/arm which has made their body unnaturally bigger the ball touches a player’s hand/arm when it is above their shoulder (unless the player has deliberately played the ball which then touches their hand/arm) However, the following will not usually be a free-kick unless they are one of the above situations: the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from their own head/body/foot or the head/body/foot of another player who is close/near the ball touches a player’s hand/arm which is close to their body and has not made their body unnaturally bigger if a player is falling and the ball touches their hand/arm when it is between their body and the ground to support the body (but not extended to make the body bigger) if the goalkeeper attempts to ‘clear’ (release into play) a throw-in or deliberate kick from a teammate but the ‘clearance’ fails, the goalkeeper can then handle the ball" * * * * * * * * * * So, basically, to defend the failure to give a penalty against Cash, the PL would have to think that: - it wasn't deliberate or - he didn't make his body unnaturally bigger. The shorts thing is irrelevant, in accordance with the laws of football. If PGMOL / Premier League are taking any contact on the player's person as being an absolute defence to handball, regardless of the positioning of the arms or any consideration of intent, then they are making up their own rules as they go along. In short, we were absolutely rodgered up the Gary.

A decision so bad, it deserves its own thread. Now, I've checked the laws and if it was a foul then it should have been a red, which seems perverse but true. The red card The law says: "Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off." So, if you think someone is trying not to make a challenge but does commit a foul, then a red card is correct. This is clearly an absurdity because a hack at the ball would result in a yellow. This law is terribly drafted by the inepts in charge of the game. The foul The obvious way to avoid such an absurd outcome is not to award a foul when a defender is doing what they can to avoid contact and a striker is falling over in the hope of contact which has not yet occurred. This is clearly what happened in the incident so it's quite baffling that the officials stuck with the penalty call. There are two broad categories of foul. There is the careless / reckless / excessive force group of offences. Evidently that didn't apply. The other grounds for a direct free kick are: A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences: a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area) holds an opponent impedes an opponent with contact bites or spits at someone throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object The bolded one is the only one that could possibly apply. It is quite clear that Martial was not impeded by Bednarek making contact with him. Conclusion Due to a badly drafted law, interpreted by spaccy goons who were no-doubt picked last in Games at school every week, the red card was technically correct if it was a foul. But it clearly wasn't a foul. The VAR review When Dean went to look at the monitor he wasn't shown proper replays of the incident. He didn't get a single view from the camera on the goal-line which clearly showed Martial diving in anticipation of a challenge which never came. An absolute clusterfuck of an incident.

RIP, Screech. http://www.bbc.com/news/amp/entertainment-arts-55896473 I will honour your memory by knocking one out to Kelly Kapowski. I am sure you did this too, many times.

Put Bertrand there and play our back-up left back..... oh.

If Ings leaves then it’s probably worth keeping him because we’ll be in the market for a striker and that will be the priority. We couldn’t afford to sign a dud striker and a dud Theo replacement. He’s a decent guy and will help bring the youngsters along. Yes, that sounds a bit like Shane Long but his contribution on the pitch is much better than Longy’s. His shooting and passing is often terrible but his movement is excellent and he does help to stretch the opponent. I doubt we expected him to play so much but the injuries to Ings, Moussa and Redmond have forced us to pick him constantly. However, if Ings stays then I would say it’s probably a waste of money giving Theo a longer deal.