Jump to content

Monty13

Members
  • Content Count

    5,840
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by Monty13

  1. Sell while they think he is great. He is a good championship player, but we need players of Bassong and Turners ability and Leon just isn''t up at that level imo. Maybe he will prove me and many others wrong next year, but I doubt it.
  2. Am I the only one who would be worried if we played 442 with Johnson and Tettey in midfield? I think they''re both great players but neither has any real creative passing ability. Howson is much maligned on here but I thought he had a cracking game against Arsenal and has been steadily improving. If we were going to play 442 I think he has to play with (a hopefully fit) Johnson or we will end up lumping the ball forward from the back to the big men. I personally think we need to start with a 451 and impose ourselves on Reading by keeping possession. Otherwise I can see an attacking formation backfiring on us as Adkins has instilled a bit more belief in them recently and to be outplayed in the first half, or god forbid go behind, might be fatal.
  3. Yep totally agree with our colonial friend! If you want a ticket on your own (usually most with a restricted view) you will have had little issue getting one for most games. However if for some insane reason you fancied going to a game with someone you knew, the majority of games have been effectively sell outs. Although purple i think you''re right the shift has been slightly towards cheaper tickets, i personally think this is because the casual fan is no longer prepared to pay just shy of 50 quid to sit on his own in a restricted view seat. That desperation to see premiership games at all cost has definitely waned from last year. This has resulted in games where those 200 or so seats dotted around aren''t selling and thats 10% of your casual seats left without bottoms to warm them.
  4. "Personally wouldn''t touch a player from a relegated club. May be narrow view, but if a player has been involved in a team that has been relegated he ought to stay and put it right, not look for a transfer out. Ok, it might be that they have to off load him, but still would prefer players that are successful, not the opposite, how ever good he may appear on paper. Hoillet is another example. There is usually a reason why teams are relegated and its usually the players at fault. " I do understand the sentiment of wanting winners, confidence breeds confidence and as a team we have been the epitome of success breeding success over the previous 3 seasons. But the rest is not just narrow minded, it doesn''t make much sense. Last time I checked there are 11 players on the pitch and 25 squad, to tar every player as at fault and unsuccessful is pretty bewildering. Not to mention theres a manager, coach, Chief exec and owner etc. who usually all contribute to a clubs downfall. Bassong being an obvious example as already stated. Went down with Wolves but with us has clearly showed the talent he has. Was Dean Aston a bad buy for those interested in him (future injuries unbeknown at the time!) because he was relegated with us? It''s true that some players are quite clearly mercenary and can''t wait to jump ship upon relegation, that some players have their confidence badly hit by relegation and some players never show the same performances prior to relegation as after. But to suggest that anyone from a relegated team is not, and therefore wouldn''t be, successful as an individual is rather simplistic imo.
  5. Turner - absolute class performance yet again. Bunn - had a solid game, an outstanding save and unlucky not to keep the penalty out. Howson - Pick of the midfield 3 imo on the day, really starting to show some of that early promise again, but for an outstanding save would have rescued a point as well I think. Whittaker - I''m a big fan of garrido and hope we keep him, but with Martin playing so well I think Whittaker deserved an opportunity and thought he took it. Considering how long he has been out thought he did very well, not a flawless performance, but determination, energy and drive to get forward.
  6. That was the poorest 5 mins from an official I ever seen, way to buckle under the pressure. Absolutely shocking run of decisions. Those blaming Hughton get a grip, we have been well and truly mugged by one man at the side of the pitch and it wasn''t Hughton or Wenger.
  7. I actually cannot believe this threads comments. If we walk away from this game with a point it will be absolutely massive. We have pretty much contained and frustrated Arsenal for 45 mins. What exactly were you expecting? Unbelievable.
  8. Just out of interest who gets dropped for Whittaker? Personally i''d love to see him in the team, i think he was great before his injury, but it''s harsh on Martin. Benno was probably our best player against Swansea so if we are bringing him onto the right of midfield again its harsh. But managers are there to make tough decisions. I agree I''d like to see a fully fit Tettey for Arsenal (although unlike most i think Howson has been improving) but is it a match fit Tettey that would be playing? Don''t think he looked very sharp for his cameo last weekend.
  9. Surely the Nottingham Forest lads will be more fazed by being in front of a big crowd baying for the other team?
  10. Excited Canary - I''m surprised no-one is talking about our number 4 Cameron McGeehan" Just had a read through, me too, thought Him, Wyatt and Morris were the standout performers. Good at breaking up play, good in the tackle and comfortable on the ball with a decent range of passing. Totally anchored that midfield. Morris was very good though, he would probably have been my MOTM, just. He''s only 17 btw, not 18 till December. I thought the Murphy twins did well, its hard to judge them on their PL potential when the standard of the opposition and the majority of the rest of the team isn''t close to that level. Like others have said, looked like they were trying too hard. I thought Jacob looked the more complete and less raw of the two in that match.
  11. I''m sorry but without knowing what question he was asked to give these quotes you can''t reflect on what he actually meant.
  12. I''ll agree badger that whichever party was in power the state of play would be very similar at the moment and the difference in what was being cut and how fast would be the politics. latest figures: £1,161.5 billion at the end of February 2013, equivalent to 73.5 % of GDP. 2013 deficit apparently 65billion down from 148.6billion in 2010 The coalition will probably borrow similar levels to the last term of the previous government, the difference being the deficit is reducing. I struggle to believe a Labour or Lab-Lib coalition would have done anything vastly different economically.
  13. I have often thought like Yellowbeagle has said the vouchers that could only be spent on necessities (food/childrens clothes etc.) would be the most effective replacement to childcare benefits. Then those who don''t have benefits can''t complain that those that do are spending it on booze, fags and sky tv and those that really need it get taken care of. I''m sure it wouldn''t be that difficult. As soon as one Supermarket agreed the others would have to join in or risk losing potential billions in income.
  14. Badger the great thing about raw data is that why you cannot manipulate it, you can interpret it differently, and draw different conclusions. While it is true the Labour Government spent less before the financial crisis, the simple fact remains that in 1997 the budget had been brought down to neutral deficit and in 2009 it had reached 156 billion a year! While from 1998 to 2001 the Government also did a good job of reducing our net debt (because as you point out we weren''t overspending, we actually had surplus), post this period it was steadily increasing before the financial crisis sent it rocketing as we tried to spend our way out of recession. It was approx 350 billion in 2003, 450 in 2007 and then over 900 billion by the change in governments. (Labour inherited a net debt of approx 380 billion.) The current government inherited a debt of over 900 billion and a national yearly deficit of 120 billion pounds (which had peaked at 156 billion in 2009, 12.5% of GDP). I fail to see how the previous government didn''t go on a spending spree? They certainly weren''t saving and they have left us, to be fair like most large western countries, hugely in the sh*t.
  15. I''d be deeply sad to see Holt move on, especially as this season has not been as memorable as the previous for him. It will be a little bit of a damp end to a fizzing NCFC career. I personally think he could do a job next year. While he has not been prolific this year, he is still our joint top PL scorer, which says more about our failure to score goals than any reduction in his abilities. If we are going to improve as an attacking force next year I think he would reap the benefits of that and we would get one more good season out of him at least. I think Hooper was the alternative to RVW rather than the addition, neither seem to be as strong as Holt as a replacement. While i wouldn''t object to the deal in principle, do we need both Hooper and RVW? Are they not very similar styles? For Holt I think it may be a good move though, European football and a last hurrah at the top level before retirement. I would still be unhappy to see him go, but if he just ends up warming the bench next year he may as well leave and get to play from a personal point of view. I think it depends very much on what Hughton''s plan is for next season, and whether he is a big part or a bit part.
  16. She is getting a Ceremonial funeral, the same as Diana and the Queen Mother.
  17. Yes it does have a welfare state, and it has had one far longer than us. Hence why I didn''t understand why the post war British Welfare state was being heralded as some advantage over Germany. also: "And so were far less inclined to expect a ''land fit for heroes''. And lest not forget that it was not all altruism, there were good long term reasons for having a healthy (and so more efficient) workforce - and for having a more efficient system that delivered that end product. When WWI began it was found that a third of the British workforce were unfit to even be killed for their country. The welfare state was not much more than a more rigorous approach to further erradicating that problem - and Thatchers years were no more than a brutal re-ordering of that system to make it cheaper to run. No more." You were the one advocating the fitness and health of the population through the British Welfare state. I was just pointing out that we are still dying before Germans. A good indication of average Health of a nation.
  18. I agree, most still call the NandP the River End. Did geordies really ever call St James'' Park The Sports Direct Arena? It will make little difference, supporters will still call it Carrow Road.
  19. Many are making the argument though that the Welfare State was all about making a healthy Britain, yet we are also behind Germany in life expectancy Badger. So what those figures show is Germany is a richer country, with less debt and a longer life expectancy. The UK unemployment rate is however 7.4% compared to compared to the German 5.4%. I''m not saying anybody is right or wrong here, the margins as you say are relatively small, but we are behind Germany in all of them.
  20. I''ve seen it half mentioned on a couple of threads but surprised more hasn''t been mentioned about Turner''s post match comment about the crowd. "Michael Turner admits he and his team-mates can feel the nervous atmosphere surrounding Norwich City in the fight for Premier League survival. And defender Turner confesses Norwich are aware of their fans'' nerves, which were particularly apparent as they made a slow start against Swansea. He told Sky Sports: "We could feel a bit of tension from the crowd, especially in the first half. We were saying to each other, ''ignore it and stick to the game plan''." We are often told how important the "12th" man is and I wonder if it is really being considered just how much of an influence supporters are having on the players at the minute. I find it quite telling that Turner decided to mention this and that the players were effectively telling each other to ignore the crowd and just keep going. Maybe people are having far more of a negative effect than they realise. Hughtons tactics, personnel choices, substitutes have been debated to death on other threads. But when the players take to the field and the lines between a win, draw or loss are so fine, I wonder how much of an effect over the last home games the crowd could potentially have in deciding our fate. I''m not telling people not to boo at half time, not to shout at Hugton to sort it out, not to moan etc. People are free to do what they like imo. I''m just genuinely interested, as the player has commented on it, what other peoples thoughts are about the crowd potentially influencing our players negatively in the final home games.
  21. Santísima Trinidad and the Hercules Tangible. They were both Batch 1 style Type 42 Destroyers built in the UK specifically for Argentina and delivered in the late 70''s. They have been ripped out and converted to Transport ships. The Santísima Trinidad unfortunately sank at her moorings in January (shame), the Argentinians even tried to suggest it was sabotage!
  22. It''s not that surprising Tanglible, one of the main reasons we were exploring diplomatic options with them was because we wanted them to buy our arms.
  23. That doesn''t make it the policy of the UK government though does it purple, and as far as I am aware it wasn''t Thatchers personal policy either. The FCO was in talks exploring options and tacit arrangement was agreed upon, but this was, as far as I am aware, not public knowledge at the time and not the policy of the UK government. Is anyone really surprised that a diplomatic solution was looked into by the FCO? But in reality they were proposals, one of several discussed solutions available to the PM, and they would have never made it to the floor.
  24. No she didn''t, it was one of the options considered and discussed but was disregarded mainly due to the fact that the Falkland Islanders (and Parliament) themselves would never except it. It was a tentative plan at best, not policy.
  25. "Sorry about that morty, but I think a big reason the war should never have happened due to Thatchers poor diplomacy with the Argentinians." Yes the smart thing to do would have been to hand over people who considered themselves and wanted to be British citizens to a brutal military dictatorship. Even those evil conservatives decided not to cross that line.
×
×
  • Create New...