Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
can u sit down please

Intersting read & poll

Recommended Posts

Now i know this may not be popular but for those who havent read the article or voted in the poll, have a look here:http://smudgerncfc.com/I think he makes some great points and sums up some peoples feelings really well. For one thread, please put personal differences to the side and purely comment on the content of the article.Enjoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ridiculously biased anti Hughton article.

Fails to mention that we were always likely to struggle this year (Swansea is an exception) and that the players are by and large not good enough for the prem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some interesting and fair points but I would like to mention that Lambert was guilty of the points raised in section 2. But I do agree that it is frustrating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Grant Holts 3 year contract"]Ridiculously biased anti Hughton article.

Fails to mention that we were always likely to struggle this year (Swansea is an exception) and that the players are by and large not good enough for the prem.[/quote]But they were last year and with a few tweaks (and not an overhaul) we would have consolidated. We brought in a coach that has evolved into a manager. All the pundits say what a great coach he is (and his team). Why has only 1 player developed (Johnson)? Why have key men last year, that were good enough gone backwards?All i keep reading is "we were always likely to struggle this year". Why? based on what? I could say with no foundation, that "we are always likely to struggle next year" as its Hughtons 2nd season. Im worried more about next season than i was thi sseason.We picked up 25 points after Xmas last year. Some great away displays and solid victories. We did stutter at times and with a young squad, could be put down to inexperience.It is an anti Hughton article, but the points he makes are good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Herman "]Some interesting and fair points but I would like to mention that Lambert was guilty of the points raised in section 2. But I do agree that it is frustrating.[/quote]Indeed he was. I always remember Lappin coming in against QPR away. It worked though. I think the previous manager was good at keeping people on there toes and freshening things up before things go stale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on CUSDP! That''s totally biased. The signings that the author thinks are good just get named with a qualification that Hughton may not even have signed them. Yet the ones the author sees as a mistake get a paragraph each. We know that''s your view Danny and you and the author are quite entitled to it. But if you''re asking others to vote it should at least be balanced!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is a somewhat one-eyed ''article'' but there are some fair points in among equally unfair ones.

I really hate is this ''don''t change a winning team'' thing, as all managers do and CH is no more or less guilty of it than anyone else (PL did it aplenty). And as for ''playing players who are in form'': who decides? Smudger? - no thanks! The manager sees players in training all week, so surely he is far better placed than we are to determine who is playing well. Half the time we on here can''t agree, I thought Wes was poor v Swansea, yet when he didnt play the next game there was criticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Come on CUSDP! That''s totally biased. The signings that the author thinks are good just get named with a qualification that Hughton may not even have signed them. Yet the ones the author sees as a mistake get a paragraph each. We know that''s your view Danny and you and the author are quite entitled to it. But if you''re asking others to vote it should at least be balanced!

 

 

[/quote]Everyones entitled to there view Nige. But in highlighting the article i was hoping some people in favour of CH would vote, to give an understanding of where we are at.Just looking for a good debate and i think the article will stir that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Come on CUSDP! That''s totally biased. The signings that the author thinks are good just get named with a qualification that Hughton may not even have signed them. Yet the ones the author sees as a mistake get a paragraph each. We know that''s your view Danny and you and the author are quite entitled to it. But if you''re asking others to vote it should at least be balanced!

 

 

[/quote]Everyones is entitled to there view Nige. But in highlighting the article i was hoping some people in favour of CH would vote, to give an understanding of where we are at.Just looking for a good debate and i think the article will stir that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="can u sit down please"]Now i know this may not be popular but for those who havent read the article or voted in the poll, have a look here:http://smudgerncfc.com/I think he makes some great points and sums up some peoples feelings really well. For one thread, please put personal differences to the side and purely comment on the content of the article.Enjoy[/quote]

Even a biased article couldn''t sway the sack vote you are craving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Jersey Canary"][quote user="can u sit down please"]Now i know this may not be popular but for those who havent read the article or voted in the poll, have a look here:http://smudgerncfc.com/I think he makes some great points and sums up some peoples feelings really well. For one thread, please put personal differences to the side and purely comment on the content of the article.Enjoy[/quote]

Even a biased article couldn''t sway the sack vote you are craving.[/quote]Good for you. Vote what you feel. Im not craving anything other than a beer. Would you like to challenge the biased points?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Baracouda"]The one bit the article misses out on...

It''s basically asking for PL as manager, he left...

Whose the next PL ??[/quote]Gustavo Poyet, but looking like we may miss the boat if BHA do the business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would love to know a stat of managers who have looked the business in the championship/premiership and now disappeared.

Hell Owen Coyle, who I wanted this time last summer. Was the best young manager before PL... where''s he now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="can u sit down please"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Come on CUSDP! That''s totally biased. The signings that the author thinks are good just get named with a qualification that Hughton may not even have signed them. Yet the ones the author sees as a mistake get a paragraph each. We know that''s your view Danny and you and the author are quite entitled to it. But if you''re asking others to vote it should at least be balanced!

 

 

[/quote]

Everyones is entitled to there view Nige.

But in highlighting the article i was hoping some people in favour of CH would vote, to give an understanding of where we are at.

Just looking for a good debate and i think the article will stir that.
[/quote]

 

That''s rubbish buddy. Message board posts encourage debate. Blogs don''t. Why not start a thread with your own POV?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloody Smudger still at it?

There''s a shock. The greatest manager NCFC never had rides again.

I was hoping he''d gone off to bother some other poor club. Like Wiz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="can u sit down please"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Come on CUSDP! That''s totally biased. The signings that the author thinks are good just get named with a qualification that Hughton may not even have signed them. Yet the ones the author sees as a mistake get a paragraph each. We know that''s your view Danny and you and the author are quite entitled to it. But if you''re asking others to vote it should at least be balanced!

 

 

[/quote]Everyones is entitled to there view Nige. But in highlighting the article i was hoping some people in favour of CH would vote, to give an understanding of where we are at.Just looking for a good debate and i think the article will stir that.[/quote]

 

That''s rubbish buddy. Message board posts encourage debate. Blogs don''t. Why not start a thread with your own POV?

 

 

[/quote]Ive done that a couple of times mate but it just digresses into the normal name calling etc.In the main, this place isnt what it used to be. ( i sound old!) Not seen much good debate on here in a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="can u sit down please"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="can u sit down please"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Come on CUSDP! That''s totally biased. The signings that the author thinks are good just get named with a qualification that Hughton may not even have signed them. Yet the ones the author sees as a mistake get a paragraph each. We know that''s your view Danny and you and the author are quite entitled to it. But if you''re asking others to vote it should at least be balanced!

 

 

[/quote]

Everyones is entitled to there view Nige.

But in highlighting the article i was hoping some people in favour of CH would vote, to give an understanding of where we are at.

Just looking for a good debate and i think the article will stir that.
[/quote]

 

That''s rubbish buddy. Message board posts encourage debate. Blogs don''t. Why not start a thread with your own POV?

 

 

[/quote]

Ive done that a couple of times mate but it just digresses into the normal name calling etc.

In the main, this place isnt what it used to be. ( i sound old!)

Not seen much good debate on here in a while.
[/quote]

 

Well you''re hardly likely to encourage it by behaving like Smudger''s bitch[:O]

 

I didn''t realise any thread you''d started had digressed into name calling. Point me towards it. I reckon this is the best City discussion site on the net. But I guess it''s only as good as it''s posters. That''s where we differ buddy. I rate a lot of the posters on here very highly.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nutty, I also rate quite a large number of posters.

Whether I agree with it or not, I try to see their point of view. I usually have different opinions to other people; and whilst you might not directly admit it you do accept peoples views and slightly change or completely change your own views.

It''s the beauty of this sport that you can put 100 people in a room, and all 100 will see a match differently if you analysis it fairly in depth. Most people have different default formation they prefer the most.

All in all, lots of different of opinion mostly all valid occasional troll but most importantly we get to talk about our No.1 interest NCFC. Everything is valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ridiculously biased anti Hughton article.

+++++++++++++

+1

people seem to mention that people need to "take off their yellow/green tinted glasses" for this season, and yet those are the people who seemed to have left theirs on from last.

almost every pundit and neutral had said last year that we were a championship team punching above our weight with momentum being one of the few things going for us.

we had a manager that did well to get us up, but when we got their his plan seemed to be "heep it forward, hope it latches on to a forward player who can shoot it."

for as much as people say we''re like stoke this year, last year we really were too.

I for one would not of liked to see what this season would of been like had lambert of stayed.

and as for his comments about the poor signings.

lee camp -

as soon as he arrived, Bunn improved dramatically. I would not want either rudd or steer in goal for the games bunn was suspended/subbed off injured.

Kamara - Involved in over half of our last 10-12 goals, without him we most likely wouldn''t of scored them. (winning fouls, putting in crosses/passes that directly lead to goals, as well as shots converted to corners which led to goals.)

he wasn''t what we needed to go forward next season, apparently, but there is no denying that he has saved our skins for this season.

Hughton has given his reason for becchio not being played - and that is for the moment he is very much like Holt, but unlike moro hughton thinks he could work with him.

I think we have very different views of the word "interesting"

I find things interesting that try to take both POVs into perspective, apparently you don''t,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Baracouda. I don''t get why the posters on here continually put down the board. If it was rubbish they wouldn''t bother coming back. Either that or they have nothing whatsoever to do. And posters of all views are important otherwise it would become sterile and boring. But to post here you have to have a bit of a thick skin. Your opinion is going to be challenged. If you don''t like having your opinion challenged then it''s probably best to write a blog......

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="SYG"]It''s hard to disagree with most of what he is saying...[/quote]

Some of it I agree with, most of it I don''t SYG

But the tone is ridulously one- sided. The piece suffers for its lack of balance. No willingness to recognise the difficult task CH inherited, the lack of squad depth he found on his arrival. No acceptance that NC need a period of rebuilding and a period of stability to achieve that.

It is so obviously intended as a hatchet job that I found myself less willing to acknowledge the bits I might be persuaded to agree with.

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

×