ToonForum - Newcastle United Forum

Remember last year when everyone said we lost because there were too many French players who didn't give a f***

6 local players on that pitch and they were all dreadful except for Taylor.

dls wrote:Remember last year when everyone said we lost because there were too many French players who didn't give a f***

6 local players on that pitch and they were all dreadful except for Taylor.

Dreadful is harsh. Dummett did nothing as usual, Sammy was a massive bag of nerves but got some good crosses in, Colback was Colback and Armstrong looked lively. I've got no problems with Alnwick's performance, no keeper would have stopped that.

Cheik the room wrote:Don't understand this mindset that we deserved the win. Are we back to the retards who think whichever team has the most possession was the better team? Thought we finally put that to bed when Spain got raped in the World Cup. Sunderland had AT LEAST 4 almost unmissable chances in the game, it's a miracle they didn't score more. We bossed the ball but struggling to think of more than 2 clear chances that we had. Sunderland were FAR more creative and fully deserving of their 3 points. Pardew out.

Assuming this is aimed at me because I said we deserved to win.

I said f*** all about possession. I said f*** all about Spain. All I said is that I felt we deserved to win because we were dominant throughout the second half and looked like the only team trying to win.

Pantimillion made a few good saves and Perez (who had a good game) could've had a couple of goals if his finishing was better. And that makes me a 'retard'? Nice one CTR.

I thought Colback played well. Armstrong did very little. I still think Dummett is better in the middle that at LB. Sammy was good in some respects but awful at times. Taylor played well. Alnwick was ok - very nervy but he's still very fresh

fatbastardvegetarian wrote:

dls wrote:Remember last year when everyone said we lost because there were too many French players who didn't give a f***

6 local players on that pitch and they were all dreadful except for Taylor.

Dreadful is harsh. Dummett did nothing as usual, Sammy was a massive bag of nerves but got some good crosses in, Colback was Colback and Armstrong looked lively. I've got no problems with Alnwick's performance, no keeper would have stopped that.

Sammy had a shocking first half but he really grew into the game in the second imo. The crosses he was whipping in are the sort Cisse would thrive on.

fatbastardvegetarian wrote:

dls wrote:Remember last year when everyone said we lost because there were too many French players who didn't give a f***

6 local players on that pitch and they were all dreadful except for Taylor.

Dreadful is harsh. Dummett did nothing as usual, Sammy was a massive bag of nerves but got some good crosses in, Colback was Colback and Armstrong looked lively. I've got no problems with Alnwick's performance, no keeper would have stopped that.

I think it's perfectly fair. Dummett like you said did nothing in either defence or attack, Sammy's touch, passing and general play was abysmal. Colback reverted to early season form, Armstrong wasted our biggest chance by not squaring for an open goal and Alnwick was completely lost every time the ball went to the back post.

beardface wrote:

Cheik the room wrote:Don't understand this mindset that we deserved the win. Are we back to the retards who think whichever team has the most possession was the better team? Thought we finally put that to bed when Spain got raped in the World Cup. Sunderland had AT LEAST 4 almost unmissable chances in the game, it's a miracle they didn't score more. We bossed the ball but struggling to think of more than 2 clear chances that we had. Sunderland were FAR more creative and fully deserving of their 3 points. Pardew out.

Assuming this is aimed at me because I said we deserved to win.

I said **** all about possession. I said **** all about Spain. All I said is that I felt we deserved to win because we were dominant throughout the second half and looked like the only team trying to win.

Pantimillion made a few good saves and Perez (who had a good game) could've had a couple of goals if his finishing was better. And that makes me a 'retard'? Nice one CTR.

Wasn't aimed at you, was aimed at numerous people claiming we deserved to win. I'm just struggling to understand that. Sunderland's game plan was to soak up pressure and limit our chances then hit on the break. We had a decent chance for Armstrong and Sissoko, and a couple of decent chances for Perez. Sunderland's plan worked perfectly, and Johnson, Gomez, Wickham, Larsson, Fletcher all created chances that were easier to score than miss, and that's excluding the goal. It could easily have been 1-4 or 1-5 and there could have been no complaints whatsoever, their finishing was just UNBELIEVABLY ABYSMAL.

I'm gutted rather than furious. Some positives to take out of today, Armstrong and Perez will be stars one day.

ALF wrote:I'm gutted rather than furious. Some positives to take out of today, Armstrong and Perez will be stars one day.

Armstrong won't. Perez will, but not for us.

Calm down lads. Do you not remember that time we got beat 9-1 by the Mackems around a 100 years ago? Spoilt twats, don't realise how easy you have it.

dls wrote:

ALF wrote:I'm gutted rather than furious. Some positives to take out of today, Armstrong and Perez will be stars one day.

Armstrong won't. Perez will, but not for us.

This.

Perez is already too good for us.

dls wrote:

ALF wrote:I'm gutted rather than furious. Some positives to take out of today, Armstrong and Perez will be stars one day.

Armstrong won't. Perez will, but not for us.

He will, there's a reason he's playing top level football at 17.

Man U on boxing day

ALF wrote:

dls wrote:
Armstrong won't. Perez will, but not for us.

He will, there's a reason he's playing top level football at 17.

He wouldn't be on the bench if we had a fully fit squad

ALF wrote:

dls wrote:
Armstrong won't. Perez will, but not for us.

He will, there's a reason he's playing top level football at 17.

So he can run and run about without doing anything?

The Deluded Pablo Diego Jose Francisco wrote:

ALF wrote:
He will, there's a reason he's playing top level football at 17.

He wouldn't be on the bench if we had a fully fit squad

TBH I would 100x rather play Armstrong than Riviere. Also, it's time for our weekly "Where's Facundo?"

How's the weather at nufcfans and their ass licker?

LaFraise92 wrote:

The Deluded Pablo Diego Jose Francisco wrote:
He wouldn't be on the bench if we had a fully fit squad

TBH I would 100x rather play Armstrong than Riviere. Also, it's time for our weekly "Where's Facundo?"

He's failing miserably at trying to hit the crossbar with our under 18s.

The Deluded Pablo Diego Jose Francisco wrote:

ALF wrote:
He will, there's a reason he's playing top level football at 17.

He wouldn't be on the bench if we had a fully fit squad

Who would be keeping him out? He's ahead of Rivière and Ferreyra in the pecking order, Cissé is the only striker struggling with injuries (we signed SDJ to be our 10).

LaFraise92 wrote:

The Deluded Pablo Diego Jose Francisco wrote:
He wouldn't be on the bench if we had a fully fit squad

TBH I would 100x rather play Armstrong than Riviere. Also, it's time for our weekly "Where's Facundo?"

I think Nacho had more game time than Fauncdo