Mauricio Isla

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Siem's sexy swagger

Member
Jul 15, 2012
84
5
8
Reported on Sky Sports.

Chilean publication El Mercurio is reporting that Newcastle have reached an agreement with Juventus for Mauricio Isla. An £8million fee is said to have been agreed for the full-back, who will join on a four-year contract.
 
Seabass said:
Well if true it would give us some more options a bit more strength in depth so I woukd be happy. Still need to find a striker and a CB though.
Click to expand...

If we are going to spend 8m I'd rather it was on a solid CB, rather than another RB. To be honest the only recent link I could find is from WhatCulture, hardly uber reliable. Plenty of links earlier this month but this is before we signed Janmaart.
 
Pete Graves off SSN has already said on twitter he doesnt believe its a genuine story.

Would make little sense.
 
He's a wingback...we'd probably put him on the wing. Gee... I mean I'd take him. He looked gooooooooooooooood for Chile.

Maybe we plan on going 3 at the back?
 
Travelsick07 said:
He's a wingback...we'd probably put him on the wing. Gee... I mean I'd take him. He looked gooooooooooooooood for Chile.

Maybe we plan on going 3 at the back?
Click to expand...

Who cares the more quality the better it means we can survive an injury or suspension in one area and to honest other than cm we don't have that at all.

Left side looks increasingly week t me but anyone good I'd have regardless
 
Mrtiote said:
Who cares the more quality the better it means we can survive an injury or suspension in one area and to honest other than cm we don't have that at all.

Left side looks increasingly week t me but anyone good I'd have regardless
Click to expand...

Albeit a friendly, but the left side of Haidara, Aaron's and Sammy when he came on was the highlight for me. <ok>
 
Somebodys pinched my sombrero said:
Albeit a friendly, but the left side of Haidara, Aaron's and Sammy when he came on was the highlight for me. <ok>
Click to expand...
Seriously all three are ****e at premier league level try seeing things as a neutral would they will all tell you the same.

We need two decent players in basically every position not one quality player and then some goof that won't ever amount to more than putting out company link arse comments when we lose trying to get in the first eleven that way
 
Gordonthetoony said:
How can anyone say Aarons is sh.te at premiership level when he's yet to make his debut. FFS the lad is what 17/18 years old, give him a chance. By the way he did look promising.
Click to expand...

Ffs exactly I'm saying you can't start getting excited playing eleven farmers. Pardew could have given him 9 games last season and we'd gave some idea but nnnooooooo the intelligencia that us Pardew failed to see that opportunity.


Jesus ****ing hid help us

I remember people going on about the wonders chopra beheld before once again they realised he was ****e.
 
Mrtiote said:
Ffs exactly I'm saying you can't start getting excited playing eleven farmers. Pardew could have given him 9 games last season and we'd gave some idea but nnnooooooo the intelligencia that us Pardew failed to see that opportunity.


Jesus ****ing hid help us

I remember people going on about the wonders chopra beheld before once again they realised he was ****e.
Click to expand...

No. You said all three were ****e at premiership level.
 
More serious comment than my last one is that Pardew should have "blooded" some of the kids in the latter part of last season. We weren't going higher and we weren't going lower, or at least not to any relevant degree.

I doubt whether Aarons would have been one of those "blooded" and there was the issue of the losing run which ideally is not the time to "blood". Pardew could and should have played one or two of the kids once we were safe but once the losing run had picked up momentum then that would not have been the time to try the kids.

Put simply, there was a few games where he could and should have but he missed the opportunity and once missed it was then too late for the sake of the kids' confidence.
 
trevornufc said:
More serious comment than my last one is that Pardew should have "blooded" some of the kids in the latter part of last season. We weren't going higher and we weren't going lower, or at least not to any relevant degree.

I doubt whether Aarons would have been one of those "blooded" and there was the issue of the losing run which ideally is not the time to "blood". Pardew could and should have played one or two of the kids once we were safe but once the losing run had picked up momentum then that would not have been the time to try the kids.

Put simply, there was a few games where he could and should have but he missed the opportunity and once missed it was then too late for the sake of the kids' confidence.
Click to expand...

It was important to Pardew - he picked up a nice little bonus for finishing in 10th.
 
Mrtiote said:
They are ****e

Totally unproven and again we have no cover
Click to expand...

Unproven doesn't mean rubbish, it means unproven. They may be great, rubbish or somewhere between. Personally I'd say Haidara is looking to be a reasonable option, but no world beater. Aarons is a promising unknown. Sammy looks good in spells but is made of glass so can not be relied upon. The way it is always going to be under MA is that 'cover' is provided by utility players - Santon will likely be considered cover for LB, LW and RB. DM as well according to Pardew. RTaylor likewise - RB, RW, LB, DM. Just got to hope we don't get too many injuries at once because you'll be wasting your time hoping for genuine squad depth to be developed.
 
trevornufc said:
More serious comment than my last one is that Pardew should have "blooded" some of the kids in the latter part of last season. We weren't going higher and we weren't going lower, or at least not to any relevant degree.

I doubt whether Aarons would have been one of those "blooded" and there was the issue of the losing run which ideally is not the time to "blood". Pardew could and should have played one or two of the kids once we were safe but once the losing run had picked up momentum then that would not have been the time to try the kids.

Put simply, there was a few games where he could and should have but he missed the opportunity and once missed it was then too late for the sake of the kids' confidence.
Click to expand...

Agree totally that we should have played the kids as the season fizzled out.
We would have reaped the benefit this season.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back