Newcastle lads, what you have to understand is the people tht have berated Hughton and called for his head all season have been totally mugged off and are calling for a moment calm to "enjoy the moment" for them to hide in/escape from. He was signed for the long term, but some people are impatient. Negativity is a lion stalking a herd, it picks off the weaker ones first.
No one has called for his head all season, we all want a good manager who will give stablity to the club in the PL. Those of us who doubt CH have seen him oversee declining performances through the season even inspite of better personnel at his disposal than last season. No one except Beef has been mugged off by the WBA result, he now blindly forgets the dross that preceeded it! I still think that sacking CH would be an enormous risk, but keeping him is equally so. I would like rid of him if (and its a big if) we have someone DM and the board believes will do a better job. Because whilst he kept us up and I know that was his brief, I'll wager no one thought it would be with such frequently abject football. No plan B, lack of impact from the bench etc (all this has been well discussed and most of the faults even agreed by those pro-Hughton.) We as supporters of NCFC will enjoy the moment. But this thread and others since the weekend still have a number of us voicing our concern (not hiding). Every manager should be signed for the long term, I'm sure the board would have liked PL to be here for the full 7 year plan and beyond. However only the truely naive or ignorant would not question poor performance levels for such a long period. How can he not of come up with a single tactical advance with the players at his disposal from a shot shy preseason to the end of the season? I'm sorry no I'm wrong we just scored 4 in a game he's an attacking genius! This is why we doubt him. If we can't replace him with better (and I concede that whilst there will doubtless be a review with the board he will likely be retained) then I really hope that he has more in his locker! I want the best available with in our clubs means if thats CH then fine but I would rather play golf or knit or watch some nice emulsion (though not blue!) dry than see us playing so poorly and go the Stoke way. The blindly optomistic fail to understand the threat of the lion and are eaten before the weak ones! Bah!
I really hope the way the team played against West Brom is an indication of things to come next season and apparently RvW was mightily impressed with our performance on Sunday according to Twitter and is really keen to don the Yellow and Green next season.
I don't think there are many 'blindly optimistic' on here GM. The truth is, no one will ever know what would have happened if CH had taken a different approach. We could be 10 points higher or 10 points lower. IMO, the latter would have been more likely, given the attacking options available this year. My hope, like many others, is that better attacking options and a fit JR will bring a better style of play next year. I also feel that Lambert would have struggled if he stayed, as he has done at Villa, in spite of three excellent attacking players available to him. There are hopes for the future, not blind optimism. The PL will always be tough, but next year we will be better prepared for it with a fit JR, an established defense and an improved attack.
Your probably right there, it was mainly a response to beefforblindoptimism. The thing is that there are a few contradictions in the arguements we are all toing and froing. "PL would of struggled second season, as he has done at Villa" Why, he would of known the players, had a full preseason, have added further quality to the squad, He may have had us on 55 points by now! But as you say we'll never know, but they were his players and as this is an argument used to mitigate some of the negatives in CH reign then its fairly valid. (It also still mitigates PL villa side so far CH had a team on the up, PL one on the slide) I also hope that CH will be more positive but with up to 8 players of his in the starting 11 on occations this season his team is mostly his already! It is is complete lack of flexibility thus far that is the worry, you could argue that having taken over he had an element of surprise in the league too and that once he had had some time he found a formula that was yielding reasonable results (not always great performances) but because it is just one rigid formula he and we were would out. He then did nothing outwardly obvious to keep the oposition guessing or arrest the slide. Bah!
Vietnam, when you say that Chris Hughton "got it right" against the top sides, you make exactly the same mistake as when you attribute the dire perfomances against less good sides to Chris Hughton "getting it wrong". Just as there are many reasons for the poor perfomances, so there are for the good performances, one of which, for example, is "underdog" syndrome which, combined with "we only have to turn up to beat this lot" mentality on the part of the opponents leads to unexpected results, giant-killing acts, etc etc. My opinion is simply that the team's performances in the latter part of the season cannot (anymore than in the first half of the season) be put down to a single reason, in particular to Chris Hughton forbidding his players to do anything but defend deep in numbers and forget about scoring goals. As Riverendrick has pointed out, our record over the same number of games last season under Lambert was, in terms of games won, lost or drawn, just as bad or even worse than this season, and compared poorly overall with the earlier part of the season (in which we accumulated pretty much the same number of points as this). Do you think Lambert was entirely to blame for that disparity? Or do you think there were actually a whole variety of different reasons which Lambert struggled to counteract, just as Chris Hughton has struggled to counteract what he referred to (after the WBA game) as "the downward spiral" this season?
I don't really agree with you Robbie. What you seem to be suggesting is that our good haul of points against the big boys is basically coincidence (or perhaps due to underdog spirit). But I think Hughton's approach is actually much better suited to playing the big boys. The problem is that he tends to tread every other club as a big boy as well, and we show too much respect for teams who are no better than us. That's my take on it anyway.
How very childish, when if you actually read Gandalfs posts he was only actually wishing us well on staying up and giving his point of view on CH. If you dont want other peoples opinions then start a board where you can invite like minded people along to pat each other on the back for agreement. I like debate and I like interaction with other teams fans thats why i come to a open site!
I think CH actually game plan this season was to try and win your home games and not lose away games, which makes sense to me. Not going to win us many titles but will finish us mid table if he had got it right. OTBC
Vietnam, I can't for the life of me see where I've said anything that suggests I think the performances against the better teams are "coincidence". My reference to an underdog mentality was simply me giving one example of the multifarious factors (other than the manager's tactics) which influence a team's performance in a given game and often play a part in games where lower-ranked teams play so-called "top" ones. Teams upping their performance against "big" teams is a widely recognised phenomenon at all levels and in many sports. There is nothing coincidental about it: it has perfectly understandable explanations. There are two questions here: (1) Is it true that we have done disproportionately better against the top teams than the others? (2) If it IS true, is it also true that this is explained solely by the manager's tactics. As far as I can see from a quick look at the stats, we have accumulated 8 points in our 11 games against what I would call the "big" clubs (Man Utd, Man City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool). That's an average of 0.73 points per game. Against the rest of the league we have accumulated 33 points at an average of 1.27 points per game. Would you say that the results against the big teams are disproportionately better than against the rest? I wouldn't on that basis. I also looked quickly at e.g. Southampton's record against the big teams. They have played them all twice, accumulating 11 points from the 12 games (which we can equal if we beat Man City on Sunday). In other words, if we have performed disproportionately well against the big boys, so have Southampton. Is that because Southampton's style of play (under two different managers incidentally) is better suited to playing the big boys than the rest? I wouldn't say so. It seems to me much more likely that some of the other factors that come into play when "big" teams play "smaller" ones have influenced the Saints results just as they have ours.
Robbie 1) You have chosen Southampton because they are the other club in the bottom half of the table who have a good record this season against the big boys 2) You have decided to include Liverpool but not Everton even though Everton finished in the top six and Liverpool didn't. 3) If there is an underdog spirit when small teams play big ones, that would be the same for everyone in the bottom half and therefore goes no way to explaining the difference in results.
Actually no. I looked at Southampton because they seemed to me to be the club most comparable to us, with a similar number of points gained this year, a very similar recent history, a squad which is a similar mix of players, etc. Actually no. It's not about league position at any given time. It's about the "big name" teams. Playing Everton, despite the good work Moyes has done, is not at all the same as playing Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs or one of the Manchester clubs. Everton nowadays don't set the pulse racing in the same way, nor do e.g. West Brom, or Newcastle, etc. I did not say that the underdog spirit explains the results in and of itself. I merely cited that as one of many factors which play a part in a team's performance on a match day. The fact that many teams who start games against the big boys filled with underdog spirit don't get anywhere is neither here nor there. I bet you the Reading players, the QPR players, the Villa players, and so on, DID go into their games against those six teams with at least an element of that mentality (but in some cases filled with trepidation as well). Whatever, you didn't answer my question about Southampton, who currently have performed better against the six big clubs than we have. Do you think this shows definitively that their manager's style of playing is better suited to playing the big teams than the rest? You think that of ours. Do you think it of theirs too?
First of all, I still don't accept your inclusion of Liverpool simply because they are a big name. Everton have been better than them this year, and therefore in my opinion should be included before them. In answer to your question, Southampton indeed do seem to have suffered the same problems as we have, with excellent performances at times against the top six and disappointing ones against the bottom clubs (losing at home to Wigan is one result I remember at random). Perhaps that does reflect their style of play in some way - I haven't really seen enough of them to comment. And I think you will find that, apart from ourselves and Southampton, very few of the bottom teams got anywhere near ten points against the top six clubs this season.
Why is his opinion on Chris Hughton valid? He probably hasn't seen his new teams play for the last 2 years, I have and I think my opinion is more than valid over his! So are you saying that unless I agree with everything everyone posts on here I should go away? How ****ing arrogant is that? DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO! My reply which you seem to have taken offence to is a lighthearted response to his rather aggresive reply to me! Jesus man lighten up a bit!
I would simply ask you Vietnam whether you feel the same frission of excitement when we take on Everton as when we take on Liverpool? When you first get to see the fixture list for the coming season, do you look for the Everton games before the Liverpool games? League position alone does not make a team a "big" team in that sense. My point is about the psychology of players (and fans) up against this or that team. I'm saying that players (and fans) are often "up" for games against those six teams as against others, even though other teams may currently occupy a top six position in the league (e.g. Newcastle last season, Everton (and at times West Brom) this season. The debate about Hughton and his supposed favoured style of football will be settled in the longer term by performances on the pitch. IMO there is no justification for the huge amount of negativity currently aimed at him by some fans. Nor, I would say, for the sour reception given by some on here to Gandalf, who came to wish us well and encourage us to think positively about the future.
Re Gandalf, I certainly don't want to be impolite to guests. On the Hughton issue, we tend to be on different sides of the fence. Having said that, I recognise that majority opinion is against me and I will honestly try my best to start next season with a clean slate and not pre-judge him.
