What has HBA done...?

I think Sammy needs to go on loan though. He's the impact sub at the moment but he isnt half as good as Ranger was at changing a game from the bench and is really very raw. He'll be a class player but I think he's too young to be playing so regularly in the PL. We have players like Raylor who would be more steady on the right of midfield.

 

I say we send Hughton Vuckic, Sammy, Abeid and Ferguson on short term loans (with an option to extend).

What's the deal with Kadar?

 

For the record I am all for bringing younger players in to the squad, just not at the expense of our better players. Smith can go **** ** *** ***.

 

Maybe Benny is slacking in training? Pardew seems to really value effort in training and bringing on Shola ahead of him may have been to send him a message?

 

Yes I accept HBA could have come on and done absolutely nothing. However, it would have been the most logical choice and correct one.

It would have had no question marks from anybody and this whole thread wouldnt have been made up and argued over for 3 days.

Nobody would have made the threads: What has Sammy done? or Why are Pardews subs awful? or nufc.com even mentioned the words 'baffling substitutions (just an example, i am not the only person)

 

Kadar's getting released, he couldnt even make the bench in the Norwich game.

 

Shame. I thought he looked quite solid in the Championship but he seems a bit injury prone, probably Ramage-level. In saying that, he's just broken into the national side aged 21.

 

It would not of been if it resulted in us losing the match.

 

No no. It wouldnt have been illogical or incorrect. It would have been the logical and correct sub to make that turned out badly that 'somehow' cost us the game. Basically no-one would have questioned it. For eg If Fergie brings on Rooney when they are at 0-0 and scores an own goal....people wouldn't say it was the wrong substitution, it just turned out badly. Fergie's decision wouldn't have been questioned. There is a difference.

 

Just because something is or is not questioned does not make it right or wrong.

 

It is if you make a highly regarded questionable decision and the inevitable turns out. If Sammy had scored the winner than the sub would have been: Questionable but the correct one. He didnt so therefore it was: Questionable and the wrong one.

Ive had enough now. No offence.

 

http://twitpic.com/7vk9px/full

Back page of Echo.

 

Sounds like sensationalism to me, I've seen the quotes from the conference and he implied Ben Arfa would start on Wednesday.

 

Pretty sure Pards said he was going to be fired up for Wednesday.

 

Exactly, if he was "out of the picture" they wouldnt have named him on the bench.

 

Yeah the headline is blatant sensationalism, but when isn't it when it comes to papers? (Excluding ****ty puns)

 

This. It's another case of making a mountain of a mole-hill. Pards basically said that Ben Arfa isn't back to his best yet, and the reason that he didn't play on Saturday is because it was a tight game and Swansea were playing a deep line.

 

It has even got a quote in it from Pardew saying that he trained very, very well today.

 

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/new...tml?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
seems to back up the echo although both could be bullshit

 

Just making a load of drama out of his quotes. HBA looked off v Chelsea and Pardew wanted to see an improvement in training before he plays him again, said in the same press conference that he trained excellently today.