Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, shen said:

Goalkeepers routinely play well beyond their mid 30s. What's the issue here? 

 

 

4 minutes ago, ScouseFox said:

tbf giving anyone who doesnt have a high resale value a contract any longer than 2 or 3 years is pretty nuts

^^^ 

There's one. 

Another is they have history of doing this and it going badly, Pardew for example. 

 

36 is still on a bit, if they've replaced him due to a spiral in form in a year or 2, they still have 4 years left of him. It's a risk that didn't need to be taken. Especially as an unstable club 

Edited by UniFox21
Posted
11 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

But giving a 30 year old a six year contract is ludicrous. How long will he be their number one for? 

 

Barring injuries, he’ll probably be good enough for Newcastle’s unambitious standards wherever they are during that time.

 

He was probably already on £30-40k. Giving him a little pay-rise (clause riddled), will mean that Ashley doesn’t have to spend on a new number one for years now. 

 

If he had to go out and buy one in a few years, he’d most likely have to pay the same wages (if not more) to the new guy. 

 

Footballing decision - not great.

Ashley’s money saving prerogative - sensible choice. 

  • Like 1
Posted
14 hours ago, Langston said:

People don't seriously still believe Pardew was given a flat eight year contract do they?!

Guaranteed it was absolutely riddled with clauses.

Well speculation was that the eight year contract was linked to an outstanding gambling debt that Pardew had and Ashley was paying off on his behalf. 

Posted

I like Southampton but how can their manager survive this? Losing 9-0 at home is totally unacceptable. 

 

Posted

Do you reckon our win will motivate Man City to go for the 10 goal record at home when they are thumping some poor relegation fodder?

 

Always thought they have a 10 goal win in them.

Posted (edited)

United fans apoplectic in the comments but surely this is just standard manager talk. Ole is not gonna say he's looking forward fo demolish Norwich.

 

 

Edited by Koke
Posted
2 hours ago, Nalis said:

Do you reckon our win will motivate Man City to go for the 10 goal record at home when they are thumping some poor relegation fodder?

 

Always thought they have a 10 goal win in them.

Given that their next two games are both at home against a certain south coast side, they probably fancy their chances at taking that record from us pretty swiftly...

Posted

Goddammit, someone tweeting in about the rugby score into BT and them reading it out. It's on quietly in the background and my Dad heard it who is in the process of watching the rugby now.

 

Why not warn people of the what you're about to say if its relating to a score of a big game?

Posted
2 hours ago, Koke said:

United fans apoplectic in the comments but surely this is just standard manager talk. Ole is not gonna say he's looking forward fo demolish Norwich.

 

 

Probably already anticipating Pukki leaving Slabhead on his arse 

Posted
4 hours ago, Nalis said:

Do you reckon our win will motivate Man City to go for the 10 goal record at home when they are thumping some poor relegation fodder?

 

Always thought they have a 10 goal win in them.

They're not prone to ease off when they've gone three or four up. It wouldn't be beyond them.

Posted (edited)

De Bruyne argues against an incorrect foul decision - not booked. Grealish argues against an incorrect foul decision - booked.

Edited by Arkie Bennett
  • Like 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...