All speculation, unless of course you have some proof he has a clause? I am pretty sure you were slating him for playing Mulgrew before he left, as were many more of us. It's desperate times at the back, but let's not lose sight of how poor Mulgrew was near the end. I think he should be in the squad, bit starting fills me with nerves. He looks to me like a lad who has mentally retired. There is no evidence to suggest there is a clause. Absolutely zero.

We wouldn't be where we are if we couldn't beat teams below us or "weaker teams". You can pick out 1 or 2 examples this season,but it isn't the norm. Every club in the division struggles at times. The results show this. I think the board needs to look a bit more at all the positives. I'm not saying there aren't challenges,but perspective is important.

We have beaten plenty of teams lower than us at home. Let's not exaggerate

A few years. He is behind Shearer, Ferguson and Keane, at a minimum.

Unreal. This annoys me. Always in a Newcastle jersey. Ridiculous.

Source?

What?

I see Mulgrew was on the tele last night. He's fit , isn't he? Are we paying for his work experience as a pundit?

I thought Williams was fit, but just wasn't rushed back last weekend? Losing Nyambes attacking play from full-back will be a huge blow

No, doesn't seem to be happening anymore. He has said we should be beating certain teams away from home recently if we have any aspirations of the play offs. Hull were one, Charlton another. It's like the ""Bennett always starts" shite, it takes some fans months to change the record, even when reality has moved on.

Ya, I thought we could have changed things earlier, but all it takes is one lucky break and we were on top, just not getting the chances.

So they obviously tightened things up after that. It's O'Neills strength Chester, Bath, Collins and Indi are all quality defenders from what I have seen of them. Butland very good keeper for this level.

Ya, 100% , the game was screaming out for someone like Chapman. Someone who could beat a man or two from nothing and just the break the line of defection and get Stoke stretched and worrying

I think the article is fair enough I don't think anyone could label Sharpe critical or negative. I think he should be more critical at times. Gallagher had a stinker of a first half last night,awful. He was better second half, but he's just not a winger. If we do persist with playing him there, then we need to hit some diagonals to him and he needs to win the headers. Otherwise he is just a lanky striker on the wing. If he can't dominate centre halves ,fair enough,not ideal but they are generally big tough lads, but if he can't win headers against full backs at six four,something is very wrong

No, it's not a genuine question, it's been an arse. I never said possession equates to results, not once. It shows, along with the evidence of watching the game that we controlled the possession and pegged them back for most of the game. I used stats because it seems you couldn't see it or refuse to acknowledge it. Of course it is irrelevant ultimately, as I agree its goals and points that matter. I'm just not agreeing that we were as "shit" as you are making out, or that Stoke were as shit defensively as you are making out. I also agree that the laborious tapping around out of defence is bollox. That's on our midfield, Rothwell and Downing in particular to turn and get things going. Games like last night you need someone to score a worldie or you need a bit of luck. If either of those things happened, I bet our performance would look a lot better. The performance was not anywhere near on par with some games I recall like that Wigan game,

Indeed, I think Terry comes across as a prick and wasn't he involved in some racist stuff when younger too? Giggs gets some easy ride(steady on) over what he did alright though.

"Stoke got cross after cross into our box"? Give over ? They had a few. We had 65% possession with 80% pass completion I would say a similar % of the game was played in their half. No doubt we could have been quicker and more direct, but they were well organised and well drilled. Sometimes you need someone to make an error to let you in, or for the opposition to actually push out a bit. Neither happened , unfortunately. We were average and didn't get a break , but they defended very well.

Indeed. Swansea will at least commit players forward and try to attack.

I thought we were set up fine. Controlled the game, just didn't have the cutting edge or performances from the likes of Rothwell. Can argue Samuel should have started, or that maybe we could have went 4-4-2, but it was a resolute and error free defensive performance. Just didn't get a bit of luck either. Missed Dack in games like yesterdays.

Indeed, even Cunningham too was braver and more direct. I think Bell has more in him, but I don't know if he will ever deliver it.

*Michael, easy mistake to make Well you could tell the respect they had by the way they set up.

Ya, it seems some player won't pass it out to bell , I can kind of understand why. I noticed on a number of occasions Downing wouldn't pass to Johnson either

"They didn't need to defend well" Ok, lets leave it at that. If people refuse to acknowledge how well organised, disciplined and hard working Stoke were in defence, there is really nothing to discuss. It's difficult to play against. I should know, it's what Ireland do to teams. We controlled the game, we needed more from the likes of Rothwell and Downing , but with Stoke so, so deep it nullified Armstrong a lot. They maintained their focus and crucially made no individual errors to let us in. They have top level players to be fair.

Of course he did, Danny Higginarse. Ah Keane can get in next year.