UV

He sure learned that lesson well. I was told in another thread that Mort has been running things for months (before he was even appointed to the board) without the old board having any involvement. Is that in the rules? As a number of people in this thread are in the "wait for the review" camp, can someone please answer my questions here. Cheers.

Those 4 players were signed under the old board, before the new owner got his own boys in. I don't think so. Chris Mort said he was the one that gave the nod for the Viduka and Barton deals to go through. but I thought directors weren't supposed to have a say in transfers ? He isn't just a director, he runs the club. Before the stockmarket was/is informed? Is that legal?

Those 4 players were signed under the old board, before the new owner got his own boys in.

I was thinking exactly that about the slow signings, by this time last year we had signed (scratches head, whistles a little, slowly drinks coffee, scratches head again and gives up trying) nobody. It may have passed you by, but there was a little cup competition going on over in Germany last Summer which kind of distracted a lot of players and delayed any major signings being made by any Premiership clubs. Also, although I know it wouldn't affect the plans of a man of your foresight, our main striker was injured during said kickabout which I think might have had a slight affect on the focus of our transfers last year. Anyway, you never answered, what do you think about the manager's statement that the slowness of the current board to act on his targets has cost us possible signings?

OMG Vidika's a Gemini, don't they know 6's are unlucky for Gemini's born in the year of the Monkey. And 3-6 = -3. They are sayin he needs to lose 3 stone. I think he has the mental strength to struggle through this trauma though.

Proof? I guess if Shepherd isn't involved anymore it explains why we've been slow at board level and missed out on putting offers in for transfers the manager wanted. It must simply be due to the incompetence of the new owner and his lackeys. > Wouldn't you agree?

I have some questions for the 50+% who voted to wait for the internal review: This internal review has been ongoing for 3 weeks now. How much longer do you think it's going to take? Is 3 weeks not easily long enough to review the major parts of the business which would affect transfers and allow a transfer budget to be assigned? Obviously Allardyce has some money to work with, but it's equally obvious from his comments yesterday that this is currently a limited amount. Ashley has his own people in now who can negotiate the deals, so he'll know what's going on during a new transfer. If a more substantial amount of money is forthcoming, then what's stopping it? Reading between the lines of his interview yesterday, Allardyce seems to be almost as much in the dark as we are. Is this review so time intensive that Mort can't even spare an hour to discuss things with the manager of the club at a critical point in the season for transfers? Do you believe that this review is anything more than just a cost cutting exercise and review of the managerial structure? The major monetary ins and outs are all in the club's accounts and will have been reviewed before he bought his first share. Do you think that lots of secret undercover work is being done to find hidden debts or something? I've repeatedly heard many posters on here claim that the only way Ashley is going to make money from the club is by investing lots in the playing staff to ultimately get us into the CL. If this is the case, then what difference is an internal review going to make to the amount of money spent on the squad? What could it possibly turn up (after 3 weeks) which would significantly change this policy?

Not heard of body doubles... /DavB93

This time last year the world cup had just finished 4 days ago. Before that, about 4 or 5 transfers in had been made in the whole of the PL.

Before waking up tbh.

So you reckon we're paying Owen £8.7m a year? No, because I have no idea what wage he is really on, I used the £100 grand as an example only.. No, because you're talking shit. Any figures quoted in the press whether true or not will be gross earnings as they want to make the numbers seem as large as possible to be more sensational.

So you reckon we're paying Owen £8.7m a year?

Could someone run the scoring system through a logic filter please. TIA # 2 Points for predicting the correct number of goals by at least one team. # 1 Points for predicting the correct number of goals for the home team. # 1 Points for predicting the correct number of goals for the away team.

I can finally stop playing the Sven to City betting market and collect my winnings. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6277502.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/m/man_city/6241052.stm

*Bump* As I'm completely unworthy to start new threads, I thought I'd find a "boro are great" thread from the past to post this in: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/m/middlesbrough/6229860.stm Feel free to add further praise of Steve Gibson, his top managerial appointment, and their running of the club below:

49th That's Spurs UEFA ranking for next year after their Uefa Cup run. Hardly worth the effort. If they try hard for another few years though they may catch up with the mighty 'boro.

I particularly liked the "Great messageboard posts of history" section (even if they did have a TI-99 with a Spectrum load screen ). So true.

We did last season. Predominantly due to a lack of creativity in midfield, and all we've done there so far is replace Parker with Barton. A good attack and an average defense will get you into Europe. A good defense and an average attack will stop you getting relegated.

Some people would say that 6 starts and 9 sub appearances spread over a couple of seasons was not enough to judge a player on. Some people would argue that he hadn't been given a decent run of games with which to gain consistency and prove himself. Some people might even go as far as to complain that despite only poor to average performances, his lack of games was reason to believe he had been unfairly treat by a manager who discriminated against him. I guess you're not one of those people.

If roeder were still the gaffer, people would be going apoplectic about this [alleged] transfer. They would also be hyper critical of the transfers made so far - a mentalist Man City reject, a fat, lazy striker from 'boro, and a defender from a French team that finished 15th last season. There's an awful lot of "Big Sam know's what he's doing" blind faith going on that was never afforded to Roeder. I hope it's justified.

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/bentannouncement290607.html Tut tut, it seems Spurs are lying to the Stock exchange as well as the press about this transfer fee, but we know the TRUTH

11 league goals in 34 games. Against the following opposition. West Ham (A) 1 Reading (H) 1 (pen) Blackburn (A) 2 (one without a goalkeeper in nets) Watford (H) 2 Spurs (H) 1 (even Parker scored against Spurs in this game ) Spurs (A) 1 (even Huntington & Butt scored against Spurs in this game ) Fulham (A) 1 Liverpool (H) 1 (gifted by comedy defending) Sheffield (A) 1 By no means irreplaceable. Especially if they replace Henry with Martins. Utter tosh. Perhaps some of the screamers he scored were because he had switched the ball with a 99p floater...and paid the keeper to dive the wrong way. Good for you if you're completely happy with a player who can just about creep over 10 goals a season playing as the main striker as long as they score 3 or 4 "screamers". To clarify, the only goal he scored against a defense better than our patched up affair last season was this one against Liverpool: "26 mins Martins chased a Kieron Dyer ball down our right but Jose Reina inexplicably rushed out and blasted the ball against his own defender leaving Martins to take a couple of touches before stroking the ball into the empty net. 1-1"

11 league goals in 34 games. Against the following opposition. West Ham (A) 1 Reading (H) 1 (pen) Blackburn (A) 2 (one without a goalkeeper in nets) Watford (H) 2 Spurs (H) 1 (even Parker scored against Spurs in this game ) Spurs (A) 1 (even Huntington & Butt scored against Spurs in this game ) Fulham (A) 1 Liverpool (H) 1 (gifted by comedy defending) Sheffield (A) 1 By no means irreplaceable. Especially if they replace Henry with Martins.

It would (will) be mighty interesting if (when) Luque fails to perform and rarely gets a game for a third successive manager to hear what new excuses will be brought out to absolve him of blame this time under a popular manager. No doubt it will still be Souness/Roeder/Shearer/Lee Clark's fault for shattering the poor bloke's confidence beyond repair and training all ability out of him.