OzzieMandias

Agree with Collymore and everyone on here who pointed out that the problem is they feel they always have to have ex-footballers doing this stuff. I like hearing the ones who can talk some sense about tactics -- which basically means David Pleat or Andy Gray. Once heard Ray Wilkins doing the summarizing for some European game, and he stuck in my mind as being very good. And I don't totally dislike Alan Hansen. Shearer, sadly, is one of the worst of the lot.

My guess is still that the Sports Direct logo won't remain up there any longer than it takes to sell the space to some other sponsor. Whether they'll find a buyer soon, though, remains to be seen.

I'd guess two wins, two draws and one defeat from that lot.

No way is Turin a "fashionable city".

Krul, Coloccini and Ben Arfa all in Garth Crooks' team of the week: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/score_on_bbci/7631245.stm

Whether people think it's right or wrong those comments in bold are cringeworthy. Comparison with the Parthenon is pretty laughable, too.

We dont have to man because you have told us the information is not out there that is why you "WOULD LOVE TO KNOW". What was it about the phrase "from available evidence" that you didn't understand? What are you after articles by Louise Taylor? Lee Ryder? Go search google to quench your thirst. Me and at least two others have expressed the opinion that the reasonable assumption is that Shearer's masterplan involved heavy spending. You have so far tried to bawl me down on this by insisting that we do not know the answer. Well of course we don't know the answer. We are dealing in assumptions. If you disagree with mine, try making a case for a different assumption. Or admit that you can't. You haven't made a case for there being big demands though. This is your argument: "And after the whole Keegan thing, I don't blame Ashley at all for not wanting to appoint another Toon icon with big spending demands. " "That would be my assumption, too. Still wish we knew the details, though." Not much of an argument. A similar counter-argument would be 'I assume there weren't big demands.' No one seems willing to say that, though. I'd say there probably weren't big demands, not by normal Championship standards anyway. Hughton's demands that summer (£0) were always going to be less than Shearer's. Hmm. Yes. Although it wasn't really £0 in that people were predicting a fire sale followed by immediate relegation to League One, and actually Ashley just moved on those who didn't want to stay, and put in enough money to keep the rest on the wage bill. Meanwhile, and given his remark that he didn't think the squad was good enough to come straight back up, I can't see a single scenario in which Shearer's plan wouldn't have involved a fair bit more spending than that. Spending that would have been unnecessary, as we now know.

We dont have to man because you have told us the information is not out there that is why you "WOULD LOVE TO KNOW". What was it about the phrase "from available evidence" that you didn't understand? What are you after articles by Louise Taylor? Lee Ryder? Go search google to quench your thirst. Me and at least two others have expressed the opinion that the reasonable assumption is that Shearer's masterplan involved heavy spending. You have so far tried to bawl me down on this by insisting that we do not know the answer. Well of course we don't know the answer. We are dealing in assumptions. If you disagree with mine, try making a case for a different assumption. Or admit that you can't. What is the point though? You wont change your mind as we have all seen many times, so is it even a bigger waste of time trying to prove point on something you have made clear you dont the answer too. Aye, keep dodging the question and eventually I'll get bored. I have given you the answer search google if you want to know stuff "from available evidence", I read them papers about 2 years ago. Well done. I'm now thoroughly bored.

We dont have to man because you have told us the information is not out there that is why you "WOULD LOVE TO KNOW". What was it about the phrase "from available evidence" that you didn't understand? What are you after articles by Louise Taylor? Lee Ryder? Go search google to quench your thirst. Me and at least two others have expressed the opinion that the reasonable assumption is that Shearer's masterplan involved heavy spending. You have so far tried to bawl me down on this by insisting that we do not know the answer. Well of course we don't know the answer. We are dealing in assumptions. If you disagree with mine, try making a case for a different assumption. Or admit that you can't. What is the point though? You wont change your mind as we have all seen many times, so is it even a bigger waste of time trying to prove point on something you have made clear you dont the answer too. Aye, keep dodging the question and eventually I'll get bored.

We dont have to man because you have told us the information is not out there that is why you "WOULD LOVE TO KNOW". What was it about the phrase "from available evidence" that you didn't understand? What are you after articles by Louise Taylor? Lee Ryder? Go search google to quench your thirst. Me and at least two others have expressed the opinion that the reasonable assumption is that Shearer's masterplan involved heavy spending. You have so far tried to bawl me down on this by insisting that we do not know the answer. Well of course we don't know the answer. We are dealing in assumptions. If you disagree with mine, try making a case for a different assumption. Or admit that you can't. You haven't made a case for there being big demands though. This is your argument: "And after the whole Keegan thing, I don't blame Ashley at all for not wanting to appoint another Toon icon with big spending demands. " "That would be my assumption, too. Still wish we knew the details, though." Not much of an argument. A similar counter-argument would be 'I assume there weren't big demands.' No one seems willing to say that, though.

We dont have to man because you have told us the information is not out there that is why you "WOULD LOVE TO KNOW". What was it about the phrase "from available evidence" that you didn't understand? What are you after articles by Louise Taylor? Lee Ryder? Go search google to quench your thirst. Me and at least two others have expressed the opinion that the reasonable assumption is that Shearer's masterplan involved heavy spending. You have so far tried to bawl me down on this by insisting that we do not know the answer. Well of course we don't know the answer. We are dealing in assumptions. If you disagree with mine, try making a case for a different assumption. Or admit that you can't.

So you know make out Al had big spending demands but you would love to see what conditions Al was asking for. So you don't know he had big spending demands. Maybe he wanted to sign Stephen Spence good striker that lad. So you reckon Shearer's masterplan involved not spending very much at all? I reckon it involved a fresh start. Moving players in and out. Some long term planning. Laying some solid foundations. This is the potential problem with our current renaissance; it’s been built on short term thinking. Hughton’s done a good job, but whether the master plan is sound remains to be seen. That would almost certainly be the case with any masterplan.

We dont have to man because you have told us the information is not out there that is why you "WOULD LOVE TO KNOW". What was it about the phrase "from available evidence" that you didn't understand?

So come on then, lads. Surely one of you can make some kind of case from available evidence that Shearer's masterplan involved very little spending.

Nobody knows if that's the case or not, it's impossible to know. Hard to see how he could have done better than Hughton last season. And his eight games in charge didn't bode that well, did they? And after the whole Keegan thing, I don't blame Ashley at all for not wanting to appoint another Toon icon with big spending demands. I'd love to see what conditions Shearer was asking for, though. Pity he didn't spill the details about that. Hughton’s eight games in charge that season didn’t bode well either, did they? I'd agree that Shearer's eight games don't prove that he would have been shit at the job.

So you know make out Al had big spending demands but you would love to see what conditions Al was asking for. So you don't know he had big spending demands. Maybe he wanted to sign Stephen Spence good striker that lad. So you reckon Shearer's masterplan involved not spending very much at all? As I said, you make out Al had big spending demands but you would love to see what conditions Al was asking for. So you don't know he had big spending demands. Obviously.

Getting a bit ahead of themselves for an organisation who haven't filed a single set of accounts yet. They only need a million people to take up the offer and then they'd have enough funds to buy the club.

So you know make out Al had big spending demands but you would love to see what conditions Al was asking for. So you don't know he had big spending demands. Maybe he wanted to sign Stephen Spence good striker that lad. So you reckon Shearer's masterplan involved not spending very much at all?

Nobody knows if that's the case or not, it's impossible to know. Hard to see how he could have done better than Hughton last season. And his eight games in charge didn't bode that well, did they? And after the whole Keegan thing, I don't blame Ashley at all for not wanting to appoint another Toon icon with big spending demands. I'd love to see what conditions Shearer was asking for, though. Pity he didn't spill the details about that. I am going to assume it included spending a significant amount of money since SHearer also said in the interview that he did not think CH would be able to bring us straight back up. That would be my assumption, too. Still wish we knew the details, though.

Nobody knows if that's the case or not, it's impossible to know. Hard to see how he could have done better than Hughton last season. And his eight games in charge didn't bode that well, did they? And after the whole Keegan thing, I don't blame Ashley at all for not wanting to appoint another Toon icon with big spending demands. I'd love to see what conditions Shearer was asking for, though. Pity he didn't spill the details about that.

Not calling Shearer was undoubtedly shabby behaviour. Not appointing Shearer was undoubtedly the right decision.

In England we don't call them the "English" Beat.

Top 20 most popular sports teams on Facebook: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/the-most-popular-sports-teams-on-facebook-2081007.html?action=Popup&ino=20 Galatasaray are top. (Fenerbahce (4th) and Besiktas (9th) are also well up there.) Real Madrid and Barca are 3rd and 4th. Man U (6th) are the top English team with Liverpool (7th), Chelsea (10th), Arsenal (11th) also in there. We're not. At 19th is Persib Bandung of Indonesia. Various US baseball, gridiron and basketball teams mixed among the football teams. The Chicago Cubs, at number 20, are "liked" by 722,559 people. Our page has 44,471.

Until his name was mentioned with 20 minutes to go, I didn't realise he was playing. Yeah, I didn't realize he was on the pitch until shortly before the end of the first half.