Cronky

If this is true, it's difficult to follow Ratcliffe's logic. It's said that Ashworth didn't provide compelling arguments as to who to bring in, but he put a premium on Premier League experience, which sounds very sensible. It's a very difficult, high-pressure job and it needs someone who can get to grips with things fairly quickly. The three candidates named all sound viable to me. Ratcliffe was apparently seeking someone who could shoulder the 'enormous responsibility and scrutiny', but a relatively inexperienced guy from the Portuguese league doesn't sound the ideal candidate by that criterion.

The reason Ratcliffe accepted the ludicrous position of taking responsibility for the football side with only a 27% stake was because he was a fan and wanted to play at being a football manager. There seems real confusion at Man U about how major football decisions are being made. I've had doubts about Amorim from the start. I think they need someone with more experience, preferably in the Premiership.

Bit of a late post. I watched the final part of the Arsenal - Man U game on Wednesday, and there was footage of Amorim on the bench, face downwards, looking the picture of thoughtful despair. Now he's saying 'We're not one of the best teams in the league' (Well actually, I think you are. You just haven't been playing to your max) and 'we're a massive club but not a massive team'. This doesn't strike me as the stuff to inspire the troops. More like getting your excuses in early. When Eddie took over, there were no negative messages.

He's a bit of an enigma. He seems a shy, quiet lad, but when at his best on the pitch, he becomes a bit of an animal. That's what we need to see more of, and there are some promising signs now. I think he needs to overcome his natural inclination to be in the background, and start dominating instead. He does have it in him.

Refs will allow an extra bit of time for an attacking set piece to be taken, but will then blow up once that particular situation is over. Unless someone is saying that the 5 minutes hadn't elapsed, it was consistent with practice to blow up once the Liverpool set-piece attack had broken down. We were unlucky with the Isak pen. It was a foul, but a difficult spot for the ref and then it failed on the 'clear and obvious' criterion. The Van Dijk incident was odd, but he was given the benefit of the doubt on the reasoning that his mind may have been elsewhere. I don't think he's a vicious player, and I'd have thought he was way too professional to deliberately clobber a player in open view like that. But it could have gone either way. I'm not a fan of the conspiratorial theory of refereeing. If it happens at all, I think it's rare in our leagues.

There is some disappointment that we didn't win, but the game showed that we can beat anybody. We're not a very technical side, so we have difficulty breaking teams down when they play defensively, but we look a decent bet for a Cup. At last, Tonali is playing with a bit of fire in his belly, which I think was one of the main qualities that encouraged Eddie to sign him. There were also signs that the Tonali-Bruno partnership could work well. I'm not 100% convinced yet, but I'm getting more optimistic. Eddie has this habit of getting things right.

I was dreading them nicking it 4-3 at the end again. We'd never hear the end of it. It would have been great to have finished them off, but a draw is about right. We battled really well.

Shame we couldn't have got a second before the break. We had them on the ropes. We just need to keep the pressure on them. We've expended a lot of energy so we need a good stint from the subs.

I think that's a very optimistic view of the state of our bench. Barnes is potentially a game changer, though very hit and miss. Trippier and Wilson can offer something different, but they're past their best. The rest are pretty ordinary, by Premiership standards. There's a chasm rather than a gap between the quality of our bench and that of the likes of Chelsea, Liverpool, Man City, Arsenal - even Man U.

It sounds like a messy attempt to please everyone. The guy is young and should be treated with some understanding.

As I said in an earlier post, our failure to strengthen during the summer has left us looking a bit stale. We needed some fresh blood into the first team - apart from anything else, to give the team and club a bit of an uplift after a tough season. I don't think our form is due to Eddie Howe being exposed as a limited manager. That was my general point.

I'm wondering whether Chelsea can feel a bit aggrieved about that indirect free kick. The ball should have been nearer the goal, and Martinez clearly wasn't on the line where he ought to have been, unless I'm mistaken about the rules.

It's not clear to me where you stand on that issue, but Eddie's ability to improve players through coaching is being underestimated here. At the time of their signing, Bruno had only 3 caps - he now has 32. Joelinton, Gordon, Livramento and Hall had none. We bought Isak at the time when his career had taken a dip, and Trippier is nearing the end of his career. Tonali and Barnes are the only major signings that haven't kicked on as yet.

Yeah, in practice if you sit still, you slide backwards. One significant addition to the squad, either at CB or RW, could have made a big difference. It's not just a matter of that individual's quality. A big signing can energise a squad and give everyone at the club a lift. It's not clear why that didn't happen, but the changes behind the scenes with Staveley and Mitchell probably didn't help. On top of that, we're a bit light at CB due to injuries. Overall, I think finishing 4th gave many supporters the impression that our squad is better than it really is. Nothing that's happened this season has deflected me from the opinion that Eddie is an exceptional manager who is doing very well with the players at his disposal.

It's difficult to see a clear road-map out of this for Pep. Attempting to fill the gap left by Rodri in January will be very difficult, and smacks of panic. They are more vulnerable to counter-attacks than they were before, but switching to a less aggressive game is a tough call to make. It feels like a very public vote of no confidence. His players are used to dominating the opposition, and there were signs yesterday that many of them were struggling to cope with being second best. On top of that, and despite the extension to his contract, Pep seems to be in the final phase of his time at City. It may not be the glorious last lap that he would have hoped for. If they get hammered on the FFP / PSR front, the dent to his morale could be huge.

As was pointed out by Neville, City usually have a fearsome high press that kicks in the second they lose the ball, and it becomes difficult for the opposition to get out of their own half. City don't have the midfield to do that effectively at the moment, and Spurs were good enough to take advantage. But the game hinged on the first goal, which came from Spurs' first touch of the ball in the City penalty area. City could easily have been ahead, in which case it's probably a different game. But i was struck by City's loss of composure when they fell behind. They seemed to rush things. Walker was moaning all the time, Haaland looked like he'd rather be somewhere else, and they were putting in some dodgy tackles. Anyway, a good watch. I'm ABC - anyone but City.

Kolo Muani sounds like the ideal signing to me. Covers two positions, and particularly the right wing, where we need strengthening. He's definitely a significant upgrade on what we have. Eddie doesn't like loan signings, unless there's an option to buy. Whether the player would go for that, of course, is another issue.

Thank you.

I'm most intrigued - who or what is Dobby and what is the connection with Steve Parish. Anyone?

I feel optimistic about a top four place. The last three games haven't been dazzling, but the players have shown a certain faith in one another and the system that they've been asked to play which augurs well. I get the sense that we can now pick up points from anywhere.

Another google that I wish I hadn't bothered with.

All schadenfreude I know, but I did enjoy watching MOTD, and the pre-produced introduction to our game, with all these Forest fans and pundits hailing the return of the glory days. In reality, I think they were one of the weaker sides we've faced. Their only goal came from a badly defended set-piece, and their main threat seemed to come from fast breaks. Credit as always to Eddie, who had them well sussed-out, and Bruno, who dominated the midfield.

I would like to officially change my opinion of this player. Defensively I had thought he was a weak link and that he wasn't strong enough under physical pressure. Maybe there's been a change in his fitness level, but either way, I take it all back.

I really wanted us to win that. I was so fed up of the media suddenly deciding how marvelous Forest and Wood were, just on the back of their league position. The commentators seemed to have bought into that, because they failed to acknowledge our domination of the game. Great performance from Hall. He really looks the part now.

We don't deserve to be behind. We just need that bit of luck in the penalty area because we're creating some good situations.