Cronky

The Big Joe one was more of a penalty than the Gordon one. A lot of decisions seem to go by convention. If a keeper dives at a striker's feet and doesn't get the ball, then it tends to get given even if the striker is deliberately dangling their trailing leg to make contact. On the other hand, if a defender clatters into a striker to bring them down, rather than trips them up, then it usually gets seen as a fair challenge. I'm not complaining. Both decisions are consistent with how the game is refereed at the moment.

I think the whole media thing kicked off because Eddie gave that interview hinting that he might not stay if the changes at the club didn't allow him to work in the way that he was accustomed to. It needed the parties to get together again, and for Mitchell to give an interview reassuring the supporters that they were working together now. Yes of course the media stirred things up, but there's no point in denying that the relationship between Mitchell and Howe got off to a bad start. The two men strike me as having different personalities, with Howe quite reserved and Mitchell more in your face. That doesn't mean that they can't work together, though it'll need some mutual adjustment. If it doesn't work out in the end, then it's Mitchell who will have to go.

Getting to the byline and cutting the ball back is football's most dangerous move.

I think we actually invented it.

Neville is going on about Arsenal not leaving one man up top, but unless you can get support to that one man, it's no outlet at all.

It looks like Trossard has kicked the game away. I can't see Arsenal holding out with 10 men. That melodramatic gesture of the wide open eyes, hands on each side of the head, and crouching open-mouthed in horrified disbelief is the clearest sign of guilt you can get.

I think it's significant that we only have three players now who other clubs seem to want - Isak, Gordon and Bruno. Of those, I think Isak is the only one who by sheer talent alone could be described as world class. Gordon is a decent player who Eddie is getting to play at his max. When we bought him, he couldn't get a game for Everton and was nowhere near the England squad. Bruno has been great for us, partly because the team has been built around him and his particular gifts. If either player was to move to another club, I think they'd struggle to reach their current standard. Eddie's coaching and drive has lifted them to another level. A club that is seeking to improve would be looking to trade up on their less important players, but no-one seems to want to spend significant money on Targett, Murphy, Almiron, Longstaff, Willock etc Trippier has been linked, but we wouldn't get a fee for him. I would say that it's a shame that we couldn't bring in just one player this window who was already of top Premiership standard. Apart from anything else, a signing like that can give the squad a lift. Maybe it was a question of chasing two hares and catching neither, as the saying goes. And just a word on yesterday - the player that I was disappointed to see in the starting XI was Willock. He shows no enthusiasm for defending and it was no surprise to me that he got hooked at half time when we were 2-0 down.

Excellent post, if I may say. Villa's academy has been way, way more productive than ours. We have some catching up to do.

Firstly, I apologise for my initial response, which wasn't very constructive. Your comment - 'The PL - outside the top three - isn’t all that great atm' did get me going, though I think I disagreed with pretty much all the points you were making. If you were to hypothetically measure the quality of all the Premiership squads, ours would be in the bottom half IMO.

You're off your rocker, man.

Eddie's big problem is that by taking the club to fourth place, he has created an expectation which is at complete variance with the standard of players that are at his disposal. He manages to get peak performances from ordinary players week on week and it's not his fault that they come up short in certain situations. Eddie is a brilliant manager and the idea of replacing him is complete lunacy. If pressure from the fan base leads to him going then we will deserve to fail. Fortunately, I sense that our owners know the value of who we have, and will continue to back him.

I think the current regs are outdated. I don’t have the financial nous to judge whether the new regs will allow more flexibility. Personally I’d have increased the three year allowance but perhaps that’s a reflection of my limited financial knowledge. But either way, I don’t think a free for all is the answer. Apart from the risk of establishing a one club monopoly, it’s not fair on the smaller clubs.

Yeah, I think Anderson is calling it right. He often gets caught out with a ball in behind him. He might well be better off as a wing back or even in midfield. Having said that, he offers a lot to the attack and certainly far more than Kelly or Burn. On balance, I’d play him. In any event, the only way he’s going to improve now is through experience.

The underlying question is - should there be any spending restrictions at all? I’d say yes, because otherwise you end up with one team dominating, as we are gradually seeing with Man City. A cartel of five is being replaced by a cartel of one. Whilst it’s a nice thought that we could be that one club, personally I’d much rather achieve another way. I don’t understand this support in some quarters for Man City. Apart from the moral issues of spending enormous amounts in a game that is already awash with money, it does look like they’ve broken the rules that the other clubs have had to adhere to, and it’s happened by organised subterfuge rather than accident or error.

I think they’ll be found guilty of breaching the regulations. The evidence seems clear. They’ll get a massive fine, 40 points deduction and transfer ban, but will avoid relegation. However, ultimately I think they are relying on contesting the legality of the regulations, and that could take ages to resolve. What separates City from the likes of Everton and Forest is that those clubs took risks which didn’t come off. The charges against City suggest that they undertook a pre-planned strategy to cover up a significant breach of the regulations.

Gomes did well in that holding role. I'd like to see how he operates against better opposition though. Assuming he does okay, then for me it's either Bellingham or Rice for the box to box role, and for me it's definitely Bellingham. (I agree that he should not be a number 10 for England.) As Coffee Johnny says, it's then either Grealish or Foden at number 10. Grealish has really imposed himself in the last two games and seems to lift the side with that devil-may-care attitude, so he should get the nod at least for now.

Jack Grealish has given Carsley a selection headache when Bellingham and Foden return. He did very well in that roaming role, and the team seemed to have a good shape to it.

Had to share this with you guys - just wait till the end. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr-rD3Wwlm4

From Howe's initial comments, it's clear that the relationship between him and Mitchell didn't get off to a good start. I get the impression now from Mitchell's recent statement that things have been patched up and there's now some mutual trust and understanding between the two men. Of course, the media are going to want to milk this, and the Sun seems to be the chief culprit. But I think Eales and Mitchell are aware of how valuable an asset their manager is, and Howe is aware of the realities of decision-making within a big club.

I'm not sure that Antony can adjust to the physical demands of the Premiership. He's certainly a talent, but is probably better suited to playing on the Continent.

Best performance I've seen from England for a long while. Best performance I think I've ever seen from Grealish. He's really enjoying that free role.

It's an odd selection, with three wide attackers, so maybe that's the way it'll go. I've never seen Grealish playing in that position though. The alternative is a 3-4-3 with Trent and Gordon as wing-backs, but Gordon is a lousy defender. We'll see.

Eddie is the Napoleon of football management. He fights the battle that he's got today - not the one that he'd like to have or the one he had last week.

Man U still seem stuck in a pattern of impatience, where they make signings who aren't significantly better than the players they've already got. Our club has been criticised, from inside and outside our ranks, for not bringing in more players, but the more I think about it, the more I feel Eddie is right to hold his nerve. Having said that, I think Ugarte will prove to be a good signing. He'll be a round peg in a round hole.

This is providing much entertainment, but sadly all these incidents have long disappeared from my mind. Erm... apart from Pele v Uruguay in 1970. I watched the Isak chip against Spurs again and it is well worthy of inclusion in this company. He won the ball from a defender, made himself only a little bit of space and time, and then produced an attempt from a very unpromising angle and with the ball not really in the right position for a right footer. It seemed to be a cross between a chip and a toe-poke. His ability to improvise is brilliant.