Cronky

Yeah, we've done okay. The team are looking positive. Haidara has done well.

Now come on, Dave. You do get it. Douglas himself refers to a 'lack of attendance'.

This is the quote I've seen - "Newcastle United fans take to the streets to protest about club's 'lack of ambition' Angry Newcastle United fans took to the streets this morning to protest about the club's lack of ambition Hundreds of Newcastle United fans took to the streets this morning to protest about the club's lack of ambition ahead of the Newcastle United v Liverpool match . The march organised by Time 4 Change supporters' group was designed to reflect Newcastle United supporters' anger at the club regime." Now considering the papers had built this up as a test of fans' opinion, and only 400 turned up, I don't think it's fair reporting. Others may differ. Nobody expects the papers to report that the whole thing was a bit of a non-event. That's not a great story. The press will always egg things up and the club should either just take it philosophically or make their protest without resorting to an outright ban. But this pompous stuff from Douglas leaves me cold. When you get down to it and focus on the issue at the core of the dispute, they have not behaved well themselves.

Why do we want it fixed so soon though, the pressure it could put on the cunts at the club may work in our favour, no toeing the line to appease the club and open season on Pardew hopefully Well, and then what? The end results of the last major protest against Ashley, following Keegan's departure, weren't exactly great.

From Douglas - 'They believe the coverage of the march against the owner is disproportionate and described it as “staggering”. Yet the only thing that seems staggering here is that the club mistake a lack of attendance as complicit support for an owner who has held them in contemptuous disregard almost from the moment he wrestled control from Sir John Hall.' This is the nub of the dispute. Rightly or wrongly, the papers had been publicising the march as a litmus test of the level of discontent against Ashley. It is then poorly attended (400 is the figure I've seen), but it is still subsequently reported as though it was a mass protest. Now everyone knows that doesn't mean that only 400 people are unhappy with Ashley, but the event has still been blatantly misreported. I would hope that the two sides can get together and re-forge a working relationship, because if this escalates it will do nobody any good. The press were naughty, Ashley was wrong in his over-reaction. No-one's completely in the right here, and they should be able to work a compromise.

Perhaps his form was being affected by this hanging over him, and we might see the return of a more confident Cheik. Every cloud.

Before this protest march, the local press were saying that the attendance would be an indication of the strength of feeling against Ashley. It looks to me like the scale of the protest wasn't actually that big, but the papers went ahead and printed the story that they wanted. It looks to me like that was what got under Ashley's nose. Newspapers exaggerating to beef up a story isn't anything remarkable, and owners in Ashley's position have to take it on the chin. As it is, he's foolishly exacerbated his own problems by over-reacting. He doesn't learn. It seems to me that when people talk about 'showing ambition', they actually mean, 'spending more money on players'. If there is an alternative owner out there who people want to rally around, it would need to be someone prepared and able to do that.

It's silly to make enemies of the local press like that. You don't need support from the media to sell tennis shoes, but they can make life very awkward if you're wanting to keep supporters onside. Did the club feel that the papers were exaggerating the scale of the protest? I've seen quotes of 'hundreds' joining the march, which suggest something really big.

It feels like this book is another extension of his will to impose himself, and win. Amazing person. On paper, I don't think Man U have been the best side in the Premiership over the last 3-4 years. But he knows how to win.

I think he's our best defender already. In time, he'll prove it.

Dortmund are so good at pressuring the ball. It got into the Arsenal players' heads a bit. You often saw them knocking the ball back when there was a chance to turn on it.

Presumably this is dictated by personal reasons more than anything. I didn't think it was a great idea last season for the club to be putting so much pressure on Colo to stay. Sometimes you have to cut your losses.

how is a player in the right for hitting the deck as soon as he is touched ? surely it's only a foul if the challenge does enough to impede the attacker which it doesn't. Well he was impeded. You see lots of little tugs like that in a game, where it's enough to throw a player off balance or slow them down. It might not be enough for them to hit the deck, but it can prevent a player from getting in a shot or going past a defender. It's a deliberate foul and I don't blame any player for going to ground and making sure they get the pen or the free kick. If you fight to keep on your feet, you're far less likely to get the decision.

His head seems to drop too easily these days.

This lad will begin to wonder what he has to do to get a start.

Under the current rules, it was definitely a penalty and a red. It frustrates me though that this rule has lasted so long without being re-considered. Personally, I'd give a penalty and a yellow for a foul in a goalscoring position, whether or not it's in the area. That way you'd get more consistency and a more appropriate punishment. I'd only give a red if it was violent conduct, as per usual. I know this breaks with the tradition of only giving penalties for fouls in the penalty area, but I can't see why it wouldn't work. Refs are already discriminating between ordinary fouls and fouls in a goalscoring position. It's just a matter of changing the punishment.

Still think he'd be better on the right. It's not just when he's in position to cross and he has to shift inside. It's any pass where he has to knock it down the left side. He always uses his right and it always drifts towards the touchline.

Playing Ben Arfa as a central striker at least relieved him of any defensive duties, and I think that was half of Pardew's reasoning. That, and we're not getting much from Cisse. Gouffran put in a lot of good defensive work, but unfortunately, on the one occasion where he ended up in the middle and Benny was back wide right, they got their second goal down that side. It was a shame, because in the second half, up to that point, we looked as likely to score as them. On the bright side, I was again very impressed with Dummett. I thought he looked very composed and assured.

AOC is a central player imo. In any case Townsend has earned his spot. Yeah, I'd prefer him down the centre, but I think he's such a talent I'd really try and make room for him. A difficulty we have is that Rooney does look at his best in a central, free role behind a striker, which then pushes you in the direction of a 4-4-2. I'd rather have the Ox as one of the wider players in a midfield three. Maybe we could have - Sturridge Welbeck Rooney Wilshere Gerrard Ox-C

Hopefully, a more sophisticated tactical plan is in the offing than just giving the ball to Townsend. The lad's done very well, but I think Oxlade-C has more to his game, and is likely to have more of an impact against the better sides. Nothing against Townsend, who I'm sure will be in the squad, but the Ox is an exceptional talent IMO. I also think we will need younger legs in midfield, and only one of Gerrard, Lampard and Carrick should start.

I think Hodgson has shown that he can hold his nerve on the big occasion, and make difficult choices. And whilst the team looked a bit nervous at times in the last two games, generally they looked as relaxed as you could expect. There's a lot of pressure on England managers, and many a big name has succumbed to it. So far, Hodgson has shown he has the mettle and fortunately, his faith in his decision-making has been vindicated.

It helps when you have Baines, Jagiekla, Cahill and Carrick starting and not the trinity of utter c***s, Cole, Terry and Ferdinand. Cole walks back into this side, like. Aye for all Baines talents going forward he's still nowhere near Cole defensively and in the end it will matter. His attacking contribution mattered more tonight. Yes it did but better teams will exploit his lack of defensive ability..... doesn't help the centre backs are very very average though. Cole is the only truly top level defender we have and he walks back in the team, even if he is a c*nt. Yeah, this is the dilemma. I'd like to play Baines, but our centre backs aren't great and they don't get much help from the central midfield players, so can we afford the choice of Baines? Most England sides of the past have been strong defensively but ordinary going forward, but this one is the opposite. Some of our attacking combination play tonight was very good. Maybe we should just go for it.

Yeah, I agree. Hodgson is opting for experience tonight, but there's some good young players coming through - The Ox, Barkley, Wilshere, Sturridge, Welbeck, Townsend.

Deserve to be ahead, but on the break they're finding it easy to get to our back four. If we qualify, that's something that needs to be addressed. The midfield don't offer much protection.

I don't think he said that the expectations are high. He said that the club has a very intimate relationship with the city, and the happiness or unhappiness of its citizens rests more closely on the fortunes of its one club than is the case with other large cities. Hence there's pressure on results, and victory and defeat can produce pronounced mood swings which can affect the players. That's a more subtle point that just saying the supporters are over-optimistic. It seemed to me a fairly honest appraisal of where we're at as a club. In the case of Ashley, and his mistakes brought about by confusion, he was probably too honest. Conflict behind the scenes is just the sort of story that the media are looking for. Running a business and running a football club are not the same thing, and he should have just stuck to that point.