Cronky

I wouldn't say that Keane was an example of Fergie's judgement at its finest. He'd already established himself as the best box to box midfielder in the country, and the fee reflected that. The big gamble was Cantona, who had failed to make an impact in England.

Let's not re-write history now. He was not scared of Shearer. In fact, it was Shearer that was taking the backward steps.

The complete all-rounder. No significant weakness in his game. A bit strange though.

That is peculiar. These forums are all about free speech, and in any case, saying that a player is past it doesn't mean that you're denigrating his past contribution.

Yeah, I'd say the best CM of my lifetime. For a player who looked quite slow, it was incredibly difficult for opponents to nail him. He just seemed to glide though games.

And the lesson is - never threaten unless you're prepared to carry it out.

Well they pay better, regardless of their prospects. Liverpool are short of a striker, so there could be something in this. If so, don't expect Demba to be putting his body on the line for us between now and January.

I gave up and watched the Jerries instead. Far more entertaining.

The best example I can think of is what's happened at Chelsea. Torres and Drogba - both good players but they both need to play as the more advanced striker. Now Drogba is gone, and Torres is the main striker with Hazard and Mata behind him - everything works much better for Torres and the team as a whole. The problem with two out and out strikers is they can end up playing side by side and the link with the midfield becomes shaky. You can end up by-passing the midfield with long balls. Relying on one striker being able to feed off the flick-ons from the other used to work better than it does now. Defences are more sophisticated now.

Aaaaaaaagh! No, Dave. With strikers the right combination is very important. Even the best strikers can be made to look ordinary if not given the right role, and they won't get the right role if in a botched combination.

A wise decision. The Wonga Stadium was never going to attract anything but hoots of derision from our enemies, of which there are many.

Agreed. They don't seem to believe in it themselves.

There's no sign of improvement, and I can't see that changing. I don't go for the idea that the partnership would be okay if there was more movement around them, and the rest of the side were setting up more chances. In modern football, the strikers themselves - or at least one of them - has to be showing good movement and setting up chances for his team-mates. The idea that the strikers are there to take advantage of what's happening in other areas of the side feels old-fashioned, and rather misses the point. Yes, any player would look better if surrounded by better team-mates. The question is, given the resources we've got, is Ba and Cisse the best option.

We didn't look mentally up for it at the start. If you're up against a good side, you've got to play with a bit of aggression, but we were far too tentative. Our closing down wasn't convincing. It was like we were going through the motions and not really believing we could get the ball. It would help if we had a striker like Beardsley or Bellamy who could track back and make a nuisance of themselves. The idea that Man U or Chelsea would bid £20m for Tiote looked a real joke today. Ba didn't get involved enough. Cisse struggled but at least he looked like he was bothered. Santon had a good game. He looks a lot more confident now and seemed far more at home on the right. Jonas showed his usual good attitude and got through a lot of work. Despite his experience, Harper often looks like a nervous beginner. This was one of those days.

Well it now seems to be a mainstream opinion that there is some kind of problem in the Ba-Cisse partnership. The debate is about whether it's solveable. I just wonder if we've got a similar situation to Drogba at Chelsea. He was a strong character who was very difficult to leave out on ability as well, but now he's gone, Torres and the whole of the team look a lot better.

Cisse and Ba seem like different characters and on top of the difficulties of getting a partnership of two number 9s going, it wouldn't surprise me if there was some personal tension there - particularly given Ba's open wish to play down the centre. I'm going to get some flak here, but Cisse looks a more relaxed and uninhibited player now when Ba isn't there, and that can rub off on the team as a whole. Ba seems quite an assertive character and sometimes a team pays a price for that.

Bordeaux gave us more time and space than we get in the Premiership. Perhaps the difference isn't much, but it's signficant in that we were able to keep control of the ball far more easily.

The one thing that I think holds him back is his height. I suspect that Pardew is wary of a sucker punch of a cross to the back post, which leaves him exposed in the air. His tackling seems okay and he's great in possession, so if he can develop techniques for dealing with that situation, then there's nothing to stop him from being one of the Premiership's best full backs. He'd be great as a wing back, but hardly anyone seems to play that way now.

When he commentates on our games, it's clear he's got something against us. He did get a lot of stick when he left us, more so than Beardsley or Gazza, I seem to recall.

I think it's true that you can't afford to have too many technically weak players in your side, no matter how skilful the others are. The opportunity to play the defence-splitting ball or seize a goal-scoring chance might not fall to the players that you want. If everyone has confidence in their team mates' ability to control the ball or make the pass, it makes a big difference to the team's confidence in getting forward. Some players (eg Butt, Simpson) can end up really holding a team back.

They weren't a great partnership but as a side we created tons of chances and they filled their boots. In terms of partnerships, nothing I've seen has topped Cole and Beardsley. I'd agree with that, though Shearer and Bellamy worked well on a similar pattern. Shearer and Ferdinand scored goals, but the team has a whole began a slippery slope backwards. My memory is that Ferdinand was the one who tended to have to drop deeper, and he never looked comfortable there. At the end of the season, Dalglish decided to try something more along the previous pattern, with Shearer and Tomasson, but Shearer got injured and Tomasson wasn't good enough.

Hmmm.... Ba's grumbling about not playing in the centre won't have helped. I'm wondering whether some personal tension hasn't now entered into the situation. It'd be quite understandable. Cisse just hasn't looked like his previous carefree self. I think things can improve, but not by much. It's fairly standard theory that playing two number 9's together brings problems.

Hold up play and winning the ball in the air is only a requirement of a lone striker if the manager chooses to play that way. Van Persie plays up like that but nobody ever asks him to win flick ons. I'd hope we'd keep it on the deck, but even in that case, I'd back Shola to be better than the other two at holding on to the ball when isolated, or at least getting us a free kick. And of course, situations arise where every team has to hit a long ball now and then.

I'll have a go - .............Krul Anita Colo Saylor Santon ........Tiote Cabaye ....Sameobi Ben Arfa Jonas .................Ba Very tempting to include Ferguson instead of Jonas, but then we'd have a very inexperienced line-up. Not sure that Ba is the best choice as the lone striker. Cisse has better movement, and Shola (yes, Shola) is the best of the three at holding the ball up and winning the ball in the air.

I'd agree. He's improved steadily in his time here, but he's very right footed and in many situations that ends up looking awkward.