Cronky

Except it'll be pass and move the ball backwards.

Liverpool have a recent habit of flavour-of-the-month signing with players, and Rodgers strikes me as the equivilent as a manager. He's had a very good season, but that shouldn't propel him to the top of the list. Martinez has also been in the limelight recently, but he looks quite a composed character, with more Premiership experience, and the better bet for a pressured position. Rodgers comes across to me as a bit more nervy, and less likely to rise to the challenge IMO.

If Hodgson picks the team according to the way he's given out the numbers 1 - 11, then it'll be - Hart Johnson Terry Cahill Cole Walcott Gerrard Lampard Young Rooney Carroll It's a fairly predictable first team apart from Gerrard and Lampard in CM. Haven't Chelsea tried Lampard in a holding role for parts of games recently? I'm not sure it'd work, but I'd actually like to see us give it a try against Belgium.

thats the thing, I don't see Barry as an anchor for midfield, he's better at keeping possession and passing the ball than purely winning and if England are going to go for 1 up front with Young or Gerrard behind then having Parker as the destroyer and Carrick as the passer both sitting deep could have worked well The issue is do you really need a Rotweiler in that position? Fine if you have someone whose tackling and distribution are equally good, but as it is, you have to make a choice. I'd question the value of an anchor midfielder whose function is purely defensive, at that level anyway. You may win a lot of ball, but keeping it and using it will be more of a challenge. In the modern game, players are having to switch positions and improvise in order to open up defences and you need players who can be flexible and adapt to different situations. Maybe Parker has got enough in his game for this not to be a worry, but I've seen too many England sides with these busy little midfielders ending up looking impotent when the competition reaches the later stages.

There's a legitimate debate between Parker and Barry for that anchor role in midfield, but it's ridiculous to say that Barry is crap. He can't have somehow managed to completely fool the likes of Mancini, Capello and now Hodgson into a place in the best club side in the Premiership and the international team. He must have something. Parker has the energy and does a great job in protecting the back four. Barry's distribution and vision is better and if we're looking to try and feed in players who operate between the midfield and the strikers (which we struggled to do against Norway), then Barry is the better bet. Personally, I'd have gone for Barry because a player in that position sees a lot of the ball, and I'd prefer to see someone there who's better at getting the ball forward quickly and creatively. Parker will do a decent job, but my worry is that he'll get found out at a certain level.

Seeing as it's more difficult to get a game for Man City than it is for England, that's food for thought. Barry seemed to take too much of the blame during the last World Cup, when he wasn't fully fit, and his reputation hasn't recovered. I can't quite imagine Jones, with his current level of experience, doing a job for us in centre mid in an international tournament.

Considering the team we put out, we did as well as could be expected. We were organised and hard-working but struggled to build attacks more and more as the game went on. Jones didn't look like a full back. It looks like Barry will be out, and unlike most, I think that's a shame. If we're going with Parker, we need to make sure there's plenty of skill around him.

He said that he was very confident of him recovering though. I think Welbeck's an important member of the squad and worth taking a risk on. Of our out-and-out strikers, he's the best all-rounder. 9 goals and 4 assists over 30 league games for the team who finished level on points with the champions...i'm just not buying into welbeck personally he's there 'cause everyone else is worse, nothing more imo I'd agree that the alternatives were never going to be great - Carroll, Zamora and Crouch are strong in the air but lack pace, Defoe has pace but his first touch isn't great and he can't hold the ball up. All the same, I feel positive about Welbeck. I think he offers a good overall package, with no major weaknesses.

He said that he was very confident of him recovering though. I think Welbeck's an important member of the squad and worth taking a risk on. Of our out-and-out strikers, he's the best all-rounder.

I agree. He's the major loss. Our midfield would look pretty good with him.

Yep, was about to mention this when I read Cronky above saying that the 12 games is lenient. Doesn't seem particularly lenient when you compare the two. Very different kinds of misdemeanour, and it's difficult to use one as a yardstick for the other. It's a contact sport, tempers will fray and occasionally someone will lose it. Some lose it more regularly than others. But the way that Barton walked up behind Aguero and hacked him was a bit unusual and I think the authorities should have treated it very severely. It looked to me to go beyond 'anger management' issues. Aguero had irritated him, and he seemed to think that he had the right to exact punishment as he sought fit. It goes along with the general impression of Barton as a rather arrogant character who sits in judgement on others whilst not being able to take any criticism himself. He hasn't made as much progress as he seems to think. It may or may not be linked with that issue, but as I said foreign players seem to figure disproportionately in Barton's long list of victims. It doesn't look like a racial issue, but he needs to look at himself and work out what might be going on.

Bobby and Jack Charlton. One to watch - Sammy Ameobi.

A bit lenient I'd say. I'd have given him a 12 match ban for the kick on Aguero alone. The elbow on Tevez you can put down to temper, but the kick just looked nasty. Nearly all these JB incidents seem to involve foreign players. He needs to ask himself whether he has a problem in this area.

I think he'd be a good choice. His calm, clear-thinking approach is just what's needed for a club that's always prone to bouts of hysteria. Plus he'd see this as his big chance to step into the big league - one that might never come again - and he'll give it his all. The fans will want an established name, but if there's one thing that the owners will have learned in the last two years, it's to take no notice of the fans.

I could kind of understand if his goal ratio for us was a one off but he has scored a s*** load his whole career. Since ACN he has been shifted out of position, we have got possibly an even better goalscorer to target and despite barely a handful of bad games he has been good even if not scoring. His confidence did start to look shot towards the end and he couldn't seem to do anything but there is no way we should get rid or not be bothered if he does go. He is a very, very good forward and will be a lot harder to replace than some believe imo. This. I was watching some of his goals for us, people seem to forget just how great his eye for the goal was, he could terrorize any defense. Great player, who apparently when playing badly shockingly gets upset... I'd be very annoyed to lost him, even if it is a bit of a drogba situation where he needs to be a the main man to score, he'd be great in rotation and as a sub. He probably wants his options open but doesn't mean he is going, I hope he doesn't. Also his goal against Man U cannot get enough love. Would Ba be prepared to tolerate being used in rotation and as a sub though? I'd like him to stay, but I'd also like us to bring in Hoilett or someone of similar ability, with a view to playing Hoilett-Cisse-Ben Arfa as first choice in a 4-3-3. As a combination, I think that would be better than what we have now. I don't think Ba would put up with being pushed down the ladder, even if he played quite a few games.

If we've got Cisse as our main striker, then it's a matter of finding the best partner or partners for him, depending on if we go 4-4-2 or 4-3-3. In both cases, that's not necessarily Ba. We've had this debate before, but IMO he doesn't have the mobility to excel in a withdrawn role. So it's not a matter of who is 'better' than Ba. It's who can do a better job in the particular role that we have for him.

It would surprise me if all our players were insured. We signed a player with a broken leg not long ago, so exactly how any insurance company would set a premium, I don't know. With clubs who can't afford to lose money, they usually get any new signing insured, and the medical takes place as reassurance all round that the player isn't a bad risk. Obviously some transfers with some clubs do flounder on that point. We seem to be prepared to take risks on a player's recovery to a far greater degree than any other club I know.

If I was playing for a French second division club and had the chance to join a Premiership club at the end of the season, I wouldn't be flying into tackles and working my cods off either.

Rumour I heard was that Dalglish wasn't originally going to be sacked, but that he was told that Suarez had to be sold in the summer. Dalglish didn't want to sell him and issued a 'Back me or sack me' ulimatum, the result of which we can see. How much truth there is to that I've no idea. Not untypical of Dalglish to force his employer's hand like that. When he left us, he got into a strange row with our Chief Exec, and then there was some confusion about whether he'd walked or been sacked. I've often felt that he was fed up, wanted a way out, and engineered a route that wouldn't look like a resignation. Incidentally, I've read that Dalglish himself requested the meeting in America - he wasn't summoned. It could be that he'd got wind of a plan to sell Suarez. There has been speculation that, following a controversial season, Suarez wants to leave England. The Americans may simply be accepting a given situation, rather than trying to cash in.

Not having that like. Up until the last World Cup Torres was a fucking brilliant footballer. One of the best strikers in the world in his first 3 seasons at Liverpool and wasn't just because of goalscoring. Even at Atletico he was never prolific infront of goal, but his ability and all round play was there for all to see. Yeah, there's some extreme pieces of revisionism going on here. I'm not sure how Torres got derailed, but there were injury problems and then IIRC he was fed up with the political situation at Anfield, felt the club was going nowhere, and wanted out. I don't think he was giving his all in that final season, as if to hasten a move, much to his discredit. Trouble is, it's not so easy to then instantly turn on your best form like you were flicking a switch. The move to Chelsea was problematic from the start, because he and Drogba were never going to be an ideal combination, and Drogba was a difficult hombre to shift. As it is, he's walking out of Stamford Bridge, head held high, at the time of his choosing. I gather Torres is a very shy character who has difficulty in imposing himself. I think he needs support and he sank without trace in the Chelsea dressing room. It's interesting that he's now found his voice, like some confidence has returned. I wouldn't be surprised if he has a really good Euro and attracts some big money interest. And he really needs to leave Chelsea and get a fresh start. It's over for him at that club.

It's clear from what he's said before that he has mixed feelings about the Europa League. Either he's pressuring Ashley for a bigger squad, or he's preparing us in advance for the reserves to be pitched in to the Europa League and an early exit, like Spurs.

Too massive a gamble - you're getting rid of a shit hot Cisse (probably overvalued, granted) on the assumption Torres could somehow be motivated again to return to the top of his game. If it comes off you're a genius. If it doesn't, holy shit. I think he's broken, personally, and it's a gamble I would not take. Torres has played like a big girl's blouse for the last 2 years, but on the last couple of occasions I've seen him, he's looked like he has something to prove. He produced moments of brilliance which showed that the old Torres is still there. A month ago, I'd have agreed with you.

The expected response. It's very unlikely the opportunity would arise, for various reasons, but an in-form Torres was one of the best strikers in the world, if not the best. My hunch is he's still got it, if he's put in the right environment. Cisse has a stellar reputation at the moment, but would probably be over-valued if he went on the transfer market right now. It's about taking advantage of the right opportunity at the right time. If Torres was motivated, I wouldn't be able to resist the chance.

An interesting hypothetical came to me. Torres is clearly unhappy at Chelsea, and recently I think I’ve seen glimpses of him recovering his best form. If you were offered a Cisse – Torres swap, would you take it? (assuming Torres would want to come and wages could be sorted etc etc) I would.

The more people they approach, the more it looks like they don't know what they're doing. I can't believe that they didn't see the possibility of sacking Dalglish months ago. They ought to have earmarked their preferred replacement at that point.