Cronky

Not a bad call Fergie would drive him down to Birmingham himself. It has to be his most embarrassing signing. You and me both know that last sentence is a lie. No, I really don't know. Explain yourself, sir. Massimo Tiabi, David Bellion, Eric Djemba-Djemba for starters. Could go on for a while. I'd even toss Veron in above Owen given the fee paid. Every manager has signings which, for one reason or another, don't work out. What makes Owen's signing a bit exceptional is that it was widely and correctly believed by all the other major clubs that the player was past it. No-one of significance was prepared to touch him, and it was not as though Owen was a young player or inexperienced in the Premiership, whose ability was difficult to assess. I can only think that Fergie couldn't resist the temptation to be proved right when everyone else had been wrong. Pride, in other words. That's why I find Owen's signing particularly embarrassing.

Despite the trophies, he left Liverpool with a sense of failure, as others have done before him. I think he fancies another crack at proving himself in the Premiership, but I suspect this is the wrong job at the wrong time. Villa's situation reminds me of ours after '97. There had been a major investment (in our case to win the Premiership, in Villa's case to get into the CL) and we'd fallen just short. Money then became tight, the team had already peaked but expectations were still high. That's a very difficult situation for a manager to come into.

Not a bad call Fergie would drive him down to Birmingham himself. It has to be his most embarrassing signing. You and me both know that last sentence is a lie. No, I really don't know. Explain yourself, sir.

Almost predictable isn't it? I agree Ozzie & Cronky are. There have been some interesting responses here. Gimp asked a 'genuine question' about how Keegan's critics compare him to Robson's situation. I gave an entirely factual response - no opinion offered at all - and I seem to be causing some annoyance. The fact is that when the basic details of Keegan's behaviour are presented, it doesn't look good. Another fact is that Wise rang up Keegan and said "I've got a very good player for you". Then Wise later said to Keegan he'd actually never seen him play... which was after he told Keegan to look at Gonzalez on Youtube when Keegan didnt like the look of Gonzalez credentials. What sort of treatment is that? Its not just a simple disagreement over a loan signing, which looks nice and innocent... but the DOF lying to the manager, showing a total lack of resprect and breaking any trust. Another fact, is that had Keegan stayed on the basis of Llambias' letter sent to him - "It will continue to be the position that no player will be bought for the first team without your approval, save of course for commercial deals which remain within the sole discrection of the Board." - then they could have brought in any player without his agreement and have it classed as a commercial signing. And Keegan wouldnt have been able to complain or leave afterwards referencing board interference as he'd have agreed to Llambias' terms in that letter - terms which wernt agreed on when he joined. Other witnesses at the tribunal claimed Dennis Wise was not prepared to accepted that Keegan had the final say. Total mess man. And can I ask where these young south american players are? That deal was really 100% legit wasnt it? The treatment was totally shabby, and more than just a simple disagreement. No-one claims Keegan is perfect, but I dont understand why a Newcastle fan would think this treatment didnt matter, and say 'it dosent look good on Keegan' when reading what happened. The mistake imo wasnt appointing him, the mistake was to treat him like the way they did and push him into a corner afterwards! It took a long time for the truth to out (and there may yet be more to come) but when it did it clearly showed KK had been badly treated. The problem is by the time the tribunal arrived at a verdict a lot of supporters had committed themselves to blaming Keegan and can’t admit they got it wrong. I'll try and be brief. The tribunal found that it was not a part of Keegan's contract that he had to accept Wise as the final decision-maker on transfers, and as such he was entitled to the £2 million specified in his contract. Gonzalez had been imposed on him, he was found right in law and there's no argument on that particular point. What was outside the tribunal's brief - although they did mention it in passing - was the general problems in the working relationships between Keegan and the Ashley set-up that had existed for some time beforehand. There had been rumours about it early on, and it had become obvious after Keegan's outburst after the Chelsea game and the subsequent meeting in London. Keegan did not like working to a DOF, and he did not like working in the context of a limited transfer budget. He was unable to change those issues, and that, I believe is the fundamental background to his walkout. Supporters of Keegan's actions often seem to speculate that there is more evidence of the Board's wrong-doing over transfers which for some reason was never cited at the tribunal by Keegan's lawyers and has never come to light since. That strikes me as a tacit admission that the Gonzalez affair, in itself, doesn't amount to a great deal. Well, on that I can agree. Only I don't think the hidden tensions were due to other players having been imposed on him. I just think Keegan didn't like working under the constraints, financial and procedural, that he was under, and was looking for a way out. Preferably with far more money than he was entitled to, of course.

Not a bad call Fergie would drive him down to Birmingham himself. It has to be his most embarrassing signing.

Almost predictable isn't it? I agree Ozzie & Cronky are. There have been some interesting responses here. Gimp asked a 'genuine question' about how Keegan's critics compare him to Robson's situation. I gave an entirely factual response - no opinion offered at all - and I seem to be causing some annoyance. The fact is that when the basic details of Keegan's behaviour are presented, it doesn't look good.

Well, to compare the two situations - Keegan was working to a Director of Football, was overruled over one incoming loan signing, resigned and tried to claim £25 million after 8 months' work. Robson was working to a Chairman, was overruled over several permanent signings, decided to stick it out and was sacked, and only claimed what was in his contract.

Surely Ashley's position is clear now. He's out to make the club self-sufficient financially and is only prepared to subsidise the losses for a limited period. That doesn't mean that he's out to make a profit for himself and there's no indication whatsoever of that. On the issue of spending big, I'm sure Ashley will have been looking at recent events and thinking why bother. We paid £9 million for Coloccini and then bought Williamson for a fraction of that amount in fees and wages, and got a player who is just as good if not better. We've got players this window on loan or on free or small transfers that I think will prove to have the quality to push us forward. At the top end of the market, the very biggest clubs are still paying crazy money for the best players, but below that, things are becoming much more sensible. A two tier system seems to have developed, but with the influx of players from different parts of the world and freedom of contract, there are good players at reasonable prices out there.

Villa is a real pressure job. The team has already peaked and there's no money for new signings. He had health problems at Liverpool and he isn't any younger now.

It's just been on Sky News, they also claim it's confirmed by him. Good decision. No-one can be expected to take the shit that's come his way indefinitely, and stay sane. He can give it his all for the next two years, and then bow out - hopefully on a high. I'll take that Shit for £5M a year, and so will the vast majority of football fans in this country tbh. I'll let the FA know you're in the frame, mate.

You could also say winning something once is better than not winning anything ever. Better for the supporters - yes, of course. But the achievement would be a credit to the players, coaches & manager at the time. The owner/chairman would get SOME credit for assembling that team of course, but unless the success is maintained or goes hand in hand with good league positions it's almost certainly a fluke from their point of view with the players overachieving or getting through with a few lucky draws/results. Winning something would be a big monkey off our backs. It's not happened at all for over 40 years, domestically for over 50 years, and we haven't won the league for over 80 years. There's a big gap between doing well and winning, and bridging that gap is more difficult now than it's ever been. Don't underestimate the achievement of doing that.

It's just been on Sky News, they also claim it's confirmed by him. Good decision. No-one can be expected to take the shit that's come his way indefinitely, and stay sane. He can give it his all for the next two years, and then bow out - hopefully on a high.

I can remember the Keegan signing very well. It wasn't something you could have predicted, but I wasn't completely shocked either. Keegan had always made his own idiosyncratic choices of moves during his career, and we were the sort of dramatic challenge that would appeal to him. Slightly off-topic, a player who I feel never received his due amount of credit for that promotion was Terry Mac. He absolutely worked his cods off, up and down the pitch every game. He gave everything, and played as big a part as anyone in raising our performances.

Well I'm buying it. The extracts in the Chronicle are about the episodes that we already know a bit about - the SBR sacking and the Spanish brothel. There's bound to be some new stuff as well. Can't resist a good old tell-all memoir, me.

I hadn't seen Phil Airey before. He looked quite promising.

There was no aggression in Rooney's game tonight. Whether it's physical or mental I don't know. On the positive side, despite one or two iffy individual performances, I thought the shape of the side looked very good, with everyone comfortable in their role. With Milner suspended and Walcott possibly out, he might restore Lampard but personally I wouldn't. The 4-4-1-1 is working well.

Ref needs to get a grip on some of the Swiss tackling. He's one of those who doesn't believe in yellow cards. Rooney, by his standards, looks poor. Normally, he seems impervious to pressure, but he looks nervous. Defoe is doing well as a makeshift target man.

snakes tbh. Snakes with scrotums. Harsh.

I think he'll start as sub, but yes, sooner or later Hughton is going to have to take the plunge. Of course, an injury or suspension (Barton has picked up three yellows in three games so far) may give him the chance to start Ben Arfa without upsetting anyone. It's tricky, because although at the moment no-one deserves to be dropped, you can't afford to wait until something actually goes wrong before you make a change. A manager has to take the initiative. So many times, Hughton's decisions have turned out to be right, even when it didn't look that way at the time, so let's have faith. With Ben Arfa, he's staking a lot on his ability to get the player to accept his authority on and off the pitch, where other managers have failed. Having been a real doubter when the transfer was first mooted, I'm now optimistic it'll work out.

Christ, I know I shouldn't respond, but 'fall just short?' Take a look at the trophy record of the three men that you've named there.

I think it's fair. How in-form is he, really? People are thinking long-term. And there's absolutely no doubt that, long-term, Kevin Nolan isn't someone who's gonna comfortably keep our heads above water in this division. He just isn't good enough a midfielder to be anything more than a squad-filler. His flaws are obvious in the same way that Shola's and Smith's are. That's why they're so heavily accentuated on the forum; particularly when he plays in such a crucial position. He has done far, far more for this club than anyone on this forum ever gives him credit for. He has the ability of the old pro, to get himself into the right place at the right time to get on the end of chances. Yes, that has been crucial in getting us out of the Championship and into our present position, so in that sense he hasn't been given enough credit. However, in terms of the next step, he doesn't have the pace or the trickery to take us forward. I think Ben Arfa can do that, if he sorts himself out mentally. It's unfair, but life isn't fair.

Even if he did, him posting it doesn't mean it came from the NUST does it? It's not like they put out a press release. Peasepud was on the committee of NUST. It was sometimes unclear whether he was expressing a personal opinion or his organisation's policy, which in itself is rather dangerous and irresponsible. What I remember from his posts at the time was that despite the fact that he clearly saw it as his role to encourage people to commit themselves, he didn't have an understanding of the basics of the financial scheme that NUST were putting forward. I'm not talking about details, I'm talking about fundamentals. It felt that NUST itself didn't have a clue what they were getting into, and the idea that they were remotely competent to handle millions of pounds of supporters' money or be responsible for a large business was ludicrous.

Doing nothing is better than doing something stupid.

I have the same problem with Houllier as I have with Avram Grant. Neither of them look or sound the part.

He's not looked the same player over the last few months. I've been wondering whether it's the aftermath of that ankle injury when Ferguson rushed him back, but I now wonder whether this impending story has been on his mind.