Cronky

Ambrose wouldn't be a bad second prize. The only central midfield player who can really get forward is Nolan, and he's so slow.

It always seemed a strange signing. I can only think that Fergie couldn't resist making a bold call on a player who'd been written off - getting it right when everyone else had got it wrong.

Unfortunately for Terry, it is to do with football, because he was shagging the wife of an England team-mate. I can't see how he and Bridge can be in the same squad now, and Terry is the one who has to go. It's like the situation that arose some years ago when the Man U manager Tommy Docherty had an affair with the physiotherapist's wife. The two men could no longer work together, and the Board obviously couldn't ask the physio to leave. The fact that Terry's misdemeanour happened within the workplace, so to speak, makes a real difference.

They wanted to play, though. How come everyone else supposedly knows better? Well the Togo government might know better. It boils down to a matter of opinion. The issue is - does the government have the right to overrule the players, and I'd say yes, in this case. It's not just a matter for the players when they're representing their country. Are you sure you're not getting a bit NE5-ish here, Ozzie? ie digging yourself deeper into a weak position?

I thought it was definitely a red. I could well understand Shearer blowing up at him, because with that stupid, selfish act, we had lost our best player at a crucial stage.

Amen.

I'm not prepared to give up on this one just yet. If Warnock wanted us to up our bid, it would be a smart move to say that some nameless Premiership club was leading the race.

The way I'm feeling at the moment, I'd much rather we had a go and lost, then continued like that and got a draw. It's torture.

Well that's the worst I've seen us play this season. Unbelievably static and lacking in attacking energy. A big problem with Butt is that he's so unsure of his ball control that he has to stare fixedly at it, as it's coming towards him and as it's under his foot. The result is he's not aware of what's going on around him and he ends up playing the ball that was on 2 seconds previously - ie the last time he had his head up. That's why he ends up giving the ball away so much. We have to choose between Butt and Smith for that anchor position, and I would always choose Smith, because at least he can pass the ball and get an attack going. It's like a waste of a player at the moment.

The team is set up purely to defend, and carries no attacking threat at all. I don't understand it. It's not as though we're playing a good side.

The players look very up for this. I'm looking forward to the game.

I find it highly unlikely that FIFA won't support this. I find it extra unlikely that anyone with a brain would support South Africa getting punished for the actions of the Togolese. It is called brinkmanship. The CAF would withdraw with that threat imo. If there was the remotest liklihood that FIFA would get all heavy-handed and start threatening one of their member associations in order to go against a rule they strictly uphold themselves, which of course there isn't. The rule exists to stop governments interfering with the appointments of managers, team selections, competition rules etc, for political ends. This is something completely different. FIFA may well be in a difficult decision when it comes to deciding whether to intervene. That doesn't mean that the CAF have acted wisely.

When he was handling our sale, Harris came out in favour of some kind of 'local involvement' as he put it, and he seems to be adopting the same policy here. I think he's acting a bit beyond his brief, which is purely that of financial adviser / broker. There is a danger to this kind of alliance between a fans' protest group and a buyer. You can get an opportunist trying to make a fast buck by using the fans' antagonism to force the owner out at a cheap price. The Man U group need to be careful here.

The whole situation is a bit more difficult than I first thought, from the England point of view. Capello can't have Bridge and Terry in the same squad - even if they're not at each other's throats, it'll create a difficult atmosphere. One of them has to be dropped and if Bridge earns a place in the squad on merit, it should be Terry that's out. You can't favour Terry just because he's the better player and would be far more likely to be in the first team. What Capello has to consider is the effect of all this on the squad. I can't see Terry commanding much respect with the other players, now that he's shagged his best mate and team mate's wife. It's a matter of practicality rather than morality. I can't see how Terry can carry on as if nothing's happened.

I assume that the Togo government withdrew the team out of respect for those who lost their lives. Seems a perfectly proper decision to me. CAF just aren't using their common sense, in what was a very difficult situation.

I like the fact that our permanent signings are players who will look on our club as a step up in their careers. We've been signing too many players who - even if they're not necessarily bad players - are on the way down. eg Smith, Nolan, Owen, Duff, Butt etc I think if the balance isn't right, it can affect the whole mentality of a team.

Yellow card for that. If there's one player who never, never spits his dummy out, it's Shola.

In recent times, I thought Parker was a very good signing. At one point, Chelsea paid about £13 million for him, so he's disappointed a few people. I thought Bramble and Duff would do better, though I don't think either of them were as bad as is sometimes made out. Chris Waddle is the all-time misjudgement. At first, I couldn't see anything in him at all. For the pot, I didn't think Sir Bob was going to prove a success.

I've never come across anybody with worse judgement on strikers. His senior career started about 12 years ago. 6 years into that career the team about to win the premiership paid £25m to sign him. Explain to me how that equates to him being 'w*** for the majority of his pro career'. w*** 50% then. Shut up. Were you calling him w*** in 2004 when he almost single-handedly put us and Liverpool out of the Uefa Cup? The point was that he was a late developer. The exact percentage of his career that could be described as 'wank' isn't that important.

Most of them are skint to be fair. Possibly the teams that would consider him are in the bottom half with half an eye on relegation, and if they're going to spend biggish money it would need to be on players who could step in to their first teams right away.

I think it's a mistake for a manager or a Chairman to try to form some public alliance with the fans against the players. Those three components have to present a united front.

Good to hear he had a promising game. A lot of wide players have a good impact in the early stages of their careers, but then defenders suss them out a bit, and they have to face the challenge of improving, when they'd thought they'd already made the grade. Some players find that difficult, and I wonder whether that happened with Routledge. Hopefully, he'll start to come good again with us. Lennon is the prime current example of a player who started well, then lost his way, but finally got his act together.

Micah Richards looks to be getting back to his best form. I'd like to see him back in the England squad.

I'd much prefer Vaughan to Beckford. He's looked very promising and I'd be a bit surprised if Everton let him go.

He's a player who's lost his way a bit. He made that breakthrough when he was snapped up by Spurs, and I wonder if it went to his head and he stopped improving. Hopefully he'll see this as his chance to work hard and get back into the top level.