Cronky

I'd pick Babatunde. Would Wullie be able to pick a team? He doesn't like any of them.

Is the answer - who cares?

4. Carlisle? 5. Blackburn?

Elton John. Darn you. Get in! Honestly don't know how I got it. The first name that popped into my head was Uri Geller and then a part of by brain shouted, "No, you twat! It's Elton John." I assume it's for Saturday Night's Alright, right? Indeed.

Elton John. Darn you.

Only Chairman of a League club to publicly advocate post-match violence?

Back to 4-4-1-1. He's been reading this board.

Athens?

That was a lot, lot funnier than I was expecting. Well done, lads.

Well I think he cares what the fans think, but only in the sense that he craves approval and hero-worship. I don't think he cares in the sense of putting the fans' needs before his own. Throughout this whole fiasco, he's acted in a very self-centred way IMO.

I don't think that statement has come out with Keegan's approval. It could be completely made up, but more likely it's one of his mates being a bit indiscreet in the presence of a journo. If he has approved it, then he's a fool. Getting upset over internet opinions just makes him look like a wally.

It's still not clear how 'permanent' the offer is. I suspect it's until the end of the season, when the ownership of the club and the management will come under review again. Hughton has experience and brains, and I can see him getting us promoted. It's best that, in the current position, he gets that vote of confidence so his position is clear, at least for this season. Longer term, I've got doubts about caretakers / ex-coaches being promoted in this way. Hughton has chosen to remain a coach in the past for whatever reason, so whether he can adjust to a new role long-term is questionable. There's also the syndrome where players who effectively got the coach the manager's job then have to face being dropped or replaced. That can breed resentment. It's not an ideal choice, but we're not in an ideal situation so we just have to hope it works out. I can't see a more experienced manager (eg Curbishley) wanting to join the club right now. Even if Ashley announces that he's taking the club off the market, he's clearly not happy and it would be some time before any new manager felt that he really was committed.

I don't know if it's been discussed anywhere else, but there's this story in the Chronicle about a major row between Calderwood and Harewood after the Bristol game. It also says that Harewood refused to shake Houghton's hand when he came off against Forest. There may be something in it. There's was something seriously wrong with Harewood's frame of mind on Saturday. He wasn't committed at all.

Well we should certainly be fit enough. We only played one half on Saturday.

What - even when you're RIGHT ? It's one of those sayings that doesn't apply 100% of the time maybe, but what has Guivarc'h achieved here except draw attention to the article and start off a debate as to just how crap he really was? He'd have been far better off ignoring it. Bleating about Gullit just makes him look silly.

Going by the Forest game, there seemed to be 2 problems. Firstly, yes, Harewood was poor. He's always been a bit limited, but you could usually depend on him for a bit of aggression and a willingness to knock defenders around. On Saturday, he seemed to have a very distracted look about him, and we couldn't even depend on him for a bit of physical presence. Secondly, two big centre forwards alongside one another isn't ideal. In the first half, we were trying to hit long balls to them, which didn't work. We kept it on the deck in the second half and dominated the game, but neither striker looked much like scoring. A lot of our goals this year have come from the midfield, and whilst we didn't look like world-beaters with a 4-4-1-1, we were still getting results. I think we should go back to that formation. Either that, or we should go with Ranger, who can at least run down the channels.

I was actually writing about Kevin Keegan. Aye. You are criticising Kevin for seemingly being desperate for the love of the public but then on the other hand you have Mike Ashley. Mike, who laps up the love and adoration of the fans, sits with them, drinks with them, but after one, albeit major incident/demonstration, tell us all he had had enough and is selling the club. I just wondered what your opinion of Mike is with regards to that. I'm reluctant to respond, because it feels like a diversion. It often feels like any point about Keegan can be somehow nullified by a criticism of Ashley. It's perfectly possible to be critical of both. FWIW, I think your analogy between Ashley's decision to sell and Keegan getting upset over what he sees on internet sites is very superficial. The two situations are quite different in reality. I was making a point about what I see as a general flaw in Keegan's make-up that has been apparent over the years. If you don't want to deal with those issues, then fine.

I was actually writing about Kevin Keegan.

The interesting thing is that he does have some previous here. I can remember reading that at Man City, he got very upset about what some fans were saying about him on the internet, and he had to be persuaded by the club against taking any action. As a whole, the bloke seems curiously dependent on other people’s approval, or at least sensitive to disapproval. The prime example was when he walked out of the England job when he was booed after a defeat. I can also remember him saying, first time round with us, that he would know when it would be time to go, because the fans would tell him. That struck me at the time as odd – a manager has to weather the periods when he’s getting criticised. He can’t expect it to be ever upward all the time. And if this story is true, it’s equally odd. From what I can tell, he’s been getting a lot of support on the messageboards, alongside the criticism. Given what’s happened, he can’t have expected unanimous approval, but somehow he’s disappointed. For a bloke who’s reached the top echelons of his profession, he seems ridiculously dependent on public love. The flip side of this kind of mind-set is that if you get public approval, you think you must be in the right. He gained a lot of sympathy after the bust-up with Ashley, and I wonder whether that provided the impetus for him launching that legal action. I know some will disagree (ho ho), but a man whose actions are dictated by his conscience would have been very hesitant to claim £25 million after 8 months’ work, especially from the club he claims to love. It’s like he was saying people love me, therefore I’m in the right, rather than being guided by his own internal values.

If your conscience was clear, Kev, you wouldn't be bothered about what other people say.

People complain about silence from the club. Then when he makes his position clear, they still complain. If someone can't stump up £80 million, then it's very questionable whether they're in the right position to take over the club. It also feels right that the uncertainty is brought to an end sometime soon.

The strikers were the big disappointment for me today. Carroll was keen, but tried to do too much at times and didn't play with much intelligence. Harewood didn't look like he wanted the ball. For a player of his experience, he looked very unconfident. We should go back to the 4-4-1-1 that got us results earlier on. Two big centre forwards doesn't really work. PS - In fairness to Carroll, he didn't get enough protection from the ref. There were a lot of challenges from behind that ought to have been penalised.

Well, we lost to an inferior side because we were day-dreaming in the first half. Let that be a lesson to them.

Now that was silly, Carroll.

His game is all about aggression and for some reason it's not there.