Cronky

As I can remember you pointing out in another thread, Ashley is the only owner who has put any substantial sum of his own money into the club. The fact that he might recoup that sum when he sells, and the fact that he could have put in more, are all secondary points. He gave the club what it needed. I also think he was right to have a long-term plan and a proper strategy rather than try to throw money at big name players who didn't really want to come. His big mistake was choosing the wrong manager for the job in hand. I'd agree that losing Ashley is a terrible missed chance. It's fan power at its most blind and destructive.

I'd agree with this. Owen does not look like a captain. He's showing plenty of enthusiasm but he seems to have a nervous, haunted air about him which doesn't really inspire confidence. I think Keegan made him captain because he wanted to quell the idea that he and Owen couldn't get on, following Owen's criticism of Keegan as England manager. He also wanted to give the message that Owen was fully committed to the club, in the face of all the doubts. A poor decision on both counts IMO.

Exactly. Kinnear wants the job. Keegan only wants it if he can go back to the old days when he can outspend the opposition, which isn't the job in hand. I would love it, love it, if Kinnear rallies the team round and gets offered a longer contract.

Going by Football First - I never like to see Zoggy in the centre, because he doesn't read the game well and he needs time and space to operate. He seemed to improve in the second half when the space naturally opened up, but before that it was like we had 10 men. We'll improve a lot once we get Guthrie, Barton and Jonas back. They are players with confidence and initiative who aren't afraid to try and make things happen.

We do have problems at CB now, and the sale of Faye looks more and more ridiculous. He was by far and away our best defender last season, and was a very important player for us. As for Taylor's contract, it sounded to me that Keegan was keen for him to be offered a new one, Wise wasn't so keen, and Ashley intervened to break the deadlock and prevent a row. Keegan got it wrong on both counts. You wonder just how much his bad relationship with Wise was influencing his judgement.

Keegan can't work with Ashley, Wise etc. Not now, and not even for a short time. It's best he stays away for now.

I'm one of Keegan's chief doubters, but whatever, I hope the new owners think carefully here. Do they really want to appoint someone whose standing with many fans means that he's very difficult to sack, no matter what the situation? And how easy will it be to attract top players to the club, if the manager has a reputation for suddenly walking out? I'd prefer to see Shearer in charge, of the two. The idea of them working together was already explored at the time of Keegan's appointment, and it's pretty clear that Shearer is no-one's assistant. Plus I don't think the two men have a particularly close relationship to start off with. Whether Shearer would want it at this time is doubtful though. Regardless of who the owner is, I still think he's wary of the time commitment that a manager's job would entail.

Who were you expecting - Mourinho? A temporary job in a pressure situation isn't going to attract the biggest names in the game. Kinnear is an experienced manager who has dealt with difficult situations, and so he's a pretty good choice for steadying the ship.

That's because West Ham fans have largely accepted the situation and haven't launched a campaign to remove the owners. That is what has forced Ashley out and led to the current instability. People have a right to form their own view of the situation and act accordingly. But you have to accept the consequences.

Or even just til the end of the season (as with Boro). Don't see why they don't just appoint him and let the new owners shoulder the cost of removing him as and when. It's not practical to appoint a permanent manager and then be selling the club at the same time. The manager and players will be operating within a climate of uncertainty where decisions could get undone and people replaced the minute a new owner comes in. The whole point of a permanent appointment is so that they can think long-term, as Venables himself says. I suppose Ashley could have kept quiet about his intention to sell the club asap, but it's likely that it would have leaked and I don't think he had much choice but to be up front. If there'd been uncertainty about whether or not he was going, then we'd have probably had an escalation of the campaign from those who wanted to force him out. For everyone's sake, that was what Ashley wanted to avoid. No decision that he made in that situation was going to be 100% right and free of bad consequences.

It looks unlikely that we're going to get a manager of any reputation on this temporary basis. It's an inevitable consequence of Ashley trying to sell up in this way. But those who forced him into that position can't now complain about the current instability. It did sound though that Venables is hinting strongly that he'd take the job on a permanent basis.

You gave him no support the last time, you've had an agenda about the guy forever. Why should this time be any different ? I didn't think he was a good choice for the job, that's true. But I support the club and I didn't want him to fail.

If he returns, I'd have no choice but to wish him well. He'd be the manager of my club after all. But I hope I'm not put in that position.

I thought, considering the team we fielded, we did okay. There's just not much creativity coming from the midfield at the moment. And I'm still not convinced about Martins and Owen as a combination. It was even up to the first goal, and then we were let down by giving the ball away. There didn't seem to be anything wrong with the morale of the side, I'll say that. There was effort, but not enough quality.

Good choice as a stop gap. Experienced.

By way of clarification - It seems to me that it's the sheer strength of the reaction that has driven Ashley out - ie the threat to create a 'bear pit' of an atmosphere at St James's and to boycott Sports Direct and the Club Shop. There was a clear determination to make life as unpleasant for Ashley as possible that wasn't just coming from a few morons, but was policy from groups like True Faith and The Mag. Now you can look at all the issues of a DOF / Manager relationship and the personalities of Wise and Keegan, and so forth and take various standpoints. But particularly given Keegan's past record of walk-outs and his moaning after the Chelsea game, there has to be some doubts about whether his actions are justified and whether he is partly to blame. It's the 'Keegan is God' idea that has led to the extreme reaction that we've seen. If it was any other manager, far more people would be calling it 50-50 or at least toning down their actions.

This whole mess is because so many fans have confused Keegan the legend with Keegan the man. Keegan the legend is this Messiah-like, larger than life character who is going to make everyone's dreams come true. Keegan the man has never quite lived up to that image. His enthusiasm is infectious but it can wane too easily. I don't think he's got the insight or the drive of the really top managers. That's why he's never won a major trophy. It was Keegan the man who walked out, but people have reacted like Ashley sacked Keegan the legend.

Well maybe on both counts. But if you look at the Villa squad, I don't think it's better than ours. O'Neill just has the ability to get an extra 10% out of all his players. The sign of a good manager is someone who can overachieve on the resources that are available to him. I don't think Keegan has ever shown that. When it comes to over-selling himself, he's up there with the best though.

The old adage, 'Never go back' springs to mind. It's a pity Ashley didn't heed it 8 months ago. I'm now looking at O'Neill and Aston Villa in 4th place. What a missed opportunity that was. Thank you, Freddie.

So much for the manager being in charge of who comes in and out, eh? I have doubts about whether this bid is genuine, but if it is, these investors might well want to bring in Nigerian players to make the club more popular in Nigeria, and to add some extra excitement and interest for themselves. "Might" being the operative word. The Nigerian investors are likely to be no different than their European or Arabian counterparts. The only reason why the majority of people on here are anxious is because their understanding of global business is limited to Europe and The Gulf. What strikes me as different about this story is that it's not about a single owner or a pre-existing investment group. It sounds like a consortium of businessmen are being put together specifically for the purpose of buying the club. It's a bit like the Magpie group that Sir John Hall put together many years ago, only with Nigerians instead of Geordies. Now what is actually attracting these businessmen to the idea? I doubt if it's about making money. It's more likely the emotional idea about having a team in the English Premiership with a Nigerian identity. You occasionally hear of these attempts at putting a coalition of smaller businessmen together and they don't seem to come off. I suspect this is actually a very tentative idea at the moment which will struggle when people really have to hand their money over. That's if the story has any substance in the first place.

This is what I heard, and stress this is ALLEGEDLY what happened(!).... He fell out big-style with Fletcher just before the season when he got sacked ; he had arranged a deal to sell Gillespie to Boro for 3.5m, but when NUFC were taking part in a pre-season tournament AT Boro, Fletcher allegedly let the Press think that Gillespie's ankle injury was going to finish his career - naturally, Boro had little choice to but pull out of the deal in case it rebounded on them, and Dalglish was furious as he had set up a deal to buy another player with the Gillespie fee. The following day(a Monday), Dalglish had a storming confrontation with Fletcher(they are 2 Glaswegians, so you can get the picture)which supposedly got very nasty indeed.... He was a marked man from then on(Fletcher was CEO then)and was fired 2 games into the season ; we hadn't lost EITHER of them, so make up your own mind..!! That's my recollection of the story as well. I do think the sub-agenda was that Dalglish was under a lot of pressure, the team weren't playing well, he wasn't enjoying himself and wasn't too bothered if he got the sack.

So much for the manager being in charge of who comes in and out, eh? I have doubts about whether this bid is genuine, but if it is, these investors might well want to bring in Nigerian players to make the club more popular in Nigeria, and to add some extra excitement and interest for themselves.

If they're struggling to find the money, they won't have much left spare to subsidise the club. And I tend to think that consortiums will be keener to get a return for their investment anyway. No thanks.

If we're looking for a short-term option until the club is sold, then we're not going to be spoilt for choice and KD might be a reasonable bet. I wouldn't go for him as a long-term option though. He actually took over from Keegan at a difficult time, I always thought. The team had already peaked and needed rebuilding, but the money was a lot more restricted. Expectations were still high though and I think the pressure got to him and the team, which began to look very inhibited. I don't know how to assess him as a manager, because at Liverpool he inherited a very good backroom staff who just kept the system going, and at Blackburn, Ray Harford did a lot of the work. I also seem to remember that first time round it all ended after a row with the Chief Exec, after which there was a dispute about whether he had quit or had been sacked. Spooky. Still, look on the bright side. Terry Mac could be back.

I don't get why so many are questioning Beardsley's motives. He's only saying what many people on here are thinking. It's not an outlandish opinion. He can't be doing it for personal gain, because Ashley is on his way out, and defending him won't be popular among the majority of fans. The idea that he should be loyal to Keegan is also a bit strange to me. There are other people to be considered besides Keegan. I think it's quite important that someone in the public eye actually has the courage to give a more balanced view than the prevailing one.