Cronky

Based on? I'm assuming transfer budgets were discussed before he accepted the position. The much publicised interview at the back end of last season. I'd assume his specific role was discussed then as well, but he continually appears to suggest not. If he wasn't happy then with the transfer budget then he should have left at the end of the season. ...In which case, if reports are to believed, he'd have had to pay the club compensation. If he's sacked, they pay him. That is presumably what the lawyers need to sort out, as alluded to in Ashley's statement. He pronounced himself disillusioned with the game three years ago. He seemed very fed up in the post-Chelsea interview, and it stands to reason that his enthusiasm for the hard slog isn't that great. A big row, someone threatens to sack him, yes thanks, I'm off.

He seemed to have a poor first touch, but was quick for a target man. Viduka, Carroll and Shola are all slow and wouldn't have been sharp enough to get that goal. He didn't look the complete package, but he got stuck in and will be a good addition to the squad for £5 million.

I'm sure a major part of Ashley's decision and statement is to bring closure to all the protests so that the team can play in a calm atmosphere. Those who wished for a change in ownership look like they've won. But as the saying goes, be careful what you wish for.

You do realise, don't you, that players' wages and other running costs have to be paid? You're talking about income as though it were profit. And yes, Ashley's statement sounded pretty honest and sensible to me.

I'd agree that referees should enforce the laws about goalkeepers and penalty kicks. They can already order the kick retaken, so it's just a matter of having the will to do it. When I first started watching football xxx years ago, about 1 in 3 penalties were retaken because of an infringement. Now it's a rarity. I wouldn't scrap offside. You'd end up with a long ball game. I'd scrap the red card for the professional foul and award a yellow card and a penalty instead, regardless of where the infringement occurred.

He'll be leaving the club in a lot better state than when he found it. I feel sad, not so much for him, but for the club. He's been hounded out by a bunch of people who seem happy to let other people do their thinking for them. I don't imagine there will be many owners ready to put themselves in the same position. Deep down, the dispute with Keegan was about how much money the club was prepared to spend. Disputes between Keegan and whichever club he is managing, have all had the same basic theme.

I agree with the sentiment no-one with a sane mind would pick Wise over Keegan for judging a players character/worth/potential. But do you really think any of those players we astounding finds? Albert and Ginola maybe although neither were unknown. Keegan isnt used to working with a budget at all his clubs he was given more money than anyone else around him, he only faultered at Man City when they stepped up to the premiership into a more level playing field. Wise's role is supposed to be about co-ordinating the scouting though isnt it, compiling the lists using his contacts/scouts to get younger players into the team and finding players for the manger in the first team. I think Ashley has decided Wise/Jimenez/Vetere etc and their contacts are more valuable than Keegan. In turn he underestimates how valuable Keegan can be to the club, it will be next to impossible to find someone with his knowledge and respect. If however he does really believe in the system then a subdued, hands tied Keegan with no war chest just wont work, so we should move on and find the right person to fit with system. If Wise was responsible for bringing in Colo, Guthrie, Jonas and Xisco, and Keegan didn't want them, I'd say it was Wise who was doing the better job.

It just sounds like some journo has been phoning round the Reliance Group, trying to find someone, ie anyone in the organisation, who's going to say something. They've finally succeeded, but for all we know 'A Spokesman' might be someone in a very junior position, repeating a piece of office gossip.

It's over. You can't have that kind of a drawn-out spat in public and hope to retain any credibility.

This can't be serious. What player is going to commit themselves to a club where the manager / owner relationship is clearly so changeable.

For their sake, you hope they've done their homework on Zola. One things for sure - being a great player has nothing to do with being a great manager. Benitez, Scolari, Mourinho, Ferguson, Wenger etc etc

Walcott's pace and acceleration is amazing, but he does need to work a bit on his first touch and general ball control. I wonder whether he didn't really need to work on that side of his game in the past, because his athleticism on its own would take him past everyone. But he's worth persisting with, because we don't have much pace in the side, and he's the sort of player that the opposition don't want to see lining up against them.

The 'Ashley is only in it for the money' theory falls down on two counts. Firstly, a man who's worth £1.9 billion doesn't need the money. Secondly, if despite that, he did want to make more money, he wouldn't buy a football club. (Particularly without checking out the level of debt first.)

It's just a question of keeping your feet on the ground. It's very striking that the media respond very much to the result rather than the performance, but it's the performance that is the better indication of how the team is progressing. Until they went down to 10 men, we didn't look that good in possession. There were some definite positives to take forward. I think in Heskey and Rooney, we now have a strikeforce that we see can working. Ashton might be a better bet than Heskey, but at least we now have a basic strategy. Walcott looked a bit raw at times, but he showed the value of a really mobile player in that position, who could get behind a defence and get on the end of chances. Persisting with Beckham has seemed to me to be a negative choice.

I'd agree with that. Things fell our way tonight.

Agreed. He was a real liability.

Disappointed we didn't get more in the end. They were a totally dispirited bunch at 3-0, 10 men and half an hour to go. We could have done our goal difference a lot of good. Until the sending off, I honestly didn't think we were that good. I wouldn't get complacent, and I'd definitely bring back Gerrard in place of Lampard.

John Terry makes more mistakes in a single England game than he does all season for Chelsea. As a whole, we still look short of confidence on the ball. The goal might settle us down a bit.

There may be a bit more to Wise than meets the eye. I can remember reading an article by Cascarino about him a while ago, shortly after Wise had taken over at Leeds. Cascarino said he was very surprised when Wise became a manager, because previously he'd seen him as the head-banger that was his image and reputation as a player. Then, when they were both attending some kind of coaching course, he noticed that Wise was the most studious of the trainees there. He was always going round with his note book, jotting down every good idea that he heard and picking everyone's brains. He really was taking his own education very seriously. I wouldn't say that the leopard has completely changed his spots, but there may be another dimension to his character. In the couple of interviews of Poyet that I've seen, he's comes across as quite calm, intelligent and well spoken. He and Wise must have something in common if they've chosen to work together.

I just want a manager who's going to win something. There's nothing quite like winning.

If clubs were runs as fans' collectives, Arsenal would never have appointed Wenger and Ferguson would have been booted out of Man U after two seasons.

If Ramos is keen to keep him, and Ferguson is keen to take him, then he's clearly got some ability. I'd see his connections with Wise as an asset, because the DOF system does depend on a large measure of trust and co-operation. I don't think the fact that Keegan couldn't get on with it is a demonstration that it can't work. But I don't think Poyet will come. There seems to be some other issue - personal or whatever - that'll lead to him staying put.

Why is that fella? Corporate finance, top level professional sport, marketing - professionals don't always get things right, but you'd back them to do so more often than inexperienced amateurs. Also, the way you approach decisions when you're on the inside and your job and livelihood depends on it is a bit different from how you see things from the luxury of an outside position. The club can't be run by a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks. To turn it round, I'd be interested to know why people think we'd generate more income and produce better decisions with a fans' collective. The amaeturs own the club Bobby they don't run it. What's the point of them owning the club, if they're not going to influence the decisions that are made? They do things like vote for a president etc who then chooses a manager and delegates downward. It's insanity that fans who own shares in a club would actually be hands on. The beauty of course is that the president can be changed if they are doing a bad job, not so our current owner. Membership of course could be reigion wide and infact international as the club grows through its ethics, philosophy and playing style. Well that's a more limited role than many are hoping for, but personally I think one of the problems of our club is that the fans have too much influence, not too little. That's what kept Shearer in the first team long after he should have been shipped out, it created a lot of pressure on Sir Bob, and it influenced the foolish decision to invite Keegan back a second time.

Why is that fella? Corporate finance, top level professional sport, marketing - professionals don't always get things right, but you'd back them to do so more often than inexperienced amateurs. Also, the way you approach decisions when you're on the inside and your job and livelihood depends on it is a bit different from how you see things from the luxury of an outside position. The club can't be run by a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks. To turn it round, I'd be interested to know why people think we'd generate more income and produce better decisions with a fans' collective. The amaeturs own the club Bobby they don't run it. What's the point of them owning the club, if they're not going to influence the decisions that are made?

Why is that fella? Corporate finance, top level professional sport, marketing - professionals don't always get things right, but you'd back them to do so more often than inexperienced amateurs. Also, the way you approach decisions when you're on the inside and your job and livelihood depends on it is a bit different from how you see things from the luxury of an outside position. The club can't be run by a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks. To turn it round, I'd be interested to know why people think we'd generate more income and produce better decisions with a fans' collective.