Cronky

Two points I wanted to make here - A lot of people have said that Owen has commercial value to the club, but I'm a bit dubious. I'm not saying there are NO benefits, but we're a club with a large, but local support where people tend to buy replica shirts etc regardless of big name signings. Is there any sign that we've got more support abroad through signing Owen? Secondly, if this story is true, Keegan has to be a bit more understanding here. He's not operating in a vacuum. The Board are perfectly entitled to baulk at continuing to pay Owen roughly twice as much as any other player, when he clearly wouldn't get that sort of money at another club.

I've been half-expecting this one. He'd improve the squad. He does have pace.

I think he only denied that the story had come direct from Michael Owen. If Owen's agent is touting him around the big clubs - as seemed to be happening last season - then there's all sorts of ways the story could come out. As Barclay said, there's no reason why Man U should want Owen, when they've already got Tevez and Rooney. They'd be looking for a centre forward type like Berbatov.

Yeah, has the potential to get a whole lot better. You sense he's an under-achiever.

Actually Yulincha Da Costa. Bit disappointing.

Pele

He'd improve the squad, no question, but I'm slightly disappointed. He seems very much a 4-4-2 player, and I'm hoping we stick with the 4-3-3.

Owen's wages are a real problem and a potential flash point between Keegan and his employers - if that hasn't happened already, of course. As everyone knows, we over-paid him because he didn't want to come here and we had to offer him a very lucrative package to compensate. It was the last of Freddy's great mistakes, which still hasn't been sorted. I don't think you can offer him a pay cut, so it comes down to either renewing the contract on the same level, or letting the contract run out. Personally, I'm with AS9 on this one.

Liverpool aren't as consistent as the other three, but they are capable of playing on a different level from the teams below them. I'm thinking of this skilful passing game, played at high pace, which marks out the Champions League teams.

I can't see Keegan getting the push, but a meeting being termed 'productive and constructive' is lawyer-speak for 'no comment'. Sorry, but I think a lot of people on here haven't grasped the damage that Keegan has done. He's the public face of a team, which includes Ashley, Mort, Vetere and Wise, all of whom are working to attract the best players they can to the club and to build for the future. When the manager comes out with such a discouraging message, he's disrespecting and undermining the people that are actually working very hard for him. That was why he was summoned to that meeting in double quick time. He may have seriously harmed morale within this group, and jeopardised their confidence in him.

He did, but it was under an assumed name. All part of the plot.

I do sometimes feel that we deserved everything we got afterwards.

Ashley is a top businessman; he's hardly likely to invite Wise along to witness Keegan being asked "what the fuck he was on about." I don't imagine he'll put it like that. But in any case Wise will probably feel he's entitled to an explanation as well. He's probably been telling players and agents that we're aiming for the Champions League. Then the manager comes out and says we've got no chance.

Ha ha. Welcome to the dark side.

Ashley will ask Keegan what the fuck he was on about. Keegan will flannel, in just the same way that he's been flanneling over the last few days. They will publicly declare that everything has been straightened out. Everything will not have been straightened out.

'But my information is that there will be no screaming match at tomorrow’s meeting and no parting of the ways from either party – and it is likely to end in handshakes all round. I am told that Keegan has been summoned to London by Ashley to be reminded that when he was appointed in January he was informed of the direction the club was taking, and that things have not changed.' That sounds like he's in for a bollocking tbh. If that's true, I can't see how Oliver can be sure that it'll all end in handshakes.

Keegan was talking like a man who wasn't sure whether he really fancied the job any more. These mood swings are par for the course with him, but they're no use when they happen in public and we're trying to attract good players. Having cleared the debt, Ashley has made it quite clear that the club has to be run as a business. He's not going to dip into his pocket like Abramovich to buy expensive players, and it's not reasonable to expect him to. That still puts us in a very healthy financial position, to compete for the likes of Modric, whilst at the same time attracting the best unproven talent. It's going to be a struggle, but not impossible, to break into the top four, and I'm not sure that Keegan's still up for it. He can be quite impatient, and his past success has been based on outspending nearly all of the opposition. That's not an option now, and I don't know if he has sufficient faith in himself to deal with the current reality. He was talking like a man who doesn't care whether or not he keeps his job. By all accounts, he can't afford to walk out, but I suspect he wouldn't be too unhappy about being paid off. He could then walk off into the sunset, still a hero, with Ashley as the villain. He has publicly and forcefully expressed his disllusionment with the task ahead, and frankly doesn't deserve the job or anything like the adulation that seems to be his by right.

I suspect this is all speculation based on people's opinion of what Ashley might be thinking at the moment. That doesn't mean that there's nothing to be concerned about. In Ashley's shoes, I'd be giving Keegan a yellow card.

For sure, there's a missing part to this story. Getting beaten by Chelsea wouldn't usually be that upsetting. It may be the loss of Modric that's got to him, because the rumour did float around at the time that Keegan was livid about it. It's interesting that Mort took the unusual step of publicly declaring in the programme that they'd outbid Tottenham. If Keegan feels that the Board hadn't offered enough money, then he'd have been annoyed at what looked like an attempt by Mort to gain public sympathy / understanding. There was something particularly half-arsed about Keegan's comments. It was like he was trying to have a dig at someone, without really coming out with it.

A player who has already made a name for himself is likely to have already been through the process of helping one of the weaker teams. They won't want to go through the same process somewhere else - they'll want the different experience of playing for an established top side. Take Bentley for example. He's struggled to get to the position he's in now. Why opt for a further struggle at a club who hasn't quite made it yet? There's a certain group of players, of which Modric and Woodgate are examples, who the top four may be looking at, but decide against committing to. A player like that would be prepared to join a club with potential, and Keegan's negative message doesn't help. Nothing is for ever. I can remember in the eighties, everyone was talking about the 'big five', which was Man U, Liverpool, Everton, Spurs and Arsenal. Looking at the situation now, Liverpool are going to struggle if they can't sort things out behind the scenes, Arsenal will be weaker without Wenger, Abramovich might lose interest (in fact I think he might be already) - anything can happen.

I think there's a problem with Owen from the business point of view. The big four don't want him, and no-one else will match his current wages. Any businessman is then going to ask - why should we continue to pay him more than the going rate? On the other hand, offering him a pay cut is a bit of an insult. Personally, I'd let him see out his contract, and then he can join whoever's offering him the most.

He seems to do well against Chelsea, either because he's not expected to do much and the pressure's off, or he relishes the physical challenge. He and Faye snuffed Drogba out pretty effectively. It's still heart in mouth time whenever the ball's at his feet though.

What could he have done, though? Personally, I'd have put Duff on for Owen and gone 4-4-2. Either that or added fresh legs by putting Duff on for Geremi - which of course he did later. The Owen move would not have been popular, but his main contribution is getting on the end of chances from deep, and when you're struggling to get out of your own half, that's not much use. If you're struggling to keep possession, you really need an extra body in there and Owen wasn't getting involved. It might not have worked, of course, but the game was going right away from us and you have to try something different.

I was surprised that Chelsea didn't play their strongest side from the off. It came off in the end, but they could easily have gone behind in the first half. I thought Keegan blundered by not making a change before the first goal went in. We couldn't retain the ball at all, the attacks were pouring in, and if ever a goal was inevitable, it was then.

Aye Taylor, yina, steven taylor who plays for newcastle united... oh and i dont question half of other peoples choices. i meen someone put dyer, he mustve had 20 good games and thats it Fair enough, but "all time" is a little over the top IMO. For the time being... i think your forgetting im 14 cant remember that much for defenders who were good so taylor/faye came in I sincerely hope that, by the time you're 18, you'll have seen one or two central defenders who are better than Taylor.