Cronky

Chelsea aren't going to release SWP at this stage. They're still in the title race and they certainly don't need the money. Carrick looks a good shout to me, because he looks to have slipped down the pecking order at Man U. We'd have to pay over the odds though, just like Man U did. Keegan likes his strikers, and Defoe looks a likely target. Hyypia? Now that Liverpool are out of the title race?

Owen's performance yesterday bothered me a bit. Everyone else seemed to have a role and, within their limitations, was performing it to the best of their ability. Owen just looked lost, and not very happy with it. It looked to me like Keegan wanted Owen to play as more of a withdrawn, roving striker, like Beardsley or Bellamy - ie get more involved in the build-up rather than just wait to finish off chances. Trying to get Owen to play in a different way produced a clash when Keegan was England manager and I wonder whether we're headed the same way. Making him Captain seemed to be Keegan's way of giving him a role and a status to live up to, rather than have him on the periphery. On yesterday's showing, it ain't going to work.

Souness shouldn't have tried tapping up both Anelka and Boa Morte leading into that particular transfer window, especially Anelka who was then plying his trade at one of Galatasary's - ala Souness' former rival - hated rivals. Souness, being a despised figure in Fenerbache's circle - ie. a lunatic who planted a Galatasary flag on Fenerbache's pitch - that he is, 'tapping up' one of it's star players in Anelka backfired on him when Fenerbache's board issued a 'hands-off' warning but then again the clueless idiot didn't consider the parameters in play - ie. his negative link to Fenerbache - before trying to unsettle the player in question. I'd say this, that is the Souness/Fener parameter, cost us any chance of signing Anelka..... wrong time/wrong manager pissing off the wrong club. Afterall they did end up offloading him to Bolton. If Souness wanted strikers in early, to work with them over the course of the pre-season, he shouldn't have turned his attentions - and blown 10m of transfer kitty - to signing Parker & Emre immediately after. Not only did he miss out on a 'bedding-in period' with both players - ie. Owen and Luque - but as we all know transfer fees rise towards the end of the window as selling clubs can hold a smoking gun at the heads of desperate buying clubs, and with a goal tally of 0 goals in the first month of the premiership that's exactly what we were and we payed over the odds as a result, for both Luque and Owen that is. Souness' mismanagement of the squad, in his failing to correctly prioritise his initial 10m which was subsequently thrown towards the Parker & Emre signings, is to blame............. not the 35m that was handed to him to supposedly spice up the team a bit. I've never seen a manager more 'financially backed' in such a short space of time as Souness was by Shepherd. The story that went around about Anelka was that Shepherd found out how much Fener had paid Man City for Anelka (which was about £4 million), and then bid the same amount. (He only did that when Souness had practically forced his hand by going public about his wanting Anelka and Anelka wanting to come.) It sounded like a token gesture on Shepherd's part, because such a low bid was bound to be turned down. The other thing I'd heard was that Shearer wasn't keen on Anelka coming, and that both he and Shepherd were determined to secure Owen, no matter what the cost. Apparently, a similar thing happened with Boa Morte, where Shepherd wouldn't bid a reasonable amount. I'd not heard the story about Fener being reluctant to deal with Souness because of his Galatasary connection. Personally, I think that if there was a problem at all, it wouldn't have been so great as to prevent a transfer going through. I didn't get your point about Parker and Emre, because as I recall, they came quite early in the summer. It's true that a lot of money was spent at that time, but it wasn't spent wisely, and Souness didn't have the degree of control that he should have had, over when and how it was spent.

Ernie Wise is more likely to become our DOF, and he's dead.

Lay off Ameobi, please, guys. At least he got himself involved. His striking partner was a non-event.

Owen looked like a passenger out there today.

I know I shouldn't say it, but - Owen really isn't offering us anything. (cue a goal)

Would give us a bi tof width, I would like to see that myself. Would Duff be able to hold onto the ball in midfield though? Yeah, I think so. His close control is good.

KK has tried to get Owen to play in a more mobile role, dropping deeper and it isn't working very well. He's losing the ball a lot. Shola's done okay, certainly retaining possession well.

We're not getting much from centre midfield, and the build up looks very laboured. No pace up front doesn't help. I'd put Duff in the centre and Zoggy on the left. I hope we score first, because I can't see us breaking them down if they go ahead.

Always wanted to see Roz in midfield, so that'll be interesting.

Souness had said earlier on in the previous season that he wanted Owen. I also recall that he and Shepherd had written a list of transfer targets, of which Owen's name was certainly one, if not at the top of the list. But the situation was a bit more complicated than that. Souness wanted his players in early, and not right at the end of the transfer window when he couldn't do some pre-season work with them. Owen didn't want to come, and Souness then targetted Anelka. I don't think Souness was so set on Owen that he would have wanted to pay so much in transfer fee and wages, to a player who was coming in late and who was extremely reluctant to sign anyway. I know the fees and wages are down to the Chairman, but if he goes over the odds for one player then that restricts the manager's ability to strengthen in other areas. It was pretty clear, then and afterwards, that the manager and Chairman weren't working in tandem. That was a pattern that was replicated with Robson and Roeder.

Disagree entirely on all accounts. I think Shearer would give a lot to be Keegan's number 2, personally. Merely to be part of the set-up and, him still being human after all, being given the chance to collaborate with his chidlhood hero would be an honour for him. He loves the club, he wants to be involved, and who better than alongside Keegan, if you're a Newcastle fan? And if we're going to be cynical, he knows he's got a good chance of succeeding him if they were to do well. Don't know where you're getting the idea from that Keegan would be against a partnership, either. "I'll definitely talk to him, no doubt about it." Hmm, hardly sounds like it means nowt, like you've suggested. You said about detecting feelings on the inside; well, Keegan's tone of voice/body language seemed pretty enthusiastic to me. Shearer's naturally reserved and he'd just returned form a flight from Barbados. He was jumping on MOTD from what i saw, anyway... What Keegan said was, 'If there's a role that Alan wants, and it's the right one - that's key - then etc...' That doesn't translate to me as 'I'd like Shearer as my number 2'. On MOTD, Shearer said that he had never seen himself as a number two. He also said that he'd be prepared to talk to Keegan if there was some role he had in mind - which didn't sound to me like he would be tempted to ditch his TV sofa for a full time coaching role. Both men must be conscious that a lot of fans would like to see them in partnership, so they're bound to be careful what they say.

You must have missed KK's I'd love to have him on board comments then. I don't think we need to be reading too much into things here. KK is bigger than Shearer and will not feel under any threat with Shearer as number 2 while Shearer knows there is no-one better to leave him a good club one day than the man who brought him here in the first place, his idol. Win win with the two together I reckon, for the two. I saw the press conference all right. Both men seem to be saying the right things when questioned, but underneath, I can't detect much real enthusiasm, that's all. Shearer hasn't shown any desire for any other role other than manager. They're both strong, imposing personalities who want to run things their way. What's more, they haven't spoken for a few years, which is a little surprising. Unless Shearer has quite a limited role, I can't see it happening.

Neither Keegan nor Shearer have sounded fantastically keen about the idea of a partnership. It doesn't sound like Shearer wants to be Keegan's number 2 (or anyone else's), and if he does have a role it's likely to be a limited and specific one that won't infringe on his TV work. People seem to be interpreting this 'we'll talk about it' business as though it meant a lot. They both sound tentative to me.

Put it this way - I can actually remember us winning a trophy.

I think we'll be a good option for the likes of Crouch and Sidwell - players at top 4 clubs who can't establish themselves but who would join a mid-table club with prospects.

Shag and forget about the future.

I certainly wasn't in favour of his appointment. I'd agree that his recent record is a worry. He's very much a person who relies on passion and adrenalin, and when that fades he's found it difficult to keep himself going. But then you look at the result tonight, and you have to scratch your head. Apart from a few years under Sir Bob, the spirit around the club hasn't been right, on or off the pitch. Whatever his limitations, Keegan has the ability to restore that positive, united atmosphere and that counts for something, particularly in our present position. He'll need to be backed by money though. He's never been much use unless he's been able to spend.

Stunned and disappointed. Ashley has clearly let the heart rule the head, despite all this talk about taking it all very carefully. By his own admission, the guy hasn't watched a single game of football since he left Man City.

Shearer has had opportunities in the past to take the job, and instead of gaining coaching or managerial experience, he chose to be a TV pundit. He can’t expect to just walk into the job now that there’s money to spend and he decides he wants it. If he’s passed over this time, it’s a reasonable decision and he has no-one to blame but himself. It also seems a bit selfish to go public like this. It can only undermine the position of the new Board, who are responsible for running the club that he professes to love.

The support for Houllier baffles me a bit. He got the boot from Liverpool, where the strain of it had a serious affect on his health for a while. The pressure at our club is worse, because we're less well placed to fulfil everyone's expectations. A signficant criterion for the job should be someone with the hide of a rhino who's going to keep faith in themselves when under pressure. Hughes and Shearer tick that particular box. I think Deschamps would as well, somehow. He looks like a toughie.

He sounds like an exciting prospect from the long-term point of view. He'd bring something different and lots of continental connections which may give us some advantages. I'm a bit worried about how he'd cope with being plunged into our immediate situation though. It wouldn't take much for us to slip towards the relegation zone.

Yet again, we seem to be slipping back into the old pattern of wanting to run the club to suit the career of one man. Sticking him into some so-called 'learning experience' position with a view to eventually taking-over is only going to undermine the position of the bloke in charge. If Shearer's the best available man for the job (and I'd rather him than Houllier), then give it to him and let him pick his staff like every other manager. If he's not the best available man, then forget about him and move on.

Hard to think of an idea that has more stacked against it. Houllier's previous experience of joint managership didn't work. If Shearer is his assistant, he'd have the fan's favourite and potential future manager working behind him, and the minute things go wrong everyone's going to be speculating about Shearer taking over. What's more, Shearer is very much a leader who would want to assert his own ideas. Nothing to commend this at all. It's just people wanting to get Shearer involved but not wanting to take the chance on his inexperience.