Cronky

With Martins you get a certain package. His ball control, his link-up play and his reading of the game are all poor, but he's quick and strong, and once or twice in a game that will allow him to create or get on the end of a chance that would be beyond other players. For me, that's better than what Owen is offering at the moment, although there's not a lot in it. Owen is being snuffed out.

No way will Owen be dropped. I think you're right. And for once, he doesn't look like getting injured.

Buying high and selling low isn't the way to a fortune. I think he'll hang in there.

If Owen stays in the side, we'll go down. When he's there, it means that we have to play in a certain way, and that way isn't succeeding. Keegan has to change it.

Good decision. Keegan showing a bit of imagination. At last.

Every time I've seen Zoggy in the centre he's looked completely lost. If that's where he's playing, that's a bad decision.

I really don't think that Blatter should be using his position to comment on individual incidents like this. It's the job of the FA and the Premier League to sort out any disciplinary action that's needed. Whatever your view of the incident, no-one can say with anything like 100% certainty that Taylor was out to nobble Eduardo. Blatter just seems to talk from the top of his head like a pub bore. Today, he's reported as saying that Rangers and Celtic shouldn't play in the Premiership. Is there a rule against that? If so, does it apply to Swansea, Wrexham and Cardiff? Blatter just seems to want to stop the Premiership from getting any stronger, but if FIFA rules aren't being violated, shouldn't he be keeping out of it?

Collymore's a good shout. There was some arrogant streak in his personality that prevented him from reaching the level that he should have. As for the six above, I only know Gillespie and Fowler. Gillespie was never a major talent in the first place, and Fowler, for all his skill, wasn't particularly strong or quick. He had a good career, but there was always a ceiling to how much he was likely to achieve.

Whatever your opinion of Sir Bob, sacking him clearly didn't work. The decline continued and in fact accelerated. That indicates that there were other problems. IMO they were the related issues of Shearer carrying on too long and Shepherd interfering with the manager's job.

They each have very different approaches, but have achieved a lot of success in their own way, so it's difficult to compare. Wenger has done fantastically well to buck the trend and build a great young side through the ranks. I've often felt with him though that he had a great bit of luck when he first joined Arsenal, by inheriting the best back five that the English game has ever seen. That was the foundation of his success, and he's kept the momentum up. It might have been very different if he hadn't started with that advantage. With Fergie, you can say he's had money to spend and he's at England's biggest club, but that brings its pressure. When he joined Man U, they hadn't won the league for over 20 years. It was a similar situation to Liverpool now, only worse - many good men had come in and failed. It wasn't an easy job.

I don’t get the impression you’ve all been waiting with bated breath for this, but this is a top 12 of post-war managers in England, in terms of trophies won. Putting in Scottish trophies made things a bit complicated and distorted, especially considering I’d have had to include Souness. Missing out his Aberdeen achievements is to Ferguson’s cost, of course. I’ve also missed out one-off games like the Community Shield and the European Super Cup. To make it a bit fairer, it’s two points for winning the League or the European Cup, 1 point for any other trophy. Actual trophy numbers in brackets, and used as tie-breaker. Some of these names will mean more to us crinklies. I don’t think I’ve missed anyone. Pts Tro. 1. Alex Ferguson 28 (18) 2. Bob Paisley 22 (13) 3. Matt Busby 14 (8) 4. Brian Clough 12 (8) 5. Arsene Wenger 10 (7) 6. Kenny Dalglish 10 (6) 7. Bill Nicholson 9 (8) 8. George Graham 9 (7) 9. Bill Shankly 9 (6) 10. Don Revie 8 (6) 11. Stan Cullis 8 (5) 12. Jose Mourinho 7 (5) Interesting that Mourinho gets in there, after only three seasons, and you can make a strong case out for Cloughie, getting in at number 4 despite only managing Derby and Notts Forest - clubs he actually took up from the Second Division.

HTT - I first started following football in the late 60's, and even though we'd just won the World Cup, you heard journos complaining that the players were like robots and we weren't producing great individuals any more like Stanley Matthews, Tom Finney, Tommy Lawton etc I can't agree that the football is less entertaining or skilful today. Teams like Man U and Arsenal are brilliant to watch, and right the way down the league, standards have improved. All subjective of course.

It's just sinking in, 37 bloody trophies. Most managers go through their careers not winning anything. 10 would put you up in the elite. I'd be pretty sure that the number two would be Bob Paisley, with 19 ie half that number. I've got a nerdy desire to compile the top 10 when I've got time. That's unless someone beats me to it.

Football was certainly the most strenuous sport I played too. As others have said, it's the stopping, starting and changing of direction that does you, particularly when you're having to try to do it quicker than an opponent. On the issue of players being tired after a midweek game, I don't imagine there's a huge measurable difference in performance between the Wednesday and the Saturday game. The issue is that if they're up against opponents who haven't played in midweek, then that can tell in the later stages of the game. Athletically speaking, the players are very evenly matched, and a small advantage in stamina can have a significant effect at that level.

Like most, I prefer to watch Arsenal, but it's kind of hard to argue against 37 trophies.

I can only see Liverpool's movement being far too good for us, even though they've got a midweek game. It could be another embarrassment.

I've never thought of Enrique in midfield. I take your point about positive passing, but he doesn't really look like a potential midfield player to me. He's not afraid of taking responsibility though. I'd agree with what I think you're saying about Barton - he's the best we have at playing the defence-splitting pass, and he's therefore more difficult to replace than a lot of people think. He's fairly ambitious in what he tries and as a result he loses it quite often, but a couple of times on Saturday he played inch perfect passes first time which left Owen one on one. We don't look like scoring many from crosses or set pieces, however many we put in, and we really need that creativity down the centre. I don't have much doubt that Smith will be the replacement in midfield though. His passing is a lot better than he's given credit for, but obviously not as good as Barton's.

Jenas played the holding/defensive MF role under SBR. Who plays that role now? Nicky Butt. We sold Jenas for £7m, since then we have bought Alan Smith for £6m. Where were we then? Where are we now? No. Jenas was carried by Speed. Whenever Speed was out (as rare as it was), Jenas wasn't himself. When Speed left, Jenas became even shittier than he was. Obviously this is relative i.e. his shit is not equal to Alan Smith shit, but the point stands, his form deteriorated over the last couple of seasons of his stay and we got good money for him. That, to me, is good business. What we did with the money we got for him is another business altogether which is why I don't understand why you've mentioned Butt and Smith. Actually, if you were to truly consider Jenas' situation with consideration for his replacement, you'd have to realize that the £7m went towards signing Scott Parker, who was as good as Jenas (the version of him that we saw in the last couple of seasons) imo. Jenas did well at first, and then - as is the way with young, developing players - he needed to be given more responsibility and put in the anchor role instead of Speed. Souness didn't have sufficient confidence in him to do that, and he ended up being played all over the place. His game declined, the fans started to get at him, and naturally he wanted out. Souness was aware of his potential though, and wanted him to stay. Sometimes, with young players, you have to take a step back to take two steps forward down the line. We didn't do that with Jenas.

I'd agree on Bellamy. We really benefit from a quick, energetic hard-working player who can link up the attack with the midfield. Before CB, it was Beardsley. Last season, to a lesser extent, Dyer did a job for us in that role.

That's Barton's job, isn't it? How can you call him shite?

I'd agree that the spirit in the side looked good. Where the pressure told a bit was the finer points of decision-making - players taking another touch instead of hitting the ball first time (eg Duff), and then at the end, throwing everyone forward when a draw would have been better than nothing.

The first choice eleven that's emerging strikes me as too flimsy. A team has to win the ball (ie defend), keep the ball and use the ball. There are too many players in there who are good at using the ball, but not the other two. That front six won't work for that reason.

These doubts about Owen aren't just in response to Saturday though. Since his injury, he's bulked up and he's lost that pace that was such an important part of his game. You say you'd prefer him to Kuyt - well I'd swap in a second. He's now no quicker than Kuyt and a lot less secure technically. Any of the big four could have had Owen for £9 million last summer, and there were no takers. Good though Owen is at sniffing out chances, he's always missed a fair percentage. As was shown on Saturday, his left foot is still weak and he often tries to stab the ball with the outside of his right foot when he should give it a blast with his left. And although his heading has improved, he tends to rely on beating defenders to the near post. He doesn't win that many headers under direct challenge.

Just watched the hour's highlights from Sky. Owen has always been good at getting on the end of chances, but his conversion rate has never been great. The two best chances fell to his left foot, where's he's still very weak. For the first one, he scuffed it with his left, for the second, he used his right but didn't get enough on it. Overall, he looked sharper than I'd seen him this season, but if you're going to pick a player on the strength of their finishing, then they've really got to do the job. It looked to me like we were unlucky, but not quite as unlucky as some are saying. The defence looked dodgy, with the opposition able to find a lot of time and space around our area. It's like the players are afraid to challenge in case they lose out, and hanging back in no man's land instead. Blackburn had some very good chances as well. We were very naive for the goal. The opposition should never score as easily as that. That was park football.

There are other factors though. That make it nearly impossible to drop Owen. To Ashley, Owen is Newcastles most marketable asset. Won't like it, Keegan won't want to upset the boss so early on. Owen is England's darling, negative press attention not what we need right now. Owen is still a top player. Top players you should keep happy. I'd agree that the negative press attention would be a problem, and it would put pressure on the other players. But we're playing a losing game and we have to change it. I don't think Ashley would be a problem. And, sadly, Owen isn't a top player any more.