Cronky

Here here. For some reason the obstruction rule gets suspended whenever a defender is blocking an attacker to make sure the ball runs out of play. Often they're nowhere near the ball, but when was the last time you saw a defender penalised for this?

Another incident which seemed curious to me was last season, when Freddie ruled out going for Moyes as our new manager. His reason seemed to be that he had a good relationship with Kenwright, which he didn't want to spoil. Now maybe he didn't want Moyes anyway, but it seemed an odd thing to say. Providing you go through the proper channels, there's nothing wrong with trying to get another club's manager.

Players taking the ball to the corner flag to waste time in the latter stages of a game. It should be classified as time-wasting / ungentlemanly conduct and penalised. That and TV pundits moaning about referees.

I think Roeder's done a decent enough job. The problem is the Chairman, and the way he's cocked up all the major decisions over the last 3 years. We need new ownership to stop us falling behind the likes of Spurs and Villa, but Shepherd is determined to stay on. I think he's got it in his head that once Owen is fit, he'll win trophies for us. The way you've put the dilemma, it's like Roeder and Shepherd's fates have been tied together. I'd like to see Roeder given a chance under a new owner.

Definitely not Chelsea. I think Abramovich and his billions are bad for the game. Arsenal play the most entertaining football, and I'd really like to see that side eventually winning the title, but this year I'm hoping for Man U. Despite his obvious faults, I really admire Ferguson's tenacity and will to win, and if he pulls it off this time, it would top all his other achievements. He and his team have been written off as past it, particularly after Chelsea raised the bar to another level, but he and the other oldies like Scholes and Giggs have risen to the challenge. To have the appetite to raise your game after you've already achieved everything there is to achieve, is quite something.

I'd agree that Roeder got his selection wrong, although usually I find myself agreeing with his decisions. He had a decision to make about which two to play out of Onyewu, Taylor and Bramble, and tried to get out of it by playing all three. It gave us the advantage of aerial power, but really we'd have been better off with Solano's constructive play from full back. But on the other points, Huntington and Edgar look promising, but aren't ready yet. The defence has looked anything but solid in recent weeks. Very rarely does a centre back go through an entire game without a single mistake. It always seems to me that no matter how Bramble performs, if he puts one foot wrong then his entire display is written off. That's regardless of whether the mistake leads to a goal. There are only 2 or 3 centre backs in the entire Premiership who would survive that kind of judgement. Carr seems to have taken over Shola's mantle as the player who gets the 'he'sabsolutelyuseless' treatment. He's not great, but he's not useless either, and he can still do a reasonable job for us. He can't really be blamed for Fulham's second goal, because realistcally 90% of defenders would have been muscled off by Diop's challenge, which would have been called a foul if Fulham had been the away side.

On talent, Gazza had the advantage, but Fabregas will improve year on year, whereas Gazza didn't. Fabregas is an amazing player. I've never seen a teenager play with such calm authority. His decision-making is so advanced.

I think Roeder was worried about our lack of height at set pieces, and made a conservative selection. It backfired, because we then lacked fluency going forward. Normally, I think Roeder's selection decisions are good, but this is one occasion where it looks like he was too negative. As for the second goal, Diop's challenge was the sort that would be called a foul on the continent, but not here. I don't think Carr can be blamed, because he was in the right position and was just shoved away by a stronger player. IMO a barge like that is okay if it's part of the same movement of getting on the ball, but in this case it wasn't.

It's been a scrappy season so far, but there have been some periods of good football, and I think if we can sort the defence out, we've potentially got a very good side on our hands. Assuming our injured players recover, we'll have Owen, Martins, Shola and Dyer as strikers, which gives us some good combination options. Out wide, there's Milner and Duff, with Zoggy and Solano as back up. In the middle - Butt, Parker, and Emre to choose from, with Dyer capable of doing a job there as well. The real problem area is the defence. A lot rides on whether Onyewu can be the centre back we're looking for - decisive, dominating and providing leadership. That can make a big difference to a team. If so, he could combine well with either Bramble or Taylor. And of course behind, we've got either the best or the second best keeper in the Premiership, depending on opinion. Which only leaves full back. I don't think Carr is quite as bad as he's made out to be, and Nobby has done a great job in that position, but we could still do with improving there. Left back is probably the weakest position in the side, and a good replacement may be hard to find. But overall, a couple of decent full backs may be all that stands between us and stepping up to the next level. That, and maybe a central midfield player like Barton, who's simply a bit better than the three we have at the moment. At the moment, we're very reliant on Dyer for our inspiration. It may sound strange to suggest this, on the back of some dodgy performances, but things may be about to get a whole lot better.

In the Premiership, I don't think a striker needs to be good at everything, but there needs to be something in his game that will trouble top defenders. I've never seen that in Chopra.

From the player's point of view, it's a good move. Given our defensive problems, he can be reasonably confident of getting a few games in one of the top leagues. If he does well, he'll get a number of options to choose from. There's no point in going to Chelsea or Man U, to warm the bench.

I'd agree his best position is an advanced one. I'd like to see him tried as one of the wider strikers in a 4-3-3 (which I think is what Souness was intending), but failing that I think he's been very good as the withdrawn striker, in a free role in a 4-4-2. He does okay in midfield, but his passing and crossing lets him down a bit.

What really pisses me off is that a few months ago, when he was under pressure, Shepherd reassured everyone by saying that funds would be available for Roeder in the transfer window. It's never a great idea to advertise the fact that you've got money (it'll drive up the asking prices), and it's completely stupid when the reality is that you're pretty much skint. Basically, Shepherd was putting his own interests before that of the club. To compound that, he had the nerve to say that Sir John Hall's attempts to sell the club were driving up the transfer fees that were being asked. It looks to me like he had no intention of spending, and was laying the ground for the Halls to take the blame.

I think you make a good point about Beardsley. His decline, when it came, was fairly rapid. He was a crucial player for us and his replacement was a bigger priority than another centre forward. The gap he left was only filled when Bellamy came. I'd also agree that the Shearer - Ferdinand partnership had its limitations. It seemed to end up with Ferdinand tending to drop into more withdrawn positions, which never suited him. He was an out and out centre forward and nothing else. It was logical to replace him with Tomasson, but then we had Shearer's injury and Tomasson never really had much chance after that, having to play with Asprilla or Ketsbaia.

It sounds like a sensible buy in our circumstances - we aren't able to buy players, so we've brought in an ambitious young centre back with potential. He'll be stepping up a grade, but this is something that he's achieved before so he may do so again. It sounds like a gamble, but one worth taking. It's a little worrying that his positional play is a bit suspect, because in our league a centre back only has to be slightly out of position or slow to react and the consequences are dire. On the other hand, he shouldn't have a problem winning challenges. The Premiership is a very different environment, so I hope that if he makes a few slip-ups to start off with, the crowd doesn't get on his back.

Agreed! People on here say that Shearer made a mistake coming here!! Only he could possibly answer that. Jesus wept man have you not heard of something called loyalty?? There are those of us who if we did manage to play for the club that we love and support would not leave and play for another club guaranteed trophy's or no bloody trophy's!! Loyalty is a dying thing in football and it sadens me big time seeing greed and disloyalty grow so unbelievably big its actually accepted by some . I admire the Shearers, Le Tissers and Steve Bulls of this world who stayed loyal to their clubs, when they could have taken the bigger club, better pay and trophy's. Players like them should be admired and congratulated for taking a stand. Presumably this loyal player is the one who threatened to leave if he wasn't guaranteed a first team place, right? Pressumably this is a fact that you can prove and not half baked gossip/hearsay?? Who in their right mind would drop Shearer in his hayday anyway (bar Guillit)?? It was a bit more than gossip or hearsay. It was a quote from a newspaper interview. You can believe that the journalist was making it up if you like, but earlier on in the season Shearer had publicly complained when he was rested for the Valerenga game. And if you read Sir Bob's book, it's obvious that there was difficulty between the two men that season over the issue of him playing every game.

West Ham look to be still in trouble. There was plenty of effort and passion, but I can't see how they're going to score enough goals. Their one goal tonight was the result of a foul on Pennant.

Agreed! People on here say that Shearer made a mistake coming here!! Only he could possibly answer that. Jesus wept man have you not heard of something called loyalty?? There are those of us who if we did manage to play for the club that we love and support would not leave and play for another club guaranteed trophy's or no bloody trophy's!! Loyalty is a dying thing in football and it sadens me big time seeing greed and disloyalty grow so unbelievably big its actually accepted by some . I admire the Shearers, Le Tissers and Steve Bulls of this world who stayed loyal to their clubs, when they could have taken the bigger club, better pay and trophy's. Players like them should be admired and congratulated for taking a stand. Presumably this loyal player is the one who threatened to leave if he wasn't guaranteed a first team place, right?

Ah, my favourite subject. I see it as a gamble that didn't pay off. When you put so much of your transfer kitty into one player, there's a risk that he'll get injured, and that's what happened. He did really well to get back to some sort of fitness (although he'd lost some pace), and we had two great seasons with him and Bellamy up front, but that's about it. Then I think age and the accumulative effect of a number of injuries caught up with him. Unfortunately, by then he'd become bigger than the club and that led to the disastrous policy of keeping him as a first team regular right up to his retirement. A great manager and three seasons went down the drain. It boils down to whether the £15 million would have been better spent in another way and with hindsight you'd have to say yes. I'd agree that the defence and the right wing were the priorities.

I'm a supporter of several years standing myself, and for most of that time the club was run by a group of committed local people who were convinced that they were the only ones who could run the club. Unfortunately, they weren't able to make the kind of investment that other clubs were making, and we slipped behind. It took a lot of effort and determination to get these people out. Looks to me like history is repeating itself.

Which Chairman of a top division club once publicly advocated post-match violence?

It's an interesting question. I'd say Boumsong, with Mirandinha and Marcelino close behind. I really did have high expectations of Boumsong, and right from the start he disappointed.

If money is tight because of some poor decisions made previously, then that's one dimension to the problem. I feel that the finger points at Shepherd, but at the same time he wouldn't be the only chairman to have made mistakes. But what for me is totally unacceptable is that a few weeks ago, when he was under open pressure from the fans and a takeover looked like a possibility, he said that funds would be made available to Roeder to strengthen the side, 'as had always happened with managers in the past'. It now looked like he was bullshitting his way out of a difficult situation by easing the pressure on himself, and that's just not the sort of person to be running our club.

And, the people behind the deal would know this how? I'm just saying, those people who say they are unhappy would they be unhappy if he had played half the games and been in top form. So which camp are you in? I'm glad we signed Owen, just monumental bad luck has seen him not play regularly. But I don't begrudge his signing in the first place for that reason. However much I'd like to. I think he was a good signing, just we have been unlucky. I think the price was acceptable and nobody would be moaning if he hadn't been injured. I've said it before from 4th down the rest of the league is a much of a muchness and with Owen fit we are easilt a top 6 team. More than any other incident, the Owen transfer was a demonstration of Freddie's complete incompetence in running a major football club. As I recall, the chain of events was that Liverpool had bid around £8 million. Owen had declared that he would join Liverpool, but only go to us on a loan basis. We then put in a bid of £17 million to make it impossible for Madrid to accept Liverpool's offer, and to put Owen in the position where he'd either have to join us, or stay in Real's reserves for a year, prior to a World Cup. On top of that, we had to provide a huge salary of around £5 million pa before he'd agree to come. No other major club was interested, and we clearly paid over the odds. Every transfer is a gamble, because the player can get injured or lose form. The likes of Chelsea can gamble with £17 million, but we can't. Freddie's understanding of football is limited, and he thinks in terms of buying star names rather than building a team. For sure, Souness wanted Owen, but surely not at the expense of other considerations. Not only was Freddie's behaviour morally dodgy, it was foolish. We're still paying the price now.

As I pointed out to you yesterday, why would a man name a player that he was 48 hours away from signing, have the move vetoed by either his board or the selling club and then come out with "It has come to light that this player is rubbish and is no better than what we've got." He wouldn't because it makes him look like a fucking idiot. So I think we can safely say that you're wrong about that one and that the reason we didn't get him is because some kind soul saved Roeder's arse by pointing out that he was shit. Either that, or the transfer proposal was initially set up by Shepherd, perhaps after contact from an agent. Roeder then looks into the idea, and decides against.