Cronky

It doesn't sit very well with Shepherd's comment that all the uncertainty over a takeover had made it difficult to buy players because clubs were asking for more money than players were worth. If we've got no money in the first place, it doesn't make any difference. Perish the thought, but it looks like he was trying to set the Halls up for the blame when no-one is brought in. I'm sure there's some other explanation.

No surprises here. Shepherd didn't work in an open and honest manner with the last two managers so it's hardly likely that he's changed his style. The longer-term concern is that clubs like Spurs, Villa, and West Ham now seem to have more spending power in the transfer market. We've already slipped behind the big four since Shepherd took over. Now we're being overtaken by other clubs who have undergone a change of ownership. As long as this fool remains in charge, we'll become a less and less attractive proposition to any future owner. I think Sir John Hall has sussed out that Freddie isn't the right man and we're going nowhere fast with him. The only consolation is that their relationship is probably damaged beyond repair, and he and Douggie may decide to bale out on their own.

I do believe he is set to become the only player to have played for five different clubs who have won the European Cup, but who is without a European Cup winners medal himself. Tell your friends.

Nobody is forcing Roeder to do the "within 48 hours", "pole position" speeches. I'd be happier hearing nothing from him if the alternative is desperate half-truths designed to appease. What would you do if a microphone and camera were shoved in your face, mate? I'd tell them to fuck off. For Roeder, a simple no comment or 'we are doing our best and you will be the first to hear if we make any progress' might suffice. That's just as bad! The point is, there is no right answer until a transfer is complete. I don't see the reason to get all bent out of shape over some comments made to give Anal something to write about. I think Roeder ought to have learned his lesson by now and button it a bit. But the main point is that it's Shepherd, not Roeder, who is responsible for transfers and he's not working well with his manager. The same problem arose with Robson and Souness. So many posts seem to blame Roeder and I can't believe that after all that's happened over the last few seasons, people aren't a bit more savvy about this.

No chance at all. Why should Man U sell an important squad player when they're chasing three trophies in the final half of the season. Besides, we can't afford him.

I think the problem is we've got no money, but Shepherd isn't being any more honest with Roeder than he is with the fans. Despite the waffle, all we can hope for is some Sibierski-type stop gap signings. The lack of honest communication between Shepherd and Roeder means that the manager is constantly making a fool of himself by raising expectations.

When you look at the situation he inherited, where he took us to, and what's happened after he left, his ability can't be questioned. I don't like the word 'legend', but he was the best manager we've had by far.

The fact that we 'want to have a look at him' before signing him on loan doesn't sound too promising. It all points to a player who's nearing the end of his career and who can't get into the first team at his current club.

Sorry to be a pessimist, but prices are bound to be higher in January and we don't have the money, except for some short-term or loan deals for stop-gaps.

JPD - fair point on the issue of Merseyside. Perhaps it's more true to say that the cities of Birmingham and London, with large ethnic minority populations, have an advantage over the rest. On Brummie's point - I can remember reading a piece of research that was published in a paper about 20 years ago, on the subject of the origins by region of English professional footballers. Every region produced roughly the same number of players per head of population, with the exception of the North-East, where the figure was about twice the average. Until recent times, there's been very little local competition from Cricket and Rugby for the interest of children. That may have been a factor.

The Owen transfer is the one above all that has really killed us. We're not big enough to be taking the risk of £17 million plus £5 million a year on one player. Shepherd had the idea that if you get England's top goalscorer then you'll end up with England's top team, but unfortunately football is a bit more complicated than that. (Not to mention players can get injured) On the area of youth development, I have wondered whether, as an area, the North East is at a bit of a disadvantage. There's a lot of athletic talent in the Black British population, which is apparent in the players coming through at other big city clubs. Tyneside doesn't have a particularly large ethnic minority population. I've not forgotten Shola. But he's the exception, not the rule.

I don't think we've got £9 million to spend or anything like. The bit about 'we always back our managers' is crap. We spent nothing last January, and from the way we were carrying on at the end of the last transfer window, trying to sell Milner to fund a bid for a centre back, there's unlikely to be much leeway now.

My reading of it is that the Halls want to sell, but they don't want to act unilaterally and they've been trying to do everything jointly with Shepherd. They'd get a far better deal if they sold both sets of shares together because then the new people would be in a position to get the 75% of shares needed to take complete control, and not just the 51% needed for a majority shareholding. Shepherd wants to stay in charge, and so a joint sale has been doomed to fail. Freddie has now thrown down the gauntlet, challenging the Halls to either go it alone with a sale, or throw in their lot with him. The bit about it being difficult to run the club with all this going on, and clubs demanding higher transfer fees, is just bullshit.

He'll never be in the same class as Waddle. I wouldn't be so sure of that. When Waddle was his age, he was playing for Tow Law and working in a sausage factory. Even when he broke into our first team, he wasn't anything like as good as Milner is now. Obviously he improved a lot, but so is Milner, and if he can maintain his current rate of progress he can more than match Waddle.

I agree 100%. Total bollocks from start to finish. Still, it looks like we now have a declaration of war, with Shepherd trying to get the fans on his side. We'll see what happens.

His touch on the ball is bad, and he lost the ball several times when he shouldn't have done. But we have to be realistic and accept the package he's offering. Great finisher but not very good during the build up.

His delivery into the box is a lot quicker now, and that's made all the difference. He reminds me a lot, and I mean a lot, of Chris Waddle. He could be his dad. He'll cause defences problems.

I don't really agree that Hunty and Edgar looked solid. You can't expect much given their inexperience, but we looked shaky down the centre all through the game. I'd give a bit of credit to Huntington though, because despite the fact that he was struggling, he kept challenging and taking responsibility. Both of them need to fill out a bit before they can be a trusted partnership in defence. O'Brien I thought improved as the game went on, and has earned another chance. I thought Reo-Coker was outstanding. If we have any chance of signing him, I'd take it.

I can't see why Spurs should want to help us out of our difficulties by lending us a player.

If Bramble is shit then what is Huntington ? SUPER SHIT Young and inexperinced? i.e. super shit With Birmingham's equaliser yesterday, if it had been Bramble rather than Huntington who had been challenging for the cross, he'd have headed it out no problem. Or to put it another way, if it had been Bramble who had failed to clear the ball, there would be an entire thread devoted to how shit he is. Bramble has his weak points, but we're not flush with better alternatives. Huntington is doing better than we can expect, given his age, and showing great potential, but he's struggling and will continue to do that until he acquires a bit more strength and experience. We should keep Bramble.

I don't think Bent is anything exceptional. However, he happens to be the best British striker that's available, and that's what's pushing his price up.

Everything was wrong about the transfers to West Ham. The players and their agents were not committed to the club, but just using West Ham as a shop window for a move to a bigger European club. It was driven through by the Board rather than the Manager, who ended up saying yes to a take it or leave it situation. The two players had a special status within the club, which was bound to upset the players who had taken West Ham forward over the previous two seasons, and then found their places under threat. I read that the transfer had been turned down by a number of clubs before West Ham said yes, and no wonder. Some lessons will have been learned.

It looked to me that we were financing that deal by selling Milner to Villa. When the Huth transfer fell through, and we were knocked back for Knight, then Milner was recalled. I don't think we've got anything available for transfers above that which can be generated by selling. I can't see that the situation will have changed much from August to January.

He's an exceptionally quick and strong athlete, and that is always going to make him dangerous in certain situations. At other times, when a delicate touch is required, he's not going to be so great. We have to accept the package. His ability to drop deeper at times and link with the midfield has been a bit better than I thought it was going to be. He's working hard at developing an all-round game.

In recent seasons, Fergie has become one of the few managers worth listening to in half-time and full-time interviews. He sums up the way that a game has gone / is going pretty well.