Cronky

Cup semi-final, Man U 2, Arsenal 1, the year they did the treble. 1999? Two great, evenly matched teams, going at it hammer and tongs, testing each other to the limit. Looking back, it was the game when I realised that top-class football in this country had moved on to a new level.

There was a rumour that Freddie and Roeder had had a row after the Man City game, so it wouldn't completely surprise me if Freddie had sounded out another manager. He's been linked with Eriksson before. I think Eriksson's a good manager, and if he's still got the motivation, he can do well again at club level. But I feel that Freddie's style of leadership is very undermining to his managers, and unless he goes or he changes his ways, no-one's going to be able to bring success.

According to the Times, Freddie wanted Woodgate, Roeder wanted Huth. They couldn't agree, so nothing happened until the last minute, when (not suprisingly, given the lack of commitment) both rejected us and we ended up bidding for Zat Knight. Make of it what you will. For me, it fits the chaotic pattern of previous transfer windows, so I'm inclined to believe it.

I was interested to see that comment that Owen and Shola combined well. When it comes to strikers, it's all about the right combination, and that may be our best one.

I think Coleman has shown a fair bit of ability in his time at Fulham, and this is all a bit surprising. You wonder how much all this personal stuff has affected the situation. (ie wife suspecting an affair and bugging his car) The stress might have affected Coleman in recent weeks and led indirectly to a dip in results. Even if that isn't the case, that may be the interpretation that Al-Fayed is putting on things.

He's gone off the boil a bit in the last few weeks, but I think people are judging him in comparison with his previous performances when he came back from injury, when he was inspirational. He's still one of the players that can make things happen for us, and I'd definitely hang on to him.

He's a very, very effective player, but a long way short of the best I've seen. I actually think he's best suited to the Premiership, because his basic style is to run at defenders and take his man on, rather than pass. If I were Real Madrid, I wouldn't be looking to pay mega-bucks for him.

That's what it all comes down to for me... For us as fans to debate academically is one thing, but Roeder must surely have known the constraints he was working under I think he probably didn't. See Sir Bob's book for the secretive way in which Freddie handles transfers. Manager and Chairman agree on a wish list, but I don't think the manager is privy to the financial side and effectively it's down to the Chairman how the budget is divvied up.

O'Neill's reputation has been built up over several seasons with different clubs, and it doesn't all hinge on his first season with a new club that were on the slide before he came. Besides, I think there's been enough signs of his ability, even in the short time he's been at Villa.

Now that the Robson era is seen as the good old days, I'm sure Freddie realises that it doesn't do him any harm to be seen on friendly terms with him. Apart from anything else, it reinforces the fiction that the undermining and sacking of Robson was all the Halls' idea.

I like the guy, but if there was a league table of managers who would not be able to get on with Freddie, Strachan would be in one of the Champions League places.

Not for the first time this season, our passing and movement was terrible. No conviction. Not enough running into positions on anticipation of a pass, although tiredness may have played a part. On the bright side, Taylor looked very confident and commanding. Solano also did very well in possession. I was expecting a big game from Emre, and was a bit disappointed.

Complete crap. Duff has never relied on outright pace. He's got great skill on the ball, and he's a far better player than you're giving him credit for. He's struggled for fitness in the first half of the season, but he can really make things happen, and it's showing now.

£7 million pounds would be a very good price for Zoggy, and if that's what's on offer, I'd take it. In the long term, I think his future would be better served as a full back rather than a winger. He's a good athlete, but his touch on the ball isn't great. Trouble is, he doesn't really have the steady, cool-headed temperament that you want from a defender at the moment, so it may be a while before he sorts himself out. At the moment, there seems to be a big gap between his own opinion of his ability, and the reality. He needs to do a lot of work on his game.

Just going by the Sky highlights, it looked like our best football came when Emre and Dyer were on the pitch. We looked composed, and capable of playing the ball on the deck. I'm now firmly in the camp of Butt or Parker but not both. Martins was a threat, but he does drive you spare. There was a point near the end, where there was a man unmarked fifteen yards ahead of him, who he could have reached with a simple ball. Instead, he tried to beat his man and lost it. The man has no footballing brain.

Woodgate a long way ahead in first place, followed by Moncur. Apart from those two, the picture's a bit bleak. For some reason, we just haven't produced or bought good CB's. (Taylor's developing nicely though)

If you're talking about blame, then the people who have decided to allow Freddie to run the club are just as guilty as Freddie himself. The point though is that the various Board members do not, in practice, participate in the running of the club in an equal manner (albeit by their own choice in the case of the Halls). Major decisions are run by them for their approval, but their role seems to be limited to saying yes or no, rather than actively shaping the decision itself. Now my point is that this way of running the club is becoming less and less satisfactory from the club's point of view, and the Halls have realised this. Trouble is, Freddie quite likes it the way it is, and won't go quietly.

Absolutely right. We're in sharp decline at the moment, and his return could be crucial to us. Despite all the sneering, no player did more to get us out of the mess we were in during the second half of last season.

You don't hear so much of cartilege injuries for some reason. They used to be all the rage. There seem to be an increase in groin strains, maybe because of the extra pace of the game.

the same major shareholders as in 1992 ? You are not seriously suggesting that Shepherd runs the club himself, and appoints the managers himself, without the major shareholders ? I've said this before, and I'm still staggered that people appear to believe this is the case. All the managers have been backed to the same degree by the same major shareholders too. It seems pretty clear to me that the Halls are no longer interested in the day to day running of the club, and haven't been for some time. I'm sure that their approval is sought before a major decision like the appointing of a manager is made, but that's as far as it goes. Up until recently, they've been happy to hand the reins to Freddie. I think they now realise that Freddie has been screwing up, and that there's a better alternative both for themselves and the club. you "think" they realise Shepherd is screwing up ? Don't you know ? Or are you just guessing. On the contrary, if THEY picked Souness, it is THEY who screwed up. And neither you, nor I, know. Do you ? If I ran Newcastle United, and I was the major shareholder, one thing I would NOT do is allow someone else to run it for me, or make the single biggest appointment in the football club, if I thought they were screwing up, and as you suggest, they APPROVED of the managerial appointments, at the very least. According to Sir Bob's book, in all his time at Newcastle, he only saw Douglas Hall 3 or 4 times. The guy lives in Gibraltar, and Sir John is retired. It's completely obvious that they're absentee owners. Neither of the Halls seem to be big football fans, and it suited them to take a back seat and let Freddie, who's the real enthusiast, run the show. Sir John doesn't want to take over again, and Douglas doesn't seem to have the ability. I think the way the last two managers have been recruited reflects this arrangement. I think Freddie did all the sounding out and then presented his chosen candidate to the Halls for their approval. Even if they weren't convinced that Freddie had found the best possible man, if they say no they really have to go ahead and find a better man themselves, and they've got no inclination to get involved in that way. I don't think they're interested in much beyond the business side. But personally - and this is where I differ from a few - I don't think the main problem has been the choice of manager. It's been the way the managers have been treated, and the position they're put in. Shepherd acts like a Director of Football, and the managers don't have the power and initiative that is needed, particularly in the transfer market.

the same major shareholders as in 1992 ? You are not seriously suggesting that Shepherd runs the club himself, and appoints the managers himself, without the major shareholders ? I've said this before, and I'm still staggered that people appear to believe this is the case. All the managers have been backed to the same degree by the same major shareholders too. It seems pretty clear to me that the Halls are no longer interested in the day to day running of the club, and haven't been for some time. I'm sure that their approval is sought before a major decision like the appointing of a manager is made, but that's as far as it goes. Up until recently, they've been happy to hand the reins to Freddie. I think they now realise that Freddie has been screwing up, and that there's a better alternative both for themselves and the club.

We can't talk about 'the current Board' as though nothing has changed since 1992. Sir John Hall ran things in a different way from Shepherd, and Shepherd himself has become more and more autocratic and involved in the football side over the years since he took over. Regardless of the amount of money being spent, and who the manager is, we'll continue to decline because in Freddie we've effectively got a Director of Football who knows bugger all about football.

Whether we should be afraid or not, the choice is simple. We either join those clubs who are attracting new investment, or we get left behind. At the moment, we're getting left behind. The Halls have realised this, but Freddie wants to stay in charge. Maybe Freddie's got it right, and the Halls and all the Directors of those other clubs have got it wrong. Or maybe not.

Well, there's a pattern here that's been established with the last three managers. The overall annual budget is about £9 million. Our overall spend in the Summer was £10 million, and it was clear from the last minute farce with Milner, that any further spending had to be financed by someone going out. On reflection, half the budget for the last 4 years was blown on one player. Funds were witheld before and after to enable that to happen. Freddie set his heart on the idea of one big-name striker to replace Shearer, which was a foolish strategy in any event, even if you consider that Owen was worth that kind of money (which I don't.) This kind of amateurish over-involvement by Freddie is what's brought about our decline over the last few seasons.

I thought the article was going to be about the strain that Roeder was under, which I do worry has affected his thinking since the Alkmaar game. I was quite relieved when I read it, because it's evidence of clear thinking. Lots of us have our doubts about Martins and Owen as a combination - neither of them show much ability to hold the ball up. If a good offer comes in that will allow us to bring in a different type of striker, then we should take it.