Cronky

Munich seem to be valuing him at around £15 - 20 million, and I don't think he's worth that kind of money. Not a great passer of the ball.

Neill, Reo-Coker and Gabbidon from West Ham. Ambrose from Charlton. I think he's maturing into a fine player and we weren't patient enough with him.

The main question mark over Hitzfeld was his ability and willingness, at his age, to adapt to a completely different challenge in an unfamiliar country, when all his experience as a player and manager had been in the Swiss and German leagues. Nothing has changed there. He's been away from management for two years, and the only post he'd take was a temporary one back on his old familiar territory. Perhaps I'm one of the morons, but that doesn't sound like a man who's eager for a fresh challenge. I think all you Hitzfeld followers have missed the point yet again.

Yeah, I don't know why Pleat seems to get singled out a lot of the time. He's one of the better pundits. Competition isn't great, I know, but he does occasionally manage to say something that isn't totally bleeding obvious.

I've always thought that Vassell was very under-rated.

The big difference between Shola and Sibierski is that, for all his faults, Shola is capable of causing problems for the very best of defences. Two or three times in a game, he will open things up through his strength or his footwork, and create a chance out of a very unpromising situation. Even if he's having a shitty game, he can't be kept completely quiet. Sibierski has done a good job for us, but he's not very strong and good defenders can handle with no problem at all.

I don't see that anyone could have done much better than Roeder. He didn't inherit a great side, he hasn't been given mountains of cash to spend, and we've had a lot of bad luck with injuries. Mid-table is as much as we could expect.

My feeling with Owen is that he's very good at getting on the end of chances in the box, not much good at anything else. I think the very best players have a range of skills so they can adapt to different situations, and adjust their contribution to what the team needs at any given time. For instance, in the early matches in the World Cup, when we didn't have a Rooney to do all the creative work outside the box for him, he was pretty useless. As for people who don't consider Owen to be 'world class', I could name you three in particular - Alex Ferguson, Jose Mourinho and Arsene Wenger - none of whom were interested when he became available.

One thing I noticed about Parker yesterday is he has difficulty in turning on the ball. Most midfield players in the Premiership are good enough to just let the ball roll past them as they turn, or take a very quick touch to take the pace off the ball so they're facing the opposition with the ball at their feet, ready to keep the attack going. He takes about three touches to do what a lot of players are doing with one touch or even none. Another problem is he can't switch the direction of the attack very easily. He's very one-footed, and he can't use the outside of his foot either, so his distribution becomes a bit predictable. This doesn't make him a bad player, just a bit limited for what we'd really like.

Michael Owen. Just an honest opinion.

It looks like Man U's defence is going to get them over the finish line. If only we could have said the same in 96.

I'm just going by the Sky highlights, but I'm a bit surprised at the low marks for Zoggy. I thought he looked a bit more composed than usual, and seemed to read the game a bit better. Not many opportunities came his way, and not much came off, but it was a much more mature performance. It looked like they've been doing a bit of work on him. It was scrappy, as derbies often are, but we looked a bit unlucky not to win. Boro defended well.

theyre both small, but i reckon they'd work... Martins aint a poacher, he drops deep alot but Owen is a nice little poacher and will never ever drop deep. Martins will occasionally drop deep, but his link-up play isn't good, and his main strength is as an out and out goalscorer, playing on the line of the back four. I think, like Owen, he's best used in tandem with a more withdrawn striker like Dyer or Rooney. For me, Owen faces a challenge in the second half of his career. The game has become more technical, and players' roles and positions have become more interchangeable in order to unhinge well-organised defences. I think at the very top level, a striker, even the more advanced one, has to be able to drift into different positions on occasions and create, as well as finish. There did seem to be a problem at the World Cup, with Owen asserting that he was a box player, while Eriksson wanted more movement from him. That's just the way the game has gone. If Owen wants to stay at the very top, he needs to adapt, if he can. I think a striker can get away with being fairly static positionally if they're acting as a target man in something like a 4-5-1, but that's not Owen's game either. I really think this is the reason why when he became available from Madrid, Man U, Chelsea and Arsenal weren't interested, and Liverpool were only prepared to pay half our money. I worry that we're the mugs who came along with all the dosh at the wrong time in his career. A bit of me is hoping that we'll get a really good offer for him that will allow us to strengthen the team in more needy areas.

Sad news. I think he's a very good player.

I think Roeder has a biggish problem here. As others including myself have said in other threads, Owen and Martins might not be the best combination. However, politically it's a big step to leave Owen out.

It's always seemed to me, with the whole incident, that Shearer and Shepherd are more at fault than Bellamy. It was a bit of banter in a private text message between two footballers, and ought to have stayed that way. Instead, it looks like Shearer makes it known within the club, the Chairman makes it public, and says Bellamy will never play for the club again. It speaks volumes about the amateurish way in which our club is run.

Peter Schmichel - lost us the league. Phil Neville - an irritating combination of enthusiasm and incompetence. John Terry - never gives us an inch. Far too good. Don't like his hairstyle either. Neil Ruddock - a fat bully. Phil Neal - always irritated that such an ordinary player could win so many caps. Dennis Wise - the Captain. The ultimate poison dwarf. Always played with a self-satisfied grin. A wind-up merchant. Dirty, and to top it all, a good player. Paul Ince - Vice-captain. Always had this expression of angry outrage, as though the world was against him. Actually it was, but he deserved it. Paul Scholes - always seems to destroy us without even breaking sweat. No player has rammed it home to us so consistently that we're still the wrong side of the class gap. El Hadji Diouf - the arch-cheat among a team of cheats. Evil. Eric Cantona - amongst his many crimes was that stupid gesture of turning his collars up. Dirty on the field, and a pseud off it. Ian Wright - Mouth was always wide open for the whole of the 90 minutes. Like Ince, he was always acting more angry than he was.

As with Andy, I don't think he'd be quite as annoyed with all the money in the game if his own team was still spending it. The major compensation about football in this country now is that the quality of the product, the skill and the entertainment has never been higher. I've seen some great football over the last few seasons. As far as I'm concerned, we were fed dross for years and I've no wish to go back to the so-called good old days. I've been watching football since the late 60's, incidentally.

This reaction always surprises me. He said he didn't want to come on a permanent basis, and we had to pay over the odds in the transfer fee and wages in order to get him. Why is it so difficult to believe that we also had to agree to a very generous buy-out clause in his contract? It's not as though buy-out clauses are rare in any event. But I agree with Riches. I think he'll stay for another season.

thats where that lost any credibility You say that (not sure why tbh), but Owen writes a column for them. The plot thickens!

According to the Times, Owen is able to leave at the end of this season for half of his original transfer fee. Believe it or not as you choose, but it could explain something of Freddie's desperation. The rules about compensation and the release of players were there before the World Cup, and applied to everyone. If Freddie and other Chairmen think that they're not fair, then they should try to change them. But trying to do it retrospectively through lawyers feels all wrong to me.

The 10,000 before Keegan mentioned amongst the comments there belongs to that old addage if you tell a lie and keep repeating it then people start to believe it. How many pre-Keeganers here remember us pulling in crowds of 10,000? I'm pre- Keegan and I don't remember crowds that low. I think there might have been one or two games in the Jim Smith period when we were playing appalling football where things dropped as low as around 12,000 - but only a few games, it wasn't a regular attendence. And I seem to recall a game against Oxford where we might have got 10,000 but I remember that was due to bad weather - it had been pouring down all day. It was an evening match and Tyne Tees and Metro were saying the game was off. We hung on at home to see what Look North were saying. They said it was still on, so we went up. But crowds of 10,000 were certainly not regular occurances by any means. During the period from 1978 - 82, when we were stuck in the old second division, with no prospect of promotion, there were 3 or 4 games when the attendance dipped below 10,000. These came right at the very end of the season when all hope had gone, and there was a lot of discontentment at the way the club was being run. The lowest average attendance for a season, even in that era, was over 17,000. But like you say, the myth is more entertaining and that is what has stuck.

You are ignoring our best midfielder in that formation. Who were you thinking of?

If he's not completely fit, there's not much point in playing him. His game depends on sharpness. He's not the kind of technical player who can create things by sheer skill on the ball.

There could be something in the idea that seeing as he's not making a good job either of the defensive nor the attacking roles in the middle of a 4-4-2, he might be better off in one of the in-between roles that you get in a Chelsea-style 4-5-1 / 4-3-3 - Parker Butt (DM) Emre Dyer Milner Martins But just to throw another idea into the post, maybe the Captaincy doesn't help him. He looks a bit tense and inhibited on and off the field at the moment. Even when he's being interviewed after we've won, he looks a bit miserable. He also seems a bit quiet for a Captain.