Mick

He played well and might give us another option if he can keep playing like that. We could look at bringing Steve Taylor in at right back as he's better in that position than anybody else at the club.

I didn't say we started with one up front just because of who was on the pitch, I said it because of the numbers in that position. Kevin Nolan spent a lot of time with 2/3 of the pitch in front of him and because of that we invited Sheffield onto us when we should have pushed up and gave them something to worry about.

I agree.

We were very lucky to get 3 points tonight. Our first half performance was terrible and typical of what should be expected playing 5 in the middle and 1 up front on his own. We were a bit better in the second half but had no pace or creativity. We fluked a goal and we would have came away with one point if it wasn't for a brilliant save from Harper who had no right to save that shot. He was diving to his right and somehow managed to get his left hand behind him quick and hard enough to protect his goal. Enrique was by far the best outfield player but I'd give Harper MOTM for being the difference between 1 and 3 points. Simpson didn't impress tonight and I would rather play Taylor in his position and a proper winger on the right but Hughton is far too negative with his team selection and we gave away 2/3 of the pitch for far too long with our 5 man midfield. Kadar had quite a good game and Coloccini didn't do anything spectacular but he reads the game well at this level and always tries to play the ball out of defence. It's just a pity that we have no vision or pace in midfield to make the most of what he does. Our midfield is the most static I've seen at this club since before Keegan arrived for his first go at managing the club. Nicky Butt isn’t even good enough for this level yet Hughton still picks him for some reason. Jonas did nothing but he was typical of those around him tonight. Smith is slightly better than Butt because he’s more mobile and that goes a long way in a league where quality is so rare and graft is enough to get you through. Nolan has scored loads of goals for a midfielder but he offers very little when he’s not scoring although I can’t fault his drive and willingness to push his team mates forwards, he never gives up. Carroll played up on his own and wasn’t too bad but I think Ranger brings more to the team than him. The ball seems to stick to him and he takes pressure off us by retaining possession like no other forward at the club. I can’t work out the thinking of Hughton to start with one up front and finish with 3 up front when the game was to tight, having said that, we didn’t pay for it.

I'll take that

The only good thing about the first half is that it's over.

Hughton out

If that is our starting 11 then it's more proof that Hughton hasn't a clue what he's doing.

No Christmas tree is complete without a fairy.

The Christmas tree formation would only work with Xisco up top.

Chris Hughton doesn’t need to worry about Shearer, he needs to worry about how he does the job, nothing else.

I’ve thought about Geographical location and dismissed it. Our location shouldn't matter in the slightest as foreign owners turn up for matches when they feel like it and return to whichever foreign country they live in at the end of the game. Our income is down because of the way the club has been run for the last 5 years and if the clubs fortunes changed on the pitch then that would be reflected off it, this club has great potential when run right. Our current situation is because of poor management and it's not something which has to continue. If the club is run correctly then everything else will fall into place.

Arsenal had to pay £390 million to build a 60,000 seater stadium, we have a ready made 52,000 seater stadium thrown in with the price. We don't own the land which the ground has been built on but for football purposes that doesn't matter as we will not be looking to sell it as we couldn't play without it. If we owned the land we could sell it and move to cheaper land to build a new one but a new build would cost more than the land would be worth. As for Portsmouth, yes they were given away, they still have debts which could be up to £40 million, they look like playing in the Championship next season and they have a shit ground which would cost a fortune to replace, I don’t see what they have going for them yet they have been taken over twice this season.

Nobody met the asking price so we don't know that he didn't want to sell it.

I can't honestly remember seeing anything which said the loans were included, is that not just a myth? I haven't seen anything to suggest that it's reality.

Seymour Pearce were selling the club and they only recommended Moat who didn't offer the asking price. Did any other potential buyer get passed Seymour Pearce?

Again though, nobody other than fans have said that the debt to Ashley goes with the club. The wages for Butt and Geremi are only a problem for this season as they'll be out of contract after this season. Our running costs should be no higher than the proportionate running costs of other clubs in the same division, as long as we're not stupid and throwing money around as if we can print our own. We would have extra income from an increased gate and we would have sponsorship which is additional to what we have now. We only had debt because we were living beyond our means. The ground extension was £44 million, I think some of the debt was also because of the training facilities but that doesn't account for anything like £120 million. I don't think it would cost anything like £300 million, I think in total it would be half that if the loans to Ashley were not part of the sale.

Did Moat or somebody close to him not say that he was close to the £80 million asking price just after the club was taken off the market? Nobody other than fans guessing have ever mentioned anything about the debt being included in the sale.

Nobody bid the asking price, or even the revised asking price so he wasn't in a position to make a decision.

I'm not sure why we couldn't find a buyer. £100 million or £80 million doesn't seem to be too high a price for what any new owner would get for his money. Other clubs have been sold with more debt and worse grounds, Portsmouth being a prime example of a club with very little to offer changing hands and they did it twice. I know they went for less than we would have so they could attract a buyer with less money than our purchaser would require. They are in the Premiership but they look as if they will probably get relegated this season and they are supposed to have a massive debt. They are in such a state that they can’t sign players because they have missed payments for players already bought and possibly sold. I think the way we react might put some off if they are short sighted, surely the gates we get would counter anything which could be seen as negative. We're in the second tier and are still getting the 6th best attendance in English football so surely our potential is obvious to possible buyers. Man City have spent shit loads and get 5,000 more through the gates than we do when we are a shambles of a club and they are 6th in the top division. I can’t figure out why we’ve failed to find a buyer when we have so much going for us, even if we’re in the 2nd division. It wouldn’t cost a fortune to ensure we are back in the Premiership next season, we could go up with what we’ve got. The purchase price would have bought a club who didn’t have to do much to become a Premiership club. A club with a ground which is one of the biggest and best in one of the best leagues in domestic football. Would the club be more saleable if promoted? It shouldn't make much of a difference if a buyer was looking long term because of our current league position. If Ashley has been a hurdle then that is unlikely to change, not that I think he has as he would be gone once sold. I can’t think of any sensible or reasonable reason why we’re still owned by Ashley other than the recession and I'm not sure how much of a barrier that should be. Any ideas?

I'd rather not go through what we went through last year again any time soon. Most of our better players are not good enough for the Premiership, that was proven last year so I doubt we'd see many getting better clubs to play for. Changing ownership doesn't mean we'd not go up, sticking with what we've got means that we're unlikely to do well. Ashley is probably not going to get what he wants for the club, he's tried and failed twice already so I doubt he'll be convinced that selling the club is going to be easy. It's either take an offer or keep pumping in cash every year to bail out the club. He's done plenty of moaning about how much the club is costing him. We have new sponsorship to look forwards to after this season so I guess the club is going to become cheaper to run if we go up and he keeps the wages down.

I’m not advocating boycotts or protests because they will potentially harm the club and I’m sure nobody wants to do that but the chants against Ashley don’t appear to have hurt the club so if that was increased I doubt we’d suffer, the sooner Ashley goes the better it will be long term. I think the best we’ll do under Ashley is become a Yo-Yo club as he’s incapable of making the correct decision needed to take the club forwards. If we do anything positive then it will be a random decision that goes right and goes differently to almost everything he’s done so far. He had my support for far too long because I couldn’t believe that anybody could be as bad as he appeared. The number of things he’s done right can be counted on one hand and most of them have ended up kicking us in the balls because something has gone wrong further down the line. To say “Affecting such an important season in the wrong way isn’t beneficial to us even if we get Ashley out” is wrong. I don’t want to go up this season to find that we can’t hold our own in the Premiership. I don’t want to find that we’re rivals to Derby for the worst number of points gained in a season, that’s about what we can expect from our current setup. I’d much rather we possibly suffered for another season to go up again and actually be in a position to do something. It’s almost guaranteed that we’ll be up for sale in the summer if we do go up and we’ll go through the same shit as we’ve been through this summer and up until last Christmas. Even if we get a new owner in the summer it will take time for a takeover and we’ll be in the shit because we’ll have a puppet manager, who will probably get sacked and he’ll have no idea what is going to happen so we’ll not be in a position to bring new players in. We’ll have no funds to buy players anyway as Ashley will not want to invest and we’ll be in the shite. I don’t want that to happen so I’ rather he went now because I’m sure he’d still sell if somebody offered him £100 million to cover the £80 million plus what he’s going to put in this week. Ashley going would give the club a massive lift. Ashley out.

I wouldn't go that far as it does seem to piss off a lot of people, few fans were too bothered about the sale of shares on the stock market. I can understand why some people are pissed off, it just doesn't bother me if it helps the club, my only problem is that I'm not too sure that we'll see any benefit. I think it will just mean Ashley having to put less in, I hope that I'm wrong because if that's the case then we've gained nothing.

I've been through 3 relegations and seen us in some of the most shit grounds in football and not being bothered means I'm not a proper fan, OK.

The end result would have been almost the same though, at least we can still call it St James' Park, we wouldn't have been able to if Sir John had got his way.