Mick

We should be stronger for this signing as we haven't lost any players who could be expected to play too many games.

Very few of the international players will be joining up for training too early as they'll not have lost fitness levels yet, if anything they'll need a rest.

The season is 6 weeks away, what happens in 5 days makes no difference to a lot of players. Some players have been playing internationals up until the last few days and will not be back in training.

The irony.

The July 1st crap is more significant to those that panic far too early, were you a one of them?

Exactly.

It's a signing that has been made public on day two of the transfer window and one that comes roughly 6 weeks after the club bid a record fee for Modric.

Not unless you want to and think we've done everything on this deal in the last 36 hours or so.

We didn't sign anybody until the 2nd day of the transfer window so the panickers are right to moan, OK.

It wasn't a bite at all.

I don't see how one is more valid than the other when it comes down to trust, I can't really think of any reason not to trust anybody yet as I think our only known bid so far this summer was the right thing to do.

I don't like Barton in the slightest but we'd be mad to sack him unless we could hold onto his registration because if we sack him he'll be quid’s in. Some other club will sign him without having to pay a fee and no doubt he'll get another signing on fee. If we sack him the football club will be the only ones to take a financial hit.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/n/newcastle_united/7122616.stm Newcastle fans vicious - Barton Joey Barton has launched a scathing attack on Newcastle fans, branding them "vicious" for the abuse meted out to boss Sam Allardyce and the players. The midfielder's comments come on the back of his side's 3-0 home defeat by Liverpool that saw Allardyce jeered by a section of the St James' Park crowd. "I've not yet seen the famous crowd I was expecting to hear get behind us," said the £5m signing. "Instead it has been vicious; I don't think I've heard a crowd that vicious."

I qualify on those grounds.

If he's lied then we can sack him but it would have to be documented as it would be the word of him against the club if we have no other proof.

On what grounds?

Mort is a lawyer but he has nothing to do with either criminal law or employment law. This is what ACAS have to say on this matter. If an employee is charged with, or convicted of, a criminal offence not related to work, this is not in itself reason for disciplinary action. The employer should establish the facts of the case and consider whether the matter is serious enough to warrant starting the disciplinary procedure. The main consideration should be whether the offence, or alleged offence, is one that makes the employee unsuitable for their type of work. Similarly, an employee should not be dismissed solely because they are absent from work as a result of being remanded in custody. We knew about the alleged offence so we wouldn't have a leg to stand on if we sacked him unless he'd signed something in his contract to say that he hadn't committed the offence.

So can I if we have something in his contract about this case, if we don't then he'll probaby not get sacked.

I can remember it well, Wadsworth got the blame for us going after some right shite although I don't remember who.

I don't think I am viewing the club through rose tinted glasses, I just don't see anything to have a go at the club about regarding Steve Round. I don't usually comment about what happens with our coaching staff other than when we've had more than our fair share of injuries. We’ve had coaches coming and going long before Round arrived and I've rarely if ever commented, 14 months ago would have been no different.

How do you know they've dropped the ball? I know nothing about him other than that he's a coach, I haven't a clue if he's good or bad and don't know how you would either. It just looks like you've found something else to have a go at the club about. I'm reasonably sure that if Keegan wanted him to be here next season he'd have sorted something out.

I'm over the moon for him, it's good news that he looks to have beaten it.

You talk about expectations of others then mention Ashley beating the best finishes under Shepherd. Do they not have to beat the first four years before going onto the best years? You know, the ones when we finished 13th twice followed by 11th twice. Shepherd was never the major shareholder or owner. Ashley has never been the chairman. bump. Ashley wasn't the chairman, and Shepherd was never the major shareholder or owner

I wasn't talking anything, I was just trying to work out what UV was getting at. Was he talking bollocks when he tied them in together?

And?