Martin Lol

I would have thought all it would mean is the selling club contact the club they bought him off to tell them about the sale, it's up to them if they want to bid and it's up to the player where he wants to go. I think that is just about right, you can't force a player to go to a club if he's intent on going somewhere else.

Possibly not. He was honest with Levy though, admitted he had been tapped up and wanted to go. Levy said only if Spurs get a full value transfer fee, that's why Spurs held out for the final figure fee of £18.6m, all of which has now been paid. Levy was upset with Utd but appreciated Carrick's honesty. Carrick got the move he wanted, there was a lot of mutual respect over how it was dealt with. I don't know about Woodgate so I can't say.

Why do we keep showing one way loyalty to players who have never given a monkey's chuff about us in the past? Fat Fred kept trying to sign Carrick and Matt Jansen based on their north east heritage. Carrick preferred West Ham and Jansen chose Blackburn. So of course, now he's playing for Man U's first team, Carrick is suddenly going to give it all up to come 'home'. The only time I know that we've looked at Carrick was when we needed a replacement for Butt, Robson wanted Carrick but Shepherd told him he'd have to wait until January to get him as his contract was up that Summer, we signed Butt for around the same money West Ham wanted for Carrick and he went to Spurs later that Summer. can you back that up ? Yes. you got me there...i thought he went to spuds for more than that. then again even at spurs he never imprssed me so where does that leave us ? We signed him for less, £2.75m although Portsmouth offered £3m. He was an ever present after Santini left and was the key to Spurs' progress. When he asked to be sold to Man Utd it was agreed but there was a clause in the contract that Spurs have first refusal should he leave Man Utd. Sadly, I don't see that happening anytime soon because he is an integral part of the Udt squad now. In the meantime, Spurs have never effectively replaced him.

6th place always used to get a uefa cup spot automatically. Oh well, my apologies. Could have sworn that's what Sky said.

6th place always used to get a uefa cup spot automatically.

I think Villa are capable of taking 5th place. Bit academic about Liverpool if they qualify through the FPL in any case.

Sky only mentioned it tonight. What am I meant to do? Put it in the diary to start a thread in 3 weeks time??

I'm not taking the piss. That's what was said on Sky tonight. I know they get a lot of things wrong, but I wouldn't have thought they would wrong with something like Uefa qualification.

I hadn't realised but Sky were saying tonight that as at next year England have one fewer place for the Uefa Cup. Next year the places available will be: Top 4 in the Premier League - CL 5th Place - Uefa Cup Carling Cup Winners - Uefa Cup FA Cup Winners - Uefa Cup (if 1 of top 4 win, runner up to get Uefa place. If runner up also in top 4, Uefa place to 6th placed team in PL). Plus the usual possibilities for Intertoto and Fair Play League. I knew that these changes had been proposed but never realised they were being implemented from next season, I am assuming that Sky are not talking out of their backsides. With it being so tight in the Premeir League for 4th-7th place, there is the possibility that Liverpool don't qualify for the Champions League.................... or the Uefa Cup either. Anyway, that's what I'm hoping for!

No, you're right.

Which means (like most in the thread) you miss the point being made entirely. Which is? I think his point is that when Spurs sacked their manager they got ina world class replacement in Ramos. When we sacked ours we got in Keegan... That's more of a description of events than a point. Maybe, but when Spurs sacked Jol, there wasn't any doubt who was going to replace him. The board decided that the time for him to go and started lining up the replacement. What Spurs did wrong was getting caught in Spain by the media. What Newcastle did wrong was to sack Allardyce and then think about who they could appoint to replace him. They thought about it, asked Redknapp, Redknapp thought about it, then said no, asked KK, he thought about it, then said yes. In that time the window was nearing closure and there wasn't enough time to recruit the players that the club desperately needed. That's where Ashley and Mort went wrong. Not the sacking of Allardyce but the failure to have someone in place to fill his seat.

Talented youngsters around the world usually also have work permit problems. Talented youngsters around Europe worth signing have invariably been snaffled up by bigger fish. Imo best to go for experienced players, maybe fringe players at quality european clubs who are looking to play rather than just sitting on the bench. They would also benefit the youngsters you have got with their experience.

Hughton was very much a public face for Spurs in the Community (now known as the Spurs Foundation), although how much direct involvement he had in its development I don't know. Spurs have been putting something like £3m pa into the Foundation which is more than any other premiership club, giving something half a million kids sporting opportunities and now having been given charitable status. I think the effort and money put into it has in some degree helped to grease the lines of communication in getting planning permission for the new Academy and Training Centre. There is no doubt that it has been successful, it's not the main reason for the initiative but there are some kids who have got to Spurs' younger teams through initial contract through SITC. I think a big thing was made some time ago of Hughton's boy Cian getting involved through it but I think his Dad being who is was meant it was all a bit of a publicity exercise. Cian btw is a talented FB like his Dad, capped at u18 level by Ireland and currently plays in the reserves.

Ok, how about 'Arnesen did make it work for Spurs but if he had not known what he was doing Arnesen could have seriously f*cked the club's finances'?

Spurs bought 15 players in one window when Arnesen first joined and seemed to be buying a couple every week. They've all gone now but Pamarot, Davis and Pedro Mendes have all done well for Pompey. The likes of those players, plus Atouba, Naybet, Carrick etc provided the 'quick fix' stepping stone to the next level from the one where Spurs had previously languished. That first season we missed Uefa competition on the final day, to be followed by successive 5th places. Buying a lot of players in one window can work, and work well, if it's done properly. Didn't you also buy a lot of players last summer, though, and that didn't work out, did it? Not having a dig - they're for the large part, good players - just pointing out that there's no guarantee and it could be said that it backfired for you this year (I'm aware the reasons are more complicated than this post suggest, mind) ;-) We seem to buy a load of players almost every window, some come in, some go out. Arnesen came in advocating the revolving door policy, I know Levy was stunned by the numbers that Arnesen was proposing each window. Comolli came in and to a lesser degree is still advocating the same. His view is that all players should be evaluated and if a better player in a certain position is available, make the change. The downside is obviously the damage to continuity but 5 or 6 changes each window to a squad of 28 or so is said to be manageable, especially as the changes in theory enhance the overall quality of the squad. I'm not totally convinced but nothing I think is going to change things so I just have to trust that they know what they're doing.

Bent was seen as the best available striker available to replace Berbatov as at that time there was the expectation that Berbatov would go. Had that scenario actually occurred, Bent would have been starting practically every match. £16m for the league's top English goalscorer for the previous 2 seasons wouldn't have been too surprising. It's the subsequent events with Berbatov staying that makes the transfer look a wierd one. Interesting. Well that was one hell of a risky move. So is all the talk of Bent being moved on true then? Or do the club still see Berbatov moving on, in which case they intend to hold on to Bent? It might have been risky but it would have been even more so if Berbatov had gone with no replacement already brought in. I think back to the signing of Rasiak! Whether Bent goes or not still depends on Berbatov and Ramos. With Uefa competition next season now guaranteed it's less likely that Berba will leave but still no guarantee. Bent is not the ideal type of Ramos striker, works hard but not got the skills level that Ramos wants although I know he likes his work ethic and no complaints about lack of playing time. You can get skilful players to work hard but you can't get hardworkers to be skilful. The difference between the Spurs and Sevilla versions of Fredi Kanoute is there for all to see. Elmander and Toni are two that, amongst others, are definitely on the radar but I don't know if its names like that being touted to replace Berbatov or Bent or fill Defoe's empty seat. Time will tell.

Spurs bought 15 players in one window when Arnesen first joined and seemed to be buying a couple every week. They've all gone now but Pamarot, Davis and Pedro Mendes have all done well for Pompey. The likes of those players, plus Atouba, Naybet, Carrick etc provided the 'quick fix' stepping stone to the next level from the one where Spurs had previously languished. That first season we missed Uefa competition on the final day, to be followed by successive 5th places. Buying a lot of players in one window can work, and work well, if it's done properly.

Bent was seen as the best available striker available to replace Berbatov as at that time there was the expectation that Berbatov would go. Had that scenario actually occurred, Bent would have been starting practically every match. £16m for the league's top English goalscorer for the previous 2 seasons wouldn't have been too surprising. It's the subsequent events with Berbatov staying that makes the transfer look a wierd one.

McGeady has done well when has played in the CL & has been a better performer in SPL than lets think of some of examples say Alan Hutton or Craig Gordon. If people think them lads are worth around £10 millionthen buying a player who can "run with the ball and he can create things" £12 million is snip. No he hasn't. It's only this year he's put a consistent run of form together. Maloney used to come up with the goods more often when the two of them were at Celtic and won Player of the Year He has won Celtic Young Player of the Year 3 years off the bounce. A load of month awards how many have Hutton & Gordon won? There are always players that are highly rated, overrated or underrated. It's also true to say that more often than not, awards go to attacking minded players rather than defensive. I'm not saying McGeady is a poor player or anything like it, just trying to evaluate his worth by considering his impact outside the comfort zone of the SPL. In internationals I've seen little to get excited about, I've been happy with what I've seen of Hutton, and Gordon for that matter.

Totally agree, well nearly. The scenarios are different, as are the squads and the current stage of redevelopment, but generally speaking, the financial backing to improve the squad is almost always there. Thanks for that. Ramos wants the football played in the way that Spurs fans (and Newcastle fans) have traditionally wanted it played. Win or lose, I'd rather see attacking football than the grinding play of Chelski. Grant was shown up for what he is, tactically negative and slow to react. Share all your views. I'm not convinced that KK was the right appointment, in fact, I'm convinced it wasn't, I think he has been away from the game for too long. But his philosophy of attacking football has to be admired and I hope that it does come good if KK is given the time he needs. What we need more than ever before are teams to break up the monopoly of the 'big 4' and in Spurs, Villa, Everton and City there are teams showing the signs of being capable of doing just that. Although Newcastle are a fair way behind in the development, there really is no reason why they can't join the 4 pretenders to the top table. It would be good for football if the CL spots were being contested by 8 or 9 clubs, not just the usual 4 deciding what the qualification order is. It would be nice to think so but Newcastle are adopting the continental style of management that has been in place at Spurs for some seasons now. It takes time to adapt, it is a big change to the traditional style of management of a club. Also, while the concept may be right, the right DoF has to be in place and I'm far from convinced that Dennis Wise is the right person. When it was finally accepted by Spurs that David Pleat was not, nor never would be, a DoF in the continental understanding of the title, Spurs went for the best they could get from the Continent, where the system was devised and works almost universally. Arnesen was the accepted best in the world, Comolli was also very highly rated, I don't know how Wise would compare to a Monchi or a Martin Van Geel. They all have to start sometime I suppose, if I was a Newcastle fan I would prefer to see someone established and proven in the job. Newcastle is too big a club to be a training ground for a wannabe DoF imho.

It doesn't help when he's having to play out of position either.

It is strange that some people have slammed Kelmsley involvement with Newcastle United but he was one of the main men when he was at Spurs who wanted Ramos & Jol out. Paul Kemsley didn't especially want Ramos, he just wanted shot of Jol. Comolli named Ramos as his #1 choice and Comolli, Kemsley and Jimenez started the wheels in motion to get Ramos on board and Jol out. TBH, I'm not convinced that Kemsley has much/any say in the running of Newcastle. If he did, I would have been surprised that there had been any talk about Chris Hughton joining Newcastle.

McGeady has done well when has played in the CL & has been a better performer in SPL than lets think of some of examples say Alan Hutton or Craig Gordon. If people think them lads are worth around £10 millionthen buying a player who can "run with the ball and he can create things" £12 million is snip. I don't honestly think you can compare a fullback, a winger and a goalkeeper when you're trying to assess who might be a success in the Premier League. Hutton has shown for Scotland that he is capable of producing quality performances at international level and has performed well in the (albeit) few games he has played for Spurs and whilst I still think the fee we paid was a little on the rich side, I'd still have no complaints if the quality of Hutton's performances was maintained. With McGeady, he may have played well against Barca but from what I've seen of his international performances, I would have grave reservations about paying £12m for him or anything like that figure. But, more importantly, with Zog and Duff, do Newcastle really need McGeady? With the time they've invested in Zog, I would have thought it would make more sense to keep the £12m player you already have and develop his talents further rather than splash £12m who may prove to be no better or possibly worse than Zog.

Can't honestly see any club spending £12m on a player (Zog) who is reputedly unsettled and whose value is based more on potential than recent achievement and can't show off his potential because he's being played out of position. Being "unsettled" is a lot less effective when you've only recently signed a new 5 year contract. If he wants to go and another team wants him they'll have to pay far more then he's currently worth IMO, otherwise they can f*** off and he can rott in the reserves for all I care. Hopefully the management will see it similarly. True, the same could be said about Downing. Boro wanted c£12m, reputedly unsettled but no one paid the fee being asked so Downing signed a new contract. I'm not saying Newcastle should sell Zog for less than £12m if that's what they think he's worth. I just don't envisage anyone spending £12m to buy him.

Can't honestly see any club spending £12m on a player (Zog) who is reputedly unsettled and whose value is based more on potential than recent achievement and can't show off his potential because he's being played out of position. If KK really wants to spend £12m on a player who hasn't really impressed yet at international level, his war chest of £50m won't go very far. Other areas in the squad need more urgent attention than LM.