Yorkie

Spurs are taking half an hour to pass it whenever they approach the box. Lennon and Keane are frustrating as hell... take two or three too many touches more than they should. IU really don't see how Lennon is head and shoulders above Milner in the England set-up, the only advanta Another great goal... ge he has over him is his pace. don't see what all the fuss is about tbh. A bit erratic i reckon.

Well, a different colour would be better but other than that it's perfectly fine. Looked smart in the blue imo. I miss the blue. Works well with the black and white i reckon.

What a goal. Ruined by the commentary.

Motson really is cringeworthy isn't he.

Is he on form?

Agreed, and the Northern Rock logo actually looked OK on the shirt; smart and simple. Which is why i'm a bit disappointed they've pointlessly elaborated on it.

you are one very sneaky som of a bitch... in a good way though I thought you already had it.

I don't actually understand why the sponsor design needs to be changed.

Dyer's been paid £80k a week when he's been a million miles away from the first team fold, never mind backup. That's what i mean by us doing so for years. We could and did. Doubt it'd make a major difference now. And i said that he'd still be a key player, which he would be. I would just prefer to see Milner on the right than him. Nevertheless, so long as Dyer's still fit and Roeder's at the helm - he will fit him into the team somehow, even if it meant making the team worse off. Cos Roeder seems to have the nack of not dropping his best players, even if it meant fatally unbalancing the side. But if i was manager, i would prefer him not to be in my starting line-up, though am sure would still get plenty of games due to injuries/inconsistency/his versatility/and being an impact player. Agree with rest of your post.

Is it me, or is the little pinstripe trim that goes up either side and onto the sleeves gold/yellow, or white?

£80k a week for a backup striker is ludicrous, I think we've adapted to suit Dyer's wages after 8 years. It was more ludicrous paying £80k a week for a player who lies on the injury table for 18 months... Still doesn't change the fact that we cannot afford to pay £80,000 every week to a player who will not be considered first choice, whatever way you spin it. Is your general stance that Dyer should not be a first-choice player at all, then? Or should he start ahead of Owen/Martins (if they are ever fit at the same time, that is)? Sorry mate, but we can. And have done for years. I wouldn't have Dyer in my starting line-up when everyone was fit, no. How i see it, and i'm not going to guess new signings, i'd like to see us line-up like this. Given Solano --- Taylor --- Defender --- Defender Milner --- Emre --- Butt --- N'Zogbia Martins --- Owen But then Dyer can fit in anywhere, and we're bound to have injuries so he will still get a lot of games. Wil be a good impact player n'all. He'll still be a key player for us next season if he doesn't get another long term injury, but i think we'd be a better team without him if everyone was fit.

Don't agree with the bulk of your post, him being the right winger. Well what i mean is, i don't think he should be. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if it did pan out as you have described. Would make sense aswell, what with Roeder's policy of dropping Milners and N'Zogbias so as not to 'burn them out'. About this... £80k a week for a backup striker is ludicrous, I think we've adapted to suit Dyer's wages after 8 years. It was more ludicrous paying £80k a week for a player who lies on the injury table for 18 months...

I don't follow your criteria... How's that?

Seriously how sad do you think I am, lol. Sad enough to have a laughing smiley and write lol aswell...

What sort of punishment would he have actually got?

All this 'Dyer isn't a striker' stuff is confusing me. Anyone who thinks that this season, he has been more effective as a midfielder than as a striker, is off their head. He's blossomed having advanced. He's far more involved and we're far better with him up there. I think he's more than good enough as a backup striker.

Not seen enough from him in his Toon career tbh, probably best for all parties for him to go. Perhaps. One dent to the squad we could do without, though. Plus i don't think it's largely his fault. We haven't used him properly, except from a little stint where he's played with Butt. Bet he'd be great in a great team.

Fantastic stuff. Really hope the air will clear because he has the potential to be a very, very good player for us.

Ah right i see what you mean... Was just confused as it's usually been northern rock (Hope that looks right)

Not yet but he's going to.

Move the pink square down and the align the R on rock under the N on northern and i think thats as close as you can get to a prediction. Eh? So it's like: NORTHERN ROCK

Presumably, NSG, if the numbers are white - it will be in a panel. Or on a plain black back.

Beyond even the slightest argument in all fairness. Don't think it's all Sibierski's fault though - even though i do feel he's a bit shit - it's the tactics we play. Sibierski did the job he was told to do, and i'm referring to the Alkmaar game here, reasonably well. But the formula simply didn't work. I use that same argument for Ameobi aswell. Why Roeder feels inclined to enforce long ball tactics whenever there is a big man in the team, is beyond me. Despite his lack of pace, i generally feel that Sibierski is fairly decent with the ball at his feet. He can certainly pick out a pass. Dyer's just generally effective upfront anyway, i reckon. Annoyed that Sibierski is getting a two-year extension. One-year, fair enough. With a bit of luck we'll only have to use him very, very sparingly - what with the returns of Owen and Shola and the inevitable introduction of another £8-10m forward. But two years is just nonsencial, and appears to show a long term 'plan'. With that sort of player? Who'll be 35 by the time he leaves in that case? What kind of ambition does that show? Liek Gemmill says, it's that cringeworthy sentimental value creeping back into our club issues, that doesn't help us one bit (apart from rare cases such as the return of Nobby). Bringing back Pav, Clarkie, Terry Mac, even Roeder. No. You don't see any other top Premiership team doing that do you? They do what's best for the team, not what's all nice and romantic.

I've been saying all along that i don't think we need to go blowing our budget, or a significant amount of it, on another striker. Something we're so typical at doing. Next season we will have: Obafemi Martins - who will no doubt be even better that this season, providing of course no case of second season syndrome. It all depends on whether he gels with Owen, which he should do. Michael Owen - who was a world class striker before his major injuries. Those who are worried about his performances when he comes back, just look at Shearer, who like Owen, was a model professional. He had major injuries and came back still a very good striker. I'm not concerned about Owen, although it will take a couple of months, methinks. Kieron Dyer - adapted to a dangerous yet not spectacular forward as far as i am concerned. Then Shola Ameobi and Antoine Sibierski. One of which is decent enough, the other to make up the numbers. To go spending £7/8/9/10m on another striker is just senseless in my opinion - there's just no need for it. There's no problem with our strikers. The midfield, with perhaps one quality addition (i'm thining Steve Sidwell), should be a lot better next season - with both N'Zogbia and Milner developing (providing they play ), and with a bit of luck, Emre will stay. Focus our budget on the defense. Get Viduka in on a free if we're getting another striker. Martins, Owen, Dyer, Viduka, Ameobi and Sibierski. Nothing wrong with that, imo.

What department is this guy in? Or is that classified? You say that the the Northern Rock logo is embroidered... definitely a good sign. Presumably it'll be one word on top of the other, as apposed to all on the same 'line', like you see on the advertising boards?