AyeDubbleYoo

Stoke are looking stronger all the time though, aren't they? I think it's a big error to assume that football is gradually sorting itself into having the most attractive teams at the top and the rest below them. Maybe to a certain extent (i.e. the top 6 or so), but not generally.

It's not even about the PL though is it? We're getting routinely outplayed in the CCC. As Shak says if he can't do it now how in hell is he going to do it in a league that is light years ahead in terms of pace, power and technique?? If you're talking about performances then I can't disagree with you, it's obvious that we concede a lot of possession and often get overrun in midfield. But we're top of the league and picking up points fairly consistently. We look on course for promotion, I can see why Hughton won't change things.

I hadn't got that impression. He falls over a lot, but that's because he tries to run through people.

You could argue that the Premiership is mostly made up of teams who play 'bad football'. Not as bad as us, but they're all not Arsenal. I want us to play better football as well, but most of all I want us to get promoted. At the end of the day, you can't argue with the results we've acheived with a very average squad of players.

Shearer also had great touch, passing, crossing, shooting and decent pace (before injury) - think he had most of the talent you need to be a world-class player. It might have been achieved through a load of graft on the training ground, not sure if that makes a difference.

On a serious note though, it's part and parcel of the game that injuries occur to players and during that time they still get paid. If they had doubts about Dyer's fitness (which they should have) and/or they couldn't afford him, they shouldn't have offered him such a big contract in the first place. Would be interesting if footballers had to claim statutory sick pay after a certain number of months out like normal people!

I always thought Lua Lua was going to be immense, but he never quite made it. Not sure if it's wasted talent or just lack of talent.

You're probably right, his personality is probably his biggest weakness.

Added. And I didn't reset the vote counter. YES. Not sure it's worth adding him, but just a thought. I'd go for Ferdinand, Terry, Brown, maybe Lescott. Think Brown is a good option because he's fairly robust and pretty versatile. I'd also probably have Micah Richards in the squad, whether he'd be in as a RB or whatever I don't know.

Couldn't take King or Woodgate really, don't think you can risk it with their fitness levels. We actually don't have that many world class CBs. No shouts for Sol Campbell?

You could argue about players like Le Tissier and Merson, if they could be arsed to do physical training they would've been truly world class. In modern times players like Andy Reid and David Dunn, although they're both doing better recently.

I would tell Sullivan to fuck off, that's ludicrous. Although obviously when his contract runs out he's done for.

This is basically the problem - although I wouldn't write him off based on such a short spell in charge, we've got no reason at all to think he'll be any good. He cares about the club obviously, that's in his favour.

It's almost pointless interviewing footballers, you could write the quotations beforehand.

Spurs kit tonight has FOUR puma logos on it, that's just mental.

Rooney would go first on the teamsheet of pretty much every team in the world. In fact, he's our main (if not only) chance of winning the World Cup.

Have to disagree. You say it isn't a factor in judging a sale, but that's merely your opinion as to what factors contribute to making a good or bad sale decision. I don't see why that shouldn't be a factor. Keegan for example stated on several occassions that he should be judged on the sale of a key player by looking at the replacements (Cole, Milner spring to mind). Woodgate wasn't sold to ease or repay any debts given how the money was stated to be available and then spent in the next window iirc on Boumsong/Babayaro and Amdy Faye. I think it's reasonable to expect that unless the sale is forced due to debts or a poor financial position, key players, even flawed ones, should only be sold with an adequate replacement plan in place. More so when the club is in decline and starting to struggle, as it was during Woodgate's sale, because the risk then becomes that the club is no longer in a position to attract suitably high calibre replacements. So a plan (with potential replacements already identified/scouted/lined up) is paramount for selling key players, otherwise it's just a case of taking a stab in the dark and risking much of what has been built up for a quick buck, and if that plan is faulty, then I see no issues with claiming the sale was flawed and shouldn't have gone ahead. You got me there. Obviously if selling players leaves a weakness in the squad then that should be addressed, but that's a football decision rather than a financial one.

All good points, I've just got an irrational hatred towards Sam - never thought he would fit in at Newcastle.

The only interesting thing about him is that he used to play for us.

No reason to take Walcott anyway at the moment, he's hardly played.

I don't hate Shola, it's just struck me how bad his shooting is. I'm not talking about 'finishing' by the way, I'm talking about striking the ball hard - that's what the original point was.

Rooney, Defoe, Crouch and one other... depends on form but not sure who it will be at the moment.

How the money's spent isn't a factor in whether a sale was the right move. It all goes on the bottom line at the end of the day. We would prefer the money for transfers, but that's not how it works.

:suicide:

Skimmed it, I agree with most of it except Allardyce, he was a disaster waiting to happen. Very surprised that if you objected to Souness you were in favour of Sam... guess he had a better recent past in terms of results though.