AyeDubbleYoo

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.

Not sure Shola is the exception, his shooting is generally awful. The last couple of decent strikes he's had have been his first in years! You're right though, we don't have anyone who looks direct for goal really... I love a striker who just looks to hit it at any opportunity. Defoe's probably the best example around.

Hope so, he hasn't played a game yet!

Are you in the squad at the moment or hoping to play your way in?

We thought the away game was going to be tough, but in the end we turned them over pretty easily. Fingers crossed for the same again. pretty easily ? Am I thinking of the wrong game?

I'm not claiming to be an authority on European football BTW, all I'm saying is that of all the football I watched during the time he played for us, Woodgate stood out as being brilliant. And yes, he ended up at Boro, but if he'd been fit he would have probably ended up at Man Utd.

I like Colo at the moment, but that's bollocks. He was one of the top defenders in Europe, excellent anticipation, tackling, everything really.

UV, so do you agree that they were appointed because they were totally different to their predecessors? Or do you think that they were appointed on merit and the difference was a coincidence? You can't on one hand say that appointing the opposite was correct because nobody would replace a manager with someone the same, and then on the other hand say that they didn't employ them because they were different. What I would say is that the managers were chosen based on a very simplistic view of what was going wrong, and generally took things too far to the other extreme.

One of the skills Souness and Allardyce share, blaming someone else for their uselessness.

Woodgate's on another level to most of the defenders we've ever had. Sadly his fitness record is so bad that the whole thing's academic. Probably the best defender I can remember seeing play for us.

Just out of interest, why? It seemed he was exactly the wrong man for a club with a recent history of good football and some success, I was amazed he was given the job - it felt like I didn't know the club at all anymore.

The problem was that each manager we appointed was the opposite to the one before, absolutely mental strategy from the board.

I also knew Allardyce was completely the wrong man for the club mind, but I see what you're saying.