mrmojorisin75

what does it say about the managerial appointment of keegan? wasn't he supposed to be able to talk anyone to come to the club? to get us scoring goals? to make the players feel 10ft tall? hmmm....

i think an important factor the detractors of the "continental system" fail to see is continuity regardless of what is going on at first team level what is we've had? 6 academy directors in about 3 months or something stupid? the massive benefit to this system is to set something up that doesn't immediately get binned by the new manager (in the event of that happening) i see no problem with wise and this scout guy doing homework on first team standard players and presenting them to keegan for go- go no to sign, whilst simultaneously overseeing youth development and scouting etc... thought this for a long time, and although NE5 for example points out it's no guarantee of success it certainly points to a higher success rate than chopping and changing every five minutes at all levels of the club

interesting that people seem to think money is no object for us now based on the drawlings of national newspapers we all hate and don't believe until we do actually start spending money i think everyone should wait it out also think there might be an allardyce influence at work here...his thing was bargains for money and he was the first voice mort ashley will have talked to about transfers probably (yeah i know about enrique and smith but those fees are nothing to 17m for darren bent are they?) it's a positive thing in my eyes, assuming once this window is done we do sufficient reasearch to be able to turn to alternate targets instead of having our eyes ripped out

If he is holding back then Keegan won't stick around that long. I reckon thats what happend with the Woodgate deal, the fee Mort would pay, it was th wages he would'nt pay. woodgate might not be the best example on which to judge mort...if he's half an ounce of sense he'd have insisted on something in the contract re: injuries and maybe pay as you play to a degree, or compensation, that sort of thing presumably woodgate baulked at it? the next target will be the one to judge probably....

losing woodgate, be that a good or a bad thing, leads me to beg the question: can keegan identify another defender with equal or more ability? he never really managed it last time in his heyday i'm just terrified by this "established PL players" garbage we're spouting out...the best defenders you can buy are probably argies, italians and germans...that's where we need to be looking personally argies or germans for me as they'd be more likely to settle

posted similar the other day and some people ridiculed, some people agreed what i'd say is looking at our remaining fixtures if it was down to us to play our way out and get enough wins to catch someone up we'd be doomed as it is there's probably a liitle too much to be done from teams below to get themselves above us so we'll likely stay up on that basis

one of the most annoying things in football - players talking up the manager when they obviously think he's shite then the moment he's gone telling the real story couldn't be any other way really, but still irks me 'cause you always can tell when a manager is not liked/failing....

we were linked with pandev the other day and someone likened his style to beardsley...this is what we need in my opinion if we're going to keep oba and owen keegan will play 4-4-2 or more accurately if he has a beardsley type 4-4-1-1 and for me that would work best during rebuilding we can't afford a gerrard, alonso, hargreaves, carrick etc... to dictate the play from the middle (maybe more accurately we can't attract them) as players like that are gold dust...the better solution for us would be to have the likes of barton/faye/butt being solid winning the ball and giving it to a player dropping in from up front to work some magic, we've got wingers who can stretch defences and in oba/owen 2 strikers with the ability to do the same an elano if you will but more of a striker than a midfielder, as that's how i see elano - an attacking midfielder, i'd prefer a deep lying striker to that at this moment in time to recreate the cole/beardsley style partenership; one with the cheeky ability the other with the pace/finishing that's my take on things, get a CB as good as faye and stick faye in the middle with barton (if he's not in jail) or butt and spend on a "creative" striker rather than an orthodox one...

just don't see it myself....in all the areas that matter; crossing, shooting, tacking, defending zog has more threat and more ability for a midfielder dyer is arguably a better passer but that's more a difference in their style rather than dyer being way above him, dyer is a fairly average passer of the ball...i'd say zog is a more effective dribbler of the ball too although it look unorthodox he usually beats his man whereas dyer flatters to decieve a lot of the time i'd take zog everyday in my team...and we'd beat the team dyer was in if it came down to one of them deciding the game

not sure there's another player around like zog in the league right now - he's pure directness (real word?) going forward...lennons the only comparable player but presently he doesn't appear to have the goals/fitness/direct play to match zog despite playing in a much better footballing team there's no farting about from the lad, the moment he gets the ball he's trying to beat whoever is in front of him to get in a position to cross or shoot...his crosses almost always cause the opposition problems and he's a powerful, direct shot...contract his play to duff!!! as keegan says today, get a midfielder who can actually pass the ball to the lad so he doesn't have to do EVERYTHING himself and we've got something special on our hands...he could truly be a top class player on the wing, in the middle he's TOO direct a player and as others have said his passing isn't good enough to be in the middle...on the wing that doesn't matter as much

On the other hand, you could say it gave Jewell the maximum possible time to sign a replacement. Heart of gold that bloke. right enough, he's a 21st century gentleman!

premeditated act then...to have the written request ready to hand in at an away game!!!

as long as i live, as a football fan, i'll never forget him handing in a written transfer request still wearing his kit at arsenal last game of the season for wigan, after what was his breakthrough season in the PL coming from france has there been a worse act of pure horribleness (for want of a better word) by a footballer?

oops, apologies for posting the fixtures, never thought! big sams "devolution", like it...what kind of worries me is keegan talking up the players we (generalisation i'm aware) don't seem to rate for one reason or another - owen, duff, milner and i think i heard something about smith, viduka and emre this scares the shit out of me seeing as our ONLY creative source this season has been charlie...!

i'm pretty sceptical about keegan coming back as manager but i honestly believe one thing - we will see a new martins once keegan gets his hands on him he'll teach him to play the game to his strengths, use his pace/power and work the channels stretching defences...i think people forget too easily under how much of an impact his pace had on games when he was given licence to roam down the flanks, under roeder (17 goals and 5 assists in a poor team) keegan will make him dangerous and renew his confidence, he'll be worth his weight in gold once that happens fly in the ointment will be owen, if keegan banks on his fitness at the expense of developing martins we might as well sell him

2m or something and i'd take him, anything else we're getting taken for a ride as Venkman says it would end in tears, no doubt about that, but i'd rather be crying 2m tears than 9m....hopefully the appearance of keegan won't lead to us becoming mugs in the market

have to say i kind of agree with that - i've been kind of baffled by the appointment since it was made if there was no money and we needed a short-term boost to morale and style of football then yeah, keegan but if there's shedloads to spend and we're looking long-term i just can't get my head around it

Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere but it's been preying on my mind - amidst the euphoria of Keegans return the difficulty of our remaining games has been conveniently forgotten. Here's how I see it going based on our usual record at certain places and possible new signings/keegan factor etc... <snipped> Please don't post fixtures on the site please. Total - 16 points? (plus the 27 we've got is 43) Now for me some of those home wins could easily slip into draws whereas the likelihood of the away games we have left turning into wins is pretty slim. I suppose the point I'm making is I reckon it'd be nice for Kev to publicly acknowledge how hard the remainder of this season is going to be and that relegation is a very serious threat. Might be sensible to make more of an effort for his signings too, what's the hold up like? Thought we had a bottomless pit of cash? Is this an overly pessimistic assesment? I don't think so, perhaps optimistic in places given I'm assuming Keegan can get us breaking down teams at home for a change. I'll probably get slaughtered 'cause no-one seems to want to think about anything other than which superstar signing will crop up in the papers next, but we have more pressing matters at hand.

end of conversation really - the team that won the title had the best away record and overall record, shit like that doesn't happen by accident mate and it's only fucken romantic dreamers that think it does

Well the title season he started off with 4-5-1 then changed it when he bought Batty and Asprilla. We had Gillespie and Ginola on the flanks whipping balls in for Sir Les, with I think Rob Lee, Lee Clark and Beardsley sitting in the middle. i meant fergie, it's an argument about a change in his style...

Ok so please explain how has Fergies playing style changed? Exactly the same as it ever was i'm not gonna look this up as i've not got time but the way i see them having changed is that they play the same game home and away now (within reason), they never did that before...they sat back and hit teams on the break away...with cole upfront and then cantona/yorke whoever drifting about now he's going into games with rooney/tevez/ronaldo/anderson/nani all in his team...half the time he's playing one DM (hargreaves or carrick) and then just letting the rest of them play teams off the pitch, it's almost keegan-esque (the difference is his back four are good enough to not need as much protection as they would have in the past perhaps) they're far, far more attacking and expansive now than they've ever been away from home, simple as that really... And you say his style wouldn't work in todays football! Man Utd have always done that, just he's got more flair players than he had before! It's not that his style has changed well again, i'll choose to see keegan failing the first time as fairly strong evidence that he'd be unlikely to succeed this time at the same game...and bear in mind the time and money it's taken ferguson to assemble a team like he's got now... see to me a midfield of butt/keane/beckham/giggs compared to the players i've named in the last post is a massive change in style in my eyes, not yours i'm aware it was basically an orthodox 4-4-2 he played to win the title against us, are you telling me that's what they play now like?

Ok so please explain how has Fergies playing style changed? Exactly the same as it ever was i'm not gonna look this up as i've not got time but the way i see them having changed is that they play the same game home and away now (within reason), they never did that before...they sat back and hit teams on the break away...with cole upfront and then cantona/yorke whoever drifting about now he's going into games with rooney/tevez/ronaldo/anderson/nani all in his team...half the time he's playing one DM (hargreaves or carrick) and then just letting the rest of them play teams off the pitch, it's almost keegan-esque (the difference is his back four are good enough to not need as much protection as they would have in the past perhaps) they're far, far more attacking and expansive now than they've ever been away from home, simple as that really...

presume you're talking about when we lost the title right? therefore 9 at home meant we conceded 28 away from home....! As you've said, our away record is what let us down. The defense, though, was pretty good in comparison to what we've had ever since. Man Utd's defensive record that season is very close to ours, but they scored more goals away from home. right enough...precisely, a good synopsis i'll choose to see the poorer away record in terms of not having as good a defence (over simplified i'm aware but had they been better players we'd have won the title, end of story) and other people can choose to see it however they want but as you point out, compared to the shite that's been served up since they were magic

Go back and look at the league tables under KK, the season we were pipped for the title we only concedeed 9 goals at home all season! Away from home was another matter, but you would expect someone to learn from that. come on mate there's having a good defence and there's playing teams off the pitch...we won 17 games at home that season due to our attacking football that's the reason for conceding 9 to all intents and purposes Well attacking is the best form of defense! And all this bullshit about footballs changed! Has it f***! Fergies still got Man utd playing the same way from when keegan was last with us! If you're talking about the mentality of stop the other team scoring as opposed to just score more then maybe that applies to lower clubs where that's the only way they think thay can get a result. Football is only as complicated as you make it! Keep it simple and you'll win. if you think man u circa the one-nil win at SJP that more or less swung the title and the team he's putting out now are in any way similar then you need help man, seriously man u played a tight counter attacking game away from home in those days and were more expansive at home...think about how we lost that title, jesus, it writes itself...the won it on the road, if our away record had been nearly as good it was our title now they've spent so much money it doesn't matter a f***, they can go and attack 90% of teams with only hargreaves in DM and they'll still get a result those two teams aren't even close God you really don't have a clue do you? What do Man u play now? A tight counter attacking game! Same as they always have. The players are just different. completely disagree, so i guess that makes you clueless? if i disagree with what you say? Your choice to disagree but I know i'm right! funny, ditto....

Go back and look at the league tables under KK, the season we were pipped for the title we only concedeed 9 goals at home all season! Away from home was another matter, but you would expect someone to learn from that. come on mate there's having a good defence and there's playing teams off the pitch...we won 17 games at home that season due to our attacking football that's the reason for conceding 9 to all intents and purposes Well attacking is the best form of defense! And all this bullshit about footballs changed! Has it f***! Fergies still got Man utd playing the same way from when keegan was last with us! If you're talking about the mentality of stop the other team scoring as opposed to just score more then maybe that applies to lower clubs where that's the only way they think thay can get a result. Football is only as complicated as you make it! Keep it simple and you'll win. if you think man u circa the one-nil win at SJP that more or less swung the title and the team he's putting out now are in any way similar then you need help man, seriously man u played a tight counter attacking game away from home in those days and were more expansive at home...think about how we lost that title, jesus, it writes itself...the won it on the road, if our away record had been nearly as good it was our title now they've spent so much money it doesn't matter a f***, they can go and attack 90% of teams with only hargreaves in DM and they'll still get a result those two teams aren't even close Bit harsh there especially as we should have beaten Man U about 5-1 that day were it not for Schmeichel. We got 78 points too if I recall correctly - heady times that seem like a lifetime away. Are you not just a little bit intrigued or even excited at the thought of Keegan and Shearer working in tandem - our most entertaining manager and highest scoring player? as i've said and repeated i can see the arguments for shearer but i'm failing on the keegan part...perhaps as much for his sake as anything else, we'll be effectively dragging him back into football and if he fails it'll change everyone's opinion of him forever depends on whether you think he'd succeed (with shearer i know), and i'm not sure...i lost faith in the man i suppose watching him self destruct after he left us, not everyone has i can tell