Jackie Broon

Despite he's inadequacies as an all round player, what he does What Nolan did clearly bring (other than the ability to score important goals) is a galvanizing force in the dressing room that for the past two seasons has helped the team to, on the whole, perform at a level greater than the sum of its parts. Without that we wouldn't be playing in the premier league next season, we wouldn't have been playing it this last season for that matter. In getting rid of the players that clearly hold the dressing room together Ashley is taking a massive risk. We're not good enough to get away with having a squad that's collection of individuals with a poor spirit in this league.

There are no easy games in this league and the team spirit that has papered over the cracks for the past two seasons is clearly fucked. We're in deep trouble.

Probably not. But, who gives a fuck?! a) Only a small proportion of it will be reinvested in the squad (just like the Milner money) b) What is reinvested will be spent on either mediocre or unproven players who are at least as likely to flop as succeed, because we can not attract the top players. c) A proper Geordie No.9 fell in our lap. That will probably never happen again in our lifetimes. No amount of money is enough to compensate for that loss.

If we go down now, we've given away a player that could've been our No.9 for the next decade for nothing. We've gone full circle now, back to 1988. I just feel empty.

If he does well there, he'll fuck off somewhere better for champions league football within a couple of years. They may be one step ahead of us, but they're still just a fucking stepping stone like the rest of us outside of the big four.

He's just swapping one has been on the road to nowhere club for a marginally better has been on the road to nowhere club.

Spot on. The point a lot of people seem to be missing.

What would you spend it on? It might as well be fucking monopoly money. No player worth buying would sign for us!

No player shouldn't be kept here against their will! It's a huge fee indeed and it's way much more than any player is really worth in our current squad £35m may seem a lot. But... Likelihood is we'll be panicked into shelling out 6-7m on someone like Carlton Cole (which in reality will be more like 10m when you add in singing on and agent's fees). So that's the extra £10m or so we get for selling him now rather than in the summer down the shitter straight away, on a player who has every chance of ending up a surplus to requirements drain on the wage bill. Then we've got £25m to spend. On what? Proven, top quality players and the best youngsters (like Carroll) just wouldn't sign for us due to our lack of ambition, status our wage structure and geographical location. So we're left with either second rate or unproven players, most of who have every chance of ending up a surplus to requirements drain on the wage bill. So we'll have swapped Carroll for maybe the equivalent of Carlton Cole, Gutiérrez, Xisco and, if we get lucky, maybe a Tioté and a significantly higher wage bill. Does that represent good economic sense? That's not even factoring in what happens if we get relegated! If a player like Carroll falls into the lap of a club like Newcastle we must do everything we can to keep him and build a team around him, because there is no way we can replace him, his equivalent just wouldn't come here. I don't believe we have. Transfer request or not, he's a Geordie, he's not going to go on strike if we say 'you're not going anywhere' or even wait until the summer.

You're incredibly naive and ignorant, or stupid, if you can't see the difference in connotations of being sexist towards women and men. For some reason it's become very fashionable recently to make all these sexist jokes on facebook recently. Sexism is sexism mate, don't really care about the connotations, all sexism is wrong. Just like racism is racism regardless of who it is towards and what form it is in. I find everything funny, particularly things which are controversial, so sexist and racist jokes don't bother me. Who said I couldn't see the difference in the connotations anyway? You're obviously very ignorant yourself, if you think that just because someone has an opposing opinion they're stupid. I didn't say you were stupid, I said you were ignorant or stupid, there is a difference. Racism and sexism is all about connotations. No word is inherently offensive, it's the connotations. I'm not saying it's okay to be racist/sexist to white males, but making a remark about a black female is a whole different thing. I'm not sensitive to racism or sexism towards me, but my 'group' has always been in a dominant position, doing the subjugating. A remark to me doesn't trigger thoughts of generations of being enslaved, objectified, lynched, treated like an animal and the still-existent residue of these practices and thoughts. Nail on the head! Well said.

You're making the incorrect assumption that we're not owned and run by fucking idiots.

People calling Stevenage c***s because they are c***s.

Also, it wasn't quite the howler people are making it out to be; just a misjudgement under pressure that was ruthlessly punished. Nine times out of ten that wouldn't have resulted in a goal.

Or they like all expenses paid holidays in Abu Dhabi.

First time around I argued with this but considering every f***er knew it was coming again and we've had a couple of weeks to prepare it's just a joke. The cost of mitigating against this type of weather isn't worth it for just a few days a year, for both government and individuals. Especially when Councils are being forced into apocalyptic cuts in staff and services.

A barrage of vitriol directed towards Ashley and his mates is more likely to fire the players up than stop them performing. As it did on a few occasions early last season.

He waited like a snake in the grass for the blip that would give that fat cockney bastard mate of his the excuse to hand him the job. He's a classless cunt and should be lynched along with his mate the second he sets foot in St James'.

When we were drawn away against them in 97ish there were concerns about their ground's ability to host the tie. We offered to host it as St James' with them getting the gate, or something. Behaved like c**ts and made out that we were a big club trying to push poor little Stevenage around.

Sorry, all my fault we're losing, I forgot to remind my girlfriend that we're playing and she wasn't wearing the black and white striped underwear that was instrumental in our last three wins. She's got it on now, despite protests that it's dirty and will 'probably give her a yeast infection'. Plenty of time for it to do its magic.

Has to be Barcelona. Never experienced an atmosphere like that before or since, the Barca players were visibly shaken by the intensity of it.

He's been badly treated; but certainly not by anyone in the North East!

I foresee an all expenses paid luxury holiday in Abu Dhabi for a Mr M. Atkinson.

Perch is a f***ing liability. Way out of his depth at this level.

Good. Last thing we ought to be doing is trying to close down revenue streams for the club. How much money do you see this bringing in? No idea. Have a guess. Why? I haven't got a clue what this kind of advertising might be worth to the right company. Obviously the club thinks it's enough to be worth the bother. As long as we're still making a loss, whatever comes in, is good. It is going to be Sports Direct based on what is included in the application. Therefore sponsorship won't get sold to anyone. Nah, that'll just be a placeholder. They're obviously hoping to sell the space. I look at these applications every day, and this is for a fixed design. Show us (or quote us or whatever) the bit that says that. I can see why planning permission is needed to erect a billboard. I'd need some convincing that every design it was used to display required a further, separate permission. It is in the application form. They are applying for red and blue letters on a white background for each one. The pictorial one would have to be agreed with the council as a planning condition. You know Argos changed all their signs recently for a modern design? These all had to have new planning permissions and were verysimilar to the planning application we see here. OK. I'll take your word for it. Seems weird, though. How could they ever sell the naming rights, if use of the buying company's logo was subject to subsequent planning permission? In determining advertisement consent applications the local authority can only take into account 'amenity' and 'public safety'. The content of the sign can not be considered. So, unless for reasons of amenity or public safety a condition restricting the detailed design of the sign has been attached to the consent (which I have personally never seen done), and as long as the size/illumination of the sign does not change, the content can be changed without consent.

There must be a few zeros added to his value after today. You can say what you like about his general play but those goals were quality. His general play has been top notch too. His touch, passing, movement have come on leaps and bounds in the last 9 months, he wins everything in the air and he even seems to have developed a decent turn of pace!