Gottlob

What is it? I can't make it out 'It sounds like we are in a library Awey Aroo Ala! It smells like we are in a library But there's no books so what's musty? It must be your entire family! Awey Aroo Ala!'

So there's three interested parties and one - the wealthy individual - has been shocked into a retreat. I'd put money then on our next owner being a poor fellow, guy or girl.

I'd be dubious about the long-term success of a Super League too, but if it happened it's all a lot of the big foreign markets would be interested in, and I think the money in the Premier League would plummet. If people are convinced that the Super League really is the best of the best, and the disparity in resources only grows across the first few seasons, then who knows. Anyway, I've had a cursory read of a few articles, and Manchester City fans seem of the opinion that Financial Fair Play was only implemented at the behest and for the benefit of the established big clubs, i.e. as an exclusionary measure meant to prevent the rise of the likes of them and PSG. According to this perspective, the reduced fines and relative lack of punishment City and PSG have faced, and the implication of behind-closed-doors agreements, owes more to the threat of lawsuits than it does to any good will, favours, etc.

For me after our second goal - Shelvey's shot and Muto's header aside - our attacking play lacked composure and conviction, Perez, Diame, Ritchie, and Kennedy all finding themselves in plenty of space but spurning their opportunities, individuals trying their luck rather than attacking with real intent as a collective. Then in the second half, especially after their first goal for which Diame was considerably to blame, our defending became very sloppy. We somehow contrived to just about deserve to lose the game against a team in utter disarray, and so far this season I think you'd struggle to point to any positives besides an ability to put men behind the ball, because contrary to last season, there's nothing special about our defence or organisation.

The original point wasn't about who has won most honours, it was a slightly absurd segue from a discussion about how Rafa keeps our goal difference down to the assertion that he's the best coach we've had in modern history. There's no doubt he's a fantastic manager with one of the best résumés in the game, and I'm delighted we have him, and of course he doesn't have anything like the resources Keegan and Robson had and works in a more difficult environment. But for all the trophies he's won he has never transformed a team in the way that Keegan and arguably Robson too transformed us: from the verge of the third tier to Premier League title contenders in Keegan's case, and from a bottom-half rabble to the Champions League places in Robson's. What does coaching mean in the original context? Is it the banal reduction of tactical competence to defensive solidity? It's much harder in my view to build a coherent side that plays attacking football. How many players have markedly improved for us under Benitez? Keegan turned relative journeymen like Lee, Beresford, Venison, Sellars, and Fox into some of the best players in the country in their respective positions, brought on youngsters like Clark, Elliott, and Watson, helped Howey in his transformation from Newcastle reserve centre forward to England international centre back, and allowed a young Andy Cole to fulfill his enormous potential. If a proper comparison isn't possible, perhaps it's best not to make one, but I find it baffling how some fans enduring our current situation can find it within themselves to downgrade the great times and the great managers of our recent past.

The goal came from Perez winning the ball then playing the sort of pass into a dangerous area that few members of our squad would even contemplate. Kennedy showed fantastic control, Rondon did well to find Yedlin although it was a basic push across goal, and Yedlin obviously deserves huge credit for making the run and for the finish.

I still think he has the most difficult role in our side, asked to be the creative fulcrum high up the pitch, a goalscorer, and more often than not the person responsible for dragging us forward and keeping the ball on the break - without a lot of support from fairly deep-lying central midfielders, our shoddy selection of strikers, and wingers who tend to keep the width. There's no doubt he loses the ball a lot, but I think even when he has a poor game he tends to be responsible for some of our best attacking moments, the odd give-and-go or break beyond the defensive line, and I'm less confident of us scoring when he's not on the pitch. If Kenedy's going to miss a few games, it's a good opportunity to try Perez alongside Muto, another player who will press high up the pitch and make more direct runs at and beyond the opposition's defence.

Forget about the momentum meter for a moment, England tonight used up the benevolent bounty of my cup of goodwill, which was full but is now sorely depleted. Competitive internationals against fancied sides come around but rarely, and this one barely came before I wished it were gone. Anyway, if the final is the objective, I don't think there's much between the two sides of the draw. Better Japan than Colombia, better the Swedes or Swiss than Brazil, and better the Argentines, French, Portuguese or Uruguayans than Spain or Croatia judging on performances so far in my opinion, then it's just the final to go!

I don't know if it's been debated much on here, but does anyone else think that with goals like that, it might be worth keeping Mitrovic on into next season? Or are there problems pertaining to his ability to fit into Rafa's system?

I understand the point and don't know how this compares with other teams, but I've just had a look and out of Switzerland's 23-man squad, only 8 players weren't born in Switzerland, while of those 8, 4 had moved to Switzerland by the time they were 5 years old.

I want my club to be in the best possible division playing against the best possible players, and that's not out of some abstract sense of elitism, because I think the skill level in the Premier League is visibly higher than in the Championship and that games more often than not are better to watch, and the sentiment is stronger as a supporter of Newcastle simply because by virtue of our stadium and support we should have the means to be reasonably competitive, and I'm old enough to remember those times when we did more than compete. The fun I had and the quality of football I watched under Keegan and Robson far surpasses anything from our two Championship campaigns. If that fun and that quality is the objective, no matter how hard it might be these days to attain, then the Championship can at best be an enjoyable blip. Also I think we need to put the fun of relegation in context. We've been lucky enough to dominate the Championship twice, with two strong groups of players and stable and likeable and capable managers who have led us straight back up. Middlesbrough fans after years of torment might well be enjoying all the goals and all the victories this season, but will the thrill remain if they're beating the same clubs next season and the following season, hovering around the play-off places but struggling to get promoted? Are the likes of Leeds, Birmingham, QPR, Norwich, even Derby and Ipswich enjoying their stints in the Championship? Surely the novelty wears off even if you're winning more often than you would be in the Premier League: I'd have thought that for any aspiring club with a decent history, the Championship swiftly becomes a slog, a sort of purgatory from which you're desperate to progress. There are other points too, for instance about the relative lack of TV coverage (a problem we barely had to endure given our stature and the briefness of our spells outside the top flight), about the novelty of new grounds and shabby officials also wearing off. I do think the Premier League comes with a unique set of frustrations, a result of the extremely fragmented nature of the division allied to all of the talk and hype: as a fan of a club outside the top six, you're constantly told how great the league is, while engaged in a fairly paltry battle just to survive. I believe that there is a moral and a practical duty towards good football. But my guess is that for fans at all levels of professional football, the game today often feels quite stagnant, with the huge discrepancies in wealth highlighted by life in the Premier League still affecting those at the lower levels, a growing barrier between players and fans, the chopping and changing of managers with little discernible progress, less interest than ever in the national team, and so on.

What a huge victory. We've been playing pretty well over the last few games, at least in periods, but our struggles in front of goal and our tendency to concede when sitting deep made it difficult to see where the next win was coming from, yet we fully deserved it today and it's such a boost not only to win but to move up to 13th. Everyone put in a shift, and the two central midfielders and Dubravka, but really the whole of the defence, were fantastic. Diame was winning everything in the midfield, and Shelvey covered so well and was so composed in possession. Even Dubravka's last-minute save showed good agility and alertness. They obviously forced a few scrambles and Sanchez had his chance, but they didn't press us nearly as much as I expected.

We had a really good spell in the first half, where we attacked with vigour and our passing was sharp and we created chances, but too many players prone to mistakes and lacking in fitness mean we can never keep that up. And the problem is that whenever the other side gain a bit of momentum, it becomes a ceaseless tide, whereby they dominate the possession and can spring attack after attack. We have nobody up front who can offer an out, the midfielders don't have the sense or the capacity to sit on the ball and play simple passes and they struggle to break the game up, and our defending is a bit of a shambles, Yedlin getting turned inside out, Clark all over the place positionally, and Dummett tucked in to form effectively a third centre back. Despite some positives I thought we were a bit fortunate, even though I think the penalty call is very difficult to justify.

What was it, £4.5 million in loan fees and £4 million in wages when we could have just recalled Sammy?

I don't think Joselu is that good at holding up the ball, and ironically I think when he's played his best for us he hasn't even provided that much of a focal point up front - when he first arrived he would drop into deeper and wider positions, and he did serve to bring Merino and Perez more into play. His all-round game has deteriorated as he's lost confidence. As a minor caveat in the whole striker debate, I had a look at some of the other teams' strikers after hearing last night that Benteke had scored only his second goal of the season. We have Joselu with 4 goals, Gayle with 3, and Perez with 2, and several other clubs haven't fared that much better. Crystal Palace have Zaha with 4, Sako with 3, and Benteke with 2; Huddersfield have Depoitre with 5 and Mounie with 4; for Stoke, Diouf has 5, Choupo-Moting 4, and Crouch 3; at Swansea Ayew has 5 and Abraham 4; West Brom have Rodriguez with 4, Rondon with 3, and Robson-Kanu 2; even Burnley only have Wood with 4, and Barnes and Vokes with 3 apiece. There's a number of teams scrapping about and switching things up without a regular goalscorer, although the figures alone don't convey chances wasted.

I'm not happy with our transfer window, which has been insufficient and at times embarrassing, and I think after a striker a central midfielder should have been another imperative, but of all the forwards linked Slimani probably leaves me most content. A signing would have been nice, but Jorgensen seemed especially risky, Sturridge is hugely talented but compromised by injuries and I'm not sure how much he can stretch a defence, the same sort of thing is true for Ings who was linked at the start of the window, while Slimani can at least hold the ball up and offers finishing plus an aerial threat. Our style of play, to the extent that we have one, might suit him better than Leicester's swift counter-attacks, and hopefully he'll thrive being the main man up front.

Since Rafa obviously doesn't rate him, at this stage we might be best using Mitrovic to get onto this Arsenal-Chelsea-Dortmund striker roundabout. If we can get Mitrovic's name involved, it means we will end up with one of Aubameyang, Batshuayi, or Giroud, who might not be Sturridge or Jorgensen, our first choices, but I honestly think that any of the three would improve us, even if it was only for half a season.

With that in mind what makes you think we'd sign someone better than Mitro for the price we sell him at, if it's to someone in this division? Especially when in order to improve the squad we're gonna have to look at teams in the higher echelons across Europe, most of which will be aiming for cups and league titles and will require their top goalscorers. We are unlikely to spend more than what we sell as the history of Mike Ashleys tenure here suggests. So what would be the benefit of selling him to fellow relegation candidates? If we don't sell and improve upon him (or worse don't replace him) we've weakened our sporting hand and short term strengthened Mike Ashleys financial hand. We've lost another saleable asset that if a takeover occurred at the end of the season could be sold and add to the investment that would possibly occur. To return to strengthening Ashleys hand financially, if the sporting hand is weakened enough for relegation to happen then it would force him to lose a lot of money or keep us. Theres virtually no realistic positive outcome of us selling Mitro to a relegation rival. Not unless something is done out of the current norm, as far as the club is ran. We are in a relegation fight as things stand, Rafa isn't playing Mitrovic, therefore Mitrovic isn't adding to our 'sporting hand', isn't contributing anything for us on the pitch. The only purported interest in the player has come from within the Premier League, with Premier League clubs most likely to have the funds to spend in the region of the £15 million which seems to be at least approaching our valuation. And my feeling is that for that sort of fee, it should be eminently possible to find a forward capable of contributing something rather than nothing. Clubs aiming for cups and titles in the higher echelons of Europe have nothing to do with it. Who is suggesting that our squad is so strong, that our strikers are performing to such a high standard, that only a player from one of Europe's top clubs would constitute an improvement on what little we've got? Unless Rafa is convinced that the money won't be reinvested - which hasn't been the practise so far during his reign - he should have enough conviction, in his judgement of the player and in his scouting prowess, to move Mitrovic on and to bring in a replacement who can help us over the coming months.

Whether he doesn't rate him or feels he can't trust him - and I can certainly understand both perspectives - if Rafa isn't willing to play Mitrovic he should have enough conviction to sell him and find a more suitable replacement. If we're not willing to sell players to our Premier League rivals, we're going to struggle to sell anyone for a substantial fee. And as I posted before, Rafa has at least been allowed to spend, more or less, what he has brought in via player sales, spending around £100 million and selling players for about £10 million more than that.

Who other than a Premier League rival is going to possess the inclination and the resources to spend £15 million on Mitrovic? And as much as we are right to bemoan the lack of investment in the squad, Benitez has broadly been allowed to spend the money he has brought in via player sales: on the basis of my last check, he's spent around £100 million and sold players for about £10 million more than that. I don't dislike Mitrovic, but if a bid has been made it's an easy decision in my opinion for one of the most peripheral members of our first team squad.

I'm no big fan of our squad, but I look at Stoke with their array of impotent strikers and Adam and Cameron in midfield, or at Brighton and Bournemouth earlier today, and I think our squad can compete with a good number at the lower end of the league.

Holy crap, I had no idea his presence impacts us so much. He hasn't started eight of our games this season, and two of those were against Manchester United and Manchester City, but I still think he's an important player for us despite his faults, whose work during our good run earlier in the season went a little overlooked.

That's 18 of our 22 points this season from games which Perez started, 1.29 points per game from those he's started, 0.5 points per game when he has not.

I wasn't dismayed nor overly enthralled with today's lineup: I would have played Perez behind a striker with Atsu and Murphy either side, and I'm no fan of Shelvey but nobody has really staked a claim for either of those central midfield positions. The important thing is that we won, and as others have suggested, after the game against West Ham and two imperfect, fairly stolid, but still solid performances against Manchester City and Brighton, it does feel now as though we've turned the corner following a poor couple of months. We're right back in the pack and should have regained a bit of confidence. I do think that after Lascelles, Perez should be one of the first names on the teamsheet, and that Murphy is really adding pace and directness which, complemented by Atsu, makes us much more difficult to defend against. Again I'd want a combative central midfielder and a striker to add to that, and then we can look at the other positions like the number 10 role and left-back.

Shearer can be one of your favourites, but to place him above all else as your outright favourite quite frankly beggars belief.