Geordie_once_removed

The reality of the two players is that they are both decent bench options to run at tired defences but not good enough to be regular starters. So you start Miggy and bring on Murphy I think he'd look better as Miggy has worn out the defenders a little. Start Murphy and it's visa versa.

So Dubravka Tino - Krafthinio - Schär - Kelly Or Krafthinio - Schär - Kelly - Tino? I think I'd rather see the latter. Also Longstaff as the more holding midfielder?

For me the sacrifices the team would have had to make to accommodate Maddison isn't worth what he would have brought to the team, so I'm glad he went elsewhere. He has quality no doubt.

I've done my bit. Him and Isak are both out of my fantasy team so they should now hit form. If I had the money I'd put in Harland and triple captain him.

I'm not sure that our owners aren't interested but I do remember an interview Mohammed bin Salman did where his dismissed sportswashing claims and said he was only interested in investing in sport (perhaps Newcastle was directly mentioned, I can't remember) in order to make a profit. I think a strong argument could be made that that goal with Newcastle has been achieved and spending what is needed to actually compete at the top level is not a sound investment so PIF aren't interested in doing it. They remain interested in spending enough to maintain their position and the value their "asset" currently has, but not much more. Those comments when they took over re: winning the league etc. could easily have just been one of those things people have to say when they buy clubs and they were taken too seriously by the media. They might also not have fully released PSR constraints or exactly how much would be needed to truly compete, either way the end result would be the same. That we could ultimately be reduced to being a line in a spreadsheet detailing investment performance of PIF was one of the (many) reasons I wasn't, and still aren't, thrilled with the takeover. I could be wrong and if I am I won't mind admitting it. I'm also not convinced this is what has happened but its definitely possible.

100% on Sutton. Another graduate of the Garth 'take a weirdly strong position on something of no importance to seem interesting' Crooks school of punditry.

It's meant to be 'DULLARD punditry' . Bloody autocorrect.

I think this is the first topic I've ever started, so hopefully it isn't redundant as a similar one already exists or drop down the listings in a wave of apathy. We often moan about the poor quality of punditry so why not let our bile pour out in one convenient place! Anyway I was looking at Troy Deeney's team of the week (thank god Crooks is finally gone) and several of his choices are just weird. Two Brighton players when they drew 0-0 at home to Ipswich, Smith Rowe who was ok in a 1-1 home draw against a very average West Ham and no Forest players who just won at Anfield for the first time since 1969! On a side note why is it that the BBC finally gets rid of one lazy ill informed pundit (yes you Mark Lawrenson) only to like for like replace them with younger equally ill informed version (yes you Danny Murphy)? I haven't paid that much attention to Deeny, but my impression of his punditry is that he's very much in the mold of Crooks in that he thinks that TAKING A STAND! on something, no matter how odd or inconsequential, is the key to being an interesting pundit. Hopefully he won't have Crooks' weird obsession with players hair.

I was a bit surprised to see him get no minutes again. Taking off one of Murphy or Gordon for him in about the 80th minute to give a focal point up front and offer a bit of an outlet would have been an obvious move but Howe opted for 5 at the back with Kelly. You can't argue with the result today but I'm not convinced this was a Howe tactical masterclass. Like others I'll watch the line up against Wimbledon with added interest to see if he gets a start.

Hmmmmm. Pretty poor half. I'm a big Murphy supporter but this is exactly the type of game where he is most ineffectual. A defence dropping deep and being compact, his direct and powerful running is totally nullified and he lacks the vision and skills to unpack this kind of defense.

Nah he's Morty from Rick and Morty made real.

Perhaps the club will finally play the Saudi card. Flog him to a Saudi club for 15-20 million in January, it would release more funds for a mid season splurge which would take the pressure off the summer window a bit. Our fee to Forest as well as his past record and that he is a international starter could be used to justify "fair market value".

I hope you're right. The only tweek I would make is Gordon on the left, though if the system is working well and they are all fluidly interchanging this should be a relatively moot point.

Wilson injury return dates are like major construction completion dates. Double them and then add a few weeks for good measure.

I'm hoping for a goal and 60 more minutes in the legs of Gordon. Tino on for the second half when England are already a couple up would do nicely too.

I only saw the second half (hence the more negative observations) but based on this three things stood out. 1. Gordon still looks to be lacking fitness and the electric pace of last year seems to have gone somewhere. 2. Tino has real chance at gaining and securing the RB slot this year as TAA seems like the RB version of Maddison, as in he's a great player but needs a system built around him and I can't see the national team being able to do this. 3. Kane is looking so slow these days. The lack of a top class mobile CF is going to be the next England issue that is debated ad infinitum.

As much as I want the arrogant tool ETH to be binned off, him staying is clearly best for the greater good.

Man U losing is soooooo delicious to me. Especially when it's due to Casemiro mistakes.

I think this plus conceding goals seemingly against the run of play will be a recurring theme for Spur this season. Well at least until they sack Ange in March or so...

I missed the first 70 minutes. Can anyone give any context to Kelly and Barnes coming off? Just freshening it up?

Is it just me or does he look slower? I hope he starts for England and has a good game. I think it's confidence and a lack of a pre-season that is holding him back rather than being unsettled and unhappy here.

Can we finally accept he's got a really important role to play this year?

I think and hope Tonali starts. For me you start with your strongest team and he's in ours. Have the game plan around him coming off at 60 minutes, Longstaff did well when he came on on Wednesday. I'm excited to Bruno and Tonali and a midfield that has been designed and trained around them playing together, unlike on Wednesday where I don't think it was in the original plan to play Bruno at all.

Hummels stands out from that list but him and Burn at the back would be glacially slow.

This begs the question, just how long have you been itching to type that?