TomYam

With you on ManU but certainly prefer ManC to Liverpool, Everton, Spurs or Chelsea.

Probably sensible as they have no money. Parachute payments and try again for promotion on a slightly stronger position financially.

Palace have a huge catchment area - the largest of the biggest 50 clubs in England. Save for one or two individual years, this is the most successful time in their history. Palace could have never been described as a big club, but the fact that they're in London and have a huge local population with no competition in their backyard means they surely have the potential to be among the biggest clubs in the country.

Both Chapel Park and Kingston Park are good neighbourhoods with decent housing stock. Desirable areas. I wouldn't really describe them as prestigious, though.

Newcastle is sorely lacking in high quality housing and neighbourhoods. Much of Gosforth and Jesmond and....well that's about it, really, within 5 miles of the centre. There are plenty of decent places to live, though, and Newcastle probably has fewer truly rough parts than many comparably sized cities in the UK.

Friends visiting Newcastle often comment on the lack of green spaces, trees, squares in the city. Lovely as Graingertown and the Quayside are, they are quite barren with very few places to linger. As you said, there is only one city centre park and that's peripheral; I'd like to see Leazes Park expanded and improved. Sunderland has a miserable centre and there is little reason why an outsider would wish to visit. Aside from a good central park it can at least compete with Newcastle on the quality of its best suburbs - Ashbrooke, Fulwell and Seaburn deserve a better centre.

I read a report on the potential support base of each of the 92 league clubs. Palacr were way ahead in top position (based on demographics within a certain radius and alternative clubs within said radius). Based on that, Crystal Palace should be the biggest football club in England.

Sir Bobby, Special KK, Wor Jackie and Joe Harvey.

Unless there were two people named James, whom both happened upon the park, and whom both happened to be saints, and the park was named after both of these beatific characters, then the correct written form is surely St.James's Park?

Of course none of us really have any idea of our owners' long term vision for the club. Time will tell. I only hope that they follow the path of ManCity's owners by investing deeply in not only the club but also in the development of its environs.

Except Leazes Terrace is Grade I listed and regarded as one if the finest residential building in the UK. It has the highest possible protection after World Heritage status. All arguments about extending the East Stand and encroaching into Leazes Terrace space and light is a wilful waste of time. Much the same can be said for St James Terrace eveb though it's only Grade II listed. Not only do all those building have Listing protection, but they also sit in a Conservation Area. Together they form Newcastle's finest collection of buildings outside Graingertown and the Tyne bridges. For those that keep mentioning building on Leazes Park, that will not happen either - and nor should it. Leazes Park is the only city centre Park and it is Grade II listed and is part if the Conservation Area that includes the aforementioned buildings in Leazes Village. Nobody would countenance moving outside the city centre so the options are: 1. Stay at St.James's Park and possibly make some (probably modest) increases to the capacity. 2. Move to Castle Leazes or other town moor land (subject to Freemen and council approval) with St.James's being laid out as part of an extended Leazes Park. 3. IF available, relocate to the Arena site. The club could then buy up parcels of land (possibly all the way to NBP) and regenerate that corner of the city extensively. I'd be happy with all 3 options, but would prefer option 3 as it would be a spectacular setting and could have a massively transformational affect on that area of the city.

That's right, basically. In the example I gave, the ball 'just about' crossing the goal line would lead to VAR disallowing a goal. You 'just about' making it out for the start of the second half should lead to an enforced forfeiture of your season ticket.

I hate that football commentators don't know the difference between 'just' and 'just about'. Eg 'the ball just about crept over the line'. For those that have been informed by football English, 'just about' is negative (ie. the ball almost crossed the line, but did not) while 'just' is positive (ie. the ball crossed the line, but almost didn't). As far as I know, only football commentators fail to see the distinction between these terms - in fact the incorrect use of 'just about' is often ised several times in one match. Grrrrr.

We're one of 4 or 5 clubs that are contenders. Should think Wolves and Forest are still favourites.

It's based on the London pronunciation. So Norwich comes before Nuucarsel.

Exactly how I saw it.

Nothing wrong with spending all your hard-earned cash on eywear and hair & beauty products instead of food.

You'd be amazed how many people in this country eat food purely for fuel or just to fill their stomachs. Quantitity over quality. It's a low priority for, probably, half our indigenous population. Not Italians, though. Tonali will learn from his mistakes.

I like it. It's colourful and different.

ManU set up a powerful marketing dept in the mid '80s. They became a dominant force off the pitch long before their successes on the pitch.

It'll be flung at any club that isn't Manchester United, Arsenal or Liverpool.

Exactly. Liverpool and Spurs in particular, Klopp and Levy, are really struggling to deal with the reality that a club that has always had the potential to be at least as big as them could soon have the financial and competitive capability to do just that. Aside from a few years in the late 90s, we haven't been able to compete financially with these clubs for 65 years. In truth Klopp is someone I'd probably live if he were managing our club; he isn't, so I don't.

From the Civic Centre to the Swing Bridge and Plummer Tower to the Discovery Museum, I guess the geographical centre of Newcastle would be Bigg Market/Grainger Street. On that basis, St.James's Park is probably abiut a 2 minute walk closer to the centre than the Arena. The Arena site 'feels' a lot more remote because it's undeveloped/underdeveloped. A stadium with football campus, infrastructural enhancements and landacaping, would transform the local economy and change people's perception of that area entirely.

A lot of folk back then were firmly against the proposals because they intended to build a new stadium AND retain the existing one (albeit with a reduced capacity) - Leazes Park would have been reduced to little more than a walkway between two huge stadia. An added problem was that Hall's reputation was such that many didn't believe a thing he said (the man was a populist à la Boris Johnson). If the Arena site is available again, then that is the best choice for relocation imo. There are limitless possibilities there and the regenerative effects for the south-west of the city would be utterly transformative.

Cultural vandalism is correct. Post-war Post-war Newcastle has had quite a history of this - and not just under T Dan Smith, but in the subsequent decades too; Handyside Arcade, for example. I've outlined my opinion before on the vexing issue of what the best stadium solution would be. We all agree it should be city centre. I believe the long term interests of the club and city would be best served by moving to a trailblazing 70,000 home. The Arena site may be a possibility once again (due to the house building plans seemingly collapsing) and Castle Leazes can be revisited. Both these options would be ideal - subject to quality of design, atmospherics, infrastructure, etc.