TomYam

Quite agree with this assessment but, although I witnessed several games when he was our best player, his playing days with us should have ended years earlier.

James Milner reminds me of Camilla Parker-Bowles and Craig Bellamy rwminds me of my niece's unborn child.

Maybe he has a medical-dental problem that when he really lets loose with a whopping smile his teeth all fall out. He looks a little like Adam Driver - though much better looking, obvs.

Very few supporters or city hospitality businesses would be happy with a move away from the city centre. It won't happen. The most realistic options appear to be: 1. Stay put and enhance our current stadium. 2. Migrate about 300 yards north to Castle Leazes. Castle Leazes is an ancient piece of common land owned by NCCC and, essentially, the freemen who have cattle grazing rights. As far as I know there are no other protections in place and the land could be built on if the council and freemen agree exceptionally. They did so in the mid '90s and are likely to do so again. Leazes Park has national protection in the form of Listed and Conservation Area status and so must be preserved. It is our oldest and most central city park and is owned by NCCC (for citizen wellbeing) although currently maintained by Urban Green due to austerity budget cuts. Any new stadium proposals on Castle Leazes should result in an extended Leazes Park on the site of the current stadium. It could be laid out and maintained by NUFC as part of the agreement. It would be a highly impressive setting. I'd be happy with an enhanced St.James's Park - as most would - but I believe the second option would be better for the club and the city.

Our origins began in 1881 in Byker with Stanley FC/Newcastle East End. In the demise of Newcastle West End FC, the club moved into (the superior) St.James's Park in 1892 and changed the club's name to Newcastle United. Like other upwardly mobile clubs that simply had a name change or stadium move, our inception date should be when the club was formed - 1881.

So many people talking about moving the club to Leazes Park. This is completely unfeasible (as it should be) as it has national protection due to being Listed and in a Conservation Area. Building a new stadium on Castle Leazes, however, is possible because the Freemen broadly supported such a proposal in the mid '90s.

So the nimbys blocked the planned new stadium when Hall was the owner and yet you think developing St.James's is light years better? Logically, then (in your book). the nimbys were the good guys as they blocked the new stadium in favour of extending the existing stadium. A lot of these so-called nimbys were against the plans back then because the club wanted to retain St.James's Park (albeit reduced) AND build a new stadium. Concrete and steel overkill - the park would have been reduced to a green corridor between two overbearing stadia.

Possibly. Fans have a visceral wish/need to stay at St.James's Park. I totally understand that, it's just that I think the club, and especially the city, would be better off with a move to the northern side of Leazes Park lake. Sure, it's not the EXACT same footprint but, other than that, so what? The stands stadium has been renovated numerous times over the years, the pitch too. We could build the state-of-the-art stadium that this club and city deserve. A stadium that can house all our supporters, with room to grow, optimising commercial possibilities and with outstanding acoustics. We have owner that have a track record of delivering such civil engineering. Imagine accessing such a stadium via a new Leazes Park entrance at Strawberry Place? As I said before, I'd be happy enough with staying put, but I just think we'd be selling ourselves short when the aforementioned propsal could easily be realised.

I'd be happy enough with an improved and expanded St.James's Park, but we should be aiming for a minimum 65,000. I still believe the best option for both the club and city would be to move to Castle Leazes. There, we could build an optimal 72,000 stadium and, while it's not on the same historic site the club has resided at since it moved in 1892 and changed its name to Newcastle United, it'd be just a couple of hundred yards away and retain all those qualities that our present location possesses. Once the present stadium is demolished, the club could manage and maintain and extended and enhanced Leazea Park

IThat's a moot point and isn't really relevant. Specifically the discussion has been about building a new East Stand and the possibilities relating to that. I cannot believe any reasonable person could argue the current stand has more heritage value than Leazes Terrace.

Yes, they have. Since 1888, to be precise.

Ughh.

They'll be lenient with Everton as they are one of the 5 'super elite history clubs' the PL owes its existence to.

Need Sammy The Sky Blue Elephant back in the PL. Howay Cov!

I think they love it and are justifiably proud of it; they just think it's been used as an income stream and the club's focus has moved away from the needs of the football team and its fans. In short, Levy & co are more interested in making tonnes of money than winning trophies. In many ways it has ever been thus at Tottenham. When longstanding manager Keith Burkinshaw left the club over disagreements on the direction the club was taking (the first club to float on the stock market and create a marketing department), he was quoted as saying to a journalist as he marched away from the ground, " There used to be a football club over there."

-Incredible turnaround from 18 months ago. Wonderful season. -The players have been remarkable. It seems churlish to highlight a single player as at least 15 have been outstanding, but special mention for our captain who has been a model of excellence, leadersip, positivity and determination. -The fans have been magnificent - how we need a larger capacity for those that have been forced to miss out. -Soecial mention to the mods on this forum for providing us with Ukranian confetti!

...and that's what we did most of the time under Bruce (and Rafa too). Desperately poor teams devoid of all confidence tend to. It's frustrating to play against such defensively-minded teams, but we need to coach our way around it. The boots on the other foot.

Not sure either, but the great music scene explosion of the mid 1960s coincided with Liverpool's rise to the very top under Shankly. Prior to that Liverpool had been regarded as a big club, but had just been promoted after about 9 years in the Second Division and there was a renaissance with the club spending unheard of amounts of money to achieve promotion (the new owner was the Financial Director of Littlewoods Pools). Everton had been the bigger and the more established and prestigious of the two neighbours, but perhaps no longer. It was almost a clean slate for Liverpool so I guess they adopted modern totems (such as that song) and have continued with mythologies, marketed by the media, to this day.

Yes. In this country it dates back to Arsenal slipping money to get promotion in 1919 and then buying their way to success in the '30s. Since the tv deals set up by the Big 3 in the late '80s, money and politics have consumed the professional game ever increasingly. As you say, Man City are just the latest of moneybags teams - and, boy, do Liverpool and the others not like it.

I thought David Gower played cricket, nit golf?

Unfortunately Everton play Bonmuff at home for their final game - who have been on the beach for the passed couple of weeks (hardly surprising when it's a short stroll away and fine weather has finally arrived).

A family member has worked at BBC Sport for 35 years. The corridors of power there have always been packed with ManU, Arsenal and Liverpool fans - especially Liverpool.

Whateve, the great majority of fans of those clubs were dead set against the ESL. Perhaps their opinions would change if, say, Us, Aston, Brighton and Wolves squeezed them all out of CL qualification for a couple of seasons?

I remember seeing a report of a survey conducted on how the fans of ESL invitees felt about it. ManCity were least enthusuastic and Liverpool the most.