Jonas

Mackems love a bit of conveniently forgetting context. If you have to go back 31-33years to illustrate that a club isn't well supported it at very least suggests for the last 31years it has been. Likewise not applying that standard to other clubs gates which were all lower on account of it being 31years ago and different times: Leeds won the league average 28k. Liverpool 35k. Arsenal 31k. Chelsea 18k. Aston Villa 24k. Spurs 27k Everton 23k West Ham 21k, Celtic25k all in the top flight whilst we were bottom of Division2. So none of them are massive by that logic. Sunderland averaged 18k so their average was the same as our selectively low terrible gates.

Makes no difference. Surface level change of scenery but the problems remain but there'll be a load of even more pointless conjecture about it that I just can't get into. Its like managerial changes under Ashley. Just cant bring myself to care cos its all bullshit.

Another journalist that wont be watching the World Cup. I take it its just going to be live feed, no commentary and no studio stuff at this point. Wonder what he thought when France collected the World Cup from Putin.

Some European team that's done us over like Bastia in the 70s probably. Sad Mackem Bastias has a nice ring to it

'Open the door, get on the floor, Miggy chipped the Dinosaur"

Brutal isn't it after a generation of melancholic meaninglessness

Urge caution. An early goal would be a delight, prevent them from spoiling. Almost inevitable time wasting instruction will be deployed whether the keeper wants the bother or not. They'll not all mind doing their thing all game. Were not free scoring and limited despite what Jerkon says.

Everybody fit we'd threaten it. Think its amazing were where we are with some of what we have. So still think its just beyond us right now

I felt that way. Every new one that comes along inflates things. Gave up completely with Man City though. But without these clubs the premier league would have been won by Manchester United and Arsenal every year since its inception with Blackburn (Bankrolled themselves), Leicester and Liverpool popping in once and that was even worse for the game. It was getting like Scotland. We were 3rd behind them and knew we couldn't overhaul them so what chance did anybody else have? That's what they all said to me about Chelsea. Not saying so much now the same people.

No biggie that he was below par. Should be expected. Every good team we've had has had good players go to places like that and not be their usual selves cos the opponent are better than usual. Never seen Beardsley play well there.

Worst thing about it is you fear it can undo so much good work

Think Anderson would be ASM up for it levels of up for it if we start him, a livewire of a difference maker. Not ruling a start out.

Shows the transition exactly. Very well organised, effort is there, just not got the forwards yet to match that and capitalise on it. Not fussed Bruno was quiet, its a different game to home games were players like him can run it, just want him to be part of the effort in these games.

Good away performance, the sort they say 'did a job on' about. Cos it came up in the week, it was Blackburn-esque (circa 93-95). Go away to another top team and show were a match, very organised. A late chance is part of the show, doesn't diminish the overall

When they found out there was five letters in his surname and forename it was their eureka moment, finally breaking through the mental creative block at the group pow wow. I like the little banner at the bottom for its lack of originality (wonder where they got the idea of that from) and for its tiny size so they both of which represent mackemhood perfectly.

Doing big flags and flag displays well is too Mag-like. Doing them in tin-pot presto-bag kind of way is more fitting, has that distinctly mackem hallmark about it

Was buzzing, but tempered now. Got a feel of playing them in 94/95, we were unbeaten and top of the league, so of course the day before Andy Cole was injured with our other striker Kitson injured the week before about it.

On football focus Jason Mohammed went to the full-time with 'this week West Brom got rid of Steve Bruce, you can guess what happened next' I'm sure this wasn't a dig at Bruce because the cabbage patch kid Alex has sat in that studio as well as other Bruce cronies like Dublin and Pallister and Jason himself wouldn't shut up about 'Aston Villa on the play-off charge' when Bruce was there, whenever they went ahead and invariably drew or lost and didn't make the play-offs. Think it was meant as 'can you believe football, Bruce can't catch a break, he was there all season, won once and now he's gone his players win' - like its nothing to do with management

'all you can ask' 'cant ask any more' 'cant question their effort'

Remember we got booed off after drawing 0-0 with Derby, first time in years that had happened. Fans were getting testy with the boring football and the media brought it up, which I was glad about, put a bit of pressure on the manager and the club. Dalglish claimed for some reason that we were actually booing Eranio who had been sent-off about 10' from time. Was infuriating after years of Keegan's honesty.

Sir Bobby was the first choice, the perfect choice and fair play to the club that's what they went for. Dalglish made sense but I personally hated Blackburn. They were the Man City (outbid Man United for players, broke the transfer record twice, this Leicester were like Blackburn is extremely revisionist) of the day and I resented on top that they played really dull negative football. Though they did win a lot. I expected Ginola out Pires/Collins in, Pav out Flowers in, and defenders like Colin Hendry. Tino would be gone. Pragmatic stuff like that. Would have been a bitter pill to swallow but if it took us that extra step so be it but it was so fine a margin. I was predisposed to not wanting him for those reasons, doubted it would work because of the brand of football, and didn't go to his unveiling when a mate suggested it (would have been hypocritical) but didn't expect even in my worst nightmares the failure that followed. Kinnear was a dark horse at the time mind, after doing really well at Wimbledon. Brian Little, Arie Haan and Johan Cruyff. Didn't see anything but Sir Bobby working so he wasn't a bad choice. His media mates pushed for him too. Our first taste of that.

Dalglish dropped and fell out with Ginola and obviously couldn't stand flair players and Gullit sold Batty. But Ferdinand yes. Though there is no defence for his attempts at replacing Ferdinand, for more money, with Andersson and Guivarch. Don't disagree with the estimation of the good signings but feel it has to be said again that Solano never played for him, Hamman played three times and Speed never played well under him. The latter weren't finds or anything. He'd a lot more money than people think. Easily in the top few in the league and we dropped from title challenges to having a relegation 6pointer against Barnsley at Easter. Undefendable for me.

They've only ever known misery by sane people's standards. Misery interspersed with once in a blue moon finishing above the Mags and now finally getting to win some derbies after being dominated most if not all of their lives which is the height of glory and of their ambitions. Which in itself is an indictment of leading miserable existences. Luckily for them they're too ignorant to realise that.

Already got vibes as if its tomorrow. Howay!!

Kinnear did a good job at Wimbledon. The likes of which Carver could never have got close to achieving. No 'what a character' element to him either. That reminds me, didn't Gullit go out with Cruyff's niece? Was talk of Chelsea signing the offspring though it all sounds very Daily Star. Doesn't work like that, every other Gullit and Cruyff in history has been shit at football and I'm not discounting Jordi.