David Kelly

What is the penalty for not complying? If it's a six point deduction, we'd be better off just taking that rather than selling Bruno. I mean since he's signed, how many games have we won when he's not played?

I can't think of too many non premier league clubs who are spending £40m on a untested kid other than Real, Barca, Bayern and PSG.

He couldn't hit a barn door for most of last season until the Burnley keeper kicked one off his arse. I'm not saying he's shit by any means but age is the only thing he has over Wilson. He's not at the level Wilson has been for us.

I did read that Lyon were willing to pay what we want. Seems unlikely they can afford to spunk £30-£40m on a pretty untried 19 yr old like.

Nothing about DLC's last three seasons would suggest he's better than Wilson. He's only ever had two good seasons. What from I can tell, even Everton supporters don't massively rate him.

Yeah I was thinking that too. In that sense and others, I'm hoping Minteh ends up elsewhere.

Exactly. Regardless of any deals for Wilson and DCL, we need an additional striker.

I get all of the PSR stuff, but there's still nothing about signing DCL as a replacement for Wilson that looks good to me. He might prove otherwise, but at this stage I can't see how it's anything but a downgrade.

I get what you're saying there, but even then we're essentially taking a risk that we took when we had no money or prospects to hope that we get someone who can replicate what Wilson has done for us. Surely there are better options out there, especially if we're talking £35m? And yes, Wilson or DCL, is not enough backup for Isak alone. We need a 3rd choice striker too. I'm under no allusions that we can get players like Sesko to come and play as backup, but Gordon/Joelinton/academy players aren't up the job. Of course we're very early into the transfer window so we may well have a plan for this. But again I'd prefer not to be replacing a crock with a crock.

I totally get your general point but the specific about DCL is way off imo. In the last three seasons he has managed 14 league goals and 5 assists from 66 games. In the same time Wilson has manage 35 goals and 6 assists from 69 games. So we'd be spending £35m (if reports are true) to get a younger, less effective, just as injury prone player. I'd have no problems bringing him in with Wilson and Isak but to replace either of them weakens us as far as I can see. I can see how the signing of Cook and some of the other, not incredibly exciting, signings that have been talked about improve the base level of our squad without necessarily improving our first team and with a low outlay they potentially allow us to spend big on the area's of the team that are weakest. But spending £35m on a striker who's worse than what we have doesn't make sense to me.

Hard to think of a name that would sound good with that accent either mind.

New messiah incoming. Apparently they're on the verge of appointing the bloke who has just got Lorient relegated.

I think he's a very prudent signing. Hopefully better player than Burn, certainly better than Dummett on a free transfer which allows us the freedom to make a £60m bid for Olise (which unfortunately I can't see happening but still it shows we have the funds). What's not to be willy wave about?

As long as it's not R.Kelly.

Aye that's fair enough. I was thinking more conversationally that we wouldn't use it so yes, totally agree with NJS. I also agree with NJS about the songs, but then again we can barely ever get a decent rendition of The Blaydon Races going at home or away matches these days which is far more concerning.

Would you have said something like "did you see how united played on Saturday"? Not being old enough to be in pubs til the mid 90's, I might have missed the boat on that time but I honestly can't remember such talk. Tbh I would just expect someone to say did you see the match and everyone would assume you were talking about us, I don't think you have to really refer to us by any name most of the time if you're in the city. I suppose with the sheer volume of matches on the telly these days (not even counting the fact that you can see every match if you have the right access to streams) it's more possible people could be unsure which match you meant.

In what context? I'm not doubting you here btw, I'm just interested in how you would do it. I honestly can't think of a time when I've heard anyone say "I'm off to see united today" or something like that. I suppose I could envisage someone saying "for fucks sake united come on" or something like that I suppose. I certainly would never dream of saying that I supported united if someone asked me. And not just because I would expect them to assume I meant Manchester. Newcastle would be the name that always immediately came to mind.

Do any of us actually refer to us as United? Obviously there's the United chant at the matches but I don't think I've ever heard anyone from here or anywhere else refer to us as United. I mean it annoys me a much as the next person when the press and sky pundits refer to Man U as United as if they're the only one, but I think the reality is, we don't use it for ourselves either.

Can't see us letting Ashworth take him to Manure. I'd hate to see him go to Liverpool but lets be honest, they're way ahead of us at the moment. What I wouldn't want is to see him go to someone that he helps move miles clear of us. PSG would be the preference.

It certainly suggests he should have had the operation earlier in the season. Oh well at least this means he's one of our star players that won't be sold this summer! This makes me think even more now that Bruno will have to be sold so that we can spend some money on the squad (real money I mean).

Come on, give us a clue.

Cue Ashworth taking up the role in Manchester next week after we've accepted a couple of mil compensation.

I think we're seeing the effects of having Gordon on the left and not having Willock for basically the whole season and missing Joelinton a bit too. We're not the defensive unit we were (Pope's injury is hurting us too) and Burn in particular seems to be suffering from it. The change in how we are going about things in an attacking sense has certainly weakened us defensively. Howe still seems to be struggling to find the right balance, we're having less games where it looks like we can't score but we're not keeping the clean sheets that we were, particularly earlier on last term. And I can't see that changing this season without having Jo or Tonali back. Even when they are, it still seems to me that we need a proper number 6 instead of playing a flat midfield 3.

I think the 4th innings was a pretty good effort, Root aside, and don't think we can have too many complaints about it (other than the iffy ball tracking for Crawley's dismissal). It's the first innings for both teams where it went wrong. We were a good hundred runs short of where we should have been looking to get to. I suppose we have to consider the inexperience of our attack too mind. The three spinners have done incredibly well when you think about how little first class cricket they have under their belts. Obviously Leach's injury has hurt us (again) but you have to wonder whether it would have been better to take another more experienced spinner (I know we're not exactly overstocked with them but surely Liam Dawson was an option) or play Wood/Robinson along with two spinners and Root.

Missed opportunity against them without Kohli, Jadeja, Raul & Shami. I still don't understand the way Root is playing. He was the one player who didn't need to change anything about the way he played to meet Stokes and McCullum's MO but he seems to have just gone too far. He should have been the player who won the match for us but instead he was our lowest scoring batsman in the match.