OTF

I think the general consensus here is that by some small miracle we actually do have a solid nucleus. Where the difference of opinion is is whether the foundation will be built upon, or whether the key structural components will be gutted and sold to be replaced with inferior versions. If only we could fast forward in time to the end of August there should be a general consensus. Of course this will never happen because both sides of the camp will likely find something to cling to regardless of the outcomes.

@ N'Zogbia at left back. He was a rubbish left back, always out of position, couldn't tackle and repeatedly failed to clear the ball. All stands to reason because you can't just decide someone is a left back because they're left footed. Has never had an ounce of defending in him and never will.

Krul has a long time to mature and get the errors out of his game. He's a long way off being at his peak as a keeper. Is a good shot stopper, which is a great fundamental to build on. With his height and reach he should be able to control the area well but obviously needs some improvement in his decision making. What you have to hope is that he will learn from each mistake he makes. If that's the case then he should have learnt quite a bit this season

The more Pardew says the more worrying it becomes. When has he ever come out and said something that has turned out to be accurate regarding player contracts?

'twas a good cross though. Had good pace on it despite the lack of backlift.

Saylor. Start your lap of honour now son!

D'oh. Forget the rest of the game it's time for a donkey race...

CT dilemma. Lua Lua on, but at the expense of Ferguson who picked up a knock.

Either Drogba has lost a fair bit of weight or his head has put a fair bit on.

We're moving the ball around well while they're busy chucking toys out of the pram. Good cover from Enrique there. As much as they're not doing much they have the ability to put a goal on in the twinkle of an eye.

Anonymous start from Ferguson, but 10-15 minutes in he's started to become more involved and doesn't look out of place. Credit to him. Jonas has been handy in this role. Plenty of running in him as usual and he's already under their skin. Lovenkrands is covering plenty of ground but many of his runs are a waste of energy. We've not been outplayed, though their goal was vastly superior to ours. Doesn't matter though cause they're worth the same where it matters. Game has had some classic Ameobi moments in there which is great- like where he somehow beat two defenders with a delicate combination of grace and clumsiness.

Our future depends on it.

Krul, Simpson, Saylor, Colo, Enrique, Raylor, Barton, Jonas, Ferguson, Lovenkrands, Ameobi Can only assume that JOnas will play on the right with Ferguson on the left and Barton partnering Raylor in the middle.

Don't particularly love him but can see the value in his play when he's one of a kind in our side. I agree that he can be incredibly frustrating. A big part of that is because he often does really well to get into dangerous positions and then makes the wrong decision at the critical moment. The fact that most players wouldn't have been able to get into that position doesn't make it less frustrating but when you're operating at the end of the market that our owners currently are the facts are that you're never going to get a perfect all rounded player. Personally I don't know how well he'd be suited to Italian football, but who can blame him for wanting to play in the best three leagues in the World. It would be a pretty nice feather to hang in his mask upon retirement.

You better have something more 'powerful' than a tea with the old dear if you want to 'experience' that outcome. It will be an interesting side that we put out there, and it will be interesting to see what Chelsea's mind-set will be. It's unfortunate that a lot of our more promising young players are unavailable through injury because this would be the perfect time to get them on the pitch.

CT mate, you have to appreciate that a lot of the time Jonas' end product is a corner, or a free-kick earned. You're generally going to get better delivery from a set-piece than you will from an in-play cross. Even still his crossing is not as bad as is generally made out. He's provided 4 direct assists this season, and countless indirectly through free-kicks and corners, plus his 2 goals. His real value is as a player who cany run at defenders and pull opposing sides out of shape making more space for our other players and maintaining width that we're otherwise lacking. If you look at our side he's basically the only player who can break out of our own half on the dribble and beat defenders. There's plenty more value in that than the average Joe supporter realises. I don't think some people understand what it would cost to replace him, especially when you consider his excellent injury record. There's zillions of players out there who may be able to technically cross more consistently but if they never get in the position to do so, what's the point? You make out like it's a done deal him leaving, but the truth of the matter is if the club showed any ambition and retained players like Enrique then it would be no problems getting Jonas to sign a new deal. The fact that he's even coming out in the media is testament to the precarious situation the club is in in terms of player retainment much more than it is a sign that Jonas simply wants to go.

You're telling me Arsenal, Man U, Spurs pay their wages out of profits from outgoing players? Simply not true. To employ this tactic you would need to continually be able to buy players for a lot lower than you subsequently sell them for whilst never spending substanciual amounts of money (and that's just to make a contribution to wages, never to actually cover the entire amount). You need to have a net profit from player movements each season. From the table indicating the net spend on transfers over the past five years Tottenham are third on the list having shelled out almost £100m net in their push to improve the status of their club (£20m net per season). They've gone some way to achieving it with an excellent run in the champions league this season. Obviously you can't pay wages with -£100m. That sort of spend is not sustainable, so I'm not suggesting we have anything like that. Manchester United despite the gargantuan sale of Ronaldo and the fact that they've bought very few high profile players since then still had a net spend of £2.69m. Not a great deal for a club of that size with such a high turnover, but considering their financial position and the amount of money spent on interest payments alone they've been somewhat fortunate that they've only been able to pay that much additional whilst maintaining an impressive trophy record (Ferguson certainly helps there). Now, onto Arsenal, they have actually made almost £30m over the five years on player transfers, taking a net of near £6m each season. Having just recently moved to a massive new stadium that cost nearly £400m to build they've tightened the belt as part of a sensible long term financiual strategy. Critically they've not won a single title, cup or trophy in that period of time. Deteriorated I would say at a higher rate, certainly with the furore surrounding Kevin Keegan and the subsequent relegation the clubs profile dropped faster than it has in the last 20 years. It could potentially be on the up now, pending the movement of the owner in the summer, but that is more down to the fact that it has just about reached a new low. More down to good luck than anything else the club are currently in what I'd consider a pretty good position to be able to continue building momentum and improve the squad and in doing so our profile. I just can't see it happening though, and that's what's particualrly frustrating about it all.

The net spend should be 35m at a minimum is what I'm saying. What I suspect is that it will be under 20 with the very real possibility of some late movement in offloading some of our better players with any moves for potential replacements 'breaking down' with no time to replace them. Bets will be hedged on our form being decent enough to keep us out of the muck and under the cover of that positive reinvesting the cash will be glossed over. The above is obviously only speculation at this stage, but it is based upon the already established trends of the owner. The amount of chances that many are naively offering in the wide eyed expectation that he has known exactly what he has been doing this entire time and that he's about to spend to improve our team is ridiculous. We needed to buy players in January, but instead we sold them. I'd love nothing more than to be completely wrong, but I honestly can't see it and don't know how anyone who has closely followed the follies of the club under Ashley could. Whilst other teams are increasing their wage bills to be able to compete we're reducing ours (as was the case in the summer and in January), yet you're suggesting that we should be paying wages out of profits from transfers. Where's the future in that? I'll ask this though - do you think the general profile of Newcastle United in Europe and in the rest of the world has deteriorated, stagnated or improved under Ashley's ownership?

That above outside of the boot goal absolutely crushed my Everton supporting mate. Had to leave the room. It's possible that my reaction didn't help.

Why should only 20m be spent? Carroll alone was sold for 35m plus it's likely that another million or so will be recouped from Routledge. The two of them are off the books as is Xisco who is likely to stay in Spain. Given that Carroll was a couldn't say no opportunistic sale then surely the entire amount needs to be invested in the side to make the most of the opportunity that was too good to refuse. That would be the case if the owner was motivated to bring about success on the pitch, but sadly he's not. Ashley will always attempt to do what he thinks will bring about the most money. The way that he intends to do that is already clear from out movements in the market. Absolutely nothing they say can be taken at face value as there's always an ulterior motive. Conversely you can analyse just about everything they do as it is revealing their true intentions. They've been gradually talking down the amount that will be spent in the summer which is a classic maneuver in resetting expectations with the assistance of time. If there had been this sort of talk in the immediate wake of Carroll's departure noone would have accepted it willingly. The more of this talk that comes out the more suspicious the circumstances surrounding Carroll's departure become. Quite simply they must have known about the interest in the player well before the deal was inked. The gamble was taken in not arranging any sort of meaningful replacement and they'll now be thinking that it has paid off. Even more so when they spend significantly less than was garnered from the sale. What's worrying is how easy the apparent financial success is coming for them. Carroll firstly, but then the increase in value of Tiote and the interest in Enrique appears to lead them to think they're on the right track. Sadly each of these moves further devalues the wider profile of the club, but that doesn't matter when you only have the foresight to care about short term financial goals. ..as for financial figures available online, they can paint just about any picture you like. Accounting is a crafty business though so there's no way we'll get a real indication of how much money Ashley is indirectly taking out of the club through payment to himself amongst other things.

...and I've slept with countless supermodels.

It will definitely be good to have someone who can strike the ball like that in the side, particularly when he's got a bit of pace about him.

Yeah, I'd be happy with that providing they were of suitable quality of course. The money is easily there for that to happen.

Why on Earth a Dachshund? Apart from their well documented behavioural issues they're completely and utterly ridiculous looking. If you get one with small kids you've made a serious mistake and will have a very lengthy period of regret and frustration to follow. Show a bit of foresight and actually select a breed that's good with children and put aside whatever weird attachment you or your wife has to the Dachshund, which for some absurd reason has become popular in recent times.

Based off that actually he's saying that in total you need 3 or 4 players who can get fans off their seats in total. Ben Arfa would be considered one of them, and I guess if you wanted to push it Jonas as well (Tiote's not really a get their fans off their seats player unless he's belting in volleys against Arsenal). So he's really just again saying that they're looking at bringing in 1 or 2 players. Pardew was talking about bringing in 1 player, possibly 2 in January and what happened? We sold our most promising player, and loaned out three others (Routledge and Xisco with a view to permanent moves and Kadar). Incoming we brought in the injured Stephen Ireland, and made Ben Arfa's deal permanent (obviously he was injured and would at best make a few cameo appearances at the end of the season). So the net effect was we lost three players. Edit - Completely forgot about Kuqi. The net 10 or 15 minutes that he's had on the pitch have been so important. As likeable a bloke as he appears to be that was a complete joke of a signing. Talking about 1-2 players now after that January is ridiculous. I mean we were short on players heading into January and ended up with fewer players. If we make two signings we'll be in roughly the same position as we were in January in terms of playing personnel. The manager in my opinion should be pushing the owner to make the necessary amount of movement in the market to improve the team. Considering we should at the very least have 35M to spend this talk of bringing in 1 or 2 players makes a mockery of the whole situation. The timing of the Carroll sale was perfect for them. The talk immediately after was about how they'd spend the entire amount on bringing in players to improve the team in the summer, that soon became a case of the money being used in it's entirety to bring in players and to pay wages. From there's it's shifted to a figure of around 20M to be spent in the summer. Now the talk of the 35M has been dropped altogether and it's just 1 or 2 players coming in, and yet some people will still attempt to make a case for these clowns. Seriously?