...its tribal football. I may as well make it up. In fact here we go We are about to sign Henry for 8 million plus Amo...at least according to www.eddiefootball.com

Well I've had the pleasure of travelling from Birmingham to Chester and from Chester to Blackburn a few times as well as Chester to Manchester. I can tell you from experience that the first takes much longer then the second two. They have to sell him now, if not they are simply wasting money on his wages.

On a note, even if we don't sign Savage, at least we've really messed up their team now

Good that you know so much about the opinion of the board and our financial situaiton, would you like to give us a source on that Ferguson comment. I would be surprised if we sold Bazza for anything less than what we bought him for, to be quite frank, I'd be surprised if we sold him full stop.

The nature of those games means that you have to stop anyway. For example in Rugby it can quickly be seen if the ball was touched down while the two teams set up for either a drop out or the conversion. While in tennis, half the time cyclopse, or whatever name youd like to use, doesnt work and they have to turn it off. I myself have played in tournaments where that is used, its more trouble than its worth. I think in football the game would be slowed down too much, we all know there are going to be mistakes, and that is tough to take, but really id rather see the game as I know it, warts and all, then some stop-start computer run affair.

I'm quite happy, terrible decision, but then Spurs are a team that we might be able to catch this season, so as many things that go against them the better.

Still owe us over half of the Dunn money I think, I'm not sure about the rest

More important than the fact that Todd is back in the team, I think we are doing better at the back because 12 games ago I dropped Friedel from my fantasy team. I really regret it now, but great for rovers

I also hope we can go on a good cup run. Might be beneficial to the season, boost for the players, and as has been said, opportunity to play some fringe players.

Interesting to see Marseille were interested in him. He'll get his chance, just as many of you are saying why Reid and not MGP, well if he starts making a fuss then he should take a look at Reid, who waited patiently for a year before getting a regular chance to prove the doubters wrong.

I think we should wait and see what the final result is before deciding who has shown weakness. Though I think a good price would be around 2 millio, even if we end up paying 2.5-3 million for him it will have been a better deal for us. We have to remember that unlike when they bought Dunn and Taylor, Savage is a key figure for them every game, and one of the players around which their team works. It will be a big loss for them, a bit like us losing Ferguson or Emerton, and for 3 million they will find him difficult to replace.

5-0 Rovers Stead to score all 5 after having one disallowed early on and to be hailed as England's next superstar.

we haven't made a second bid for savage Intersting, thought we had. Apologies if someone has mentioned this. I guess that means it is more likely that we actually will sign him as probably our second bid will be about as high as we will go.

I think he meant because of their temper

I'm still encouraged by the fact that we have played so badly but still defended well and really should have taken a point from the game, earlier in the season we would have been on the wrong end of a thrashing. I'm still really looking forward to the coming weeks, especially after we have a few more players in the squad.

Ah and we are back to the webiste of knee jerk reactions. The hero of last week is now crap, and the signing that would have made us title challengers is suddenly a waste of money. We lost, it's a shame, probably didn't play as well as we could have, but it happens.

A real shame. Oh well, still seems like we've defended well other than posing little attacking threat. Bad day at the office.

I suppose it was put that way because we were the away team, but they haven't done that the rest of the time, so I'm not sure.

Give me a couple days and I will do.

You also cause a lot of the problems . If you didn't arm half the world peacekeeping would probably be a lot cheaper. I'm not using this to promote any anti-american sentiments, I have nothing against the country, just don't like it when they try and pass themselves off as better than they are. If you really want to base this discussion on articles though, I can produce a ton that talk about how poor America's contribution to the United Nations is, even compared to some other nations.

One side of the argument I'm afraid. Living in Paris and having the friends that I do I've talked to many close in with UNESCO, embassy, ambassadors, the United States owes 1.5-2 billion to several UN funds, it's great for them to chip in now, but it would be a bit like not paying your taxes and then suddenly donating to a cause, looks good, but it would be great if you did both. I understand that most things the UN asks for most nations ignore, but as self acclaimed dominant force in world politics America should set a better example and have no real reason for not doing so.

There is basically such a thing, where you are supposed to make your yearly donation and it is calculated based on GDP I think, though it may be GNP. Sadly many countries fail to give as much as they are supposed to, including the United States, who since the Bush administration came to power have given virtually nothing (obviously relative to what they should do). America does give a lot, but then as the major world power and the country with the most powerful and largest economy it should be expected to do so, in the sense that it has the most available and if each gave a percentage it would obviously have to give the most. However, I'm not attacking the United States, and certainly don't hate it, liked the people and I loved living there, but certainly aren't as involved in global issues as they should be, except of course in the "war on terror".

I don't really mind. I mean as much as I feel sorry for all of those who have been affected, and as much as I want to help and will try to do so, I haven't been personally touched by it so I'm not that sensitive to remarks. I was simply saying I don't think people should use this as a chance to put down someone else's beliefs, no one benefits from that, not those in Asia and Africa who have been directly touched, nor those who's beliefs are being attacked.

I always think that's a bit unfair. I'm buddhist so no god or anything for me, but I thinkt to ask people to explain why their god would let something like this happen in such a mocking way is tough. Let people have their faith, if it gets in the way of your way of life then fine, try and do something, but don't bring it up yourself when no one is bothering. This is a tragedy, not an opportunity for some to push seperate agendas.

Not a great guy, but if he does the job on the pitch then I really don't mind what he is like off it, and I have a feeling that he would be good for our team. Plus, remember that has much as we are working on rumours and stories, Hughes knows the man, so obviously there can't be that much wrong with him.