Faust

You don't think it could be problematic for a shareholder and board member of Company A to be involved in conversations about that organisation paying money to another company, which he happens to part-own? Unless Sawiris was kept at arm's length from all of these conversations, it looks like textbook conflict to me. His duty as an Adidas board member is to act in the interests of Adidas. Not to further the interests of Aston Villa.

Yes.

Excellent report. Really enjoy reading these. Thanks for putting in the effort.

The fact that Mellberg is leaving and it looks like Cahill is also joining him says nothing whatsoever about whether - or how hard - O'Neill tried to keep them. I think you're conflating "effort" and "achievement". It's an easy trap to fall into.

And what evidence do you have to support that opinion? I have no evidence, what evidence do you have to support he has? There isn't any. That's kind of my point. The nearest you ever get are articles like the one Oliver Holt wrote about O'Neill during the pre-season tour, when he talked about how the manager wasn't taking days off - or time off for sight-seeing - and was instead dedicating himself to getting players in for the new season. But there hasn't been anything like that during Jan, so we have absolutely no insight into O'Neill's activities. It might be sensible to assume that since O'Neill has spoken about the need to add to the squad - and since his job and reputation are on the line - then he might be putting in a fair amount of work. But that's just an assumption. Of course, I'd argue that it's a more sensible assumption than your claim that O'Neill hasn't been working very hard. How do you know that he made no attempt to keep Cahill and Mellberg?

And what evidence do you have to support that opinion?

What are these marks based on Nick? Just the transfer window? Yep! Two questions, then - first, what achievement grade would you give Moyes, Hughes, Benitez, Eriksson, and Curbishley? And how do you know that O'Neill deserves an "E" for effort?

Kin ell Tricella , Lighten up for once will you, you're like a grumpy old woman!! Too right. Did anyone really think we were going to go there and win comfortably? The only thing that mattered in this game was the result. The fact that the performance was also (for the most part) very good is a bonus. That's seven points from our games against Bolton, Derby and Blues - I think that's a very good haul.

It's not a question of arithmetic. Bar McCann, the players that have left wouldn't even have been on the bench next season, so we don't need to replace them. What we do need are some more players of real quality, to compete with (or provide cover for) the first XI.

It seems that way because we don't follow other team's transfer stories with the same attention that we follow Villa's. It's also wrong to assume that as soon as a player's name appears in the press we are "trying" to sign them. There may have been some interest - a phone call to an agent, for example - but almost without exception, the first stories will be placed in the news by those same agents. In the case of Young - and now, apparently, Reo-Coker - there was some haggling between the clubs over the price of the deal, but I don't see a way to avoid that.

Of the players that have gone, only McCann was a first-team regular last season. Also (as you noted), we need to add quality to the squad - not quantity - so your "we need to buy ten players" line makes no sense at all. At the very most, I think O'Neill is looking for six players this summer - a keeper, two defenders, two midfielders and a striker - and if we get that many in, we'll have good cover for the season.

What makes you think that Howell "stole" the story from this site?

Yeah - I read that post on H&V as well. Bren_d will be delighted to know that he's not "some div who likes to blag".

Third place in Germany is a Champions League qualifying spot.

Good idea. You should phone up the club and suggest it.

Hang on ... :yawn: There you go.

That's exactly what I didn't do when I saw your witty play on Defoe's name. Incidentally, if he does sign for us this summer, will you still be referring to him as "Duh-foe" next season?

Nick, you've spelled Defoe's name wrong.

Ok. Owen's agent spoke to the press about the release clause - an attempt to put Owen in the shop window and drum up some interest from buyers. Shepherd knows how upset the Newcastle fans would be if Owen waltzed off this summer after spending an age on the injured list, so he spoke out to let the fans know that the club wasn't the source of the story and wouldn't be a willing seller. Steve, in your interpretation of events, if a club outside the top four had made an enquiry about Owen, what possible motivation could Shepherd have for making these comments? What would it achieve? I'm not ruling out the possibility of Villa making a bid for Owen this summer (although I don't think it's very likely), but there's nothing in this story to support the idea that that might be the case.

I doubt it. We know he can play - he just hasn't produced his best for us over the last couple of years. Given a fresh start, I think there's every chance that he'll be a great signing for whoever picks him up. Personally, I'd rather flog him to someone overseas than see him go to another Premiership team.

Jimmy Bullard, Wigan to Fulham last April/May. So it happened once last season. That's hardly enough of a precedent to assume that we'd be able to pull off the same thing, is it?

Not outside of a transfer window, it wouldn't. As I understand it, while clubs can - if they both agree - talk about a signing, discuss fees, shake hands and so on, you can't actually change a player's registration until the window opens. Therefore, there's always a chance that one party will change their mind. When was the last time you saw a transfer between two Premiership clubs being 100% confirmed outside of a transfer window?

He surely will. I doubt that will cut much ice with the players' agents or their current clubs, though.

I wondered who'd jinxed him!

Spell-checkers are great but... I never said that. I said* the manager who led us to our worst defensive record in ten years wouldn't have been in charge of a capitulation last night. Right: you thought it was nonsense (or rubbish, if you prefer) to suggest that O'Leary would have been in charge of a capitulation last night. That's what I said. But you haven't explained why you think that suggestion was rubbish.