Cronky

The 80s were indeed a bad time. First Waddle, then Beardsley, then Gazza in successive seasons, I think it was. We did our best to get relegated and finally succeeded. Time to shed the pessimism now, I reckon. We're in good hands.

Not really. That was more or less a swap for Les Ferdinand. (Unless that was bait, he added hastily) That did prompt me to wonder what was our costliest sale. Arguably Gazza, with Beardsley a close second.

I think we’re in for a good run-in. It’s probably been mentioned before but this Gordon-Isak-Barnes attack has parallels with the Salah-Firmino-Mane trio that did so well for Liverpool. Plenty of pace and trickery.

Both are immature, but there’s a difference between taking the piss out of fans who were booing you and mocking defeated opponents in their time of misery.

I was talking about his general quality and contribution to Villa's season.

Didn't see the game, but yes, good player. Gets goals from very unpromising situations.

Forest were unlucky, but I don't think any of them were stonewall. The ref didn't give any of them, and then it's down to the 'clear and obvious' test, which of course has a subjective element to it. On another day, a ref would probably have given at least one of them, but it's not about just substituting one opinion for another. Either way, Forest should not have accused the system of corruption, and made some veiled threat of legal action. I don't like agreeing with Gary Neville, but he's got it spot on. It's a very slippery slope when clubs join in with the sort of conspiracy theories that supporters like to nurture.

Only saw the last hour of the game, but during that period Coventry did not look like a Championship side. They got back into it through Premiership standard football. That's the story here, surely.

Yes, the players end up playing too many games, but Pep is the last person who should be complaining. In fact, City have been able to take advantage of the situation. They effectively have two first teams and can easily rotate the squad whilst their opponents are forced to field the same players.

Villa looked good against Arsenal, and as long as Watkins stays fit, they should be fine, I'd have thought. He gets them goals from all sorts of unpromising situations.

No, you're not. The FFP evidence against them is overwhelming and that gives the whole enterprise an unreal flavour. They also stifle teams and are boring to watch.

He reminded me of that Harry Enfield character - 'You don't wanna do this, you wanna do that'.

It was interesting what they picked up on - eg the way a player approached the penalty spot and put the ball down.

It sounds like Postecoglou is concentrating on instilling his basic strategy, which is to play an all-action aggressive style, with a big effort to squeeze the space and recover any lost possession far up the pitch. It worked very well at first, but a team is liable to pick up more than its fair share of injuries and cards, and may run out of steam later on in the season. And when the pressure comes on in the final stages of the season, you may need more strings to your bow. The thought is that Postecoglou will later develop his team's capacity for other strategies, as situations change in a match, and to suit different opponents. At the moment, it's the cavalry charge, but are his players starting to want something more?

Eric Dier was asked about the difference between Conte and Postecoglou, and this is what he came up with - https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/football/tottenham-eric-dier-explains-how-ange-postecoglou-differs-from-antonio-conte-and-jose-mourinho/ar-BB1ljFA3 Make of it what you will.