Crusoe

What do you think is wrong with Firefox? Don't work for them and not blind to their faults, but it's a lot more customisable than Opera.

What bb80 said. Technically good, not good enough to score goals. The next Carlos Roca.

Let me get this straight: an injured player from a struggling Scottish team may have decided to sign elsewhere? One that our own club has mentioned nothing about signing? You know, maybe we'll miss out and maybe he's a very good player but I'll not be crying myself to sleep tonight or screaming for Hardy's head on a pole.

But to spend all of that money on a non-league striker is a huge gamble, and for every Wayne Andrews there's a Steve Whitehall. The risk we face is that the top level of non-league players are often expensive (reputedly in many cases on a par with League Two wages) and the very best prospects are often subject to interest from several clubs. To find the real bargains you have to look lower still, but you need the scouting network and you need to believe that those players can make the step up.

Wasn't it Michel Vonk, not Christian?

Wegerle was born in South Africa, although he moved to the US. According to Wikipedia (so take with a pinch of salt) John Kerr at Portsmouth was the first American, but it looks like Wegerle was at Chelsea earlier.

I can't even think who'd come close to Gunnar. Kowenicki I don't remember (too young), Orlygsson wasn't the best we've ever had (although I thought he was alright). Killen? Nope. Hodgson? Not here long enough. Pedersen? Ditto. Clyde W? Good, but not here long enough to be great. Aha! One just sprung to mind: Pogs! He'd be up there close to Halle for me. Quality keeper on his day.

Halle, definitely, but even I'd hesitate at top 100. He was a solid utility player for us, not a matchwinner or trophy winner (although I'd question why Wegerle and Latapy are in that top 100!).

How do you know he wasn't? Of course you could be right and we've not spotted him, but it occasionally irritates me when there's an assumption that just because someone's not turned out on trial or been the subject of a failed bid that we've ignored them completely.

Firefox or Opera. Both are faster and generally more secure than Internet Explorer (although no browser is completely secure). I prefer Firefox as it has a vast range of add-ons (for example, I use one add-on that blocks all adverts from all websites once you've configured it, one that checks my email for me, one that blocks unwanted scripts, one that uses my email account as an extra drive, and many more). I have heard that the latest Opera is slightly faster, but Firefox is due a new version later this year that may be faster still. Both are a lot more user-friendly and customisable than Internet Explorer. Safari had some very poor reviews when it was released for Windows (it's been an Apple product for a long time) but I don't know if it's improved since then. Apple have also come in for a lot of criticism for bundling it with iTunes as if you have to have it.

Yes, I'd tend to agree that Wolfy's not done enough to be a viable long-term solution. When lads younger than him are preferred up front it's not a stretch to see the writing on the wall. I'd hang on to him for the remaining year of his contract (strength in depth and all that), farm him out on loan and see if he comes good elsewhere.

Personally, I think it would be foolish to cash in. He's young, decent at the level we play (and hopefully above too), I doubt is on extortionate wages, doesn't have a bad injury or disciplinary record, and could well get better with time. We may not be flushed with cash but I don't see that cashing in is necessary (at least until summer 2009 when he has a year left on his contract, and that's assuming he doesn't sign an extension). Lomax and Black look like good prospects at full-back, but if there's one thing this season is likely to show us it's that strength in depth can make the difference between play-offs and mid-table finishes. For whatever reason you care to name (some kind of bizarre intransigence on Shez's part, lack of quality players, extortionate demands from available players, I've no idea) we don't have a great record of snapping up quality replacements in a hurry, so I'd be loathe to start selling the decent players we do have.

Eh? I'd be disappointed to see him go, but we've hardly done badly from him - 80 games and a reasonable fee. Not sure why that would count as a massive betrayal.

Maybe I'm the only one, but I never thought Beharall was that bad. Not great, sure, but we've had many worse defenders in recent memory.

Call of Duty 4 is the one, the only game an Xbox Live gamer needs. At least until GTA IV comes out in April. I can't wait.

Or the new Cristian Colusso...

How are Virgin Media scammers, exactly?

Yeah, I use that Netgear model too. Very easy to set up.

Allott for me too. Glad he's shown his doubters wrong.

Farnborough FC are my second team (where I was brought up). I wouldn't start supporting a Premier club, or even a league club really.

Wolfy's finish was superbly controlled (or just very lucky, but I'm being positive here). Robertson's finish wasn't as good but his play to get into the position to take the chance was excellent, a real instinctive run.

I agree with most of the rest of what you say, but not this bit - every team needs a player who's in the right place at the right time to get the tap-ins. They all count. I'd rather have a striker who scores 30 tap-ins than one who scores 15 world-class scorchers.

Hughes' goals-to-games ratio is 0.44, or 0.38 if you include his sub appearances. For comparison's sake, Davies' ratio is 0.35 (including the Leeds goal he was credited later).

Terrible news. Obviously didn't know him personally but on the pitch seemed like a wholehearted and committed player who always gave his best. Thoughts are with him and his family.

Senor C - it's not the rule that's important here, it's CAS' response to the challenge. According to another source: And: And: