CanadaSaint

Negatives: No points and closer to the precipice. The winner? More pussy defending from Tadic, and Cedric beaten at the far post again - both are utterly predictable weaknesses that we don't seem able to cover. Positives: Some real fight for the first time in ages, Long and Austin seem up for the battle ahead, and now we'll be forced into (what Hughes didn't yet know is) IMO our best CB pairing. At least there's now some room for straw-clutching.

The first half looked like a carry-over from Pellegrino. Whatever Hughes said at half time, we started to see players who - for the first time in months - looked committed and unified. The celebrations at the end looked like months of frustration had just been unloaded.

Okay, that would be why he's not in the frame (head-slapping noise).

Surprised that Martinez isn't in the frame yet. Smart guy, can play good footie, still very in touch with the PL. Might not want to start against Wigan.

Pellegrino is a gutless puke who makes Puel look like Rob Roy.

I think we should start calling him Adele.

Unbelievable. How many times has he surrendered leads by doing exactly this?

How many more times does this cretin need to lose a lead before he understands that his tactical changes are momentum and game-surrendering? And how may more killer goals will come from a Davis turnover in midfield? East was sh*t but he didn't change our tactics.

Most of the responses reflect the only answer I could come up with, after trying to see things from their viewpoint. We are indeed at the most critical juncture that I can remember. Keep the VvD cash and sell some more assets to 'protect' my investment, or trust in the people who have created this mess to spend it wisely enough to stay up. We have an ugly few weeks ahead of us.

You've invested 200 million or so in a football club, and it's rapidly in the process of turning into about 50 million inside the first year. You don't know much about football and you don't have many (any?) contacts in the game. A) What would you do if you were them? B) What do you think they'll do?

Out-fought in sapping conditions by a team that played two days ago. Out-managed by Roy Hodgson. I'm normally an optimist but those are terminal failings.

The Sturridge rumour is probably just a media thing. If we'd really wanted him we would have sorted things out at the same time as we satisfied Liverpool's desperate desire for VvD.

Really nice guy and really smart guy, but he was there because Katharina trusted him to sort out a period of upheaval. We should be thankful for the stability he brought, but I think he'll soon be moving on. His heart is in hockey and he's extremely well regarded, so he'll be snapped up as soon as he makes himself available. The problem is that the Gao family know as much about football and football people as Katharina, so they're going to need someone they trust as well. I don't think that's Reed, although they might. As frustrating as he may be for some of you, this might be a case of "be careful what you wish for".

Has anyone compared our record while Paul Mitchell was here with our record after he left? The obvious implication behind that question is that the mythical "Black Box" was actually Mitchell's head, and that he was making Reed look far better than he really is. And that went for both player and manager signings. At the very least, both while Mitchell was here and after he left, Reed seems to have grossly mismanaged relationships with both players and managers. He might be good at managing his relationship with Ralph and the owners, but the dressing room and the pitch are much harsher judges.

Was it my imagination, or did the players seem more engaged and looking like they were actually enjoying the way we've started to play? Bertrand and VvD - who have often looked as though they'd rather be having an enema than playing - really stood out today.

In the NFL they are very successful at improving the "painfully slow feet" of linemen who are as tall as Forster but 100 pounds heavier. There are purpose designed drills for it. It would be a lot cheaper to get rid of Watson than Forster, and task the incoming guy with doing what Watson should have done long ago - getting Forster's expensive feet moving. Unfortunately, my suspicion is that we might need a brain surgeon as well.

I don't give a sh*t how much we paid for him - or even what the alternative is - but Forster needs to go. Beaten by a header from 13 yards out, that bounced. His foot movement/positional adjustment is - and always has been - awful. That just about sums up Watson's competence as well.

Yoshi could be sitting on 5 or 6 goals - he's missed a few sitters. Says a lot that he's probably had more chances than our strikers.

We are serial over-elaborators and we crowd ourselves out on the flanks, so we have no choice but to stop, turn and go back. Rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat. How often do we play the early ball inside the defender, get around the back, and play the early cross? The defence is well-set before we ever get the ball in, if we ever do. And Forster is exactly what I thought he was when we bought him - a lumbering hulk who can't get down to low shots and doesn't make his size count on crosses.

It's not just about keeping VvD, it's also about the impact this will have on Cedric and, especially, Bertrand. Whether we play Hoedt on the left and Virgil on the right, or keep Vigil on the left with one of the other three CBs, both Bertrand and Cedric will feel less reluctant to push-up, and that could transform everything for us. I've got a lot of respect for the job that Yoshida and Stephens have done, but if Hoedt is what he's supposed to be, they could both become solid depth players, at least for now. We're a million miles away from the days when Jos was a starter or first back-up. Keeping VvD, assuming that we can reintegrate him, and signing Hoedt could produce a positive impact throughout the team. I think time will tell that this was a great window for us.

Nothing to do with the above post Redslo - I'm interested in your input on something: I think Katharina is retaining 20% as a way of protecting the interests of the club and its supporters, and to keep her father's vision alive. So, to what degree can she rely on minority shareholders' rights to accomplish that goal?

For some time we have needed to place VVD, his agent and Liverpool in a "catch 22" situation, and I can't understand why we haven't done it. Issue a media release stating that "we do not wish to sell Virgil but we will do so reluctantly A) if he formally requests a transfer, and B) if the buying club meets our valuation." If VVD loses his 'loyalty' bonus, he (and his agent) will be looking for Liverpool to make that up, which would only drive the cost up for Liverpool. We will have taken a principled stance, and the parties lacking principles can figure out how the hell to move ahead. Good luck with that.

That's it for me. I think the club should impose two criteria. Not only must the buyers meet our valuation, but VvD must formally request a transfer. If the club wants to make a point that will stand the test of time in this world of self-serving agents and players without any loyalty, that's the way to do it.

The thing that makes me think this is very true is the fact that we do not appear to be shopping seriously for a quality replacement. As much as the club tries to keep its business quiet, agents have big mouths when it suits them - it's their #1 tactic. If we were expecting to be down-VVD but up sixty million quid we'd be seeing a lot more links with quality central defenders. Forget what has happened in the past. The club knows that Yoshida and Stephens are okay but not Top 6 standard, so there's no way that we'd let VvD go unless we had lined up a quality CB. And the longer this goes on, the less likely it is that VvD will end up at Liverpool. Or anywhere else. And then the sh*t will be hitting Klopp's fan.

I don't think that's the case. There will be a legally enforceable shareholders agreement which will define the agreements and future conduct of the parties, and it will be underpinned by laws surrounding minority shareholders' rights. It will include things such as commitment to future investment, staff (including players) to be retained, the provisions for a final buyout (price and timing), and so on. I'm not happy about this either, but I don't think Lander would come in with free reign - and finalizing that agreement is probably what's taking the time. I don't think Katharina wants to sell - she probably needs to see in order to pay a probable tax bill and diversify the investment of her wealth. The VvD thing could have been a key component of the SA, which would account for the Club's uncharacteristically "ballsy" reaction to stuff they've tolerated without much of a whimper in the past.