Harry R

OK, fair enough, I don't think your critique is bizarre in itself. What I think is bizarre is how prominent the negative takes have become in the discussion of the Twine signing. I mean, I see your points as a series of cautious caveats to an exciting loan signing, but they've become the dominant part of the narrative, at least on here. By exciting, I mean I want to watch him play, I want to watch a City team with a player of his qualities in it, and if that's just for 4 months and then we sign another no. 10 instead I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

I don't think all we're getting is a short term boost, even if he isn't here next season. We're getting a player who helps us get closer to the way Manning wants us to play, in a role not easily filled by anyone else in the squad. He clearly wants us to play with a 10, or two 10s, and now we can. And there's a chance we sign him in the summer anyway. If we don't, we look for an alternative with similar attributes.

Some of the negativity around us signing a good player on loan - a completely normal thing for a football club to do - is really bizarre.

Just tried to find a £10 ticket (ST is in £25 section) and it appears they've blocked them all out - i.e you can't buy a ticket in the South Stand unless you've got a season ticket in there. Annoying.

I've got a Newport fan mate who keeps texting me about how good he is. Says he's too good for L2 and should really be on loan in L1. Considering who Newport have had on loan over the years - Semenyo, Twine - I'm taking this as really encouraging.

People still talking about him like he's always injured. He's played 55 games since the start of last season. He had one terrible year of injuries, but the rest of his career has been pretty normal. He's putting in Marvin Elliott-like performances and has been one of our best players this season. Really hope we sign him up to a new deal.

For anyone who hasn't heard it, the OSIB 'cider with' Jonathan Pearce is incredible. Never heard someone talk so emotionally about a football club. He basically grew up around the club, knew the players and even went to away games on the team coach. He talks about Gerry Gow like he was a member of his family.

Why would that be spin about Weimann though? He must be one of our top earners.

It's no longer automatically the case that both clubs can't be at home at the same time. Haven't there been a couple of occasions now where it has happened?

He also does all the admin for substitutions with the 4th official. Critical work.

I'm clearly in a minority here but, while I didn't want Pearson sacked, I do find the idea of appointing a promising coach with plenty of upside a bit exciting. It's a risk, but it's one way to potentially outperform your wage budget in this league. And if it's Manning, he also has a reputation for playing good football.

Pretty normal recruitment practice to interview a credible candidate who has done a job at the same and higher levels before even if you think you're unlikely to hire them. They might have interesting ideas, might surprise you, you might encounter them again in future. I don't even want us to hire Lampard, just surprised if we've declined to interview him.

Two reasons. One, he's managed at the top level so I think deserves us to hear him out at least. Two, he's likely to manage at our level in future so worth being on good terms in case we're ever involved in a potential transfer with a club he's at.

If the club didn't even want to meet Lampard, which you'd do as a courtesy even if you were sceptical about him as a candidate, they must be close to appointing someone else. Even more so if they had a meeting in the diary and then cancelled it. If they're not close with someone else, but cancelled Lampard anyway, that's pretty incompetent. Whatever you think of him as a manager, he's a credible candidate.

If Shaggs was wrong about Lampard, doesn't that mean he could also be wrong about Luke Williams?