http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/f/fulham/7155545.stm

Fulham are a poor team. They needed a complete overhaul, something that Sanchez hasn't had the oppurtunity to do anything about.

He should never have quit the Northern Ireland job.

Should never have got rid of Coleman in the 1st place. i'm sure if they had weathered the storm he would have got back on track by now.

He has never been a good manager, Coleman would have been just as good and him leaving the N. Ireland job was a mistake for him, wish him all the best in the future as i'm sure he will get another job as all football managers do

Agreed,should never have left N.I job but he got a BIG bonus for keeping fulham in prem last season and he was only in charge for 5 games!!!
Dont think Fulham will survive this season with or without Sanchez,the signings he made were pretty poor and havent made any impact

Sanchez does not look a well man, I mean he looks increasing gaunt lately.

Sanchez does not look a well man, I mean he looks increasing gaunt lately.
That's what being Fulham manager does to you. Al Fayed expects them to win the Premiership with Championship players.

If only Warnock had waited a few months.

What a mistake Fulham have made, they never give managers time.

Too right he got sacked, spent £15m + on lower division garbage and is going to them relegated. Good on him `cos Fulham are ugly.

You don't build a top side for only £15 million. You need at least £75 - £100 million.

What a mistake Fulham have made, they never give managers time.
Or anywhere near enough money. The likes of Healy up front won't keep you up.

You don't build a top side for only £15 million. You need at least £75 - £100 million.

Fulham aren`t a top side, and never will be.

Your quote of £75-100 million to be a top side is a bit on the cheap side an all.

Fulham aren`t a top side, and never will be.

Your quote of £75-100 million to be a top side is a bit on the cheap side an all.
That is assuming you've already got a decent side. If you've got a crap side, at least £30 million to survive. Look at Sunderland. Spent £30 million and I believe are in the bottom three.

If you've got a crap side, at "least" £30 million to survive. Look at Sunderland. Spent £30 million and I believe are in the bottom three.

So....are Sunderland staying up or not? :huh:

Absolute cack.

Ho hum. Spruce is his usual trolling self.:huh:

As for Sunderland staying up - it'll be close. But Fulham are currently playing worse than everybody except Derby. Their goals have almost dried up whilst their defence is leaking like a sieve. The classic example being their 5-1 thrashing at Spurs today.

If what I've just read in the Daily Mirror is anything to go by, Fulham's relegation from the Premiership looks pretty inevitable. For starters, four of their last nine home matches are against Manchester United, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool, whilst they haven't won an away match since September 2006. I wonder what the odds are against Fulham actually finishing bottom, below Derby County.

If what I've just read in the Daily Mirror is anything to go by, Fulham's relegation from the Premiership looks pretty inevitable. For starters, four of their last nine home matches are against Manchester United, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool, whilst they haven't won an away match since September 2006. I wonder what the odds are against Fulham actually finishing bottom, below Derby County.

I hope Fulham don't go down. I have been a few times to Craven Cottage, and they are a cracking little club, with a friendly atmosphere and a proper old school ground set in a tranquil part of London. Whilst one cannot deny that they have been bankrolled to the Premiership (they were getting crowds of just 3000 ten years ago in the basement division) at least the club have some character, unlike so many teams which are going down the indentikit stadia route on out of town industrial parks.

Ho hum. Spruce is his usual trolling self.:huh:

Jeez, read the posts man... You said Sunderland spent £30m and now find themselves in the bottom three, You say you need at least £30m to even have a crack at staying up, Sunderland now find themselves in the bottom three....So I`ll say it again moneypenny. Will Sunderland survive? I cant take you seriously, first your post about Jihad...and now this. What do you use as your `sources` the Daily Mirror?!

Jeez, read the posts man... You said Sunderland spent £30m and now find themselves in the bottom three, You say you need at least £30m to even have a crack at staying up, Sunderland now find themselves in the bottom three....


which entirely proves his point. You drink too much this Christmas and having trouble following the posts?

Spending as much as thirty million doesn't guarantee survival - witness Sunderland's predicament.

which entirely proves his point. You drink too much this Christmas and having trouble following the posts?

Spending as much as thirty million doesn't guarantee survival - witness Sunderland's predicament.

Managers like Steve Coppell must really stick in the side of other top flight bosses who bemoan their lack of money. The Reading team who did so magnificently in their first season in the Premiership cost a total of £500,000 to assemble. A laughably small amount of money in the context of such a league.

One can't help thinking that the sudden spate of billionaires buying clubs as play things has caused has caused a false economy (again) in the Premier league, which was possibly starting to reallign itself in the pre-Ambramovich era. It is no coincidence that the 'value' of players suddenly doubles the second a cash rich club becomes interested. Michael Essien's transfer from Lyon to Chelsea is a classic example of this.

One also can't help thinking that transfer dealings, given the global scale of the game, are somewhat myopic at times. There is an arrogance, represented quite tangibly in transfer prices, that suggests our own players are somehow better, or more suited to the Premiership, than those abroad. Citing Sunderland above, one wonders what possessed Roy Keane to spend £5m on Michael Chopra, a player totally unproven at top flight level. British players have always been over valued, which is why managers on a shoe string have and will continue to look abroad, especially to embryonic footballing nations or continents where players can be bought for a bag of tracksuits. It is also why the likes of Arsene Wenger keep close links with third world academies, such as ASEC Mimosas in the Ivory Coast, who have produced the likes of Kolo Toure, Emmanuel Eboue and Didier Drogba. Toure's transfer cost to Arsenal, of £150,000, is surely one of the bargains of the decade.

There is so much more to this complex debate, not least the queston of global economics and the poaching of raw disposable talent from lesser sides which stunts development, but my tea is getting cold.

which entirely proves his point. You drink too much this Christmas and having trouble following the posts?

Spending as much as thirty million doesn't guarantee survival - witness Sunderland's predicament.

It proves my point. You not been able to afford a drink and had a crap christmas? Pity.

Why Sanchez had to go http://timesonline.typepad.com/fanzine_fanzone/2007/12/the-end-of-the.html