In 1989 Franklin Roy Bruno found himself playing with the big boys.

He was in the ring fighting for the Heavyweight Championship of the World against “Iron” Mike Tyson, a pugilist so ferocious he had only ever admitted to being afraid of one thing. During the filming of an American edition of Celebrity Weakest Link, referring to Ann Robinson, Tyson said “she’s one scary bitch”

In the first round of the bout Tyson threw a right hook hook that caught Bruno smack on the end of the chin - that oh so delicate chin, thought to be formed of Edinburgh Crystal.

Bruno went down like the proverbial sack of shit, but managed to get back to his feet and even shook Tyson at the end of the first round with a couple of rights of his own.

History tells us that Bruno, sharing a common trait with that other sporting hero of the time - Eddie The Eagle Edwards - didn’t last the distance, hitting the deck more times than Ronaldo on a windy day, but at least having the decency to stay down.

In the interview after the fight Harry Carpenter asked Bruno about the Tyson punch that put him down in the first.

Frank replied with one of the great boxing quotes of all time - “Wot punch, ‘arry?”

A certain Mr Roeder must be wandering the FA wilderness at the moment muttering “Wot Punch ‘arry”

He can’t have any idea what hit him. Though the million quid settlement probably makes it a little easier to stomach.

So who is to follow in those hallowed footsteps?

Will it be Ladbrokes favourite Big Sam? Uncle Sven, Koeman, Van Gaal, or two white mice and a goldfish? That’s speculation for another day. Knowing Fred it’ll be a toss up betwween the goldfish, Chris Coleman and the peoples choice, Mike Neville.

Regardless of who is convicted after Roeder the question has to be “where did Roeder go wrong?”

It’s all very well slagging the poor bloke off but why is he getting such a slagging?

Almost a year ago he started that long, almost guaranteed, meandering stroll to the dole queue otherwise known as managing the Toon, but what was the main factor that contributed towards his dismissal?

Was it the lack of tactical nous that was demonstrated on so many occasions?

Was it the inventive use of substitutes - bringing on a first sub 89 minutes into an arse kicking springs to mind?

Was it poor team selection?

Was it his misplaced faith in certain players that scuttled his ship?

Was it his apparent lack of enthusiasm for the whole picnic?

Was it those months spent with his nose pressed hard up against Fenwick’s window, without actually dipping into his wallet - window shopping. Hell we’d have done better if he’d come back with a couple of mannequins.

Was it those awful post match interviews - capable of putting a charging rhino to sleep at a hundred yards?

Apart from the obvious “lack of points” what do you think was the biggest contributing factor to Roeders current predicament?

How many times did we see the lads come out of the blocks like their arses were on fire and play cracking football, passing the ball around, having the odd shot on goal and then take the lead, only to come out in the second half, change their tactics completely, and try to defend that lead?

Like Paris Hilton, Vinnie Jones and Pete Doherty, Newcastle United have become famous over the last few years for something other than their supposed professions.

Our defence leaks like a porcupines condom.

I would have turfed Roeder just for being daft enough to believe that the team could sit back and depend on our back four to protect a lead of anything less than 27 goals.

What do you think was his downfall.

Oh - and the glasses too.

Archie Brand
Bahrain