Birmingham have extended Jessie Lingard's loan, Derby have taken Tottenham's Simon Dawkins on loan, Nottingham Forest have extended Billy Davies's contract and Leeds United have...well the Board and management at Leeds United have sat on their hands and done precisely nothing. Never mind a Murray, you can't Hurry a McDermott it seems.
How good is young Dawkins? I have no idea, but he has to be better than nobody, and the fact that he is on the books of Spurs suggests that he can kick a football. Based on the last game before the international break, which team is most in need of a new player or two, Derby or Leeds? So why is it Derby that have recruited first exactly?
Friar Brian initially insisted that he wasn't a fan of loan signings, but after the Derby game indicated that he would "step up the search" for somebody to bring in. But so far that search seems to have drawn a complete blank, unless Leeds are going to call a dramatic press conference today to unveil young pup Keane or old dog Keane or Zaha or whoever.
And on the subject of inactivity, what exactly has happened to the new investment that Chairman Noruddychance said was "close" some time ago now? It's in the pipeline, presumably, just like all the oil money that Leeds fans expected to pump through when the Arabs initially declared an interest in buying the club.
Leeds fans themselves seem to understand better the urgent need to bolster the team and it will serve the club right if they are as slow to get their money out of their wallets as the club are to spend theirs. When you can see the Seventies on YouTube free of charge, who wants to pay to watch a club big on history but devoid of ambition exactly?