IT feels like a lifetime ago since the transfer window closed, but it's just eight days.

And there's been about as much action in the transfer market at most Premiership clubs during those eight days as there was throughout January.

The transfer window has got to be the biggest anti-climax in sport.

Not even an England Ashes campaign Down Under or British athletes going off to compete at the Olympics have a greater let-down factor.

Transfers used to be a vital part of the football fabric. Every morning, when fans threw open the back pages of the papers, there was a chance their team could have signed a new player.

It gave a buzz to the daily routine of being a football fan, a thrill which disappeared - as so much of football's excitement has done - when the transfer window was brought in four years ago.

Back then, we all knew most transfer stories were mere speculation, designed to spark interest and sell newspapers. But there was always the feeling in the back of your mind that this latest deal might just be the one that comes off and you could have the new star striker you had been missing all season in your team by the end of the day.

When they took away the freedom to sign players all year round, they took away some of the fans' dreams.

And what did they replace it with? A two-month transfer window in summer when fans aren't all that interested in football, and one month in January when all the expectations of major signings fail to materialise.

Take the latest window as an example. The hype started a couple of months before with the media building it up as a time when clubs would buy and sell players as if their lives depended on it.

What did we get when it came? Not much transfer activity but plenty of excuses from managers for their failure to sign players.

They told us clubs don't want to sell or loan their best players in the middle of the season, and that there was no point in signing players who are not better than the ones they already have. So, what's the point having a transfer window if you're unwilling or unable to transfer players in and out of your club?

It would be like having Christmas but not being able to buy or receive presents.

The activity of the Premiership's top clubs showed the meaninglessness of the January window; Arsenal and Chelsea bringing nobody in and Manchester United doing one incoming deal, and that was a loan signing.

Middlesbrough, Newcastle and Everton all signed just one player, two of them on loan, while most of the activity was at the bottom of the table where January signified panic buying month. After all the hype, the biggest deals were the practically unknown Ashley Young and jobbing defender, Matthew Upson. If that's the best the transfer window can do for our entertainment, why bother?

A new development to emerge from the Premiership's transfer activity were the number of fees which were undisclosed to the public. Of the total of 66 incoming deals, 23 were either free transfers or the fees were disclosed, 18 were loan deals and 25 involved undisclosed fees. It is a disgrace the fees are not disclosed in the vast majority of deals and begs the question: what have they got to hide?

The worst culprits for not disclosing fees in incoming deals in January were Reading, who signed six players, one for a disclosed sum and five for undisclosed fees. Blackburn were just behind with five players brought in, one on loan and four for undisclosed fees.

The most open club was Sheffield United who signed five players and revealed the fees for all five. They also sold six players and all six fees were disclosed.

The lack of transparency from most of their fellow Premiership clubs is disrespectful to the fans who have a right to know where there money is going.