Teasy

You can say that about every other case. We reportedly couldn't give Ba, one of the top strikers in the country, the very reasonable 60/70k he wanted, now we can't compete with f***ing QPR for his replacement. It's the same story for transfer fees, where we are being massively outspent by most other Premiership clubs. Ashley's business model has its merits, but it's also holding us back massively when it comes to realising our potential. I doubt that's true. Misrepresenting the facts isn't going to help any. There you go sir: http://i.imgur.com/bBUiA.jpg Source?, the numbers look very odd even at first glance.

We're incredibly awful at the transfer market now then? We haven't signed a CB in...how long? And? We also signed some excellent players last season for quite small fees, I don't remember people talking about us being terrible in the transfer market when we got Cabaye, Ben Arfa, Cisse, Santon, Ba and Marveaux for about half what we sold Carroll for.

We're incredibly awful at the transfer market now then?

You can say that about every other case. We reportedly couldn't give Ba, one of the top strikers in the country, the very reasonable 60/70k he wanted, now we can't compete with fucking QPR for his replacement. It's the same story for transfer fees, where we are being massively outspent by most other Premiership clubs. Ashley's business model has its merits, but it's also holding us back massively when it comes to realising our potential. Source? Tell me, who else in this league would offer Remy £80k+? You're going on as if QPR are one of the lesser paying clubs and we can't even compete with them, bollocks quite frankly.

The other option is to double what we'd already agreed with him at the last minute in order to have him for Reading though, if they did that then they'd definitely need to be replaced. They've been wankers in the past, but in this case they've done nothing wrong.

Club income can in no way cover ther oy goings, going to end in an epic fail at some point. Epic loopholes more like. We all know FFP wont do a thing. Yeah I'm sure QPR will find a loophole to artificially increase their income by 300% in order to meet the financial fair play regulations... Financial Fair Play regulations won't force clubs to work 100% within their means, but the idea it will have no effect is rubbish. can't fernandez's air asia simply increase their sponsorship? They can't increase it to whatever they want though. At some point is gets past "Hmm is that legit?" to "that's an absolutely obvious attempt to circumvent the rules". Like I said they'll do the same as Man City ect are doing and artificially increase revenue, no doubt about that. But at least their will be limits, unlike the current situation where someone can come in and literally spend as much money as they see fit.

Club income can in no way cover ther oy goings, going to end in an epic fail at some point. Epic loopholes more like. We all know FFP wont do a thing. Yeah I'm sure QPR will find a loophole to artificially increase their income by 300% in order to meet the financial fair play regulations... Financial Fair Play regulations won't force clubs to work 100% within their means, but the idea it will have no effect is rubbish. They'll find ways to do it. Look at Liverpool's ludicrous shirt deals. It might make it harder, but they'll have had their thinking caps on a long time ago. You can only do so much padding financially. They'll find ways to artificially increase their revenue yes, but they won't find a way to allow them to spend whatever they want, there will be limits, just not as many as are planned by Uefa. You mention shirt deals but even if they artificially trebled their shirt deals (even worse then Liverpool) it wouldn't give them the kind of finances needed to pay players £80k per week.

Club income can in no way cover ther oy goings, going to end in an epic fail at some point. Epic loopholes more like. We all know FFP wont do a thing. Yeah I'm sure QPR will find a loophole to artificially increase their income by 300% in order to meet the financial fair play regulations... Financial Fair Play regulations won't force clubs to work 100% within their means, but the idea it will have no effect is rubbish.

I do wonder why there wasn't huge competition for the guy given his relatively low fee and apparent status as France's premier right back. Sagna was injured, otherwise I think he is generally first choice IIRC. He was before he was injured, but he's been back since October and so far Debuchy has stayed first choice.

Doesn't to me, he says Ba gets 50%. Then he says if we sell him for £7m we'll end up making £3m because we had to pay £2m to get him in the first place. I also haven't seen any other sources mentioning 50% going to Ba. Everyone now is talking about £7 or £7.5m but for quite a while it was reported as £10m. You can take a guess at what we've received for him, but it certainly isn't clear.

That only happens when the clubs have to agree a fee, in this case all Chelsea had to do is offer the amount in the clause and there is no requirement for us to agree anything. We could claim that he's broken the clause agreement somehow by touting himself around, but I don't think we did.

Doubt this trend will continue with his next move mind. His next move will be his knee exploding leaving Chelsea to pay him to sit on his arse for the following 3 years.

The clause fee has never been reported consistently, either £10m or £7.5m depending on the source (it was even reported as £15m at one point..). The only thing that has never changed is the £2.5m to Ba's reps. So it seems we've either received £7.5m or £5m. That Sullivan interview is the only one that's ever mentioned 50% and I really can't make much sense of it. Am I missing something or does that sound like gibberish to anyone else?

I think we're far more likely to go than not at the moment. As I said, you said the same daft things last time despite it being obvious from about October that we were going to drop. It's a lot different this time to last. We know what this manager & squad ARE capable of. Last time we were basing it on player reputations, but looking at that season, 06-07 were were only a couple of wins from relegation, and even the Allardyce/Keegan season, we were right in the relegation battle until we got that draw at Birmingham and then won 4-5 on the spin. It's different in that we've got less points this time and look considerably even less capable of even getting draws. We've got 3 points fewer after 21 games aye, but the team in 18th also have 3 less, and the teams 19-20th are about 8 points worse off. We're actually in a far better position this time than that season. We're also not on our third manager of the season who was four games away from having a heart attack. I still maintain that even if Kinnear had stayed in charge that side would still have stayed up, not blaming Shearer, it was just one interruption too many (well two since Houghton came back in and then Shearer). Far less injuries that season as well so very few players of any consequence to come back and help us in the second half. Comparing points isn't really telling the whole story.

Factually inaccurate as well considering Coloccini's salary. Not that I believe we'll necessarily pay new signings that kind of money, just saying.

We've got skill, flair and close-control in the squad. Really? In the midfield and attack, I'd say we have three players that I'd call skilful - Marveaux, Ben Arfa and Cabaye. Four if you count Sammy, who's a bit raw. The rest all struggle to keep and use the ball when deprived of time and space. In the absence of two of those players, the balance isn't right. Anita struggles to keep or use the ball when deprived of time?, really? Anita isn't that neat on the ball, in truth he probably isn't that much better than Tiote... who does have it in him to play like an actual footballer, somewhere inside. How many times did he lose the ball today? Is that the definition of a skilful player? Part of the problem with the midfield was that we were spending so much time fighting to keep the ball by playing it sideways and backwards when under the least bit of pressure. Marveaux was the only one comfortable in possession who could lift his head up, take his time and play the ball into the feet of player further forward. Well there's no real definition of skillfull player, but I wasn't referring to that. I just questioned the suggestion that everyone outside of Marveaux, Ben Arfa and Cabaye struggle to keep/use the ball when deprived of time and space.

We've got skill, flair and close-control in the squad. Really? In the midfield and attack, I'd say we have three players that I'd call skilful - Marveaux, Ben Arfa and Cabaye. Four if you count Sammy, who's a bit raw. The rest all struggle to keep and use the ball when deprived of time and space. In the absence of two of those players, the balance isn't right. Anita struggles to keep or use the ball when deprived of time?, really? He's not the worst we've got, but he's not what you'd call a skilful player and he should be in the anchor role. He's not a flair player no, but he's very neat on the ball, very good first touch and makes the right decisions with his passing to retain possession.

We've got skill, flair and close-control in the squad. Really? In the midfield and attack, I'd say we have three players that I'd call skilful - Marveaux, Ben Arfa and Cabaye. Four if you count Sammy, who's a bit raw. The rest all struggle to keep and use the ball when deprived of time and space. In the absence of two of those players, the balance isn't right. Anita struggles to keep or use the ball when deprived of time?, really? Anita isn't that neat on the ball, in truth he probably isn't that much better than Tiote... who does have it in him to play like an actual footballer, somewhere inside. How many times did he lose the ball today?

We've got skill, flair and close-control in the squad. Really? In the midfield and attack, I'd say we have three players that I'd call skilful - Marveaux, Ben Arfa and Cabaye. Four if you count Sammy, who's a bit raw. The rest all struggle to keep and use the ball when deprived of time and space. In the absence of two of those players, the balance isn't right. Anita struggles to keep or use the ball when deprived of time?, really?

At home against Everton, who in no way shape or form was anything more than decent today. We should be getting points here. But no, we were set up badly, and we played likewise. Anger fest is in it's place. Yeah at home against top 5th place Everton, and yes we should have gotten something because we put in the energy to close them down well and created quite a few clear cut chances, but yet again stupid mistakes cost us and of course that makes me angry But the way some people are posting you'd think we just lost 1:0 to QPR and created nothing. I'm angry, for many reasons. Pardews insane tactics and certain players fucking up yet again. But I don't get the "embarrassing" and "toothless" stuff, and mental rants about players never playing for us again, its nonsense.

I think literally the opposite to everything you've just said there. They're not our strengths, Pardew has just made us believe that. We've got skill, flair and close-control in the squad - and we looked completely bereft of ideas once the manager had us booting it long. He withdrew Obertan immediately after he looked the only player capable of getting into the box and shooting. Yep, Anita, Marvaux, Cisse ect, all need the ball to feet, but Shola needs it high so lets hoof..

Also I don't want to spoil the anger fest in here but did we just lose hopelessly at home against QPR?, because you'd think so from the reactions here.

I know Coloccini is held to a different standard due to his quality but Santon was most to blame for their second. As usual watching the ball with no idea where the player he should be marking is until its too late.

We had enough clear cut chances to win the game, never mind draw.

Speechless, Pardew does the absolute opposite of the right thing over and over again.