80

It'd be interesting to find out on what basis our recruiters are screening out applications. Whether Giles is one of them or not - again, we can't make too many assumptions at the minute. I have to say, I'm not entirely comfortable with us (apparently?) outsourcing the search to an external agency again. It made more sense to me the first time around with Ashworth, when we'd just been taken over and had much less internal infrastructure. I realise that the exact way in which we're using them could vary a lot, and therefore affect my opinion. But if we're quite reliant on them cutting out 95% of the field, as portrayed in the media, there's scope for it to hold us back a lot. The worst case scenario is assessments being carried out by miniature versions of that Eghbali guy at Chelsea.

Yep, I'm firmly in the no rush camp.

Interesting...

Imaging having him AND Tonali... Got to admit I'm praying Bruno's never been attached to all this given Paqueta is his best friend. Woodgate was shattered by it, but Bowyer had the form of his life.

SLUTTY SEAHORSE KLAXON!!! @Kid Icarus INCOMING!!!

True, but if we don't offer an avenue for his ambitions we might just lose him anyway.

Trippier always looks like he's carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders nowadays. Not sure why. Hope he's alright, but it does need to be solved somehow.

What a poor article. And they wonder why local papers are going out of existence.

Didn't realise yoyo clubs were so beneficial to other premier league members... Interesting. Seems like you'd rather give preferential access to your loan kids to recently relegated teams therefore. Big conflict of interests.

Can't help but see him as a div. Don't know for sure what happened, but it must have been the straw that broke the camel's back, and there were rumours he was leaking.

Agreed - although again, it's not obvious to me what Paolo Maldini knew about that before he became a director - but if they're talking about splitting those kinds of technical responsibilities off, I guess that improves Nickson's chances. He was the one that flew out to Brazil to onboard Bruno too, and I think I read he was the one who fronted Joelinton's recent contract negotiations after Ashworth fucked off. We'll see. His candidacy seems to have gone more quiet so maybe it's not happening, but we'll only really know what they're thinking once the appointment/s are announced.

Singing Joe White's name. Must make you feel immense to work alongside Bruno!

There was talking of him putting himself forward for the position and being taken seriously due to the quality of his performance in other areas. He's handled some negotiations for us before and since Ashworth, seemingly well. It's conceivable they'll promote him, everyone's got to start somewhere. Particularly as they're now looking at splitting the position and having a separate Performance Director. I like the idea of getting a vastly experienced guy in, but I think the quality of the person is most important, and my suspicion is the marketplace of sports directors is riddled with charlatans. CVs pumped up with hot air and salt water.

They might sound exciting to us, but the club might not have been impressed in reality. I wouldn't be stunned if we stick with Steve Nickson.

It's a bit self-fulfilling, but I'm inclined to think anyone who chooses not to come here shouldn't be offered it in the first place. As Kaka said, it's all in or no thanks. I realise the Sports Director position is a bit different, but you need someone with a clear vision of what the future should be.

That's a small example of what I was saying earlier. I realise it doesn't mean a ton, but it's interesting that the armband would be given to Joelinton before Bruno. The team - including Bruno himself - might see it differently to how we do.

Everyone's already got that permission

Sure, but after the latest revelations, again, I really don't think we need to worry too much about it. We just need to be clear and consistent with our messaging about needing to protect ourselves from a rogue agent, someone who has a demonstrable track record of behaving outside acceptable bounds of conduct. Even in other areas like Bruno, we've been far less overly combative than clubs like Tottenham or West Ham would be. The main focus has been on wanting to be a club that staff don't want to leave, rather than just enforcing contract terms.

I know what you mean, but I think we (ably assisted by Ratcliffe and his cronies) are doing a pretty good job of dispelling that perception. All other indications within the game are that we're pretty amiable and constructive to deal with. It's Manchester United making headlines about breaking deals, banning lunch and making staff attend offices which don't have enough seats for them all etc. The mood music is very sour and small time. They're starting to settle into their status as the third team in Lancashire.

It's certainly shitty for Ipswich, that's true. Modern football is grim.

Totally. Football's a strange business in which your career can collapse overnight. McKenna retired injured at 22, he'll have only made a relative pittance from the game so far. Puts any decision he makes in a different light. Plus, I fully agree with the idea Chelsea's reputation is so poor now that they're more likely to come off with a smell than the next manager.

Agreed but with the rider than I can see Ratcliffe being pathetic enough to throw such a big tantrum that he starts the ball rolling on all concepts of binding contracts and transfer fees in football being eliminated. Which, if the football grey suits don't interject forcibly to remove his hands from the steering wheel, will kill the golden goose. But fuck it, I'm up for that.

Looks like this trip might be going better than feared

Seems likely it wouldn't have just been Berrada's idea...

Pretty much priceless. It's like saying how much money would you have swapped Keegan for in 1994.