macphisto

I'd definitely sell him but if it's decided to keep him then I'd give him a new contract if his current one runs out in 2027. One thing we can not do with PSR is risk a saleable asset under 30 years old leave on a free in a few years time. Situation changes a lot once you get into the final 12 months of a contract which is why this summer is so important regarding Willock.

No one is against a squad, but this is where you'd want Mitchell to have an impact at the club. A lot of people have criticised the club for being poor sellers and in Willock we have an asset we could sell, for hopefully decent money, to then reinvest in new and better players with the aim of building the squad. When people say the club are bad at selling players, surely it's players like Willock they're referring to? We'll not get much for him after this summer as he'll be in the final year of his contract.

This season, our management of injuries has been excellent. To be any better, we'd have had no injuries.

I'd be very surprised if he's not sold in the summer. What I could see online, his contract expires in 2027 so this will be the optimum time to get the most for him. Hopefully stays fit and makes a decent contribution until the end of the season to attract clubs. When people say we need to be better at selling players, surely Willock is a prime example?

Can you judge a stadium by TV?

Anyone read the Athletic article about Spurs? This stood out, "Spurs’ financials dove into the red in sync with the arrival of the Covid-19 pandemic, and while both the virus and other matters since have contributed to a half-decade of loss-making, the bulk of those deficits have been driven by a single line item: the accounting cost of depreciating the recently built Tottenham Hotspur Stadium (THS)." I thought infrastructure had nothing to do with PSR?

I've had similar experience and often wonder if it goes back to their Bedouin tradition? Almost like Life of Brian in that they need to barter. You have to remember that it's only within the last 100 years that they've gained their wealth.

Agree, good team but not excellent. Excellence belongs to teams like Man City in the past few years. You can't be excellent when you're in 7th with a +6 goal difference. I'd also say a team has to have a few world class players to be in that bracket too.

Is it really mind boggling? Was he not Chelsea's player of the season for a few years running and also an England regular? I ask the above, even though I never rated him as a player!

100%, their commercial income has been amazing for a long time.

Any examples of decent players at this stage of their contract signing an extension? Interesting situation where data analytics seems to be determining what Liverpool offer as opposed to personal opinions.

I wrote about fans in Thailand watching the match. This is class. This is what it means to be growing our global base. I wonder if there was anything like this in other countries where the gathering is just made up of locals, not Geordie expats? Any footage from Saudi Arabia?

Different landscape now, who's paying these big transformative fees? The external money from PSG/Man City and even Chelsea, under Ambramovich, that oiled the transfer system has really gone down due to PSR and possibly Qatar losing a little interest after hosting the World Cup.

Celebrations in Thailand was class!

I wonder if we could claim damages/ loss of earnings in either not being able to strengthen resulting in us not finishing in a European place or being forced to lose Anderson/Minteh on the cheap/against our wishes? Apologies if it sounds stupid, I didn't tread the whole thread.

Completely different clubs and from afar I see them as good places for players to get accustomed to the Premier League without too much pressure. I would chuck Brighton and Fulham in the same category too. It is completely different at Newcastle where players don't have that bedding in period. I'm not saying don't buy young but they have to be top pedigree, like Hall, and they don't come too cheaply. I'm sure there will be occasions when we buy a cheap player from nowhere who can do a job but that will be very rare.

I'm not so sure we did buy to sell initially, more buy young (better value) and develop the team. The problem with selling our main players, where are the buyers? A lot of money flowed into the game through PSG, Barcelona and Madrid when we talk about Suarez, Bale, etc. No one is spending that type of money now.

I wonder what agents are making of the lack of spending? Must be losing a lot of money so I wonder if they're agitating for change behind the scene. Obviously not bothered about the welfare of agents but they are a powerful influence in football.

Very few people follow Leicester in Thailand, all of the traditional teams have big followings and I see quite a few Newcastle tops too; last year I even saw a local wearing the Joelinton hawaii shirt.

Is it not more Levy is like Charnley? Ashley's equivalent would be Joe Lewis. I saw references to Bale and Modric, I think that model's now dead as there just isn't the funds out there and PSR; no one is paying that money anymore.

Without reading the article, I don't think there's too much wrong with the headline. We'll have gone 2 years without a first team signing by the summer, no significant progress off the field, and we are nowhere near exploiting all of the loopholes regarding commercial income. The above is fine but don't blame PSR; PIF simply either do not want to invest as they initially led us to believe they would through their statements or are currently reassessing their whole football strategy (Newcastle, Saudi Leauge and World Cup). One other thing to note is maybe Eales was meant to play a more prominent role PR wise but unfortunately he can't do that.

Is this first time of PIF using a Saudi club to get money into the club? Seems more than a coincidence that the same club has gone for two of our goalkeepers.

Is that the same Barclays who was involved in the libor scandal? So fair criticism of Staveley is her dealings with Barclays? Bizarre thing to bring up, only fair criticism is PSR but we have no idea if she was responsible and if she was who should she have not bought or sold?

Be even more interesting to see what would have happened had we got Zola instead of Asprilla as they both left Parma at roughly the same time (not sure who left first); think we'd be talking about a living legend.

For anyone having a go at Staveley, we don't know what was promised in terms of incoming commercial deals. The other thing is no one says which transfer we shouldn't have done or who we should have sold that would have covered the shortfall?