AyeDubbleYoo

From what I’ve seen he carries and dribbles the ball through challenges quite well too, which might open up defences in a different way to a creative passer. While also having the other attributes Howe likes.

We've had almost every opinion going on both players, including myself. You could argue that Murphy is at his career high value at the moment, therefore we should sell him now. But he also looks more valuable to the squad than Miggy, so you take your choice I guess.

He was pretty good, would like him to start instead of Longstaff but either him or Joelinton would have to play right side.

I go by the assumption that any functioning PL player starts at £30m. Then he's English.

Looking forward to watching Miley, can’t remember ever seeing him play. For long anyway.

Sela Cup?

Striker, but I guess maybe AM too. We need more possession maybe.

Any chance Willock starts the season instead of Big Sean?

I still reckon Barnes would be quite good in the middle.

Good workout with them being match fit.

Hall is ridiculously good.

I think I’m watching someone play this game on FIFA

Is child maintenance usually based on parent's income? No idea how it's usually done.

But when we sign people like Hall we get accused of not upgrading enough, it's hard to win.

Yeah of course, but what I mean is, I guess people gave that feedback just because it was better for them personally.

For the people who can log on I guess it gives us more chance, but I think it's slightly unfair for the people who can only do the ballot. I didn't read the justification they gave, I know people wanted the general sale period but I don't see any non-selfish reasons that it's better. For me it will make things easier.

Exactly. At least we have two shots, but it does mean you spend a lot of time working for your ticket.

Makes you wonder how it hard it is to win in the ballot now

I don’t think anyone could complain about a badge, it’s an image which can be made accessible by things like an alt tag which describes what the image contains. It would be like complaining about a drawing or a photo. It’s good practice to be legible in every thing and digital will be a major driver for people changing badges. But I’d say it’s more a matter of having something that stands out and is easy to use in various context. Not accessibility guidelines. And in our case it’s using a retro badge, which is probably just because it’s cool.

Villa sold two fairly important first team players like, including their best midfielder. Granted, they did it with less of a rush than us, but our sales were less harmful.

Yeah, I'm just saying it's more for ease of use and versatility of a brand mark, along with a trend, rather than because of accessibility in the sense of disabled access.

I don't think accessibility guidelines would cover a logo or badge, would it? You could add features, like an alt tag, to describe the badge digitally. You wouldn't be legally required to simplify the badge itself. I think the simplification of badges is part trend and part to make it more nice-looking against a wider range of backgrounds and on various different channels. Maybe it's a good idea for a few reasons but I doubt it's legally required.

Apply this question to every fucking thing on transfer rumour Twitter

It doesn't but still tempting to get on it ASAP.

Isaac Hayden levels of enjoying a slide tackle.