Jackie Broon

It's expected news but depending on how they've gone about it could fuck our ability to bring in money from sponsorship in the short / medium term. If the PL have to sign it off before we can agree a deal it could be like the O&D test all over again.

I don't think so, this is driven by the 6. The temporary ban was always temporary until they came up with changes to the rules aimed at scuppering us. From what's reported what they are putting in place is having to agree any related party transaction with the PL before it takes place, the previous rule was that the PL could discount anything over fair market value from the FFP calculation. I expect that any such potential deals will be held up for months / years in legal disputes over what represents fair market value now. Rather than as it was before where we could have just signed them and then had that argument later.

Us taking down the sports direct signage puts a different twist on it this time, if they extend the temporary ban any further we can unquestionably demonstrate that it is now costing us sponsorship money.

Shelvey shouldn't be dropped, but he needs a more defensive midfielder alongside / behind him. Willock should only be played in a more attacking midfield role, or behind Wilson, he's just not suited to playing in a two man midfield, or three man midfield without a more defensive midfielder in there. Hayden, Hendrick or even Schar could be options until January.

This. He need to set the team up to get the best out of what he has at the moment, it's blindingly obvious that we need more bodies in central midfield, we just don't the quality of players to get away without any defensive cover in midfield.

Whilst that is true, Howe is persisting formations that we just don't have the players to make work. He has made selection errors that have directly cost us points and other than Joelinton's form it's hard to find any positives on the pitch from his management.

Any other team in this league would have made it really difficult for Leicester today. We're going down.

This 4-3-3 just isn't working, we're just getting overwhelmed in midfield. It suits Joelinton but no one else.

He just doesn't fit into this system.

I would've hoped we'd see less of that backward passing then hoof forward under Howe by now. Far too much of that in our play.

There would probably still be ways to extend the Gallowgate even if the Strawberry Place development goes ahead. Well, it's much more likely to be feasible than extending the east stand.

Lets see what division we're in next season before worrying about that. It should still be possible to extend the Gallowgate.

And your reckoning is based on exactly what knowledge of the planning system? If Leazes Terrace could somehow be relocated (which is pie in the sky in itself because, even it it were physically possible, and they could voluntarily or compulsorily purchase all the the individual properties, the cost would be astronomical) it would need to be pushed further into Leazes Park, which would harm the significance of the park (which is also listed). Moving the building would also inevitably impact on its significance, it would change both its setting and the setting of the park and would inevitably alter the fabric of the building. Also, it would involve the demolition of St James' Street, which is also listed. This would all also cause substantial harm to the significance of the Leazes conservation area. There is no redevelopment of Leazes Park that could offset that, there was an extensive restoration of the park in the early 2000s. It would result in at least substantial harm to the significance of Leazes Park, Leazes Terrace and the conservation area and complete loss of significance of the listed buildings on St. James' Street. Planning policy dictates that substantial harm or complete loss of a heritage asset an only be acceptable if it is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh the harm caused. That just wouldn't be the case here. No chance, pie in the sky, end of story.

It has been extended until next Tuesday. Presumably the PL clubs will meet before then to either extend it again or decide on new rules.

I'm not saying there haven't been some signs of improvement, particularly against Brentford, but miles better? I haven't seen that yet.

Have we? Against Brentford we were better going forward but but a shambles defending, our performance against Arsenal was as bad as anything Bruce served up, as was the performance against Norwich (although hard to judge anything form that being down to ten men).

It shouldn't take Darlow and Clark costing us four points for them to be fucked off, with the research he's supposedly done on the squad they should've been nowhere near the pitch.

That's what Man City thought... until their emails got hacked. Hopefully our owners will be more careful than that.

It depends what's in the legal agreement they made. Just based on PL rules they can't remove them as owners of the club but they could suspend the club from the league if they didn't sell it in that circumstance. Realistically though, it's unlikely they would ever be able to actually prove state control of the club.

Well this guy is probably in charge of our PR now...

I think that's probably likely, unless the clubs meet before then to change the rules. The current rules are: E.46 The Board shall determine whether consideration included in the Club’s Earnings Before Tax arising from a Related Party Transaction is recorded in the Club’s Annual Accounts at a Fair Market Value. If it is not, the Board shall restate it to Fair Market Value. E.47. The Board shall not exercise its power set out in Rule E.46 without first having given the Club reasonable opportunity to make submissions as to: E.47.1. whether the said consideration should be restated; and/or E.47.2. what constitutes its Fair Market Value.

I don't think that's how it works. The rules allow the PL to adjust the FFP calculation to reduce what is taken into account from related party transactions to fair market value. The club only has to submit accounts for FFP once per season. The current situation is that the PL have temporarily banned all new related party transactions until 30th November.

simple mistake or unconscious bias

In FM terms, something like this I reckon