ponsaelius

But the £30 is nowt for a membership if one ticket success gets you a profit of 100-200 quid. That ticket will potentially win 5-6 tickets a season even if you're only mildly successful on it. Then if you have 10-20 memberships the multiplier effect goes up each time. Every single of those memberships will be profitable over the course of the season, and even if some of them aren't the more you have the more you are de-risking the overall process because of the profit margins for each success. The current system of unlimited untrackable memberships, ballots, digital tickets and demand exceeding supply is a ticket touts dream. For some people ticket touting is a full-time job, not just a side hustle. They will have hundreds of accounts applying for football and gig tickets, bots and macros doing the work. I have absolutely no doubt there will be professional touts with 10-20 accounts, each with fake addresses, running off hidden IP addresses. It's why it's so difficult to get a ticket compared to last year because the total pool of accounts applying will be much higher.

Gambia qualified for the AFCON (thanks to his goal) so good chance he'll be there in January if fit anyway.

Maddison out until January - back just in time for Son, Sarr and Bissouma to go away for a month.

Harvey Barnes, Alan Barnes any any Barnes

Apparently City happy to loan Phillips to Juve and seems to be a goer.

Yeah if we can have him back for early December that would be superb.

Thing is if it wasn't for FFP, and then restrictions on 'fair market value' sponsorships, we wouldn't even be considering workarounds like loaning from other PIF clubs. Each thing leads to another. I get that there has to be some restrictions but it is mad that you have a governing body basically preventing private entities from investing their cash in their product. There should be a lot more scope within FFP for the costs to be offset over a longer period of time to allow initial investment. Man City and Chelsea were able to skip the queue and set themselves up nicely with valuable squads, feeder clubs and great academies before FFP was ever even a thing. This gives them such leeway to spend now in the age of FFP. It's systemically unfair. I would actually support a salary cap more than I would the current restrictions on player asset spending.

I suppose if you accept that the PL doesn't care about ruining the competitive imbalance of other leagues and only gets involved when they want to protect their own closed shop, then yeah, it is sound logic. Personally the whole model of multi club ownership and deals is crooked and should have been massively restricted across the board years ago - not just in one specific way when it threatens the big 6 clubs.

I can empathise with this view to some extent like. PL football (and most top flight) is in a lot of ways designed for television viewing rather than in person. VAR is the most obvious manifestation of this. It wouldn't even exist without the hypertelevised nature of football with all the cameras/angles/replays. The result is that the traditional spectator can be completely in the dark with what is going on in the game while the home viewer sees the whole picture. The reason to go to the game in person is for the atmosphere. But if this is sanitised or underwhelming then the reason for being there in the first place is lost. I was really disappointed by the atmosphere for Dortmund (h) and it really felt like a lot of money for the kind of experience I got out of it. I had a season ticket for years of shit, but I don't really massively regret not having it now despite us being much better now. I got used to going to watch lots of non league football and going to see other football home and abroad as a neutral. I don't think I could do this as much if I went to every single home game - and I'm happy to just dip in now and again these days.

I think restricting it only one way (inwards to PL) is nonsense. It still encourages the multi club ownership model and farming players out. This has gone on for years now with clubs benefitting from this model. The timing of it, and the specifics of it, are so thinly veiled so as to a target one specific club and one specific threat/issue rather than the wider issue. I would also say there is a major issue with allowing all other clubs to trade freely with the Saudi league sides, and pick up any unsettled players freely on subsidised deals (this is inevitable with some players going there IMO and the money they're on) while we banned from doing so. I don't see how that can stand from a competitiveness point of view.

Probably Forest as well. Although the restriction only amounts to incoming loans not outgoing. Maybe some of these clubs won't mind that.

Spied myself in that bottom shot!

The manner in which they've been so draconian as above does it make it difficult, at least in terms of optics, to then roll it back and introduce the option for limited numbers of transfers. You'd be even more miffed in the case as above for losing all your points.

It's not over yet either. We still have two games. Sick of the defeatist attitude. We had 0 points after 3 games in 02 and got through!

It'll probably be stronger than last night's, as at least we'll have Krafth and Ritchie back to make up some numbers.

Yes I agree with that. I can see the arguments both ways. Games have been coming right down to very low points totals compared to recent seasons (where the totals needed had previously gone daft) so it's obviously worked as intended, but equally plenty lads who have gone to away games for years informally have now been locked out. I don't know what the solution is. Personally I hate e-tickets but a digital away ticket system would open up the possibility for a limited number of times per season (3-5?) where the name on the ticket can be formally changed before the game (and nobody gets the point). This significantly reduces the potential for empty seats, stops loyalty point hoarding, but allows a degree of reasonable flexibility and doesn't completely shut out the spares market and exiles who don't have STs. I think that is a reasonable middle ground.

He still completed the most passes of any player on the pitch. Despite being asked to swap sides twice during the game. So much of our play goes through him (too much, probably) so when he dips on performance it is more noticeable.

I'm probably (definitely) a miserable twat but I personally don't understand going to an away game unless you're actually going to the match. I had a great time in Brugge during the day but certainly didn't have any FOMO for those that just stayed in the square. I was there to see the game Different strokes for different folks I guess.

I'm fine to sing it when we're playing them and agree every team should be rubbing their noses in it at OT. But singing it randomly elsewhere is weird IMO.

Gordon as third choice striker would normally be absolutely fine IMO. The issue is we have Barnes, Murphy, Anderson etc out so have massive issues in terms of other options to play wide.

It's obviously just a bit of a pisstake. Singing the Glazers one outside of the context of Old Trafford when they're not our rivals is embarrassing.

Happy Milan won personally. Rather the group was wide open than settling for playing for the dropout route. Even if that means ultimately finishing bottom.

Wanker opinion I'd have never usually have said but personally I'd rather just go out than drop into Europa League. Don't like the idea of CL teams getting in via the back door anyway (this route gets plugged next year). We don't have the depth or quality to plough through from a round of 32 without it harming league form. Would rather focus on the domestic cups and the league.

Such a frustrating 180 mins of football. Feel like every single bounce has gone against us across the two games. Think if we have even one of Isak/Botman available we get 1-3 points from these two fixtures and keeps us right in a great position.

I think this is a myth. When I looked it up (it was claimed on some blog) he'd played almost exclusively at full back or wing back in a 5 throughout youth and reserve level. Again being a wing back massively different role to be a wide forward. And even if he had played there - it would be clear that he's moved back for a reason to best exploit his attributes. He needs to be running into space not receiving it in forward areas.