ponsaelius

We did, he declared for the US a month ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folarin_Balogun

Rebuilding on the same site is basically impossible I'd say. There's nowhere reasonable near by to play in the meantime.

Never a good finisher in a million years. Seen him miss chance after chance for both Sevilla and Morocco. A big lump and can get his head on things, that's about it.

100,000

Everytime I've seen En-Nesyri play he's made me hate football. I think he's utter shite.

It's an amazing piece of infrastructure particularly in respect to the folding pitch but I think it looks utterly shit from the outside. The Nou Camp renovation is going to look absolutely identical too. Once two of the most distinctive stadiums in the world that you will now struggle to tell apart.

I quite liked the idea of Adarabioyo at Fulham because he will be relatively cheap. Huge in stature but still quick, used to playing with the ball at his feet for Fulham. Just don't think he's ever going to be top class. Would be a squad/stop gap signing to upgrade on Lascelles - and I think we're clearly trying to avoid those kind of signings in general.

I'm actually not opposed in theory to Castle Leazes/Leazes Park build. If done well it could be the best outcome for the setting of the listed buildings while also expanding the park into the city centre and making it a real amenity feature of the city as well as a usable thoroughfare on matchdays. I just think modern new build stadiums are shit. If you let any of the current mainstream stadium architects get a hold of it it will be a giant spaceship/bowl with no character. Every new stadium and redevelopment at the moment has exactly the same fundament design with variations to the exoskeletal facade. A football stadium, especially in England, should have four clearly recognisable stands from inside and out. I have no idea why this stopped being the case but it did, sometime after around 2006. Just don't understand why anybody would want a copy of the Spurs stadium or any of the rubbish from the Qatar World Cup.

St James Terrace is a nice enough building but I would agree it is of significantly less heritage value than Leazes Terrace - which as a set piece is one of the finest and heftiest examples of Georgian residential architecture (although technically Victorian by date) in the country. I don't know about complete demolition but I think part relocation/repurposing/redeveloping of SJT into a new East Stand may be a goer. But you're definitely only ever going to get an extra couple of thousand seats. The real capacity increase comes from doing the Gallowgate extension. I don't know about 62,000 being too little. I think between 60-65 is about right. Again I'm in the minority but I think long term when we're playing 50+ games a season, ticket prices have gone up and the current buzz has become normality there will be an equilibrium point for demand. And you don't want to keep expanding to get more tourists in at the expense of sacrificing atmosphere.

Fair, I hadn't watched the video. Even then you're extremely unlikely to ever be allowed to demolish a fully in tact Grade II listed building. St James Terrace is the more immediate barrier just because of how close it is. I know for a fact the club have already suggested informally the option of moving it brick by brick. However I still think even with that obstacle moved you would be struggling to significantly expand the East Stand because of Leazes Terrace. Maybe a couple of thousand extra seats by going vertically. But to significantly increase the size of that stand you need a much bigger footprint.

It doesn't matter what the owner says, you cannot demolish Grade I listed buildings. It's simply not going to happen.

A lot has been made about Anderson not getting enough gametime and he's a player who can play in all three midfield positions and either wing. In the modern game central strikers are second only to goalkeepers in competition stakes - because there is only one position you can play on the pitch. I can't think of any club who play one forward who retain three central strikers within the squad. Doing so is either wasting resources or stunting a youngsters development. Gordon played central striker for Everton and England U21s. I think he will be our third choice.

It's not just Man City though. Arsenal have two (Jesus and Nketiah), Man United only really had Weghorst this season with Rashford who can also play through the muddle. Spurs only have Kane/Richarlison and Son who is more versatile. Very few clubs have more than two out and out centre forwards in this day and age. In fact even keeping two happy can be hard (look at the difficulties Arsenal had with Nketiah's contract for example). Teams have other players who can also play through the middle when needed. We need a long term replacement for Wilson IMO, not just any kid to fill a squad place who won't get game time.

If you only play with 1 striker then two strikers in a squad is pretty normal for most clubs. Even City only have Haaland and Alvarez (who can play other positions). Isak and Wilson with Joelinton/Gordon as emergency options is fine for now.

Thanks, but no Yanks. Works better imo.

Calling him Your Excellency man

Think the most impressive thing about this signing, when you're used to how we operated under Ashley, is how we've quickly co-ordinated the whole process despite the player being at the Euros. I know this operation is probably the kind of thing that top clubs all do - but after years of Charnley and co running it and needing so many stars to align to make the simplest of signings it is such a culture shock.

If we want another Italian signing then Giorgio Scalvini is the player to go for. Right footed centre back, more modern footballer than a traditional Italian CB. Already played 50 games in Serie A at 19 (this is a league that rarely drops kids in at the deep end).

Don't know how accurate this is. Hopefully if true some daft friendlies against local teams if so.

Yeah his game is totally different to when he came through. His season on loan at Blackpool he scored loads of long range goals, and when he first came into the team at NUFC there were some comparisons to Carrick because of his passing range. Now he plays like a workhorse cog in the system. Endless running, overlapping, short passing patterns on that side to allow Trippier and Bruno to be more expansive. That's fine. It's probably perfect for what we need him for as a squad player. The one thing that would be great is more goals in the box but I'm not sure his role in our system is ever going to require him to do much more expansive work because other players are better at it.

If we got high offers for either ASM or Miggy and they were open to going I think we'd sell them. I don't think we're going to actively shop them around, just like we weren't with Wood, but if above value offers are there for players then the club will act in a business like manner. They've already said on multiple occasions we will have to get used to unemotional player trading.

Think Milan would be asking for even more for Theo Hernandez than we've paid for Tonali. Can't see us going in that heavily on a left back. Also while Theo is a great player, he's very attacking. I think while I think we're wanting more from any new LB we'd be expecting more balance. It's why I'm not completely convinced by the Dimarco links either - a player who has never played much in a back four at club level.

The reffing in this game has been so bad

Home kit is superb

16 is a bit De Rossi, which works.