Interpolic

Basically trying to say that I think you're talking about 2 managers, and maybe a handful more.

What do you mean by that? I think he's saying that when a club hits a rough patch the fact that the complaints are roughly the same as other clubs in said rough patch are broadly the same never cease to amaze. its all the same, regardless of manager its always too cautious, too much long ball, boring football etc. Just one of the quirks I've noticed, perhaps all managers fail in the exact same way but its a little curiosity I found amusing How many managers have you noticed it with, out of the many, many, many Premier League managers that have been and gone over the last 20 years? 2? 10? Most of them?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2539828/With-Anderson-Nani-set-chop-United-look-biggest-let-downs-Premier-League-era.html

Man, so many of the N-O gang are there! PM me your addresses and I'll make badges.

What do you mean by that?

Jesus.

Skirge, you are absolutely obsessed with swap deals.

It amazes me when people say they've seen enough of Marveaux to gather that he disappears in too many games and never makes his presence felt - if you believe ESPN's stats then he only played around 1,000 minutes in the League all last season (despite being available for selection for the vast, vast majority of games) which is the equivalent of about 11 games if you divide it by 90. When you consider that he still managed a handful of assists and was clearly one of our top players in a good few of the games he started then I think the sample size (i.e. the time he's actually been given on the pitch for NUFC) is far too small to write him off as not good enough, particularly when you look at the contributions of other players in our squad that contributed fuck-all last year but got a comparable amount of minutes or actually a fuckload more. It's a wonder some players can be anonymous for 45 minutes and they're relegated to the bench for the next 10 games and basically written off, whereas others can do the same for games on end and are mainstays regardless. Assuming there isn't something fundamentally wrong with Marveaux fitness-wise then I'd back him to be a big success at his next club, if he has a manager that rates him and allows him to play and create.

For those who watch more Spanish football than me - did you expect Negredo to do this much better in the Premier League than Soldado, who cost £10m more?

Dat criteria.

Mort was chairman, Llambias was Managing Director. Now its like this.. Mike Ashley (Owner) | John Irving (Finance Director), Lee Charnley (Football Secretary) & Joe Kinnear (Director of Football) | Alan Pardew (Manager) Not sure if that illustrates how far up Ashley's ring piece Pardew is.

FWIW it doesn't seem like anything as subjective as this (i.e. related to football performance/reality) is considered, it's just a figure based on cost that decreases through the course of the contract, whether relevant or not, as if the player's a piece of equipment that cannot actually increase in value (IIRC). Yeah I see, in a way I guess it's a sensible way to account for player value, as it's a conservative/worst case scenario. It would be incredibly difficult and subjective to try to assess the actual current value of a player for each tax year, and a serious injury etc could reduce the value instantly. At least this way the paper value of the player is accounted for, even if it's rough. It doesn't really do that though, someone like Giggs or Messi will be valued at nowt when they could have fetched millions.

FWIW it doesn't seem like anything as subjective as this (i.e. related to football performance/reality) is considered, it's just a figure based on cost that decreases through the course of the contract, whether relevant or not, as if the player's a piece of equipment that cannot actually increase in value (IIRC).

I don't really have any knowledge or a view on this, but why is player amortisation such a bad thing to include? If you spend loads of money on an asset that quickly becomes worthless, that's bad right? If Mike Ashley could have easily refinanced the debt at favourable terms, why didn't he? It just seems really arbitrary to me, forgotten how it works exactly but you'll have a player in the squad who was brought through the youth system who is worth millions but not in the eyes of the books or a £10m purchase that loses £2m value every year over the course of their 5-year contract. Someone remind me exactly how it works and I'll remember why I disagree with it.

Most people gave Keegan the credit that day mind IIRC.

Exactly man, get with it.

The jeans are areet, fuck knas what he's playing at with the top and the hat though. Should ask for a refund on his face n'all.

Have always wondered about the wisdom of using player amortisation to indicate the financial health of a club when what people really want to see is the actual profit/loss.

My dad hates him, well done my dad.

Always seeing the negative, Ian.

N-O has got 5 out of the last 6 results right btw. Tripped up vs West Brom, but the others spot-on.

Do market forces fall under science?

Might give it a whirl some time.