Hughesy

Not even sure what saying Dubravka should be stronger even means. What - jump with a bit more force to burst through Boly's arms? Which he needs to anticipate might be there?

He was fouled. If he isn't fouled, he catches it. Saying he should punch it is just hindsight talking.

I don't know why bother signing him then. Might have assumed he would acquire a working knowledge of the language in 8-9 months.

He plays on the wing mainly this season. Danny Graham is their main striker. Yep and only got 5 assists in 28 games. From what I’ve seen the majority of Blackburn fans don’t rate him.

He's not exactly set the Championship on fire this season...

Was really impressed by his ability to do this. Always seemed to be able to create a bit of space for himself.

Agreed - to be honest, I can see some of the arguments for people still going on a regular basis if they want to - people have their own reasons. But to sacrifice one game? There shouldn't be a single fan who isn't prepared to get behind that.

Not only are you completely wrong about his Liverpool signings, have you even bothered to see who he signed for Napoli? Do some research ffs.

I don't think it was necessarily the wrong time for Robson to go - the team was certainly not performing that well (we finished 5th on 56 points in 03/04 - the points total being a fairer reflection of the performance than the league position) and expectations were obviously higher then (and rightfully so). The bigger mistake was not appointing a good manager after Robson.

The new Andy Cole.

People were saying this about Staveley. What publicity would Kenyon or Staveley get and how would it help them?

That's a bold claim. Lloris, maybe. Unless you mean currently in better form? Even then, Dubs was a bit scratchy at the start of the season and is only now back at the standard he set last year. Kepa is probably the weakest of those 4 to be honest.

I trust Caulkin, but he was fed 3rd hand news and spun a yarn. It was a clever campaign from her, in the end though not serious enough to come back at any time in the last year, even when interest has sparked again by other bidders. Not sure if she was just an Ashley pawn, the setup meal makes me think so. What did she stand to gain from not being a serious bidder? She didn't get any good publicity from the bid and, in any event, she doesn't work an industry where good publicity makes a difference. If anything, not making a serious bid would damage her reputation.

Haven’t actually checked the full set of articles (and in a very different time zone at the moment), but the 1998 article amendment that Chris posted on Twitter is unusual in that it allows the directors the ability to refuse a share transfer. That is a massive red flag for a bank - but no idea why the banks that lent to us at the time didn’t spot that and change it. Unless there was a subsequent amendment or the money was lent somewhere else in the group. Weird.

Man Utd is the obvious example that I can think of.

In my opinion, if it is significant, it would mean a takeover would be imminent. But it is more than likely to be something completely meaningless. Literally as meaningless as amending the provisions about whether a board meeting can held by telephone or needs to be a physical meeting. The articles basically govern how a company is run and so loads of it is boring admin stuff. If you suffer from insomnia, read a set and you’ll soon find out how dull most of it is.

Getting a bit niche here, but on a debt funded acquisition a bank will often ask for the articles to be amended to ensure that their security is enforceable (assuming the articles don’t already include the required language). But as mentioned above, this would normally happen at the same time as the acquisition and not before.

This could all just be the most elaborate wind-up yet, but the timing is interesting. It's not like companies change their Articles on a whim, and we know MA isn't a huge fan of wasting money. Would take a regional law firm about 1k - if that - to amend the articles if Ashley really wanted to wind fans up. But the timing is definitely interesting.

Agreed - it would seem odd timing to amend the articles now to be honest. But if the articles are being amended for a takeover related reason, you wouldn’t tend to do it in advance of a takeover, you’d normally do it just before or concurrent with the deal actually occurring (for the simple reason that a seller wouldn’t want to amend its articles for a buyer unless it knows the deal is definitely happening).

Amending the articles could mean absolutely anything to be honest. Not sure where the idea has come from that the changes would amend voting rights necessarily - it could do, but it could be as mundane as changing the number of directors required or as meaningful as including provisions regarding external debt.

Can't really understand why someone wouldn't boycott one match. It's one match. Do some Christmas shopping or something. No-one is asking that you pay £600 and never go again. It's writing off £30 for the greater good.

Good.

Players getting admonished for showboating. So fucking pathetic the way people react as if it's a great insult if a player shows off.

I don't think it's any coincidence that Brahimi is out of contract in the summer.

Pretty glad we didn't spend £20m+ on Cairney after his performance last night.