Toonpack

According to Borson's article on player contracts (the main clauses are standard for all players) failing to show at a game as required/told to do so, is a single offence, every single time, punishable by a fine of two weeks wages. He could end up owing us money 😂.

Btw, If anyone is wondering if Ornstein has an agenda - The New York Times (The Athletic) company is second only to John Henry in shareholding in FSG who happen to own...............

Read Borson's article (posted previously, but here it is again) We hold ALL the cards https://stefanborson.substack.com/p/the-final-isact?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1780285&post_id=170761047&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=172gw&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

He stays unless we get the top dollar, because we really, REALLY do hold all the cards: https://stefanborson.substack.com/p/the-final-isact?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1780285&post_id=170761047&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=172gw&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

That should be enough, combined with the "robust" rejection of the dippers bid.

Sorry, I perhaps was not clear, when I said "before you get near to the site" I meant "start on the site" i.e. breaking ground. I was not inferring you do all the planning and then go "oh where will we put it".

New CEO will definitely want a view and give his approval for any of the plans, after all he's the person who'll be responsible for delivering it. I think folks are underestimating the amount of work involved in projects of this size, I'm far from being a civil engineer but I do frequent places where there are big project c/engineers and they just laugh at the "there's nothing happening/why hasn't it started merchants" because (they say) it takes years of planning for stuff like this before you get near to the actual site.

It's bollocks, planning submissions are public, nothing is submitted, let alone signed off.

You were wrong

Huns in game saving penalty shocker, who'd a thunk it.

We will sign some players, but they'll meet criteria from Eddie's list.

Window closed now has it ??

Y'know, I'd understated the whingers if we were getting beaten to signings by Everton or Fulham etc. But as it's all the cartel clubs, I really, really don't.

There will be but we'll only sign someone who meets Eddie's (probably exacting) standards.

That's why it takes a lot of time, he'd rather do without than take just anyone.

Also could be read as the group is similarly livid with his antics and they don't want him back unless something significant changes. Last sentence of Caulkin's piece: "But I have been aware of feeling around the group that there’s something there that’s not to the benefit of the group.” They are all really pissed off with him IMO.

He'll get that with the U21's plus high level coaching. He's got a lot of acclimatisation to do as well, learn the language and a whole different culture to adapt to.

It was stated when he was signed he wasn't going to be loaned out but would be kept with the squad.

Whatever the fuck that means, enjoy shouting at clouds.

We haven't though, not materially, we haven't had a deal knocked back and even then any case would take years, City's is way more advanced.

In order to challenge it meaningfully, in the courts, we would have to have suffered loss, that's why City challenged it, because they had a deal disallowed and is why we are supporting City, we don't really need another case of our own.

If we need to look at the rung below, we need to keep Isak, whether he likes it or not, end of.

No, but clubs thinking is circulated by, and infuences, chosen journalists.

Pure conjecture, they would have been planned but when all of a sudden you have to double (maybe treble) your budgetted striker outlay, that may, y'know, just cause knock effects somewhere.

More fool you then