Eveready

Why is the guy who did wear the armband under more fire than the guy who didn't wear it at all?

Don't think he'd have even given a freekick if the linesman didn't flag for it.

I hope this time his 'long term' contract is longer than 3 and a half years.

Everyone was shite at Fulham. Bit harsh to single him out. He also scored a screamer the game before to drive us on to beat Wolves. Appreciate you worded your post as a question, not a statement, but with how good he's been for us the past few years I think it's fair to give him the benefit of the doubt. He's only 32, hardly that old for a CB.

Are there other games this season he's been a standout poor player? All the comments in the previous couple pages are about how he's been back to his best.

Mostly banks and other financial institutions, not shareholder loans I think. They pay interest on it which harms their PSR/FFP position as far as I'm aware.

Go to Sports at the top, scroll down to football then scroll down to Carabao Cup. Took me awhile to find it!

For me it's less about tricking the defenders and more about not allowing the goalie to set his feet and expect a shot. I do recall the winner against West Ham being from a similar area and him winding up for the shot though, so not sure he always strikes the ball that way. Bruno for example will always let the ball run in front of him and take a few short quick steps before striking and give the goalie time to set themselves. Always felt it was a hugely underrated aspect of finishing.

It's not just the accuracy and power that make him such a good finisher, he doesn't telegraph his shots at all. He doesn't wind up or set himself. By the time you realise he's taken a shot the ball's already left his foot and flying into the back of the net.

Not sure even I'd say that was a foul. Nothing dangerous about that challenge and he gets the ball.

Arsenal, Barcelona, Juve, Real Madrid if they eventually decide Mbappe is better on the left, Bayern Munich once Kane is too old in a couple of years, Haaland wants a release clause in his new contract so Man City if he leaves. Wouldn't say they're top clubs anymore but he would drastically improve Man Utd and Chelsea who could offer him significantly improved wages and despite their trajectory over the last few years, it would be naïve for us to write off any idea of our players wanting to leave to join them.

Completely against any release clause myself. Bruno had some leverage with 2 years left on his contract, we needed to get a deal done. Isak is young, one of the best strikers in the world, irreplaceable and a lot of top clubs seem to be a world class striker away from making things click. Even with an extortionate release clause I think they'd be interest.

Think we can disregard this.

Surely with current form it has to be Palmer as the 10 and Bellingham in for Mainoo Edit: Mainoo, not Rice

Thinking it may be Barnes starting out on the right. He and Tino looked to have a good understanding towards the back end of the Forest game. Also wanting to keep Gordon in his preferred position while we're hopefully trying to negotiate a new contract.

Think it changed to 75 minutes this season for Premier League games.

Bit worried if they press well as I expect them to. Tino might be able to carry the ball out from the back a bit but other than that, none of them are great at progressing the ball up field.

Accounting in any business requires a certain level of industry knowledge. PSR/FFP is pretty simple to grasp in the grand scheme of things. I don't think Eales particularly lacks industry knowledge either, he's been working in professional football backroom roles for 18 years.

We've been taken for absolute mugs if we always thought Guehi would go through with no contingency.

We're in full agreement. Just trying to think of the reasons the club/Eddie have specifically mentioned before that we aren't interest in loan deals (was probably a year or 2 ago in a press conference).

I'm assuming the general idea around it is for FFP purposes, with loan fees possibly being seen as a sunk cost by the club as there's no way of recouping anything from player sale. I don't disagree with that general idea, but we have to be a bit more flexible as being fleeced for a ridiculous transfers fee for Guehi isn't smart business with Lascelles and Botman coming back half way through the season.

Still time so not going to get too worried just yet, we have had some deals completed fairly quickly. Biggest concern for me is that if we don't sign a starting quality CB/RW, the player's who were sold on the project here will lose faith. Over the last 2 transfer windows our only meaningful signings would've been a rotation CB on a free, a LB who was already here on loan and a completely unproven young striker. Regardless of our FFP position and anything else going on behind the scene with the restructure, it doesn't scream ambition. Would be understandable if Bruno, for example, questions whether we'll be able to be reach the level to compete at the top whilst he's still in his prime.

One of our best players towards the back end of last season and had a great preseason, playIng lots of minutes. Feels a bit harsh to drop him off one bad performance where he was on a yellow all game, with a goal line clearance and keeping a clean sheet. Hoping this is just to compensate more for aerial presence with Schar out.

I was thinking the other day that this is one thing that VAR had taken out of the game. Used to see this quite a bit, but now the referees generally seem to give the benefit of the doubt and then allow VAR to intervene. Could just be that people don’t put their head in as much as they used to as they know they can’t get away with it with VAR. Just seemed like the ref guessed.

I get that's how it would work under normal circumstances as an overall group consolidation. Just with all this nonsense Chelsea are doing it's worth a go and trying to claim any costs relating to the disposal are entirely related to the women's team and should be deducted from PSR calculations.