Manxst

2 minutes ago, junkhead said:

 

We might also be very close to UEFA's 90% limit of wages/turnover.

Or even well over. We were at around 95% in the last published figures. We’ve only gone and added a lot of quality players on top of that, without being able to get rid of many. New sponsors will help, of course, but I reckon we’re still right up there. 

4 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

He was gaming last night with Tonali at about midnight, according to his instagram

Whilst ordering UberEats, and munching on bowls of wotsits, ice cream and full fat coke…? 

On 12/08/2023 at 08:24, Manxst said:

“Newcastle are looking at centre-backs and have explored fees and availability for the likes of Jean-Clair Todibo (Nice), Edmond Tapsoba (Leverkusen), Odilon Kossounou (Leverkusen), Perr Schuurs (Torino), Joachim Andersen (Crystal Palace), Armel Bella-Kotchap (Southampton) and Antonio Silva (Benfica).” (Craig Hope)

5 minutes ago, jack j said:

That ITK Rob first mentioned him beginning of June

He's always been an option by the looks of it and now Chelsea need the FFP sorted we got it done

 

Wonder who our centre half targets are

🤔

Andersen seems to be a constant link not seen many others

3 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

The contract thing is true and contributed to a lower fee. But the equivalent of less than 8 full games , in a bad sad, no outstanding performances he’s unproven.  
 

Again tbf I think City sold a U21 GK for £20m but at least he has won the U21 euros as a starter. Lavia went for £10m. 
 

we can agree to disagree.  But £30m is Brazy to me.  
 

Shea Charles has just gone for £15m having made one appearance! 

4 minutes ago, thepercyarms said:

 

they still have the option to take a case to court 'in the public interest' regardless of whether or not the she withdrew her statement. I would say the video evidence would've been more than sufficient to bring about a realistic chance of conviction. he was as guilty as fuck. 

the justice system in this country is by and large, fucked.

Yeah, they do have that option, but then he could’ve forced her to attend court and give evidence (or else the court could’ve wanted her to themselves) and it would’ve gone to ratshit- that scenario is just not worth the bother. 

Just now, nufcjb said:

If we get Hall, is that out signings done? Thought we needed a RCB?

I reckon so. We needed a CM last Jan but the club spent on Gordon instead and seemingly hedged their bets on leaving the midfield signing for the summer. If we can’t get signings we want, it seems like the club will wait rather than go too far down the wanted lists. Think they’ve decided Lascelles will be fine as backup until at least the winter window now.

15 minutes ago, astraguy said:

Can't see what any new evidence could clear him from that, only fake audio and pictures but that would of come to light very very quickly.Rape is rape i never want to see him play again 

Too simplistic a view of what ‘evidence’ consists of. It’s not always pictures etc, but ANYthing which can relate and either add or take away weight of argument to the case. In this instance I presume that the ‘new evidence’ is literally the fact that the lass is no longer willing to attend court and support the prosecution (and a statement to that effect- literally a few lines of writing is all that’s required). Given the audio and video evidence that was released, the only ‘KEY witnesses’ in the matter are Greenwood and the lass. If she decides she doesn’t want to pursue the matter or doesn’t want to go to court etc, then the CPS will not want to either drag her there and make her give evidence against her wishes, or be able to pursue the prosecution without her being there, hence the matter being dropped with the ‘new evidence’ and lack of ‘key witness’ given as reasons. 

😂😂

1 minute ago, wormy said:

 

I'd play for free, me. 

Of course you would- you’re a fan. Would you go and do your job for free though? I know I wouldn’t. Nor would I move jobs and lose millions of £’s unless I had to, especially if I only had a few more years left to work and hopefully a long time to live after that. 

7 minutes ago, Hovagod said:

Any change of Wor Flags bringing out the rainbow colours for this? Or would that get them in trouble with Amanda?

Don’t think they should get involved personally. Their role is to support

our club by helping to create a cracking atmosphere for our fans and players - they’re nothing to do with international games (don’t think any flags have been done previously for England etc?).

Just now, KaKa said:

 

If you believe 11 Premier League cameos trumps a full season doing what Maatsen did at Burnley then fair enough. I disagree.

I can see your point. But those stats can imply Chelsea rely on Hall in the PL more than Maatsen. (Which yes, I’m twisting the meaning a little). As I said, the stats can be misleading. 

1 minute ago, ponsaelius said:

 

However I just can't see us offering the kind of deal that would tempt them to sell at this stage. They will be better off letting him go to Palace for a year and his value increasing through more gametime.

Yes, they would be better off. However, it’s not conclusive that Hall has signed a new deal. And it’s also been reported that we have potentially turned his head and he might want a move, which is why the loan to Palace hasn’t occurred. 

Just now, KaKa said:

 

Maatsen was exceptional for Burnley last year in a Burnley team that romped the Championship.

 

If you think that is meaningless then that's fine. I disagree.

And Hall as been good in every PL game he’s played in- a clear step up from the championship. 

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

 

Bruh ... As big part of player valuations is based on how proven a player is.

 

Maatsen has shown more because if the opportunity he had last year and so he is rated more highly.

 

This has nothing to do with how good Hall is or isn't, but he is less proven as of now, and so his valuation cannot be that high IMO.

 

I don't know why what I'm saying is seemingly so confusing.

“Proven” is a hard one to quantify- Maatsen has played 1 PL game compared to Halls 9. Does that mean Chelsea rate Hall higher? Stats like that are meaningless. 

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

 

It has nothing to do with Hall being ahead of him or not.

 

Asking £50 million for Hall based on last season's 11 games just isn't happening. Maatsen has done and shown much more. Hall might have done just as well too, but he wasn't in the position to do so.

 

£50 million is close to what we paid for Tonali. If they ask that for Hall then they're basically not interested in selling.

Maatsen has shown “much more” purely because he’s three years older and had more opportunity to. You’re comparing them as if  Hall was loaned out at 15. 

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

 

If they thought that highly of him already they'd at least be keeping him as a backup. 

 

I think he's a big talent but hasn't played a ton and so it's hard to justify that sort of fee.

 

The other kid they have that was at Burnley playing left back is the one in that £50 million range, as he looked a class above last year for Kompany and he can also play left and right wing.

Maatsen is 21, Hall is 18, and like you say, Maatsen went on loan last year for playing time (and it’s now rumoured they want to do the same for Hall this year)- it’s be daft to think Hall would be over him in development terms at the moment. Hall hasn’t played a ton as he’s had senior internationals in his way, yet still managed to get 11 appearances last year. 
 

It’s the great Mackem diaspora, the dispersal of their people fleeing the magedia and the hewman rights abewsers down the road

2 hours ago, beardsleymagic said:

The thing that annoys me is the amount of leyway that is given to goalkeepers.

 

The officials need to forget who's involved in the incident and where it's taken place.

 

It should always be judged on "if this was two midfielders in the centre circle 30 minutes into the game... Would it be a freekick?"  And then take the appropriate action ie. a penalty/freekick/red card.

 

I know other things will come into play as in last man or whatever but the actual awarding of the freekick/penalty should be based on this.

Also equally annoying (to me!) is the old “well, it’s in the first 5 minutes of the game/it’s the first bad foul, so the ref can’t give a booking”. 

1 minute ago, Tina Tooner said:

Only 35m. Wonder why we never explored that

 

 

 

Because we’ve chosen to buy a CM, LW and RB with our FFP limited funds instead? If we were able and wanted to buy a £35m RW then I guess we probably would’ve at least enquired. Seems the club has other priorities for now though. 

5 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

He’s on £42k per week for another two years.  He’s unlikely to earn that elsewhere - he doesn’t strike me as someone arsed about playtime. 

Fraser is on £70k per week I read. It’s Hayden that’s on 42-50. 

2 minutes ago, Miggys First Goal said:

Fucking get rid of Fraser. That’ll help towards it surely. 

That’s the difficulty though. Who wants him for the wages he’s on, and why would he leave for less given there’s two years (I think?) left to go? 

3 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Sorry you’re right. 
 

I think the first half was close but we edged it. We score 2 great goals and I think Watkins misses a decent opportunity. Gordon has Cash number.  Our press is largely effective. But Villa are able to get at our back line. 
 

Second half Tonali begins to swagger. But Villa still look a threat and not out of the game. The defence looks susceptible at this point but truthfully so does ours (to a lesser degree). Some players are a bit sloppy especially in transition.  
 

After the 3rd we gradually become sharper and harder counter punchers as Villa chase. Isak has a good chance to score a hat trick and Villa miss a sitter. I think Cash moves into midfield at this point and gets the better of Burn a few times and looks a threat.  Our subs come on and kill the game flat. 
 

It’s when the subs come that we really run away with it. The second half we are undoubtedly better but Villa still look a threat. Which is why I don’t get Ferguson’s comments. Villa looked dangerous and good in spots but never dominated any phase of the game.  The only domination came from us at the back end of the game. 
 

If I’m a Villa fan there’s positives to take. Villa look like scoring a lot of goals - 2 lads upfront will bang. Coutinho looked good when he came on. The Mings injury is a big concern and I would wonder why Emery didn’t close up shop at 4-1. Protect your fighter and throw in the towel. Took a needless battering at the end there to the GD.  
 

Oh and Cash was bad defensively. Question why Young was released and not replaced. 

 

 

 

Cool. I couldn’t get a ticket to the game so it’s interesting to hear what went on- obviously the majority say we smashed Villa and should’ve had more goals, so thanks for clarifying 👍

29 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:
 

I do think it was a very even game until the last 20.  

8 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

After Mings got injured it was 1-way traffic and we could’ve scored 6 or 7. 

He went off in the first half though. So was it one way traffic after the injury, or an even game til the last 20? 🤷‍♂️

Outrageous VAR.

1 minute ago, RodneyCisse said:

I’m like 15 mins walk away, reckon he’s still in there?

Yeah. He’ll be on the tiramisu now.