jonny1403

Darlow/Woodman Manquillo Fernandez Clark Dummett Barecca Ki Diame Almiron Muto Joselu

You have literally no idea if any of that is true

Can people stop going on about the added time? It's already been pointed out the goal was scored on 94 mins 34 seconds. There was 4 minutes of added time plus we made a sub in that period which adds another 30 seconds. There wasn't a problem there.

Can't be dropped playing as he is at the moment. Looking forward to seeing Diame or Ki alongside him.

If you look at our bench options for Spurs: Woodman Clark Fernandez Manquillo Kenedy Barreca Joselu it's likely we'll now be able to add Dummett, Ki, Diame, Almiron and Muto to that list which is incredible really. So many more options - Kenedy might not even make the bench!

I doubt they'll search for his body. Maybe get washed up if tides are kind. Yes, which pisses me off over the whole thing as if it had been you and me for example then apart from the families etc then no one would bat an eyelid over the search after a few days/week. Hasn't the search only continued due to private funding? Which wouldn't have happened if it was you or me. True, but imo it has to be a search for both bodies to be respectful for the whole tragedy. Guessing we don't live in that sort of world though. I thought I read that it was the Argentinian government that was paying for the extended search? Which would make more sense for it to be finished up, when the Argentinian was found? It's cold as fuck, but as you said, the world we live in. It has nothing to do with being cold as fuck. The effort was to locate the plane, which is feasible with radar. Luckily Sala's body was in the plane and so retrievable, but if the pilot's wasn't there's next to no hope of finding it under that depth of sea unless it washes up. It would be exactly the same outcome if the pilot's body was there and Sala's wasn't.

Rafa's not going to start a new left back who has barely played all season, is new to the league and the club and has question marks over his defending in an away game against one of the form teams in the league.

Is Rafa the only one wearing shorts

You can't leave us hanging on that!

You're not the sharpest tool in the box are you Shows Darlow's pass into danger % and positioning errors to be off the fucking scale you mentalist. Errr no it doesn't. That chart shows Darlow to have better stats then the other two. His pass into danger % and positioning errors are much lower than the other two.

They're starting to turn on the Don

Surely they need at least one striker

He's not borrowing against the tv money specifically. Any company that takes out a loan will need to grant security over an income stream to support it. Typically, any bank will ask for that loan to be secured against as many assets/income streams as possible. The TV money is naturally included in that. It's not that the TV money is being paid to the bank, its just being used as security should the club default on the loan. It's pretty standard practice.

No we wouldn't. We would have had a different draw number than Watford.

Gillinghams CEO earns 3x his salary and Aberdeens earns 5x his salary. He is the CEO of a premier league team in effect a hundred million pound operation and he earns less than a London cab driver It just shows how much out of his depth he is how seriously underqualified and how much lack of self belief he has. People working in his position for other teams in the league command salaries in the millions yet here he is on 115k a year The guy is a cucking clueless puppet and its completely embarrassing that we have someone so useless tasked with running our club. He doesn't kick up a stink as he knows hed go back to earning 30k a year if he loses the gig hes got at the moment No other premier league CEO would get out of bed for what he earns I don't think this is entirely accurate - what will be being reported is Charnley's base salary - Ashley likes to pay a low base salary and incentivise employees heavily with performance related bonuses, none of which would be reported in the media.

The Articles of association are the governing documents of a corporate entity - so a resolution has been passed amending them. We can see what that is in a few days when CH upload the docs themselves. Could be anything though - from changing the number of directors on the board to changing how many days’ notice is given for shareholder meetings.

Cancelling a sky subscription is in no way equivalent to not going to a game. Ashley has 52,000 'subscribers' a fortnight. Sky has 22.9 million subscribers a year. The vast majority of which have nothing to do with NUFC. It's a pointless comparison. It's about money is it not ? The point being that if 10,000 Newcastle fans stop going to a game - the empty seats, the financial impact are directly felt by Mike Ashley. Visually, if nothing else, the impact is felt. If 10,000 NUFC fans stop subscribing to Sky it will barely affect their own bottom line. Once that is diluted through the amounts distributed to football, the amounts distributed to the premier league and amounts eventually reaching the club and Mike Ashley, the effect is non-existent.

Cancelling a sky subscription is in no way equivalent to not going to a game. Ashley has 52,000 'subscribers' a fortnight. Sky has 22.9 million subscribers a year. The vast majority of which have nothing to do with NUFC. It's a pointless comparison.

This ffs. My parents didn't get tickets and didn't have sky - I think I went to one game between the ages of 4-12 - and I was still a massive Newcastle fan despite barely seeing them play live or even on tv. Used to watch them in the pub whenever I could with my dad and when I did get a season ticket at the age of 15 it was brilliant. I wasn't being denied a 'right' to attend the match though - if you're taking your kids for that reason you're doing so because you want to - over and above your grievances with the owner. Just admit that, don't pretend you're doing so because Ashley would otherwise take away some sacred childhood bond you'd get with your kids What's the difference? I want to take my kid, yes. And I'm not going to let my dislike for the owner get in the way of building those bonds with my kid. And that's absolutely fine - but don't pretend that its something you have to do in order to raise your kid properly rather than something you want to do. Plenty of other ways to watch us that don't involve propping up the owner. And what if I believe that? My dad took me to games semi regularly from the age of 4. Those bonds I built with my dad through those years mean the world to me and were a huge part of my childhood. I want to have the same with my lad. So respectfully, Jonny, wind your fucking neck in and stop telling me (and others) what I should be doing. I'm not telling you what you should be doing. Feel free to go to the games. Just accept that you're going to come across as a hypocrite in the future when commenting on all things Ashley.

This ffs. My parents didn't get tickets and didn't have sky - I think I went to one game between the ages of 4-12 - and I was still a massive Newcastle fan despite barely seeing them play live or even on tv. Used to watch them in the pub whenever I could with my dad and when I did get a season ticket at the age of 15 it was brilliant. I wasn't being denied a 'right' to attend the match though - if you're taking your kids for that reason you're doing so because you want to - over and above your grievances with the owner. Just admit that, don't pretend you're doing so because Ashley would otherwise take away some sacred childhood bond you'd get with your kids What's the difference? I want to take my kid, yes. And I'm not going to let my dislike for the owner get in the way of building those bonds with my kid. And that's absolutely fine - but don't pretend that its something you have to do in order to raise your kid properly rather than something you want to do. Plenty of other ways to watch us that don't involve propping up the owner.

This ffs. My parents didn't get tickets and didn't have sky - I think I went to one game between the ages of 4-12 - and I was still a massive Newcastle fan despite barely seeing them play live or even on tv. Used to watch them in the pub whenever I could with my dad and when I did get a season ticket at the age of 15 it was brilliant. I wasn't being denied a 'right' to attend the match though - if you're taking your kids for that reason you're doing so because you want to - over and above your grievances with the owner. Just admit that, don't pretend you're doing so because Ashley would otherwise take away some sacred childhood bond you'd get with your kids

I mean, to be clear, he owns the club. If he wants to take £200m out the club every year he is perfectly entitled to do so. There's no legal restrictions on him doing so.

Anyone know what the away pub is for this one? Just heading over now.

The way he's went on in the media, getting a new contract for absolutely no reason after getting one a year ago. So the club offers him a new contract and he should turn it down for fear of being labelled as 'cocky'? FFS

I work in the area and this is exactly right. Any amendment would take place on completion not in advance.