Kid Icarus

He's not solely to blame, but the idea that he gets to say what is and isn't fit for purpose is a joke. Our transfer policy was working very well until he arrived.

Both baseless assertions, but a distinction without a difference as both ultimately come down to the club being at fault.

Good for Brentford if true tbh.

The Paul Mitchell who reportedly went back on Staveley's assurances that Isak would get an improved contract and in doing so contributed to this situation. The Paul Mitchell who stopped us buying James Trafford last season? The Paul Mitchell who by most accounts came in and fucked up the harmony inside the club? That did similar at Monaco. He's the one that's not fit for purpose.

Speak for yourself

Correct, it's his last 40 shots, of which he scored 12. 30% conversion rate, none of them pens. For comparison, Isak's shot conversion rate last season was 23%

UEFA's punishment is a fine, ergo the club have no reason to give a shit.

In the video he scores 12 goals out of those 40 shots so not sure where you've got all this from.

It does seem like ousting Staveley was one in a line of absolutely idiotic decisions like. She wasn't perfect but she was 100x better than these utter frauds that took her place.

For all the stick I give him, Luke Edwards did pretty much put it in a nutshell imo when he said that this is where PIF get to show what they see Newcastle United as being. For all the talk of player and agent power, client journalists, us being lower in the food chain, this that and the other, the bottom line is still that this is the club's decision. This idea that players always get their way is a pure myth, countless players have tried forcing their club's hands - including at Liverpool - and ended up losing the battle, only to come back with their tail between their legs, or leave on the club's terms. Crystal fucking Palace are capable of doing this so I absolutely refuse the notion that we can't. So what sort of club do we want to be? One that other clubs see can be bullied into selling its players? One that players and agents see can be bullied? Or one that can stay resolute and take short term pain (keeping a want away player, upsetting an agent etc) for the long term gain (setting a precedent that the club comes first) I don't think it can be emphasised enough just how much of a disastrous watershed moment selling Isak to Liverpool would be. We wouldn't just be losing an excellent player, we'd be defining what we are as a club now and in the future as a push over, as small-time, as a club where strengthening future rivals is acceptable and with a so-called project to be number 1 that's effectively over, was a pipe dream, or was never an objective at all. Other players and potentially the manager - the person holding all of this together- will see that the writing's on the wall and they were sold a lie. This is partly me just needing to get this off my chest, but I do believe this. By some accounts the 'project' not being what it was sold as is in part contributing to Isak wanting to leave, and if they don't buck their ideas up while at the same time either keeping Isak or selling him abroad then I think we can put a pin in all of it for the time being.

It seems like plenty of sources within the club haven't got a clue either tbh.

I would think it would be even less like. That 23% is for the full season. I don't think we'll get him anyway like, entire situation is an absolute shambles.

Looks bad but I work that out as a 30% shot conversion rate. By way of comparison Isak's is 23%

He's a client journalist.

Could try and convince him to sign a new contract or whatever but there's absolutely no need to convince him to stay like. 3 years on his contract.

The excitement was off the scale when this actually happened.

But you just said Cabaye played until he was sold...

Cabaye? He didn't, he refused to play.

Ideal Isak replacement

We absolutely fleeced Leicester tbf and weren't competing with them. Last one that really actually stung for me was Carroll. Ba, Cabaye etc were bought on the premise of leaving and neither of them ever meant anything to me.

As soon as I read not a replacement for Isak, the brain synapse went to Colback isn't a Cabaye replacement.

Nearer our terms. He's still an extremely valuable asset that clubs will want regardless of whether he's playing. Even then I'd much rather take a hit on the fee to a club abroad than sell him within the Premier League.

Only if we accept it. Teams will want him, the play needs to be if you want him at a discount you'll have to wait 3 years. Find this assertion that we simply must sell him baffling tbh.

Not really, Liverpool don't have our player and we can sell him nearer our terms in the next window.

The irony