Abacus

In the cold light of day, it would be harsh to judge him on one failed transfer where the consensus was we would have paid over the odds. I get the point that Mitchell might have been able to present a number of different options (but maybe not so soon into the job, or maybe not that Howe would have wanted), or that they should have all agreed on several different options at the outset of the negotiation. And again, perhaps they did that, but those options weren't then available. So, hopefully, once he gets to grips with what Howe needs that can be the case next time. On paper it looks like it should be a good team.

Had an auld fella toddling up to me today saying this. In fairness it matters to some people.

I just want to see players doing what seems impossible to normal mortals and take my breath away, forget the rest of the politics and shite. That was Hatem. Edit, basically I agree, but it's not what I watch a match for. Yeah sure, let's grind out a result. Are you there to see someone win the league with a daily grind, or are you there to see the most beautiful minutes of how football should be played?

That leg break he got at Man City, which as far as I recall wasn't even given as a foul, was one of the most sickening things I've seen. So, I was so pleased he recovered from that, came back and was still the most sensational player I've ever seen. I think what's sometimes forgotten is that the reason you pay for a ticket is to watch people do things like he could up close, and it's totally different to watching it on TV. I thought the same thing the first time I saw Ginola play, but to me Ben Arfa trumped him in terms of the sheer excitement of just watching him. I still remember that goal from the halfway line, sat in the Gallowgate. Even from when he picked up the ball to start that impossible dribble, the bloke next to me, never one given to getting carried away, just said excitedly "oh, here we go". It seemed there was something in Ben Arfa's mind right from the off. And then just we watched him just go and do it and went crackers when he did - never felt anything like it when he got the ball and you just knew he was on one. And that wasn't even his best goal

Personally hoping he gets a good run out at Wimbledon, a good 60 mins or so, rather than run Isak into the ground.

This was also the main bit that bothered me. If his intent was to calm down speculation, then he hasn't as far as the press goes at least. The Times this morning writing about not not rushing to appoint a permanent England manager in Carsley, with the 'smart money' being on Eddie Howe for the job, and referencing apparent tension between him and his employers being 'timely to say the least'. We'll have to see, I guess, but I can't see how that interview has helped. Nor did Howe's in Germany, for that matter.

Yep, if the interview was designed to settle speculation it doesn't seem to have worked out like that in some parts. Maybe it was designed instead to mix things up with a public statement of intent about what is needed instead. I'm just glad we're on an international break, so there's been no Howe interview where select bits would be put to him by folks trying to create a story where there may not be one.

For me, one insinuation in that article which might just be how I read it first time, wasn't about Guehi's own desire to come here or not, it was about our negotiating tactics. Essentially somehow showing Palace our cards and allowing them to then demand what they wanted. Having heard that Howe had put all their eggs in Guehi's basket, Parish used the information as a leverage to stick to his high price. Of course, you can read that several different ways and I doubt it was like that. Perhaps he just guessed right if it was the case it was Guehi or nothing, perhaps he had information from somewhere other than the negotiating team, or perhaps it was nothing of the sort like it was reported. In general, I am leaning towards the whole article being a lot of nonsense.

Fair points, on reflection.

The point is that he said those things which were ambiguous or could be taken that way, which you wouldn't do if there's a united front, or if you're media savvy and also know there is a press conference coming up. Saying you were just sticking to the original strategy is, then, deflecting blame from yourself when you presumably could have stopped it at any point.

Bet he asked how much for a bottle of brown ale and you quoted him £10. When he reluctantly agreed, you'll have immediately put the price up to £11 as it's a generational beer. Then he'll have sat fuming and parched until after last orders.

It was a weird quote re the England job so not surprised you could get this vibe - talk about being patriotic Englishmen, and also of not being afraid of interest for anyone at the club especially our head coach, was what he was quoted as saying.

I didn't much like his response on the Howe to England thing. All that said, it felt a bit of a non-update. We won't overpay on transfers? Really!? Well I never. It would have been much funnier if he'd said the opposite and gone

Someone should show them when they met for the first time and obviously didn't have a clue who each other were. Still, he's the most important English manager in the last ... 100 years

Pretty sure Swiss Ramble was asked this exact thing about the granularity of amortisation, and he seemed to think it went by day (none of the accounts state this clearly, but it would make sense). So a player bought on PSR deadline day costs you virtually nothing for that period, as it's just one day's worth you are paying for. I can't quite see how you could shift the weight of a deal around per point 2. But I suppose that you could assuming that's how you had always treated player contracts. I.e., you couldn't take a years worth of amortisation for one player and only 3 days worth in the same period for a different one. That said, I'm not sure the PSR rules are clear enough to make it clear if there's a prescribed treatment either way there as they have somehow created an entire shadow financial system. On the conditional elements, the only way that could work is as you described - i.e. the minute they are triggered (regardless of when they are paid) and then being amortised over the remaining contract length at that point. They are, after all, part of the original sale contract and the conditions would or should be tied to that. I guess the option there would be to treat it like a one-off bonus payment to the selling club and write it off in one go at the point it's triggered. But I can't see that being allowed as it was essentially always part of the original purchase price.

Agreed. Adds so much. Edit - so many players I know nothing about that he's prepared to champion, never afraid to express an opinion either.

On a different point though, if the rules weren't sufficiently well drafted, that too presumably opens another route for all sorts of appeals.

I would have thought a lot worse of him if he'd agitated for a move or put in a transfer request. Whatever you think about the amounts we were prepared to have bid for him, I like his character, so it shows we're doing something right. Edit - the ball is now indeed in his court as to what he wants to do next.

Ace posts thread here we come.

Parish was entitled to hold out for what he wanted, tbf, even if it was way above what we deemed fair. Playing it out in the media, however, is his mistake, not to mention his daft hair, which was also caught on camera. Fine if you just want more money, but not fine if you don't want to unsettle the player as well. Then again, if there's any truth in the Gordon to Liverpool for a wild swap thing, we've done quite a similar job ourselves. So, you know. Schar is back soon anyway, so hopefully this thread vanishes till January at least.

I feel the best cartoon bear isn't even being discussed in amongst all this other nonsense.

Not having that, I think Pep is in charge of every bit of how the first team works there, and probably the academy too, as I think he's a similar control freak, hence hiring all the Barca people. But, I agree with large parts of what you're saying. Good to see you back btw, even if we disagree on a lot.

I've been talking to other fans after the game and it's ridiculous how negatively some people are seeing our start to the season. We're not firing on all cylinders yet, of course, but we've beaten Spurs with the only two bits of genuine quality in the game, and conceded one goal today by a mistake from our back up CB. Held our nerves in the penalties in the League Cup too. We're going to channel that and steamroller some teams now.

I wondered, though, whether he could be trusted to be the person to do that as well, with the right support and advice. If you have to think outside the box, then perhaps he is the maverick to do it. Somebody needs to be able to make the tough decisions, and he's probably the one who understands this team the best. You don't get to be the best with decisions by committee all pulling in different directions. Pep, I think, just to add to the other examples, is probably in complete control of who they buy and sell, whilst delegating the admin. Apologies if that sounds like word salad - I just don't know who else has the vision now.

He is irreplaceable. God damn, he's a lightning strike when I thought I'd learnt never to get attached to a footballer again. He's our captain and then some.