Abacus

Love this. Paulo - you're the most positive NUFC fan on the forum and find and then post things like this which make me smile all the time. That is all.

I had an irrational dislike of Geremi. I couldn't work out why, so watched him play a few times, almost ignoring the rest of the match. This could be confirmation bias, but all he seemed to do was jog around the same small area of pitch and, any time he was passed the ball, simply pass it straight back. You might as well have kicked a tennis ball against a wall, and then see it bounce back at you at an inconvenient angle. There are bad players, and then there are the ones who don't just make a mess of things because they are trying, but add less than nothing. That's how I saw him, and I'm probably being completely unfair, but he is the first name I thought of when I saw this thread.

Commentator on Kane - "On another day, without VAR, he would have had a hattrick" No he wouldn't, you plum, it was correctly ruled out in real time.

Decent from Gordon, that. Nothing special, but maybe not the right kind of game with Finland sitting back and negating his pace. What I most like though is that after Southgate didn't even bother with him, Carsley knows in his first two games. Carsley IN for England manager. Also a draw tonight and the Howe for England bandwagon starts again in the press. So, couple more goals please (sorry KingArthur).

Agreed, Saka always in acres of space, Gordon is hemmed in by our own players, drawing Finland's defenders towards the left as well

Towards the end there was 'a bit of sparkle' at 'the top end of the pitch' was there? I seem to recall us being dreadful and hurtling towards relegation, but my mind must be playing tricks.

We're going to have to get used to this sort of thing. Like for a lot of clubs, buying or developing and then selling promising players has to be part of the model now and always runs the risk that some of them go on to develop into real talents. But good for him, best wishes to him, and also hope he carries on doing well there.

That'll be down to your search preferences too mate, less sportswear more food

A quick Google says they're a sportswear brand owned by Fosun, who also own Wolves. Either that or it's a Malaysian restaurant in central London.

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.