Abacus

Whereas I think he'll mainly be filling Charnley's role of buying paperclips and whatnot. Urgent! Printer ink levels are dangerously low, the office fridge needs a quick wipe down and Brenda from admin has gone and left a Muller Fruit Corner in there that's about to go out of date.

And Trippier. As well as the policy of extending player contracts before that under Ashley just to avoid spending on new players. If it's reliable, then according to Transfer market (or whatever it's called), we've got one of the highest age squads in the PL at 28.5. We really need to freshen it up, and if we want to spend big money, then while the odd bit of experience is great and it's got to be taken case by case, in general I'd rather spend that on a 25 year old rather than a 30 year old. NB, Burnley's average age was higher at 30 but they're gone now. Villa had an average squad age of around 26.2, over two years younger on average than us, so less of a risk to them I'd guess.

Funnily enough, Bruce has insisted now that all West Brom players need to move to be near to the training ground so they don't travel long distances. So he clear knows this could be a problem, but still didn't do anything about it for us. He also excluded himself from this new rule of course, because he still wants to live in the North West.

Hate this guy much more than Pardew. Should be banned from the city forever.

They reportedly lost nearly £150m last year. Despite them blaming Covid for around £100m of that, the underlying position still doesn't seem terribly healthy to me. Especially since their own website records them as losing just over £96m in the year before Covid. I'm sure it's all absolutely fine though.

The thing is, those asset valuations only make sense if you expect income will continue to grow as they have done. So, I expect r0cafella is right, and it's a gamble by their new owners that TV money continues to increase exponentially. I'm more of a pessimist there, since we seem to be heading towards a global recession, and it has the feeling of a bubble ready to burst. Meaning I don't know what supports that pyramid scheme idea of constant growth. That said, whilst I correctly called the tech bubble bursting, I also thought the internet in general was just a fad for nerds. So what do I know? And here I am now, come to think of it.

I expect that's true. I'd just wonder how they'll be able to justify it given the landscape has changed since RA took over. If you've had inflated related party sponsorships to boost your income, that's one thing. You can at least point to precedent to back up those future deals. But if you've been reliant on an a wealthy benefactor and are still making losses despite you probably being as successful as you'd expect to be, it'd be tougher to justify that level of spend.

It's not simple, and it's quite unclear as to how it will have accounted for.

Abramovich bought Chelsea prior to FFP (2003?), and I think much of the loan was incurred prior to those rules coming in. In any case, FFP is based on losses over the most recent 3 year period, rather than the whole length of time of an ownership so it's not that relevant. In theory, though, writing off the £1.5 bn does make them a more valuable asset. But there's no indication he was calling in the loan anyway and besides, even if the value of the club as an asset goes up, it makes no difference to FFP anyway. Though, I'd be interested to see how they account for the debt write off - I'm assuming it would have to be done below the line, rather than as a direct profit. Regardless, in their shoes, I'd be more worried that they regularly lose money anyway. Longer term, they won't be such big spenders any more I'd guess.

Joe and Lascelles went for the same ball. Lascelles landed on him and injured him.

Leeds seem well up for it at Brentford, who don't seem up for it at all so far.

Bloody typically if that's Lascelles last game for us, and he's gone and knackered Joelinton for months. Talk about a liability. Talksport speculating an Achilles or a fracture, but they don't know.

Yeah, I'm not saying there was anything dodgy about it. Just wondering what was in it for Atletico to agree to that. From their point of view, Trippier was worth X. It wouldn't make any difference to them if we were relegated or not - in fact, it looked like we would be. They'd want what he's worth. You tend to put in performance bonuses for untested younger players.

Steward's enquiry for that goalkeeping

Always seemed odd that £25m was being quoted, and then suddenly he was announced and it was half that. Not sure what was in it for Atletico, mind, since at that point we looked dead certs to be relegated, so they couldn't count on that extra £12-13m. Makes me wonder if there was something in the deal meaning they got their player back if we did go down, so they wouldn't lose out. I've just made that last bit up, of course, but if there was anything along those lines agreed, then it wouldn't be that different from a loan to buy type arrangement.

So... after trying to copy wor flags, they've instead gotten scammed into trying to make an unsafe flag out of bog roll, which is now banned? Still, there's still time not to embarrass themselves in front of the couple of hundred TV viewers around the world tomorrow. Crisp packets at the ready lads. You've got this.

Maybe their accountant caught Covid.

It's a bit cramped in there.

Whereas, I'm only a football fan because of Newcastle. Had no interest in it at first really, but all my mates at school did and all were interested in Newcastle first and foremost. So gradually, I started going along with that, listening to the radio, reading the match reports, going along to games. So everything, to me, is through the prism of Newcastle. I know the players, our history, our ambitions, our highs and lows. It means something to me - most other teams and their games don't. So, there are no dead rubbers for me - even friendlies are all about testing out youth players, or seeing a glimpse of a new signing. In contrast, I only watch most other games because they're on and better than EastEnders. But even if I accepted a game being a dead rubber in the wider context of football 'achievement', I'd still want to watch Newcastle first. I don't care much at all about which one of the two wins the title this season. Nor who ends up in a CL spot, though I would if we were competing for either one of those. Don't even care much about who wins the CL final - just looking forward to being entertained by a good game, but the result won't affect my feelings in any way ten minutes after it's over. Likewise, international football. Mostly, it's quite boring outside of the main tournaments, and often I'm looking to see how any Newcastle players, or players linked to us, get on. Though a lot of the time I'm happy if no-one is called up, because less time away or chance of injury. Even the tournaments themselves I get a bit annoyed with. I'll watch games with my mates, but I'm not that invested in the national team. Worse, during a tournament it's like going to the pub at Christmas, when you can't get your favourite seat, the bar is crammed and it's full of braying part-timers who don't know the rules. This weekend, had Burnley been safe too and therefore our game had nothing to do with the relegation spots, if I was given the choice I'd have watched our game in preference to any of the others on Sky and kept up with the other scores on my phone, only flicked over for a couple of minutes only if something really exciting was happening. Before switching back again and wondering if we'd give Dwight Gayle a runout.

He might have a better idea now after getting a kick up the arse.

I'll be watching in the hope of a having a good laugh, as they once again heroically attempt to scrabble out of the third division in third place on St Mackerings Day. Though if I'm honest watching the semi final was a right chore, the all round quality was so poor. So if they score early or make a decent start, I'll probably just go and do something else and then switch on again a few minutes before the end.

Tyrone Mings. A name and a review all in one. No.

That comment right there is why I want to beat Burnley finish above 12th. We already have more points this year than the shameful Bruce's two full seasons in charge, despite the terrible start he made and the state he left the squad in.

Targett was also voted Villa's Players' Player of the season last year. So, clearly valued in their squad.

I don't believe so, no. The equivalent figure quoted for the previous year was £36m. That would be mainly the transfers of Wilson and Lewis, who cost around £35m. If you look at what was then capitalised as an intangible asset (I e. the cost of registering those players) it's around the same amount - about £40m. If you believe what's reported about their wages (on 4 and 5 year contracts respectively), which you can't capitalise in the same way, that would add another £20m or thereabouts to the total. The short answer being that it doesn't look like those figures include wages. (Nor should they be - not least as those amounts are described as transfer costs).