Abacus

Well, if true, I'm fairly sure I read some critique of Howe somewhere that he was only interested in winning the next game and not thinking ahead to the medium term. So maybe that wasn't right. Anyway, truth is we're all guessing. The one thing you can say about Howe is that he keeps his cards close to his chest about what he's really thinking.

I know, let's just bulldoze the Theatre Royal and move the whole thing brick by brick to London.

Well, I suppose that what you're paying the selling club for is the value to them of breaking their existing registration to them early, unless I miss your point entirely.

Indeed, and per my previous post, because there is no way of proving FMV, that's why the PL are putting the onus on clubs (mainly us and Man City) rather than themselves. Two options here; you either show you have competing non-related party bids of similar value, which you could get in all sorts of bother with re commercial confidentiality, even though in a free market sponsors will have all sorts of different reasons for what they're prepared to bid. Or, you say this sponsorship is worth x amount in an open market because it's what similar sized clubs have. And there's no way you could compare our size to Man U's, say, meaning that any deal would automatically be lower than theirs, hence locking in their advantage forever.

Fire up the bread-maker Di Marco. Could be a lot of dough in this for you.

The one thing I didn't get was when Chelsea waived the requirement for Hall not to play against them in that game. Sounded like they were keen for the transfer to go through. I'm assuming that's for FFP reasons rather than not rating him. Or maybe, more simply, they genuinely thought it was a decent fee. I hate the way thoughts of FFP muddles everything. Anyway, that's Chelsea's issue - I hope we decide based on purely footballing reasons I.e. whether we want him or not rather than anything else. Some loans just don't work out for a whole load of reasons, and after a season watching him closely in training, I hope this is only Eddie's call.

Re the new adjusted rules; for us I think the most damaging thing is putting the onus on clubs to justify that commercial deals are at fair market value, rather than the PL having to prove they weren't. Each football club is unique - the reasons sponsors might invest and what they want to get for it differs. I have no idea how the PL could have proved what was or wasn't FMV, which wouldn't be open to challenge. Likewise, knowing what a range of sponsors, say, had offered (per the supposed database they were building up) was always pure nonsense. Let's say Saudi wants to improve it's reputation with it's companies wanting to associate themselves with a PIF owned club. Regardless of whether you think that's palatable, what's the fair market value of that? If we'd made that case, how would the PL have disproved it? I think flipping the burden of proof to the club was the only way they were going to get out of the stupid situation they'd put themselves in previously. And makes it all the more obvious who they were aiming this at. The PL are politically inept and have tied themselves in knots ever since this whole saga started.

I enjoyed the way competition and protectionism were thrown in liberally. You've been saying for a long while a legal challenge on competition grounds is the only way. Let's see, maybe even the threat of it is enough.

To be honest, I've been thinking along similar lines. Having had to fight tooth and nail for so long to even get the club, and then, when finally let in being completely prevented from doing what they'd hoped to do, it's either another long battle or stepping away. Hope it's the former, if only to give them time to get the infrastructure right.

Oof, would like to see that pen shout again. Played much better second half tbf Oh well, lost again.

Been a pretty dismal watch so far, other than flashes from Leicester. Not surprised even the commentators seem to have gone to sleep. 10 points off the playoffs as it stands, I think.

I didn't want him at all, couldn't see why we'd pay so much for a player I'd only seen glimpses of, and had mainly thought of as a diving cheat. But my word how wrong I was. He's been an absolute beacon of hope this difficult season and far surpassed what I'd hoped for. Superb.

I think he's working on the basis that £100m over 5 year contracts costs £20m in year one. Agree with you, though.

Was also thinking along these lines. But more Rafa finally walking away, then Ashley appointing Steve Bruce being a sliding doors moment and a long term positive compared to if Rafa had stayed or Ashley had appointed somebody even slightly competent after him. Yes it was a terrible time short term, but it was going to be the end for both Ashley and Bruce. Crowds walking away, us sliding towards the championship, there being nobody with a brain who would come in and replace him and Ashley clearly not having the stomach to fix his own mess again, hence being desperate to cash in. Really not sure the takeover would have happened if we'd kept Rafa instead and we'd limped on. Or if Bruce hadn't been so completely and utterly awful at absolutely everything.

Didn't log on at all here during the match, probably for the best by the looks of some of it, watched it in the pub with some mates. Thought it was fantastic entertainment, a cracking cup tie and just felt so good to win in a shootout. Went to bed happy, woke up looking for the time of next draw. Credit to Blackburn, this is how an away tie to a championship team should have been and they were on it from the start. And this is how the Cup goes

But then he left when the politics became too much, and was working in a different era when the restrictions weren't as much to be able to reset his squad. Not a slight on Keegan, just saying that the comparison with Howe isn't like for like as we don't know what each would have done in the other's shoes.

I agree that it would be extremely harsh to punish Everton twice this season, and that the way this whole thing is being handled is shambolic just for sporting reasons if nothing else. From what I understand (and please correct me if I'm wrong), a large part of the problem stems from interest costs on debt for building their new stadium. You'd have initially assumed that this would be outside of FFP as it relates to spending on infrastructure, but no. I mean, as well as other spending and COVID losses etc. Either way, they had owners who were prepared to invest in the playing squad, albeit badly. It now looks like they have been driven to sell to new owners in 777 who are struggling to pass the tests, with the whole thing being dragged out again by the PL. Whatever the intent of FFP, to maintain club solvency supposedly, it's had the complete opposite effect. Whatever you think about individual owners, their source of wealth etc, surely now nobody with ambition would invest in a club outside of a certain few with the intent to establish them as a major club again, as the rules are so heavily stacked against this.

I'd take it, obviously. But it would be a bit ridiculous if nearly half the teams in the PL who stay up end up in some form of European comp next year.

Very poor tackle by Caicedo, and he looked guilty as sin.

Thought he was OK today, and actually pretty good given how easily we were torn apart and how little competitive game time he's had. It seemed to me though that neither him nor Dubravka have the same link with the defence or command of the box as Pope does. As the third choice keeper, given limited funds to spend on alternatives, seems to me he's been a pretty good choice to keep on. I know we conceded 4 goals, but in the context of how much he's played, the nature of the goals themselves and what most were expecting the score to be before the game I don't think he can be criticised too much.

Arsenal were brilliant and deservedly won, with crisp, confident passing as if they had a point to prove after Porto and the last game at SJP, even though they really didn't re us since Havertz should have been sent off in that game even before the correct VAR decision to allow our goal. But I have to agree about the ref. Even though there were no individually contentious decisions, Bruno took multiple tackles from different players clearly knowing he was on a yellow card ban and couldn't respond. Credit to Bruno for not reacting except for one dicey moment. On the plus side, what I will credit the ref for is having the ball smack off the back of his head to accidentally prevent a promising Arsenal attack in the second half - he was the midfield defence we didn't have.

No card for Bruno either (again)

The Discovery+ QR code just now blocking a chunk of the screen has been our best player so far. More please.

Agreed bobbydazzla it's got to be a great project to join, but I'd equally hope that a clued up DOF would know this already and would be pitching to us.

I hope they go all the way up to Beale's sacking, and close the episode with the EastEnders theme tune.