Abacus

Yes, as Jackie Broon says, it's about what hits your short term profit and loss. You're allowed to inject cash for specific longer term reasons. So, you're not supposed to excessively fund short term spending e.g. on players and wages, whilst gambling that you'll be successful. Building a stadium, on the other hand is seen as a longer term thing and less risky - since at very least you'll have an asset to show for it at the end of it - so it's less of an issue for FFP. It's not perfect, but that's the idea.

It's a good question. Many people have said that all they want is a well run club, that competes commercially and is ambitious on the pitch as a result. So presumably lots would be fine with that. I wouldn't. Ever since it's looked like the self appointed ESL 6 were influencing how the league was run and also attempted to stitch up and destroy the league with their breakaway, I've wanted to smash them to pieces. I'd love it if we kept Man U and their despicable owners out of the champions league money trough, and make life hell for the likes of Spurs and their owners by blowing their transfer business out of the water. And I really don't think PIF are planning to be in the most high profile league in the world's biggest sport with the intention of purely making up the numbers. That's the reflected success they'll want those shirts to convey around the world. I think having chosen those colours in the first place is very much a sign of their intentions - they'll not want them to be associated with a losing team.

I'm pretty sure that money is earmarked for infrastructure - mainly Stadium development. That kind of spend doesn't count from a FFP point of view anyway. So I don't think it should make a difference, no.

I see there is now a Mags at Wembley thread. One of them has imagined there will be lots of 'mags' in the away end. His 'mag' mate has told him he's talking rubbish. However, now that he can't find any evidence to support him in this argument, rather than admit he is wrong, he has asked his RTG mental health support group if they have any evidence he can use. None of them have any, of course, but it hasn't stopped them imagining it might happen, and furthermore to go on to fantasize about what a kicking these imaginary mags would get. For one thing, there will be so many Sunderland fans that they will be packed in the away end too and so there should be plenty on hand to deliver a shoeing to all the fictional mags in there. Through all this, I am sensing that they are actually deeply ashamed to be playing a L1 playoff against lowly opposition. And all the made up mags laughing at them, in their own heads? Pure displacement of their own feelings.

In this case, if there is basically an obligation to buy then maybe it wouldn't make much difference to Reims. It would be a sale in all but name. It might be unrelated, but I read an article recently that Newcastle would be trying lots of inventive ways to stretch FFP. And another brief reference in the Times saying that one club (unnamed) would be backloading deals. I.e., relatively low up front sales, but loaded with incentives so that the fee was likely to increase retrospectively in future years of the contract. The idea being that, in future years with a higher profile and more successful team, other revenues would have increased to offset it and therefore mean that FFP wasn't an issue. The article didn't say that it was us doing that, but in a way it doesn't matter. Because, completely speculating here, I could definitely see us doing that. It might be a risk for some clubs to gamble on that kind of growth, but with PIF's backing you'd have to think that growing our name and commercial income is very much part of their medium and long term plans. Long and short of it is that things like this kind of loan deal would fit with that kind of strategy. [Speculation ends.]

I see that the breakaway Saudi golf tournament is getting quite a bit of the same sort of heat that our takeover got. Even though it's not funny, I had to laugh when Greg Norman was asked about the murder of Khashoggi and he replied "Look, we've all made mistakes...". Reading that, Eddie Howe's no comment policy is for the best, despite the evident frustration of the journalists who are desperate for it to be the only conversation. Such a kit change would bring another round of such questions. But hey, it's not like they ever really went away, so bring it on, ignore the noise and just get on with running the club as best they can.

I can see why some people would be annoyed. Those who took the view that they'd support the team, but not do daft things like waving the Saudi flag, for example. Of course, they don't need to buy the shirt, but the team will be playing in it. And no doubt there will be some outrage about it from outside the club, but that's happening now anyway. But they have every right to do what they want and advertise how they please. So, like ripping off a plaster, might as well do it quick, as it'll die down as quicker too. Personally don't give a hoot about it. In fact, if it raises our profile in the Middle East, all the better. I'll probably buy one.

The Benton Buffalo

If it's 5 teams from the premier league, it seems fairly ridiculous that a quarter of our teams will be playing in the 'champions' league. Then you add on the other competitions, and European games will be even more commonplace. I'm just a stick in the mud, though, as I still think 4 teams in the CL is too many. I also believe footballs should be made out of leather and there should be a cup of tea and an orange at half time.

"And once again, Matt Targett collects the man of the match award"

The current first choice back line has mostly been good under Howe, so I don't want to exaggerate any problems after a bad result. I also don't know how much the weaknesses the back 4 have are due to deficiencies in other parts of the team. For example, whilst I like Dubs, I'd probably upgrade there and have him as my backup. Just having a keeper communicating more to the defence on when he's got a ball covered, organising them more or coming to claim the ball in a commanding way immediately takes the pressure off the central defence and makes them look better. Likewise, not spilling shots back out into dangerous areas. Also, whilst Shelvey has done an OK job there, he's not a specialist defensive midfielder, so that again exposes your defence. Longstaff being there today exposed them even more as he was pretty anonymous. Although, in fairness, de Bruyne was all but unplayable. Then at left back, Targett has been very dependable, but sometimes exposed against top teams. Without wishing to get into that argument again, though, some of that will be down to the gaps ASM leaves him to cover, which you just can't do against the best. All that aside, a central defender is a must - both Schar and Burn have their strengths and weaknesses, but either would improve with a quality first choice addition there. Targett - I'd probably bring him in, but longer term I'd like another specialist LB too.

Wood needs a motivational goalscoring coach. I suggest that recording of Ando yelling "Just put it in the net!" on a loop.

I'd guess because guaranteeing that spend is part of the conditions of the sale, so it is part of the price. Our owners could have bought us for £300m and not had to spend a single other penny on infrastructure or anything else if they chose not to. I.e. the £300m alone satisfies the seller's demands.

We want 7, we want 7!

Actually, I just looked it up and, in a way, we are both right, as there were widely criticized US tours both years. However, as for being disastrous, in 11/12 we fluked 5th. Whereas in 15/16, we ended relegated. So in another, possibly more accurate way, it is you that is right.

Looks like Boro missing out on the play offs - two down and Luton ahead as well.

I'm pretty sure I remember some disastrous pre season tour of the US when Pardew was in charge due to the distances they travelled. But I have total faith that this one will be better organised. Might be good if it raises our profile a bit in the US too.

Disappointed we're not in the all inclusive Butlins in Portugal.

He will be now

On the one hand, I'm reading, he isn't very good. But on the other, he's always injured so he won't play anyway. Sounds to me like his two biggest weaknesses cancel each out, so I don't know what people are complaining about.

Come on TV directors, take this to penalties. I pay £20 a month for this BT subscription.

The World Cup in the winter, plus playing alongside good examples like Trippier (with Graeme Jones clearly knowing Southgate) might be a decent incentive. It's probably a long shot for him, but still. I'm a bit indifferent to him coming here, to be honest. But that's probably because I've barely seen him play.

Hard to know the context. To be possibly far too generous, he could just be saying it's easy to create that many assists if you're at Liverpool or Man City. Either way, it's a daft thing to say and will backfire. I'm sure there was a comment from Wilson a while back (not entirely admiringly the way I read it) along the lines that he was difficult to play alongside, because he didn't put the crosses in when you'd expect and so was hard to predict. Next season could well be make or break for him here, assuming he stays.

Poor Steve. He has all these brilliant ideas on tactics and formations, but try as he might, wherever he goes not one of his teams is capable of knowing what to do, or be able to play in a different style to the previous manager. These players should all be ashamed as they really have let him down time and time again. He's the unluckiest man in football.

A couple of Yankovs there.