Abacus

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.

20 hours ago, FloydianMag said:

Agreed and the first hint of ‘legal battles’.

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.

8 hours ago, r0cafella said:

I love the optimism, but let’s be real here. With all of the restrictions that have been put in place we will not be overtaking Man city, we leagues apart and any opportunity to catch up is being taken away  

 

I’ve been saying for sometime FFP will only get more restrictive and it does appear to be trending that way. It’s any I made my rather gloomy post, the market they bought into is already quite different. 

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.

1 hour ago, timeEd32 said:

 

It's not just more complicated than that. It's not remotely true that a £20m sale affords two £50m players.

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

1 hour ago, Yorkie said:

Rafa knocking on our door, March 2016. An absolutely colossal moment in our history because it was the beginning of the end of Ashley. It took a lot longer than it might've done but I genuinely don't think we'd be anything like the club we are now if that didn't happen. We had absolutely no right being able to appoint a manager that good in the situation we were in. 

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

5 hours ago, Strawberry said:

Keegans biggest assets replacing any player with a better one doesn't work for Howe he is too loyal to individuals and he doesn't like to disturb squad balance.

 

Hence he will never be a better one.

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.

1 minute ago, Stifler said:

Yes, potentially 8th, depending on if England get the 5th Champions League spot, and who wins the FA Cup.

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.

5 minutes ago, midds said:

Also, another thing that fucked me off tonight was the ref. Arsenal outclassed us and would have won regardless so it's not a biggy but the ref was so weak tonight. He, rightly, booked Odegard for chopping down Almiron as we're breaking at 0-0 in the 8th minute . I think it was their 2nd foul. He then allowed Arsenal to make another 13 more fouls without getting close to booking another player. Arsenal took the lead and were allowed to sit on it and kill any break we made chasing the game with a soft foul in the middle third that was never punished for the remaining 80+ minutes. When you're chasing the game and ref is just letting the winning team kill any/every attack you have without any punishment then you have no chance of getting back into it.

 

Arsenal were brilliant tonight and fully deserved it but they played the ref like a fiddle and he let them control the game. We need to learn from it and do that more

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.

On 21/02/2024 at 13:48, TRon said:

 

 

Maybe we can put him on the bench and bring him on for the last 20 mins as a bit of a run out. Other than that, I agree, we won't need him to get us a result, the game will be gone as soon as we announce the starting 11.

I'm back and forward on this, if he's fit enough to train I'd rather have him on the bench even if the game is gone for a possible run out, like you say. Treat it like a training match.

Maybe not as much as 20 mins, but still, better than having someone else on the bench we won't use in any case and so who wouldn't get any minutes anyway.

Looking forward to when they play next, in order to watch Ratcliffe charge onto the pitch and head it into his own net.

I can't recall exactly, but when we settled compensation with Brighton wasn't that also to shorten the period of gardening leave he was on?

By the way if I have to say gardening leave one more time, I'll be convinced this whole thing is an elaborate advertising ploy for Dobbies.

27 minutes ago, TeddySAFC said:

Well it totally depends if theyre going to flex this ‘model’ and not be as restrictive on what the manager can and cant do if they get the job.

 

In an ideal world someone like Cooper or Still, however I dont think they’d work under not being allowed their own coaching time, little say on transfers etc

 

It will probably be someone like Heckingbotttom.

You seem downcast by the model, and all banter aside have argued your points like a genuine fan. This is not a trap 

I agree with the bandit in that Cooper is someone who'd be good and also deserves a chance, but if you're going to go that way he'd need to be able to negotiate his own terms. Seems like Speakman is skating on thin ice with the fan base from what little I know, so maybe he'd get that.

Edit, I hope not and that it all goes terribly wrong for many future laughs, but you'll know by now that's obligatory.