Keegans Export

Can't say I have much recollection of his time at Wolves. Mainly remember him for being binned by Spain because he said he was taking over at Real then getting sacked by them after about 12 games.

I think even if they went into Administration today there's a cut-off point where it would be applied the following season. Presumably to stop teams who know they are safe just taking the -9pt hit with minimal consequences.

Yeah I've just seen the goal again this morning and it's a fantastic save, that's going in 9 times out of 10.

If we can keep Bruno, invest in a couple of key areas and have a bit more luck on the injury front, he could do something special next season.

I think it'll be his Bournemouth 4-4-1-1 with Isak playing #10 Murphy and Gordon should have enough legs to help cover Longstaff and Bruno in the middle.

Mandy and her Multi-Club Mags feat. Mehrdad

Move his post brick by brick to Beamish-Online.org

The article suggests the club in question is potentially going to do exactly that Besides changing/scrapping the rules all together, the FMV/related-party stuff is the biggest hurdle for us.

The FA said they wouldn't have had a case against him if he hadn't come forward, the only evidence they have has come from Tonali himself.

The idea is nice enough but for some reason it looks less like Lewis Miley striding out onto the hallowed turf and more like an angry 30-something with a backwards left hand marching towards his first EDL rally. With a Lewis Miley shirt on.

I'm going to have to learn to pronounce his surname now aren't I? F**ks sake...

According to Wikipedia, we got planning permission in July 1998 and the work was completed in July 2000.

With options on the bench starting to return this needs to be a Howe-ball, press them all over the pitch, 22/23 special. Don't give them a second to breathe on the ball.

The genuine ITK stuff was before my time here but has the cold-reading skills of an expert psychic so he deserves credit for that at least.

You could probably expand the Gallowgate without encroaching too much onto the new Stack site I reckon?

I had wondered that actually, especially if they're talking about changing the facilities within the stadium. Presumably a phased rebuild, renovating/rebuilding one stand at a time?

Jesus, father time has done a serious number on him there. Has he been off the telly for that long?

Sounds ideal really. Can start at RW, could cover for Isak at CF. With PSR etc limiting what we can spend I think this is the way we'll go - CB who can cover LB, RW who can cover CF etc. James Perch would be the ultimate PSR-buster.

I can sort of see the appeal. Although it doesn't allow us to increase our spending, it theoretically puts a cap on the highest earning clubs so they can't outspend us by that much. The key thing for us going forwards is the related party stuff. That's what's making it so hard to substantially increase our turnover and that's what's limiting what we can spend under the current (and proposed) rules.

It's not impossible to have both, it just means that the clubs with turnover of over £640m will have their spending capped at £450m whereas clubs with turnover below that amount will have their spending capped at 70%.

Presumably it's either 5x what the bottom club earn or 70/85% of turnover, whichever is lower. I've seen the argument that it at least caps what the big earners can spend, but by Kieran Maguire's calculations there's only Chelsea and maybe Man City spending above this 5x cap now, so I don't see it making any fundamental difference.

In that case it makes very little difference to our spending power, seeing as 70% of our turnover is going to be nowhere near enough to spend £450m.

Wow, that's a big shock. Unless they're bringing it in in addition to the 70/85% rule?

Don't blame them for threatening but would the argument against be; They'd still have to abide by UEFAs 70% rule regardless Judging by Kieran Maguire's figures, if the multiplier was 4.5x then only Chelsea and Man City would be over the limit currently, if it was 5x it'd just be Chelsea On current spending, English teams (especially the "big six") are competitive both in terms of attracting players and in terms of success on the pitch The same argument could be made against a challenge from the PFA - 18/20 (or 19/20) clubs are already spending within this hypothetical limit, nobody is having to get their wages cut to keep their club within the rules. That was part of the argument against Saracens - you can't say the salary cap is anit-competitive because you are still attracting top European players and regularly winning European games and competitions. Admittedly that was just arbitration though wasn't it?

The "Big Six" will vote against it because they don't want to restrict their own spending versus European competitors but also want to limit the likes of us and Villa from matching their spending power Teams like West Ham and Brighton will vote against it because they don't want us (and possibly Villa) suddenly being able to spend twice as much as we are now because their owners couldn't afford to keep up Perennial bottom-half teams don't want to risk a fellow relegation candidate getting bought out and being able to buy their way out of trouble overnight Honestly, if this gets more than a handful of votes in favour I'd be very, very surprised.