TheBrownBottle

He’s not someone who can tuck in and cover at centre half though, is he? NB I wouldn’t pick Burn ahead of Livramento either. But I also wouldn’t allow Schar to think he’s fucking Beckenbauer, and I would tell the dozy sod to stay in shape / formation.

The club don’t have a choice tbf. There isn’t an option not to pay the lad - I don’t understand why people are choosing that hill to die on. Hey, we could sack him - but that hurts us, not him.

I can’t argue that - but they simply don’t do it. And Schar can’t be blind to that. It works better when Joelinton and Willock play, as they offer cover on the left & do the defensive work, allowing Burn to tuck in (BDB gets called all sorts on this site, and people wonder how he plays ahead of Livramento - for me, it’s because Burn allows Schar and / or Trippier to bomb on more).

I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be able to do it. But they don’t. Bruno might as well stand pointing in the direction of our goal when it happens.

Gan on Pards lad

I mean, you’ve just answered the very point you’ve been raising. None of the MFs can cover - so why does Schar keep doing it?

Let’s not get too Rinus Michels. Who is more likely to cause problems in the opposition area - Bruno or Schar? Given that I’ve asked a rhetorical question, Schar needs to stop whatever Total Football fantasy is playing in his head and get back to playing centre back.

Thirty years it’s been, we’re due a result. Fuck it, I’m going to go for a shock win.

It wouldn’t be a terrace - safe seating still has seat numbers. The actions which followed the Taylor Report knackered all of it - safe standing will improve it, a singing section will improve it - but not by much. The truth is that even when it was good decades ago, it was actually not great most of the time. Crowds have always been louder for some matches than others. Forest at home for a lunchtime kickoff isn’t going to sound all that different no matter what is done.

The reverse is true for me. Why would they? I didn’t know it existed for years and I’m an actual NUFC supporter. I can’t picture Sandro surfing these pages

The irritation would be minimal if FFP didn’t exist. I wouldn’t give a solitary shite if our owners made a bad signing and they paid the price. Unfortunately FFP offers little wriggle room for signings like Tonali to sign on in bad faith.

Remember folks - these are anonymous comments on a Newcastle forum populated by a few hundred people at most. The idea that any stress or pressure is being applied to Tonali through comments on here is daft at best - no-one other than us is reading them.

I’ve heard Tonali reckons Almiron’s English is improving

Mansour has also comfortably doubled his investment in Man City: https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakgarnerpurkis/2021/05/29/sheikh-mansours-biggest-win-manchester-citys-46-billion-increase-in-value/amp/ This is what PIF will be aware of - and club valuations are continuing to increase. NUFC require far more infrastructure investment than Man City and Chelsea, though of course PIF can’t spunk money on transfers anymore. If PIF spent, say, £700m on a state of the art new super stadium, and used its considerable reach to pull in sponsorships, and threw another £1bn at the club - say a total cost of £2.5bn, then the gamble would be that a successful NUFC in 5-10 years is worth several times that figure.

Yep. State assets stolen and laundered through scum like Abramovich.

£900m total loss over 18 years, again allowing for inflation say £1.5bn. Club was sold for £4.25bn. Total profit = well over £2bn. Doesn’t sound too bad to me.

If you’re curious re Abramovich, Chelsea posted total losses of £900m over 18 years under him. Allowing for the purchase of the club and inflation during that period, you’re looking at somewhere in the region of £1.5bn. Boehly paid £4.25bn for Chelsea. Without the sanctions, Abramovich would have pocketed all of that profit.

Yes. Stamford Bridge already existed and we paid for Man City’s ground. Man City’s training facilities cost c.£200m. Clubs have incomes, which does fund a lot of the costs, regardless of the wealth of the ownership. NUFC has spent £400m on transfers under the current ownership, but that doesn’t mean the owners have put £400m into the club.

No - Chelsea went for more than Abramovich had invested including the purchase price. Man City are valued at c.£4bn - far more than Abu Dhabi has poured in.

He pulled Italy U21 teammates into it. He was seen as a ringleader in getting those lads into online gambling. It wasn’t a private issue - he was doing it openly and other players asked him about it. Now, perhaps he was only gambling when on international duty. But others definitely knew.

Looks like our CEO can’t do numbers, then. We haven’t doubled turnover in the first two years - but if we had, and then doubled it again in the following two, we’d have an income of c.£850m p.a. For context, Man City has the world’s highest turnover at just over £700m p.a.

Honestly Deuce, Occam’s Razor would be pointing at AC Milan knowing based on past history

The British did once set the White House on fire in a war fought over trade disagreements. If Brexit was about anything, it’s about returning to those traditional values. Burning down the San Siro would simply be a restoration of traditional British values of fairness

Haha aye, ‘and how the fuck did I suddenly become their manager?’

MBS is our own Ron Noades, then - owner / manager