geordie_b Posted August 22, 2021 Share Posted August 22, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, gjohnson said: Well yes they are....surely last week proved that Not at all, there isnt many in their starting lineup that you would swap for ours, their club structure/ownership is as much of a shambles as ours but the main difference is that we are lead by Steve Bruce. On that basis most clubs are light years ahead atm Edited August 22, 2021 by geordie_b Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted August 22, 2021 Share Posted August 22, 2021 53 minutes ago, geordie_b said: Not at all, there isnt many in their starting lineup that you would swap for ours, their club structure/ownership is as much of a shambles as ours but the main difference is that we are lead by Steve Bruce. On that basis most clubs are light years ahead atm Of their starting 11 last week, there is at least 8 I would happily transfer immediately into our team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordie_b Posted August 22, 2021 Share Posted August 22, 2021 53 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said: Of their starting 11 last week, there is at least 8 I would happily transfer immediately into our team. Im bored so i'll humour you, which 8? Fabianski Coufal Dawson Ogbonna Cresswell Rice Soucek Bowen Benrahma Fornals Antonio Beyond their centre midfield pairing and possibly their full backs im struggling to see at least 4 more? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Zaius Posted August 22, 2021 Share Posted August 22, 2021 5 minutes ago, geordie_b said: Im bored so i'll humour you, which 8? Fabianski Coufal Dawson Ogbonna Cresswell Rice Soucek Bowen Benrahma Fornals Antonio Beyond their centre midfield pairing and possibly their full backs im struggling to see at least 4 more? Players in bold walk into our team, midfield pairing and the full backs are a cut above what we have in those positions. Could easily make a case for Bowen ahead of Almiron. Id prefer Dubravka and Wilson ahead of Fabianski and Antonio but they're pretty close calls. Most importantly though, they have an actually competent manager. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted August 22, 2021 Share Posted August 22, 2021 6 minutes ago, Doctor Zaius said: Players in bold walk into our team, midfield pairing and the full backs are a cut above what we have in those positions. Could easily make a case for Bowen ahead of Almiron. Id prefer Dubravka and Wilson ahead of Fabianski and Antonio but they're pretty close calls. Most importantly though, they have an actually competent manager. I had exactly the same as you - plus Fabianski, Benrahma and Antonio. In a 4-4-2 you could probably fit all 8 in. Admittedly the last three are debatable. Not sure how many of ours they would have. Wilson and ASM maybe? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted August 22, 2021 Share Posted August 22, 2021 If we had a midfield we’d be a half decent team. We don’t and that was abundantly clear when we played them, theirs just took the game and ran with it, we had no response. They don’t need 8 players who would walk into our team, just 2 that trampled all over us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nbthree3 Posted August 22, 2021 Share Posted August 22, 2021 Then we need to seriously move on Cajuste and Kamara like we're supposedly after Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 11 hours ago, Fantail Breeze said: I had exactly the same as you - plus Fabianski, Benrahma and Antonio. In a 4-4-2 you could probably fit all 8 in. Admittedly the last three are debatable. Not sure how many of ours they would have. Wilson and ASM maybe? Would only put ASM and Wilson in their lineup over ours. Possibly Dubravka and Schar when fit Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
olliemort Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 11 minutes ago, gjohnson said: Would only put ASM and Wilson in their lineup over ours. Possibly Dubravka and Schar when fit Dawson is abs shite have to say but yeah i would only have ASM, Wilson and probably Schar , maybe willock too ahead of bowen depends on this seasons form Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokerprince2004 Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 Back to the takeover talk and there is a lot of gossip on twitter about a new company registered on Company House (PAUK) on 16th July 2021 just 3 days before arbitration was delayed. When you compare the initial documents of PAUK and NCUK, they are almost identical. Yassir Al Rumyyan and Vincent Cheshire named and everything appears the same except for the PIFs ‘legal form’ changing from ‘Public Investment Fund’ to ‘Corporate Sole’. Heres a link : I understand most will be highly sceptical but it seems it could well be takeover related. Dont know if theres any legal boffins in here who could explain better than me? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdm Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 PIF bought in to McLaren on the 16th July. Likely to do with that https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/saudis-pif-talks-buy-stake-mclaren-group-sky-news-2021-07-16/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazarus Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 PAUK could be PIF and Ares Management. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thumbheed Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 They formed the company the same day they completed the purchase? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Linton Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 1 hour ago, Lazarus said: PAUK could be PIF and Ares Management. The K could be Keith. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happinesstan Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 On 07/08/2021 at 18:24, Jackie Broon said: My point around the public announcement was that public announcements are not formal. The formal process of withdrawing from the deal would be separate and behind the scenes. That public statement in reality holds no weight and there is no requirement on them to have actually formally withdrawn from the deal. On top of that there is evidence in the documents of a court case, leaks from government and documents on Companies House that the deal was still alive until at least September. What do you mean by behind the scenes? As in unreported? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
loki679 Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 4 hours ago, Pokerprince2004 said: Back to the takeover talk and there is a lot of gossip on twitter about a new company registered on Company House (PAUK) on 16th July 2021 just 3 days before arbitration was delayed. When you compare the initial documents of PAUK and NCUK, they are almost identical. Yassir Al Rumyyan and Vincent Cheshire named and everything appears the same except for the PIFs ‘legal form’ changing from ‘Public Investment Fund’ to ‘Corporate Sole’. Heres a link : I understand most will be highly sceptical but it seems it could well be takeover related. Dont know if theres any legal boffins in here who could explain better than me? Try here Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 57 minutes ago, Happinesstan said: What do you mean by behind the scenes? As in unreported? I mean it's not a public process, it would be between two parties behind closed doors. Just because something has been reported or publicly announced it doesn't commit them to actually going though the formal process of doing that. For example if you're buy a house and you've exchanged contracts and you then decide to pull out of the sale, you can't just make an announcement on twitter that you've decided not to buy the house, you'd need to get your solicitor to formally stop the purchase. If you were to just make a public announcement on twitter that would not either formally withdraw you from the purchase or commit you to actually withdrawing from the purchase, legally it would mean nothing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said: I mean it's not a public process, it would be between two parties behind closed doors. Just because something has been reported or publicly announced it doesn't commit them to actually going though the formal process of doing that. For example if you're buy a house and you've exchanged contracts and you then decide to pull out of the sale, you can't just make an announcement on twitter that you've decided not to buy the house, you'd need to get your solicitor to formally stop the purchase. If you were to just make a public announcement on twitter that would not either formally withdraw you from the purchase or commit you to actually withdrawing from the purchase, legally it would mean nothing. All good points, but generally buying a house doesn't have every factual detail reported in the media, and have hundreds of stirrers trying to make out that they know the details of what your solicitor is doing Edited August 23, 2021 by gjohnson grammar Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happinesstan Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 36 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said: I mean it's not a public process, it would be between two parties behind closed doors. Just because something has been reported or publicly announced it doesn't commit them to actually going though the formal process of doing that. For example if you're buy a house and you've exchanged contracts and you then decide to pull out of the sale, you can't just make an announcement on twitter that you've decided not to buy the house, you'd need to get your solicitor to formally stop the purchase. If you were to just make a public announcement on twitter that would not either formally withdraw you from the purchase or commit you to actually withdrawing from the purchase, legally it would mean nothing. If it's not a public process then the only way the public would be aware is through a public announcement. Obviously this doesn't mean they've formally withdrawn but it certainly implies as such. A hell of a lot more than it implies they haven't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed210 Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 Those sneaky Saudis are doing a bit of car washing now. https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry-news-finance-and-corporate/pagani-plots-huayra-successor-saudi-arabia-takes-30 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 So the Saudis can buy and invest into anything but a football club? They can meet the Queen, we can sell arms to them and sign trade deals but we can turn down investment in a needy area. It’s over but fuck me we’ve been done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 I can't help but think they pulled out last year partly because of the uncertainty they thought covid might bring to football, now that England has fucked the virus off they could come back if they get a hint of a deal, Amanda has been far to quiet though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 It’s much better when she’s quiet when it comes to this deal to be fair. I could listen to her all day about her plans for the club however Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
et tu brute Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 52 minutes ago, Ben said: I can't help but think they pulled out last year partly because of the uncertainty they thought covid might bring to football, now that England has fucked the virus off they could come back if they get a hint of a deal, Amanda has been far to quiet though. You don’t spend millions going through an arbitration case if there is not an actual buyer. If it was just the CAT case, with Ashley just going for compensation, then maybe (I don’t think it is just for compensation though). Whether PIF stay at the table will be interesting. It’s their only chance of getting a premier league club for the foreseeable future though, so I think they will see it through until it’s concluded either way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty66 Posted August 23, 2021 Share Posted August 23, 2021 24 minutes ago, et tu brute said: You don’t spend millions going through an arbitration case if there is not an actual buyer. If it was just the CAT case, with Ashley just going for compensation, then maybe (I don’t think it is just for compensation though). Whether PIF stay at the table will be interesting. It’s their only chance of getting a premier league club for the foreseeable future though, so I think they will see it through until it’s concluded either way. Agree with this, Ashley and his persistence to force this deal through one way or another screams that PIF are still willing to buy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now