The9

At least we all know your membership complaints are actually about you realising that you've got less chance of getting a ticket due to being a tightwad and not due to any selfless interest in "fairness" now.

And now I'm not continuing it on this thread.

Worth noting at this point that Premier League and Europa League squad numbers don't have to be the same for each player (though there are obvious admin benefits of players having the same for both competitions).

Concessions are not relevant to the general discussion about prices, no standard priced seats have changed prices, only the number of concessions likely to get those prices. The seat itself, sold to your walk up adult human punter, costs either the same or less than last season. How's about you take the argument somewhere relevant, or try and discuss Europa League on this thread?

The Spitfire is my pub o' choice, but it is starting to get VERY busy on matchdays, can be one-in-one-out by noon for a 3pm kick off now - tends to be less busy in evenings as people can't get to the pub in time.

If they've changed the increments for discounts, that that means they've reduced the number of concessions so fewer people are paying less than the standard cost, not that they've put prices up. People no longer being eligible for student/U11/U17/U21 rates is also not putting prices up.

They didn't put any prices up at all, just reduced some in the wings. They have offered a pay-for-priority service for home tickets, and a pay-for-priority and travel service for the Vitesse trip. I'm fine with that, as long as the right people (those travelling to lots of aways in the case of Arnhem) get the opportunity to buy reasonably priced tickets. This morning's queue also offered people the chance to get tickets - the only remaining question is whether 7 aways is much too high an increment, and where do you draw the line if not - people who don't have those can still get them via travel club, just at a premium.

Of course if they're taking you to Arnham not Arnhem that might be a bit of a problem.

Probably didn't come up as you weren't logged in. I had that yesterday, only shows Newcastle, when you log in showed Vitesse. I know 4 people (in 3 different groups of friends) who queued from about 6am, at least one of them got a ticket online whilst stood in the queue - and he was only about 9th in the queue! Have to say I was expecting a lot more traffic online and much longer waiting, but I guess when you're only offering tickets for people between 7-9 aways that narrows the field down significantly to begin with.

Agreed. I think he's toss, but he's first choice backup levels of toss and he occasionally goes a match without either running straight past the player with the ball, misreading a long ball or skimming a header behind him, which is ok for facing some opponents in the Prem. Whilst he's not good enough to be a starter in a top half side, he's good enough for cover in a top 6 one.

This year's home shirt is the same as the last adidas home shirt, which I can confirm as I'm in the same size as the horrible adidas red thing from 2013/14, and from all indications, the green away shirt is the same sizing as both of those (the black adidas away shirt 2 years ago was Formotion and skintight but this one isn't). I will know tonight, as the wife is headed for the ground RIGHT NOW.

It's no "My Lovely Horse".

Vitesse are bringing the tickets with them, so there aren't any tickets to have until at least tomorrow... ...in good news, I now have both legs in my purchase history.

I've had a bit of a Google - UEFA Regs are here for 2015/16: http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/uefaorg/Regulations/02/23/69/59/2236959_DOWNLOAD.pdf 50.01 The UEFA Kit Regulations apply to all matches in the competition, unless specified otherwise in these regulations. 50.02 Exceptionally, for all matches in the qualifying phase and play-offs the domestic kit regulations of the relevant associations apply, provided that the sponsor advertising on the kit complies with Article 32 of the UEFA Kit Regulations and the kit has been approved for and worn in domestic competition matches. So it could be that the patch is not needed until the group stages. (Ask Hull!) I've also had a look at the Kit Regs themselves, but I can't find a copy since 2012 and frankly even *I* think they're ridiculously detailed: http://www.uefa.org/MultimediaFiles/Download/Tech/uefaorg/General/01/75/63/78/1756378_DOWNLOAD.pdf For instance, the ruling on colour panels states: ANNEX D: Colour and contrast-related terms Using a spectrophotometer UEFA may measure the values of the colour, the reflectivity and the contrast of the various colours used on a kit. This method helps to ensure better legibility of the numbers against the background colours and to avoid reflectivity of colours, and also provides an objective means of decision-making. 1. Spectrophotometer An instrument that measures the spectral reflectance. 2. Measurement method The measurements are to be recorded using a spherical spectrophotometer with an aperture of 6.6 mm and a measurement area of 4mm on a white-point of D65 and Standard Observers Angle of 10°. All sample measurements are an average of three readings, 0°, 90° and 45°. A spectrally neutral 18% Reflectance Grey Card must be placed under the single layer of fabric to be measured. 3. Delta E Delta E is a formula to calculate the difference between a pair of measured colour samples. The Delta E CMC 2:1 equation is used by UEFA to determine the colours of decorative elements. 4. Delta L Delta L is a formula used to calculate the difference in light between a pair of measured colour samples. UEFA may use it to determine the contrast of colour. 5. Number-zone colours In order to be approved, the contrast between shirt colours in the number zone must be less than or equal to a Delta L of 25. Colour combinations with a Delta L value greater than 25 are considered as contrast colours and require a neutral patch on the back of the shirt. 6. Contrast to player numbers In order to be approved, a player number must contrast with its background colour(s) in the number zone. A number must contrast by a Delta L value equal to or higher than 30. 7. Decorative elements In order to be approved, a decorative element as defined in Article 12 has to differ from the shirt colour(s) by a Delta E CMC 2:1 value of up to 10 maximum. The background colour will be measured before the decorative element. 58 58 8. Reflective effect No kit item (including player numbers) must be too reflective. In order to be approved, the spectral gain of a material used must be less than 0.009 (representing as “spectral Gain x 100’ being lower than 0.9). Spectral gain is defined as the average positive difference of the specular-excluded subtracted from the specular-including readings, within the range of 400 to 700 nanometers at 10 nanometer intervals.

If it doesn't Hull wasted a shedload of cash making shirts for only the qualifying rounds last season... They also insisted on wearing one of their away kits at home in one of their 4 matches to ensure the "European" kit got used in Europe, too. It's been a while since the home team changed shirts in case of a clash in Europe, but I remember it used to be a thing!

Doesn't answer my question, which is "what are we wearing at home?" - the club has said nothing about a Europa kit, and the striped shirt we do have doesn't meet the UEFA shirt numbering regulations - which are that we need a single coloured panel behind the number. So either we're wearing green for all matches, or we're wearing a different home shirt which the club hasn't mentioned and isn't selling... most likely the normal shirt but with a back panel (which could be red or white, but red makes the most sense).

Not sure the relevance of a completely different player's completely different injury (plus Rodriguez had a surgery setback and started from scratch after 6 months of recovery), and also not sure what kind of "stern test" you want for a side playing a less auspicious, lower placed team from the same division in the Europa League in the same month. Davis has weaknesses, as do all players, as long as our defence and defensive midfield is near last season's level none of them will matter too much.

Actually I went to the Salzburg game, and Stekelenburg was excellent there too.

I'm waiting with bated breath to see which of the fan-ownership models Newport decide to adopt - remarkably pro-active of them to have mooted and started a fan takeover BEFORE the club sunk into administration and dropped 3 divisions, and managed a mutually beneficial handover from the time when the multi-millionaire chairman pulled the plug to prevent a crisis, but I guess not all clubs' fans have the ability to see the completely bloody obvious unfolding before their eyes.

I prefer that to the "get to sleep" moaning. Took all of 30 seconds to Google it, it's all about the sources.

To give you odds... We're probably 66% likely to win against Vitesse, Sampdoria probably 75% over Vojvodina. Sampdoria will be seeded, and at the moment I'd say there is a 40% chance we won't be - we're right on the cusp of seeded/unseeded but I'd expect more EL upsets than CL, pushing us into the seed pot. So for us to even be in the right bit of the draw to face Sampdoria I'm saying it's about a 20% chance (⅔×¾×2/5=12/60=1/5), and as there are about 20 other possible opponents (22 matches, can't draw West Ham) I'd say there's about a 1% chance we play Sampdoria in the next round. That is still 1% more than our chances of playing Fiorentina, however, as they're in the Group Stages already and don't join the competition until the round after the one we're discussing.

Going to be a little light on post 3QR updates as I'll still be in Arnhem when the POR draw is made and the focus will be on getting the cheapest travel and accommodation possible as soon as possible whilst still abroad (all assuming we win of course) - and as I'm flying to Netherlands before 7am that morning I doubt I'll be updating with the CL losers on the day either (they'll have already played on the Wednesday of course). The seeding link above and the Wiki page are pretty good for it all, though losing the basic coefficients from the Wiki page was annoying. One problem with maybe being seeded is that there are still a disturbing number of very very eastern European sides left in the unseeded pool at the moment. But I guess that's better than potentially having to beat Dortmund.

Quite.

I should bloody hope signing better players relegates the ones who aren't as good as them to substitutes, what else would you do with them other than sell them before they lost their value further? As for buying John Terry, I suspect he wouldn't be the kind of player we'd want in the first place for all kinds of reasons: age, cost, attitude off the pitch and lack of sell on profit being the first 4. £10m is sod all in modern football and all players of that age have value even if they're only squad players. If our scouting and analytics say Chester is suited to being a starter right now and could improve too, we should buy him at anything resembling a not completely unreasonable price. It's the idea of deliberately paying the going rate for players we know aren't good enough to start which is the problem here, not paying a bit over for players who meet all of our criteria and could potentially make us a profit as well as be successful (or God forbid actually want to stay). Fonte's been excellent for us, but I never want him or anyone else to think they can sit back because they're undroppable. Pellè must have got a shock at Chelsea away last season... It's not "squad rotation", it's trying to find an Alderweireld replacement to start ahead of Yoshida, and ideally another one to push the first signing and Fonte more than Yoshida does.

I find him amusing (he even gives me a reason to mention Afan Lido now and again).