verlaine1979

Well, at least it sounds like we're all in agreement that our owner is substantially poorer than the league average, and we got sold up the river.

C) Have an owner who puts money into the club in the form of loans converted to equity, just like most of our close rivals do.

Oh, just the perception. I've got friends who support Celtic, and they're all very happy with him.

Your reading of the accounts is just flawed, that's all. We lost money only because of player purchases, and then one line down in the accounts we made it all back again and more through player sales. It's almost as if this is part of the ordinary income of the club! Maybe that's why the club's statement of income from ordinary activities is actually calculated post-player trading. But pick whatever accounting standard you like, and year on year, the club has wound up increasing the amount of money it has sitting in the bank. That's money that isn't on the pitch.

Based on his turnaround at Celtic, I'd say he's a confidence-driven shot stopper, who isn't great coming out for crosses and has a weakness getting down to low shots. We're not the right team for a keeper with shaky confidence, or one with limitations that our defence isn't dominant enough to mitigate. Understandably, playing for the biggest club in Scotland conceals pretty much all of these.

Not quite. My point is we HAVE ALREADY SOLD, therefore should ALREADY HAVE MONEY TO BUY - especially as our player trading balance over the past five years shows an almost unheard of profit compared to every other club in the league. Your only conceivable argument is that we are uniquely financially constrained compared to all the other clubs in the league who have the same types of operating costs, but who spend more on players than they bring in through player sales. If that's the case, just say it. We're a unique case. We have to put up and shut up. I won't believe you, but it would be good to just have your position succinctly stated rather than rooting around the club's books looking for something that isn't there.

In the accounts, operating profit is calculated before profit from disposal of players. Therefore it gives you an inaccurate summary of financial performance in a business where player sales constitute a huge percentage of income.

No need to debate - you can download the full accounts from Companies House. They show a profit before interest and tax of £33.65m for the year ending June 2018.

I thought your point was that clubs were obliged to sell before they buy, not just that it was prudent to do so, which is another argument entirely.

There's a restriction on how many players you can register in your PL squad, but no restriction on how many you can have on your club's books. Newcastle still had five senior players left out when they submitted their squad at the start of the season. There's no rule saying every player above 21 taking a wage has to either be in the PL squad or loaned out/sold.

Terrible from Vest - Moura turned him outside the box and suddenly he barely seemed to know where he was on the pitch.

What's your problem with lesbians, stroppy or otherwise?

The youth squads' only purpose is to be a production line for the first team, or a source of revenue if we can sell the ones we don't want. That's why players have always been promoted from the under 18s when someone from the under 23s is elevated to the first team. As said below, there is literally no point and no precedent in loaning a player just to make up the youth squad numbers for five months.

Yes, I can read, but there's little point in loaning a player with the sole intention of them only ever turning out for the under 23s.

No idea if he's remotely ready for the premier league, but until Armstrong came in over the past ten games, we'd been crying out for someone who can carry the ball out of midfield and link up with the attack. From the clips this looks to be one of Maddox's main attributes.

Don't think he seems either way. He doesn't come across as much of a show off, much of a whiner or much of a cheat. Certainly doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the likes of Zlatan, Suarez or Vardy who are all genuine c**ts.

Suarez, though I'd get over it if he fancied ending his career here

Eh? What's wrong with Firmino?

In fact, it's not an investment if there's even a slight chance you might lose money. That's even more basic on the business stuff curriculum.

This. It's not an investment if you don't make money. That's just basic business stuff.

I count five under-21s in our 25-man squad listed on the Premier League website. Plus, you do what PL clubs have always done when buying potential for the future - you loan them out which helps you find out quicker if they're likely to come good.

The problem with our approach is that we've stopped taking a punt on players like Bednarek. The buy-to-eventually-sell approach requires speculating on players in a range of price brackets to spread the risk. Over the past couple of seasons we've reverted to one-in-one-out at the first team level, with no real investment in players outside that. Wolves' punt on the lad from Rochdale being a case in point.

Stephens not covering himself in glory there allowing Firmino to turn so easily.

Or they can check it after they score, just like they do with a handball during the build up. No way you could argue that a missed penalty shout during the phase of play is less significant than a handball.

Was there really no VAR review on that challenge, or did they just not mention it on the tv feed? Only seen three replays, but each time it looks like Fabinho jabs his foot out and misses the ball.