angelman

And also here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2737191/Roy-Hodgson-shares-Louis-van-Gaal-s-fears-Luke-Shaw-s-fitness.html http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-united-new-boy-luke-shaws-4125611 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/england/11062102/England-manager-Roy-Hodgson-warned-Luke-Shaw-over-his-fitness-at-World-Cup.html http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/international/england-manager-roy-hodgson-lectures-luke-shaw-over-fitness-issues-9697922.html http://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/396833/FAT-CHANCER-Roy-Hodgson-blast-at-out-of-shape-Man-United-star-Luke-Shaw On the one hand I feel a bit sorry for the lad, but then I am sure that the £120k a week will keep him happy and any misfortune a bigger club suffers is fine by me. But it would be such a shame for him if he does a Franny Jeffers (albeit for different reasons).

SO16, yes quite. Hence why I am a little surprised that the contract extension offer was not taken up.

You seem to have a rather fanciful idea about how level the playing field is in the PL. Sure there is a group detached from the rest, as there is in Spain, Germany and many other leagues. The English group might consist of more teams than other leagues, but that hardly makes it more level. In the past 10 years, 3 teams have won the Premier League (and this is with Man City being no where 10 years ago, and now that Utd might be in the wilderness....). In the past 10 years 3 teams have won La Liga. Germany is slightly better with 4 teams having won it in the past decade. Serie A has had 3 winners. Actually Seria A and La Liga are similar in that two teams (Juve and Inter) have won all but 1 title. But what really is the aim of most clubs? Realistic ones? Sure we would all love to win the league, but that's not very realistic and the first goal is European football specifically the CL. From that angle, then Spain offers more opportunities by virtue of more teams qualifying. In the past decade, our CL spots have been filled by... Arsenal x10 Chelsea x10 Man Utd x9 Liverpool x5 Man City x4 Spurs x1 Everton x1 In recent years, Man City replaced Liverpool to make it a quartet of Man C/U, Arsenal & Chelsea. Up until last season, Man C and Liverpool had never both finished in the CL spots. Now things might have slightly shifted and Liverpool come back into the frame and replace Man U - but for how long? So I disagree that with you that there are 5 times that can win PL, but would agree that there are 5 teams that are competing year in year out for the 4 CL spots. Of course there is the occasional interloper - like Atletico winning La Liga, or Spurs & Everton finishing in the CL spots - but in reality the PL is hardly better than any other league, althogh granted, it has one or two more teams that "block off" the top spots. And it isn't bellyaching. I would love the CL to disappear in it's current form and return it to how it used to be. European nights used to be something to look forward to, but now they are far too commonplace and is to serve the same teams year in year out. Sure I would love to follow Saints in Europe, and being realistic we have no chance of that (and I don't mean the Europa League). Which comes back to if there is a competition that ¾ of the participants have no (or little) chance of gaining access to the next tier up, what is the point? Do you not think that something needs changing? While it might be detrimental to the ¼ that can and do make it to the next tier, is the game being run to benefit the minority or the majority? That is slightly rhetorical, and probably should have been phrased, "should the game be run for the minority or the majority?". And if the CL serves the same teams ad nauseam, piling more riches upon them, then the PL is going to get ever more distorted, rendering it ever more uneven a playing field. The top 5 or 7 is pretty much a closed shop now, and it isn't going to open up any time soon. So, feel free to call it bellyaching, me, I'm just being pragmatic and looking at a broken "sport" that serves no one save for the minority. But I guess it's all about what you want from football. I would love to see Norwich, Ipswich, Forest embark on a European adventure rather than the same 4/5 clubs, year in, year out. But the powers that be seem content to let market forces rule and not interfere. I am not a Rugby Union fan, but I imagine that they might have had half an eye on the PL and football and seen what path it had gone down and decided to interfere rather than let market force create these chasms. The final nail will be when clubs will be allowed to negotiate their own TV rights. I can imagine that that will soon be on the horizon.

Spain really only have 2 teams that dominate, leaving room for others to qualify for CL. In the past 10 years the teams that have finished top 4 for CL qualification Real x10 Barca x10 Valencia x5 Atletico x4 Villarreal x3 Sevilla x3 Bilbao x1 Sociedad x1 Malaga x1 Betis x1 Osasuna x1 Germany is now as bad as the PL. In the past 5 years, Bayern and Dortmund have always finished top 4, and Shalke and Bayer have finished top 4 in four of those 5 years.

FIFA could impose it as part of a condition of taking part in any particular competition/league. I don't think that there would be any contravention of employment laws - Rugby Union seems to do it OK, but not France, hence why all the players go there. Anyway, I think if you turned up at court and said that a wage cap of £10-20k a week was restrictive, you would be laughed out of court. One of the reasons people move is for CL football, but lets be honest, money is the main factor. If all clubs could compete financially, then there would be less incentive to move for financial reasons. I would welcome a salary cap, but really can't see it happening. Are £200k+ a week wages really necessary? And if the cap was £20k, do you think that many footballers would give up and go and get another job?

We had outgrown the Dell. Grimsby haven't had a sell out for years.

Are they? I sincerely hope you are not AB. As for being replaced for Poland, who played against England?

don't be disingenuous. you lost the no 1 spot for Poland 3 months ago. There are other decent Polish keepers, so it is a wee bit arrogant to think that that is an automatic choice.

Fair enough to me. If he wants to leave, why should he take the place of someone who doesn't? It might be harsh in some people's eyes, but it is a pragmatic approach.

Not being happy to sit on the bench - fair does. or rather good. Nor should he. He should work his hardest and when the opportunity comes, grab it with both hands. I am sure that he is contracted to train and play when chosen and to sit it out when he isn't. If he wants out, RK has said he can go, although you seem to allude to the fact that he isn't being allowed to go. It sounds like we want a transfer fee for him, that others aren't prepared to meet. People might think this wrong seeing as we picked him up when he was unemployed, but that would be wrong, as the transfer fee and wages are taken into consideration.

Bash one out, have a decent drink or two, and then you should sleep OK. HTH

What with Chambers being called up since his move, I was wondering what England starting line up people can come up with using players ONLY from unfashionable clubs. Certainly no Liverpool, Man U/C, Chelsea or Arsenal. Think Everton can be used as well as Spurs.

True. I don't know why I m listening to Durham and Gough, but they seem to be talking (and have done so for all of today and most of the transfer window) non stop about the Champions League. There are 4 English teams involved, with 16 of the PL not involved. I don't care about the CL, save to now hope that all the English teams lose. Gone are the days when I liked to see them do well. All it does now is reinforce the differences between the haves and have nots in the PL.

Does it matter who said what? Sometimes a white lie has to be told for the benefit of the club/player or whoever. Obviously it was deemed to be in the best interests to not be wholly truthful. How has that impacted upon anyone? Certainly hasn't with me.

He was linked with Cagliari. Almunia had a medical there, failed due to a heart problem (and promptly retired at the age of 37). Strange that they seemed to prefer Almunia over Boruc. Maybe they will come back in for him. Maybe he will stay.

Well, sometimes the idea of a second wife is appealing, just if one doesn't know about the other. But 2 teams? In the same league? That's bizarre. You a young un Turkish? Seems to be something a PL Baby would do. (By PL Baby I mean anyone about 27 or younger).

Shocking posting by many this summer, but still a few days for them to get a grip.

I agree. Potential - it's hard to put a price on. Franny Jeffers had that by the bucket load. A 19yo who player, what was it, 12 PL games (and was in truth pretty accomplished) going for £16m - how much do people expect us to have got for him? Sure it would have been nice to have kept him, but that didn't happen. Are they expecting us to get the same amount as we did for Shaw? The hype around Shaw was utterly ridiculous hence why the ridiculous transfer fee. Sure it would have been nice to repeat that, but that doesn't happen very often. As it is, looking at the potential for Shaw and Chambers, I would put my money on Chambers to succeed over Shaw.

I agree that it is. Here is the data....just change the season and see for yourself. In fairness I was only after league games, but there might or might not be a cup game in the mix, but I think the point is made what ever the case. (Edit - checked and I don't think any cup game is relevant. so never 4 games for the full 90 in a row stands) http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/gaston-ramirez/leistungsdaten/spieler/123742/saison/2013

Probably the amount his ability in this league deserved. The answer was 2 which happened 3 times in the 12/13 season. He did manage to do 3 x 90min in a row once while at Bologna and once at Penarol. So during his whole career, he has never managed to do 4 games in a row for the full 90 minutes.

This is how I felt last year, and again this year. But the manager is on the ground and knows more than I do about all aspects of football, so I trust his view on things and let's face it, Gaston has had more than enough time to prove himself. Plus the financial side of shifting him (wholly or partially) off the wage bill is another important factor. Value for money he most certainly hasn't been (and that is both transfer fee and wages).

I don't really care. He's acted like a ****, so he can toodle off if the price is right. He may well be a very good player, but I'd rather be a weaker side with players who want to be here, than have arseholes rocking the boat.

Hart? And frankly, unless I was related to a goalie, I wouldn't watch a game just to see how they performed.

Who cares? I certainly don't. I had a brief interest in the England team over the past year what with Saints players being in the squad and the WC. But the WC didn't disappoint and we were served up with the typical dross we have been used to for the past decade. Now that there aren't any Saints in the squad, I'll spend my time doing something less boring than watching dross.

Why would Cork really want to leave for Palace? He is getting game time. RK says he doesn't want him to leave. And if he is a free agent next year, then it should be financially advantageous for him. Or isn't he getting enough start time?