Whitey Grandad

They're all worth keeping IMO (at the right price) so it's a difficult decision. I went for goals so Rasiak took it by a nose.

So, Professor, do you think that the same style of football will be as big a success in League 1 as last season? (and I'm hoping for an honest debate here)

I think that much should be clear after the debacle of last season.

Thanks for the clarification. You will understand and hopefully excuse a trace of cynicism in one so old...

It all looks a bit déja lu to me.

Didn't I read this same statement about 2 weeks ago?

If the 'mystery group' have not paid for exclusivity then Fry is free to talk to whomever he wants. Of course, he's not paid by percentage is he, is it a daily rate?

Yes please.

It's a bargaining ploy throughout the world. Start to walk away and they'll call after you 'how much you want to pay'?

Would that be a bogit?

I would expect home teams to 'field' 7 subs and away teams to field fewer.

I was questioning why we hadn't sold any tickets before we went into administration. And we have been selling assets to pay wages for years, nothing new in that. It's just that we havent been producing the assets any more.

Does anybody have any idea why they were never sold?

Austria's a big place. You should have no trouble avoiding him.

... for the time being...

That's an interesting thought... Not paying their wages would make them free agents and off the books with no liability to pay them for the next season or two. Of course, the value of their contracts would also be wiped out.

I believe the phrase is: 'put up or shut up'

I hear you. The sanctions are not so much for what has happened but for what will happen.

Ta for that. So SMS loaned 10m+ to SFC and SFC has to pay interest on this as well as 'rent' for using the stadium? Direct costs of over £21m would seem to have been the problem.

Going? I think we've nearly gone.

If it's between SMS and SLH then why does it appear on SFC as a current liability?

The FL quote is, in my opinion, imprecise and disingenuous. There may well have been a document on the table waiting for Pinnacle to agree, but it may not have been to their liking, legal or financial, or maybe there were other compelling reasons as to why it was unacceptable. We can speculate all day but in the end, agreement could not be reached.

A strange case, really. What I found annoying was that you felt that he could be a really special player with that little bit extra. We'll miss his goals. I can't see anybody else scoring many, what with Surman and even McGoldrick gone.

What's this 'amounts due to parent company undertakings'?