stevegrant

I've not voted - as with so many things, I don't think it's a case of black or white, there's a murky shade of grey in there which largely represents where I stand. While I fully appreciate the good work that has been done over the last 4 years, particularly on the pitch, I don't think the club (or the Liebherr Trust) should be held to ransom (if indeed that is what is happening - we simply don't know for sure) and I also believe there are many other people out there who could do a similar job and even improve on things in the future. No one person is bigger than the club, so if Cortese did bugger off I'd say thank you for the many good things he's done, **** you for the many (much more minor by comparison) **** things he's done, and look forward to the club's next chapter. Should Cortese stay? Yes, if it's in everybody's interests to do so. If it's not mutually beneficial then a parting of the ways is probably for the best.

We're only worth what someone is willing to pay, and if someone is looking to make money from a football club, we're probably no longer a "great prospect" as the vast majority of the required investment and development has taken place in the last four years.

Exhibit A...

There's certainly a great deal of weight in the "better the devil you know" argument in this scenario. No reason why we couldn't find another chairman/CEO who is equally or more capable than Cortese, but also just as likely to find someone who's useless.

The Football Editor of The Times lapped up a completely made-up story by a French blog site about a Qatari Super League and ran it as a major exclusive, so I wouldn't read too much into his endorsement

To be fair, with our current cost base, we don't need to cash in on anyone, especially with an extra c.£20m in broadcasting revenue next season.

****s sake, how many people are going to continue to assume that because someone has "journo" in their Twitter handle, they're actually genuine? Look at that guy's profile, go to the website that's linked there... It's a fake.

While that is entirely true, there's absolutely no reason why a new chairman/CEO couldn't possess an equal (or greater) amount of drive and ambition. Given backing, it's a role that I'm sure would be highly desirable.

Would rather Sunderland went down, but they won't. Wigan will be gone, which is a shame as they're quite entertaining and a decent away day. Watford or Palace to come up, I don't think I could stomach an increase in the Brighton smugathon, to be honest.

Not sure that's true, they've converted around £35m of "loans" to equity - somehow I can't see them selling the club for £350m.

Spot on. The devil is in the detail, but it's a detail we're unlikely to discover until after the event, if at all.

Difficult to make a call on anyone from 9th downwards at this stage as some teams you'd predict to do well could lose key players to bigger clubs and some who you'd expect to do badly could make some good signings. Man City Chelsea Man United Arsenal ------- Spurs Liverpool Everton Newcastle Swansea West Ham West Brom Saints Aston Villa Fulham Sunderland Norwich Stoke ------- Cardiff Watford Hull

Nail on the head there.

We comfortably sold out more than 2,000 at Newcastle. Sunderland is more or less the same travel distance, the same nonsensical up-in-the-gods seating, and also happens to be the last away game of the season. I'd say it's pretty ****-poor, to be honest.

1415 of the 2200 allocation sold as of this morning, apparently.

We owe Watford's fans team a return match after they travelled down to us last season, this game has been pencilled in for Saturday 8th June. Venue and kick-off time are yet to be finalised, but it's likely to be a mid-morning kick-off. If you're interested in playing, please let me know. If you're a newbie, please let me know your age, preferred position(s) and vague standard.

There will be a big firesale at Malaga this summer as they have massive financial problems so I'd expect lots of clubs to be looking at their players - we certainly won't be the only ones.

But that would involve someone else having already done the research for that "investigative journalist" to then collate and pass off as their own work.

Metro Bank (mainly in London but starting to branch out elsewhere as well) don't charge fees on overseas withdrawals and payments

Somewhere like Purley or Coulsdon are quite nice and are both handy for London Bridge connections via East Croydon

IIRC, we've only had one scheduled midweek home game this season (Norwich), plus one moved to a Monday night for TV (Everton).

By SFC standards in recent years it would be very moderate. I've had a £110 increase in each of the last two seasons, although naturally the rise in the level we're playing at has had a large impact on that. Last season, I paid £465 for 23 Championship games at £20.22 per game. This season, I've paid £575 for 19 Premier League games at £30.26 per game. While the actual rise for this season was 23.7%, on a cost-per-game basis it rose 49.7%. For many seated elsewhere in the ground it was an even bigger rise. It'll be interesting to see how people judge whether next season's ST prices are fair or not - would they judge them on the amount they've increased this season, or would they simply look at the price in isolation? Clearly looking at it from the angle of a 9% increase makes it look not completely horrendous, but then pushing it through the £600 barrier for renewals might be the straw that breaks the camel's back for some.

Of course it shouldn't, especially with a 50% increase in TV revenue next season, but the reality is that football clubs will do all they can to drain every last penny from the fans. For the most part, at the highest level, if one fan isn't willing to pay the going rate, there will be another one ready and willing to take their place. The only way prices will drop is if people stop going and attendances fall.