stevegrant

Wasn't dune. Damning him with faint praise, admittedly, dune's smarter than that.

I've no idea how we compare on that front, but from speaking to people who have worked at the club both past and present, the turnover at SFC has increased a lot in the last 3 years compared to before that. As a guide, since David Luker left nearly two years ago (who had been at the club for a decade or so), we've gone through 3 ticket office managers, for whatever reason. Whether we're just hiring the wrong people from the start or we're hiring the right people but failing to keep them happy, I don't know.

Of course, this assumes the chairman is only "managing headcount" (i.e. hiring and firing) for the position of Team Manager/Head Coach. There has been a massive turnover of staff in back-office departments (ticketing, marketing, retail, commercial, etc).

I've just checked PayPal and it looks like it'll attempt to take the money again tomorrow.

Oh good, that means the new design focuses on being really slow to load, especially on mobile devices...

From F365's Mediawatch page today: Portsmouth fans might be despairing. The club is on the verge of going out of business - and really, this time, not like those other 423 times they've been going out of business. Trevor Birch has warned that they only have 16 more days unless senior players like Tal Ben Haim and Kanu come to a compromise over their outstanding wages. And yet - what's that coming over the hill? No, it's not a monster, but Harry Redknapp, riding on a trusty steed, ready to save the day. He told ESPN: "I will be ringing Kanu today to see if there is anything I can do. I signed him for Portsmouth on a one-year contract and Tony Adams told me: 'You must be mad, he is finished'. Six years later, he is still there." So there you have it. The man who jazzed something like £40million on transfer fees and lord knows how much more in wages it turns out they couldn't afford during his time at Portsmouth (and that was just his second spell), as well as his assorted bonuses that Rosie the dog kindly held in escrow, is now lending a hand by having a word with Kanu. Perhaps we're being a little unfair. Perhaps we shouldn't have a pop at a man who was told money was available and then spent it. Perhaps we should go easy on him. However, take a look at what Harry said again, specifically about Kanu. "I signed him...Tony Adams told me: 'You must be mad, he is finished'. Six years later, he is still there." Yeah, you were really proved right there Harry. What a shrewd move that turned out to be. If we were you, we wouldn't be taking credit for bringing in one of the men who, perhaps through no real moral fault of his own, is taking Portsmouth down.

No, we have the maximum number of tickets City will give an away team for a league game. I'm sure teams like Wigan, Fulham, etc will struggle to take a thousand there at those prices (especially having been there loads of times in recent years), so City - in the same way we do - will have ways they can split the away end to account for a smaller away following and allow more home fans in. I'd guess they've got 1500, 2000 and 3000 blocks, with the 3000 one on a "guaranteed-sale" basis, i.e. the away club has to pay for them all up front, with the other allocations on a "sale or return" basis, where the away club only has to pay for the tickets it actually sells.

Another thought, perhaps we do have the "minimum" 3,000, but the other 200 are for the players' allocation for friends, relatives, etc.

Quite possibly. Now they've got the demand for tickets from the home fans, which in previous years they haven't had, they're probably not that bothered about squeezing in another 2-300 away fans.

I notice that they've removed the option to link other people's accounts to your own - this will be fun next week when Man City tickets go on sale and people try to get 3 or 4 tickets together...

The home club are allowed to remove seats from the away end to account for segregation, so that'll be where those 200-odd tickets have gone.

And of course there's absolutely no "details" there anyway... surely the most important detail is the price?

Yeah it originally looked as though they were going to do it on a very simple "one point per pound spent" basis. The way they are going to do it now, based on getting more points for going to the less attractive games, makes a lot of sense, but I'd still expect loads of problems with points not being allocated when bought in a group, etc.

The thing that seems "inconsistent" with the whole thing is that the inquest into Tomlinson's death found that he was unlawfully killed, and that inquest requires the same burden of proof as a criminal trial. If we take the inquest's verdict as just - which seems reasonable to do - it seems a bit strange that Harwood could be found not guilty of manslaughter.

My belief is that any players you sign should be of high enough quality that they are better than you already have. What's the point in buying a back-up player? No player with any sort of ambition and drive will sign for a club on that basis anyway, but doing that doesn't provide much competition for places among the existing squad.

Fair to say it's done and dusted, I reckon

The deal offered has to be of equivalent or greater value to the existing contract.

Reading seem to have decided that they're going to place games into categories as they go through the season rather than announce them all at the start. £32 for adults for "standard", £40 for "gold". From their first 6 games, Spurs and Newcastle are "gold"-rated, with Stoke, Fulham, Norwich and Everton "standard". Given the relatively short distance between the two sides, I reckon we'll end up in the "gold" category

I can only assume that someone else is footing the bill (just to make a change), perhaps the Gibraltar tourist board in an attempt to get more teams over there?

They can "offer" what they like, they're not registering any new players with the Football League for the forseeable future.

He won't be playing competitive games because Pompey can't sign anyone. Assuming he gets games in friendlies, he'll be putting himself in the shop window for other clubs to sign him on a proper contract.

Doncaster will only be paying him for this month. Standard terms of a player's contract in this country is that the club will pay the player for another month after the end of the contract if the player has yet to find another club. As he's officially out of contract at Doncaster, they have no say in the matter.

It's a no-lose situation for the players, go on "trial" with a club you know won't be allowed to sign you any time soon, but with a club with a relatively recent PL record, get your fitness levels up in a semi-competitive environment and then wait for other similar-sized clubs who will actually pay you to come calling.

I don't think it makes any difference, players and managers leave clubs "by mutual consent" with compromise agreements all the time.

They were supposed to be under strict financial controls last time. That went well.