stevegrant

That's Megson's bullet-points on where they are (were) halfway through the season.

And nor, in all likelihood, will any of the other likely candidates. Terry, Ferdinand and Gerrard will all probably be too old/unfit to be relied upon by then. You could argue they already are. I don't see why the captaincy is so important anyway, no other country really gives a **** who wears an armband and gets to call heads or tails before kickoff.

The master of understatement

Lounge? Really?

I wonder where Konami got the designs for the match graphics for Pro Evolution Soccer...

Ah ok, fair enough. I had a look through the qualification procedures document on the FIFA website and it didn't mention anything about seeding. The next stage is 2 groups of 5, made up of the 5 group winners and 5 group runners-up from the current stage - not entirely sure how they'd seed that, unless it's done in points order or something like that. From there, the top 2 in each group qualify for the World Cup, with the two third-placed teams playing off for the right to enter a playoff against the winners of the Oceania group (which will almost certainly be New Zealand).

Sorry, are we in the 1950s again?

He played the last 25 minutes or so. Uzbekistan have an incredible defensive record, only one goal conceded in 8 qualifying games so far. Today's game was a dead rubber anyway, both sides had already qualified for the next stage, and there doesn't appear to be any weighting placed on winning the group as far as I can see.

Yep. I'm all in favour of ditching the FCR, but it's got to be a gradual process, I think, otherwise it'll cause absolute carnage.

If the FCR is binned, I'd like to see HMRC at least make a concession that all transfers which took place before the ruling are still subject to the old terms of the FCR, but anything from, say, this summer onwards is outside of that remit. Otherwise I can see a load of clubs going into admin in pre-pack administrations where the current owner buys them back from the administrator for a knock-down price with 80%+ of the debt wiped away. West Ham are probably the most obvious example, their debts are staggering, and Gold and Sullivan would love to just wipe most of them away, but they know that they can't do that at the moment because the vast majority of their debt is to football creditors. Many clubs sold players to the likes of West Ham, Pompey, Bournemouth, etc, safe in the knowledge that even if the club went tits-up, they'd still get their money through the FCR. If the goalposts are suddenly changed, that's a lot of clubs that could end up getting completely shafted.

It does genuinely amaze me that even journalists can't see the fundamental difference between the situation at Pompey and the situation at

You should write to them issuing them a penalty charge of 100% of the tax, plus interest, for late payment

Spencer Day, ****ing hell. Many people will be more familiar with that particular character under his previous name, Spencer Trethewy, the man largely responsible for Aldershot going bust in 1992.

I can only assume they've relied on the services of this man for their legal business: Rather ironic in this particular situation

Not sure why this happened, but HMRC ceased being a preferential creditor in 2003.

The whole point of HMRC's case is surely that the rule itself is illegal. If they win the case (and, given their record with football cases, that's unlikely anyway), the rule would have to disappear.

It would appear not, although our game against Reading on Friday 13th April is the last one they've scheduled for the Championship so far. With a full Championship programme on Tuesday 17th, Saturday 21st and Saturday 28th, they've still got a few to sort out. I'd expect them to only make a decision on the game they show on the 28th after all the games on the penultimate weekend have been played. All of the games will be kicking off at 12.30 anyway, so they don't have to move the kickoff time or date.

West Ham's game is midweek as well, to be fair. Re-arranged from a couple of weeks ago when it was frozen off.

To be fair, we expected a) the terrace to be gone this season and b) Peterborough to get dicked by Huddersfield in the playoff final. West Ham have sold around 5000 for their trip up there at the end of March

In theory, around the end of the season and the start of the summer is when the bulk of a club's income is received, through season ticket sales. However, with no (as yet) clear business plan to go on beyond the end of this season, the administrator isn't going to let the club take season ticket money for a "service" that may not ever be provided. With only two players out of contract at the end of the season (Ashdown and Rocha), the only way I can see them being remotely sustainable next season is if they offload the likes of Kitson, Lawrence, Norris, etc for knockdown fees. They might even have to subsidise the wages for the remainder of their existing contract by £2-3k a week - not ideal, but if it gets them somewhere near break-even, it's certainly an option. Unfortunately, I think a lot rests with the outcome of the Football Creditors Rule case with HMRC. If HMRC wins, that gets rid of the FCR, which in turn makes players much more wary about which club they sign for - as a result, someone like Lawrence will be much more prepared to take a significant wage cut if it means he joins a club where he knows he will get paid. 100% of £10k a week is better than 20% of £20k a week, after all. Even then, they've got to get a new CVA agreed, and the chances of that happening appear slim to say the least. Baker Tilly, having been appointed by HMRC, will surely oppose it, and that would probably be enough on its own to prevent a 75% acceptance. HMRC would simply add to that opposition with the £1.6m owed before admin and the money they would be due upon payment of the deferred wages. While we know what happens if they don't get a CVA agreed in terms of the Football League, what happens from a company perspective? If a CVA isn't agreed with creditors, does the administrator have to go back with another proposal and hope that gets agreed or does he then say "sorry lads, I've tried, but the creditors want you gone"?

On the subject of Peterborough, I got confirmation from their chairman on Twitter earlier this afternoon that the terrace will still be there when we go there

Other than bubble trips, Millwall is the safest away game in the country these days.

I emailed the Millwall ticket office about the possibility of getting the lower tier as well if the upper tier sells out and their (speedy) response was So I guess it's a "cross that bridge when we come to it" scenario. Get that first block of tickets sold and then go from there.

Mills has been a good Championship centre-back for a few years now, having made a rather unwise career move in going to Man City when Burley seemed to want to give him a run in the first team here. That said, there's absolutely no ****ing way he was ever worth £5m, but that was at a time when Leicester were chucking money at anyone and everyone. I actually suspect one of the biggest problems he's faced at Leicester is that Sven gave him the captaincy as soon as he arrived, which has perhaps fuelled a sense of entitlement, and he possibly felt he was undroppable. As we all know, Pearson doesn't stand for that sort of behaviour, so it's no surprise he's on his way out. It would be nice if they'd wait until after this weekend, mind you...