stevegrant

Yeah, sorry about that. Our certificate provider were particularly tardy in issuing our renewed certificate

Zaha handed an improper conduct charge by the FA in addition to the red card itself, so he'll probably be looking at a two or three-game ban instead of the mandatory one :lol:

If you're betting on 0-0, you should always go for the "No goalscorer" bet instead, as that'll cover that exact scenario. You'd still win even if the score is 1-0 if the goal comes from an own goal. The odds are (almost) always the same.

An utterly baffling assessment of his own performances with absolutely zero grounding in reality Since joining us, he played 41 Premier League games - full 90 minutes every time - and we conceded 66 goals in those 41 games (1.61 goals per game). The games he's missed since he joined, 18 of them (only one missed through injury, I think, v Palace last season when he had concussion), we've conceded 28 goals (1.55 gpg). So not a huge difference, but there seems to have been a noticeable reduction in "how the **** have we conceded that goal?!" moments since he lost his place. Worth noting that it was Mark Hughes who eventually dropped him after the Fulham debacle, and Kelvin Davis showed no inclination to restore him to the team for his one game either. Also, considering Ralph hasn't exactly been quiet about some of the negatives he's seen from players (having particularly called out McCarthy and Obafemi in interviews and press conferences for various reasons), I find it very difficult to believe there hasn't been a detailed conversation where Ralph has laid out exactly why he's not been picking him.

Largely depends what ticket you buy - if you've got an "Any Permitted Route" ticket, i.e. not franchise-specific, you'd probably be OK.

This is also very true.

For what it's worth, I personally don't count the words "d!ck" or "crap" as swearing. Others may have lower thresholds, obviously...

Maybe, but it's impossible to say for sure either way. Hughes did what he was appointed to do last season - as it turned out, we probably should have thanked him and sent him on his way at that point, but hey ho...

A few Charlie Austin stats from Saturday's game: 68 minutes played 0 shots 5 completed passes from 10 attempted 1 aerial duel won from 5 attempted 0 tackles 16 touches Yes, you read that right. SIXTEEN touches in 68 minutes. Absolutely pathetic.

Perhaps he doesn't particularly "love" playing football at the moment, considering the last three or four years has largely consisted of a horrendous knee injury, the associated recovery, and a dramatic loss of form and the stick from the fans that comes with that. Also, while £40k a week is obviously a ****-load of cash for you and I, put it another way... would you take a near-50% pay cut to work a similar job at a different company? I certainly wouldn't.

I think that, unless someone has some pretty firm evidence that he's displayed a "poor attitude to finding a replacement or loan club", it's a bit unfair to have a pop at him for not moving. The club offered him a contract 18 months or so ago on terms that they deemed to be appropriate - the contract is binding on both sides, we have to live with the fact we offered him far more than he would likely command elsewhere, and he is perfectly entitled to tell the club that, having offered that money, they can just continue to pay him that money for the foreseeable future. I don't know whether that is his attitude, or whether he genuinely believes he can force his way back into the first team. There didn't seem to be many clubs linked with him in the summer, there was a rumour of a move to Turkey, but I wouldn't blame any player for not wanting to move abroad if they were settled, especially to a country that seems like it could be (or become) quite volatile. If there was a loan move in this country on the table, I'm sure from a playing perspective he'd look at it, but it could also come down to what was on offer financially to the club - if a loaning club in the Championship was only willing to take on 25% of his wages, the club might reasonably decide that's not worth their while, and I certainly wouldn't expect Forster himself to agree to take a pay cut at any stage of this. I'd like us to find a solution to get him off the wage bill, because with two seemingly excellent goalkeepers ahead of him now, I don't really see a future for him here, but I wouldn't blame him at all for not wanting to lose the money the club has effectively promised him.

We have either the seventh or eighth biggest wage bill in the league, there's a reason we can't move on the ever-accumulating dross in this squad, and it's not because there aren't teams who would take a chance on them, it's that they'd only take a chance on them at a much lower salary. Rewarding Forster with a new 5-year contract to replace the 5-year contract he only signed a year previously - having just had a distinctly iffy season anyway - will probably go down as one of the club's most expensive mistakes. It'll probably cost the club £12-15m for a player who is now highly unlikely to ever play for us again.

Christ, what a colossal waste of time and money that Topley signing was, and I'm pretty sure many of us called it that at the time - pretty sure we paid Essex a fee to sign him mid-contract as well! And didn't he arrive injured?! I see the official statement tries to pin the blame on the player himself, saying that he wanted to leave, but the recruitment department are equally to blame for signing someone who had such a dreadful fitness record.

Are we not counting games that take place in cup competitions because in one of them we got to the final and that would therefore paint a rather different picture?

Perhaps - I just think that the batting has to be a priority for the close season, we've been nowhere near good enough, especially in the first innings of games. 16 bonus batting points, comfortably the lowest in the division, and we average 243 in the first innings over the course of the season, with half of our first innings seeing us bowled out for less than 200. Bowling-wise, we've been excellent, only dropped three bonus points all year (weirdly, Lancashire are the only side with a better record, and they've been relegated). The downside to our bowling attack is that it is ageing - Abbott, Edwards and Berg are all the wrong side of 30 already, as was Steyn as our overseas for the second half of the year. Adding another bowler who's of that age smacks of short-termism to me, but then our recruitment in recent years has largely been of that nature, so I guess I shouldn't be that surprised. With some of the names we have, we must be pretty close to the salary cap, which surely doesn't leave a lot of room to bring in some quality at the top of the order.

Rather apt that he has gone off injured today in his last Warwickshire appearance. Can't say I'm overly enthused by this signing - as solid a first-class player as he may be, he's 31. It's not exactly a signing for the future, is it? Also, we appear to once again be signing bowlers to make up for the fact that we can't bat...

Jimmy Adams has been and gone for the final time, lbw for 13. Here's the video of the dismissal... https://ecb.cdn.nvplay.com/78c19340-f38d-4e81-b7e4-866657a06da4/3_012_04.mp4 File that under "iffy at best"!

Play called off for the day already, so match drawn. Can't catch Essex in 3rd now, as they've won 6 games to our 4, so even if they got 0 points and we got the maximum 24 against Lancashire, they'd still finish above us on wins. Lancashire need at least 20 points against us next week to have any chance of staying up, which seems a tall order. They'd also need Notts to get smashed by Somerset at Trent Bridge (Notts need 5 points to stay up) and/or Yorkshire to get smashed by even more at Worcestershire (Yorkshire need 2 points).

I think these days everyone has to accept that they're both "real" cricket. There's a strong argument that the longer form of the game now would have no chance of survival as a professional sport without the financial benefits of T20 cricket.

9 wickets taken this afternoon, so that's the 3 points required to guarantee finishing above Lancashire. 3 more required (or for Worcestershire to drop that amount) to confirm safety.

Safety pretty much assured this morning after Worcestershire were bundled out for 94 at Chelmsford. That means we now need only six points to mathematically guarantee safety, and we've picked up the first of those with 3 Yorkshire wickets (70/3 after a delayed start). Worcestershire aren't going to beat Essex AND Yorkshire, while beating Yorkshire with near-maximum points, even if we were to lose both of our remaining games. Still an opportunity to finish third, which would probably underline the mediocrity in the championship this season (with the obvious exception of Surrey) considering how rubbish we've been for most of the year.

Lancashire TIE with Somerset Needing just 1 to win with 2 wickets remaining, Dom Bess ran down the wicket and was stumped, and then two overs later Leach ****s it down deep midwicket's throat. No doubt Somerset will recover their form for next week when we play them...

Looking at the remaining fixtures, it's going to go right to the wire, and everyone will think they've got their safety in their own hands. Lancashire: 10th Yorkshire (away), 18th NO GAME, 24th Hampshire (away) Hampshire: 10th Somerset (home), 18th Yorkshire (away), 24th Lancashire (home) Yorkshire: 10th Lancashire (home), 18th Hampshire (home), 24th Worcestershire (away) Worcestershire: 10th Surrey (home), 18th Essex (away), 24th Yorkshire (home) So Worcestershire have the hardest fixtures, Yorkshire and Lancashire theoretically the easiest but all games against teams around them. Only 9 points between the teams before the start of the current round of matches, with Lancashire having played a game more.

He IS the captain, isn't he?

I would assume that the payment source linked to your PayPal account has either changed or expired - after three attempts, I think PayPal automatically cancels the recurring payment, but you can set up a new one here