egg

Yep, although Haller at £50m comes close to Carillo in the shit transfer top trumps.

No he wasn't. Mendy has been charged and has appeared in open court where he'll have had to confirm that he's Benjamin Mendy. Not a difference in treatment as such, rather they're very different scenarios.

Idiot

The point is that it does. When you go somewhere you have to play the tape forward and think how you'll get out. Leaving was always an inevitability unless permanent occupation was intended which I doubt. I can't point to anything to suggest that regime change was the initial objective, save for history suggesting that the US have form for it, and refusing to accept that 4 years into their mission that the US suddenly thought it'd be a grand idea.

I know that. That's got nothing to do with a 20 year occupation which would never have stopped the risk of terrorism. I'd imagine that whoever chooses to use the weaponry and warplanes left behind in Afghanistan could cause a bit of damage with it. We disagree massively so I'll leave it there.

You don't strike me as naive, but any belief that entering and occupying Afghanistan would end the risk of terrorism from people in Afghanistan, and it's supporters, is naive in the extreme. Ditto that the US changed its policy mid course. And yes, I know what Bush said.

Yep, all whilst the afghan (and syrian) people seek refuge in europe, with Turkey at the heart of that and involved in yet more political conflict with its nato partners. The wider geopolitics of these should not be underestimated.

I originally typed the same question, but altered it to Kelvin as he's already here. Theo surely was never signed as Mr Motivator.

Yep, that suggests hindsight is all we have. It's untrue. We saw what happened in Afghanistan with Russia. That gave foresight, and our failing mission on Afghanistan taught lessons which we didn't heed when we then proceeded to destroy Syria. We then walked away leaving yet more division and chaos there. Sure, teach al qaeda a lesson, but that did not warrant an invasion, occupation, and what we've left for the Afghans - and the wider region courtesy of the arsenal left behind - to live with. We've fucked up.

Out of curiosity, where does this come from? What can he offer in the changing room that someone like Kelvin Davis, for example, can't give? Personally I don't get the argument for paying £7m + over 2 years for someone to be a motivator and bit part player when motivation should be a job for the coaching staff.

Ha! That said, imagine if we weren't wasting £200k + PW on Forster, Theo and Long...could have thrown that money at something pretty decent on a loan or free.

See my post above. You can also list the positive legacy we've left behind if you like. Personally, I'm looking at a shameful clusterfuck, a destroyed country, and people left without hope.

Have a little think Whelk. Doing something created the shit show that is the diminishing west bank and gaza. Doing nothing about the actions of Israel, ie its treatment of Palestinians and settlements etc, is something that has led to fundamentalism and terrorism. That's something we should have dealt with, and the umpteen UN resolutions that have been breached, all whilst we arm the Israeli's is shameful. Back to the subject. Tell me how our meddling has helped build safe and stable countries in Afghanistan. Ditto Syria. Ditto Iraq. Write down all the benefits - Afghanistan didn’t have an ISIS until we all but created it, it didn't have all the warplanes and tanks etc the US have left them to play with, it didn't have a generation of people who'd had their hopes built and the rug built, etc, etc. The Taliban are a disgrace. Strict interpretation of Sharia law is unpleasant, but here's the thing, it's someone else's culture and problem. We perpetually wade into other countries imposing what we think they need, fuck it up, and leave. Afghanistan is a worse place after out meddling. Anyone who disagrees is an idiot.

I thought the question was rhetorical. The answer was bomb the shit out of the Al Qaeda. They were never going to be able to destroy a fundamentalist Never. The more you hurt them, the more you feed the ideology, and the more it grows. A ground offensive was never going to work. Russia failed in Afghanistan. The US did not do great in Vietnam or Korea. It was a futile willy waving exercise. Did you think that the USA would ever have been able to do any of defeat the Taliban and Al Qaeda, instil regime and societal change, and leave a stable country? None of it was realistically achievable. We fucked up. Amazing that anyone would disagree.

It all came as part of the same invasion and occupation. 9/11 necessitated a reaction. Not a 20 year occupation which leaves the same people back in charge, but with an arsenal of weaponry they would never have obtained if we hadn't left it for them. In any event, enforcing our will, and societal change, is not our place. However you approach it, we fucked up.

I disagree. React to Al Qaeda by all means, but occupy and enforce societal and regime change? Anyone with any sense could see that'll breed fundamentalism, terrorism, and goodness knows what. It's been a car crash, sure some of it can only be seen with hindsight, but a fair amount should have been foreseeable. Regardless, we haven't learned from it and in not many years time we'll be talking of another country we've meddled in, how we've supported different sides of the dispute, how a new terror group has been formed as a result, and how we've left a clusterfuck behind.

Our issue was with Al Qaeda. That's a separate issue to enforcing regime change, and democracy. It's not just Afghanistan. We later meddled in Syria and look at the state of that. Before that Iraq. Along the way we've created ISIS, flip flopped from supporting one side to the other, created divisions amongst nato nations (look at who's camp turkey are in on a crisis by crisis basis), etc. Then look at what caused the Al Qaeda situation to begin with. It goes back to earlier meddling. We're not here to impose our will and our ways on other cultures and societies. It rarely ends well.

Agreed, but better still, don't try to impose your will on other countries. Not our circus, not our animals.

Yep, but still a man short in midfield for me.

Lacks any gravitas at all.

Horrific situation, and no obvious solution. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but we should have never have laid boots on the ground. 20 years to see the Taliban replace the Taliban, all whilst seeing the creation of ISIS, exposing many people to the wrath of the Taliban and their newly built lives and lifestyles left in tatters. Sad times.

The only part of that I disagree with is that any of this is FF fault. Nobody is to blame for saying yes to a lucrative contract, and nobody in their right mind would walk away from it. He's a bright lad, well advised, and understandably he'll happily take what we agreed to pay him. Now the idiots that have him that deal, that's a other thing!

I don't think he was Collins. Antrim, yes.

If we buy out a contract, we pay the wages in full up to the end of the contract unless a player takes less money - neither would agree to that.

I suspect we are. A mere £7m over his 2 year deal 😕 Not the smartest but if business we've done recently, but like Long and Forster, it's done and we're stuck with it.