egg

Don't be so correct Matthew. Our season seems to hang on this position apparently.

McCarthy wasn't number 3. Lumley wasn't trusted and when push came to shove, McCarthy played. We were never going to keep Ramsdale on our books, ditto the other two, then sign another keeper to push the starters. What has happened is what was obvious. You don't see that, I get that, but it was.

I think it depends how it goes for him imo there. If he plays second fiddle to Pope all season, why would he want to stay?

So Macca as number 3. That's not realistic. In your scenario, Macca needs a buyer, and we then need a new number 3. We then have the number 1.5 knowing he's 3 if we go up. Who'd sign in that basis? However you cut it, what you'd like wasn't realistic, and us signing a number 3 on loan is sensible and obvious.

I'm not sure what debate there is. All I can read is posters expecting us to buy a brilliant number 1 who knows that Ramsdale comes back 1 if we go up, and all while keeping Baz or Macca, or selling either to the plethora of buyers banging down the door to buy them. Crazy thinking that's happening.

Ok mate. Calm down. No point discussing with anyone who genuinely thinks we were going to loan Ramsdale, but buy a new number one, whilst having other senior keepers on the books. There's no comprehension of reality there.

If we go up, yes. If we don't, then we cash in and see where we are keeper wise next summer. I think that was pretty obvious from the moment we went down.

I haven't said I'm content with him! I've said he's our number 1, that's obvious. What's also obvious is that we were not getting a new number 1, or a high calibre number 3. This is all "daddy I want another pony" pie in the sky nonsense.

Ah, it's that easy isn't it. Football transfers ain't like buying on Amazon and selling on eBay. We have shed loads of players we can't shift.

Who?

What's that got to do with us having 3 senior keepers already on our books? Stoke signing someone last summer doesn't have any impact on our dealings this summer does it.

Indeed.

We were never going to sign a new first pick when we have our number 1 still on our books ready to come back if we go up. Absolutely mental to think we'd sign a new number 1 for this season only. Just was never going to happen.

The expectation judging by this thread is that we either bought a brilliant number 3, or that we'd be buying a new number 1. Absolutely delusional thinking when we have our number 1 on loan. "I want, I want". Get fucking real.

Fact 1 - Baz hasn't cost us goals this season. Fact 2 - despite what you may want, it's obvious that Baz is number 1 this season. Fact 3 - we still have a very good number 1 out on loan. It's pretty obvious that we wouldn't be buying in another keeper this season and being lumbered with him if we go up. If you can think of another number 3 we could have gotten in in loan, shout me some names.

That wasn't the point. Someone was flapping that 1 of 5 loan spots being used on a keeper was a waste. My point was that 4 left is plenty, and that loaning a 3rd pick in makes perfect sense.

So a CM, winger, AM and a spot left. Plenty.

Baz is clearly the number 1 and has been good so far. Mac ain't realistically going to be number 3. We needed a number 3 and got one. The expectation from some is ridiculous.

Who did people honestly expect us to get as 3rd pick?

I'm not sure that'll happen, especially leaving the ECHR. The sad thing is, this is all about a small proportion of our migrants, and the wider discussion about the migration we need is lost. The irony for labour is that they've reduced legal migration by more people than the illegal immigrants. Re your first point, we're back to the starting issue today namely that we can't easily deport those who shouldn't be here. That takes us full circle to making us a less attractive proposition.

So if labour don't sort a tory mess, we'll get torie's on steroids. The "how this happens" is kind of the important bit.

But the boats are a reality, and there's been more this year primarily because of the weather - nothing else has changed. Where we agree is that we need to become a less attractive proposition for illegal economic migrants, but it can't just be a 'house people in a less attractive way and they won't come' type approach, especially if you concede that most will be granted asylum anyway. We need to deal with applications quickly, properly, and look carefully at the criteria to succeed - we need to sort the needy from the greedy.

Then Duck's question stands. The concept can't become reality. I don't think even Farage thinks it possible.

I think labour will shift to less pleasant accommodation sooner rather than later. Putting aside that the Tories started the hotel thing, public feeling is strong, and Labour will have to do something to avoid rolling out the red carpet to Reform. I'd also like to see the detail on the Adjudicators rather than Judges idea for asylum applications. The Tribunal system is far too clunky. Although anything that speeds it up is good, the decisions need to be legally sound otherwise we'll get loads of people failing at Adjudication stage getting stuck in even lengthier appeals.

I thought he meant France. Equally impossible.