egg

Yes, I'm serious. You know I'm not comparing Raab to Solemani as a character. Focus on the principle if you can. This was the killing of a senior figure of a sovereign regime on foreign soil. The USA are not the worldwide police force. Should the Americans also take out the murderous leaders of Saudi Arabia and Israel, or does their conduct not matter as they support the USA economy? If they're off target, explain why there can legitimately be one rule for Iran and another rule for American allies.

Nuts if true. Obefami is not ready to be back up yet, and is injury prone. Adams is our best back up and to move him on is madness.

The actions of the Iranian regime are appalling, but it doesn't alter the fact that the Iranians would have not needed to react to the American action if they had not taken that action. The murdering of Solemani and the rest of the convoy is no different than, say the USA, killing Dominic Raab or another senior British political or military leader as he was driven away from, say an airport on foreign soil. No difference whatsoever. It was an outrageous act that has been followed by outrageous acts. Both sides are guilty. In terms of shooting protesters with live ammunition, if you condemn what the Iranians are doing, take a look at what Israel do in Gaza and the West Bank on a daily basis with their American supplied weapons and ammunition.

Great Post in many respects. There's too much negativity and naivety from many posters, and a belief that if we don't get transfers over the line then promises (!) are somehow being broken and/or the club and it's senior staff are incompetent.

Gordon, as much as I'm delighted that you're thinking about me, my financial information has long since passed so in terms of actual facts / information, I'm almost as clueless as you are pal.

It's all about opinions mate, and mine is that if the majority of fans were being honest they would say that with the run we were on, and following a 9 nil loss, that sacking would have been justified. As it turns out, something has happened and we've been transformed so keeping him, with hindsight, was the correct decision.

*home = gone

This. There'll be plenty of people with masters degrees in hindsight coming out and saying they never wanted him home. In reality, no manager who loses 9 nil at home, and who's team is losing consistently and playing terribly, would be surprised to get the sack. He was lucky to keep his job and the turnaround in our play and results is remarkable. On the question, I was sack and leave. Now I'm stay and remain.

Don't be a helmet. A comment from our manager suggesting that we are signing full backs is clear. Some geezer suggesting something in a newspaper isn't. Back on topic, LeG comments are positive.

Sounds like the Israeli and Saudi governments. What's the difference?

Because he was a member of a legitimate national command structure, not a splinter group, paramilitary organisation or similar. In what way was he a terrorist? Is the head of the Saudi government a terrorist for slaying people in Yemen? The Israeli top guys for killing people in Gaza? To answer, they are not, but neither was Solemani and he doesn't become one because the state he was associated with is not a western ally.

Wanyama can't be finished at 28. He's had niggly injuries but nothing Ings esque. I suspect he's short of match fitness and confidence, but I'd have him as another option in midfield if he's available.

My issue relates only to transfers, in a transfer window thread, not the clubs general pr policy. Nothing that has been written on this thread, or in any link posted, relates to the club directly or indirectly promising a transfer that hasn't been delivered. Sure, to use the words someone else has used, the club may have used the press to treat us mugs but I'm still waiting to be shown in the press or anywhere else where they've deceived us over transfers. The reason I haven't, is because they haven't.

Gordon, the discussion finished last night. I haven't had time to read your post (perhaps be more succinct) and I don't think that you've read mine, or understand my simple point namely my finding it hard to accept that the club have, or would benefit from, leaking false transfer rumours to the press, and that said rumours (which are perceived as promises it would seem) have been broken. If you read my posts you'll see that I accept that the club will use the press as part of its pr machine. My point relates solely to the broken / false transfer promises which I say have never been made. Sure Promes went to another club, but there was never a promise we'd sign him.

Gordon

No I haven't. I've said that I cannot see why the club would leak false transfer rumours.

Fair point mate, I'll leave it and if the pr experts have anything to say I'll let them have the last word.

Del. CB Fry is a big boy and can do his own explaining. I get the appeasement point, but as above, I fail to see how it has any possible benefit in the footy business.

I repeat, tell me how that benefits the clubs, short and long term. Short term season ticket holders will come along with or without transfer rumours, and day trippers won't come along this week cos they've read in the telegraph that played x might sign next week. Long term, broken promises (not there have been any) damage goodwill. I'm guessing your pr course had anything to do with the football business.

Pathetic response. You apparently have a simple explanation why the club make up transfer rumours but won't explain. Pathetic.

Good player. I'd be happy to get him.

We all feel it when we're playing badly / losing. A rumour in a paper ain't gonna make me feel any happier of it doesn't come off. Quite the opposite in fact, if I believe we're signing a player but it doesn't happen, and we're still **** on the pitch then I'm more ****ed off. We see it differently pal, but I don't get why the club would make up transfer rumours.

That says nothing. I've done all of those. On topic, ie footy transfers, what's your super obvious theory as to why a footy club would make up rumours and seek to publicise them? If the suggestion is that player X is a target, or his agent is touting him to us, are you suggesting that a few moody names of other targets in the telegraph as a point of reference strengthens out hand?! If you are, that's ridiculous, especially given how obvious and we'll known our tactics apparently are.

Indulge me.

Cheers Del. At least someone has pointed to a link. I won't comment re Mitchell as the focus here is transfer. Re those, two points : 1. Why would the club leak untrue transfer speculation? How does it help the club or fans? 2. Assuming though that those names came from the club, what's to say that all or some were not targeted but didn't come off, hence Carillo? I love a conspiracy theory but a need persuading that there's one here.