bugenhagen

Just read the text... his stance "could change in the coming days" - a prime example of clickbait, and the need to make money out of nothing. Flogging a dead horse. Just to keep the story alive, even after it's dead in the water. In the next couple of days there will be new "development" in this story to keep the clicks, views and £££££ ticking in.

As a person with English as a second language, I read that as he is another option op front for us, that Johannes wanted, not that we are looking for another striker in addition to him. Might be wrong, but I think it’s just poorly worded.

This is how I interpreted that. He gave assurances that if we would not sell off the team and replace with BBD’s

I think you are spot on here. This combined with the fact that these players think they are so good that they should have been in the Prem by now. They have to start matching that belief with performances again, just like at the end of last season. It doesn't matter what they did last season, they need to start again and back it up with performances.

No, you are absolutely right. The way this guy says it is a little closer to the correct way of saying his name (it will never sound quite right in English). There is supposed to be a little bit of the "u" in Matsuki there. Its not quite right to leave the entire letter/sound of the "u" out when saying his name, but it should be less pronounced than what is normal for the letter "u" in English.

We probably decided against it as we already have BBD who can play in that position. He may not be perfect, but he’s OK

He might also just want a fresh start. Everything about his time here screams treatment rooms and injuries. Could just be a simple as that.

Sure it's not just the weather? 😉

I think with all rules, there are some you never break (or consider breaking) either becuse of your moral, ethics or the severe punishment. Then there are some it's a little more easy to break, or that we sometimes consider breaking. Risk vs. reward and the likelyhood of getting caught. Some people on here would never consider spying on another team, as it is breaking a rule, and their moral compass would say no. Others would say: it's no big deal, "everybody" does it. The people at SFC clearly thought that the reward was bigger than the risk. They would not have done that if they knew that the punishment would be to be thrown out of the playoffs, and a 3 points deduction for every game in the Championship. The problem we face when discussing this topic here is that some of us have respect for this rule, while others of us don't. Anyways, the punishment given in our case will make sure that nobody does this again, even if they respect the rule or not.

“We’re all aboard Ben Garner’s boat”

Maybe they want to anounce it when Tondas ban drops, either to deflect attention or - perhaps the blue one was just a prank, and the real one is this:

I personally don’t think there is any conclusion to be drawn. We all like to speculate, and think there is more going on behind the scenes, but I think it’s just as likely they are trying out how it could work if he gets a touchline ban.

Yeah, I agree - but I was talking about that even in a different situation, where the manager had not, he would still hold some form of responsibility. Not trying to start a discussion on if Tonda did or did not. There are enough of these kind of quarrels going on here. I was just trying to answer a question posed by another poster.