shurlock

0-0. Sevilla been on top but Saints coming into it in the last few mins.

Who are they missing? Don't know much about Sevilla beyond the usual suspects.

Yet there are seemingly streams for the Palace and Burnley games (tbf non-UK streams).

----

Shtickmeister, promise me you'll have that epithet engraved on your headstone.

The midfield still looks a liability. Thought it might be one of JWP or Davis, not both; but Hojbjerg and Clasie have done little to deserve a place. Perhaps today that weakness will be disguised by the fact that it's still preseason and Sevilla's more technical play (Nzonzi aside) but it'll be exposed by the pace and power of a premier league game.

Would say that's our starting XI for next week.

That's also true. "Poor" only in terms of GDP per capita which isn't the be all and end all.

I think the precedent point is overblown. Good players will always clamour to move if the opportunity arises while we proved we can put our foot down, as with Schneiderlin and Wanyama. A few points: Our Academy will always goes through peaks and troughs - we will never produce a steady, predictable flow of domestic talent that can be sold off to support our business model. It'll be years before we're in a situation where we can sell the equivalents of Shaw, Lallana and Chambers in the same window. 2014 was the exception, not the rule. We were further lucky in 2014 because most of our transfers were successful. In reality, misses are as common as hits. This isn't a criticism of Uncle Les; it's inherent in all transfers and affects all clubs. Because we do not spend beyond what we receive from transfers, it leaves little margin for error. The more players we sell and have to replace at any one time, the greater the likelihood of buying a dud. The good news is that this year we've tried to slow things down, as symbolised by our stance over VVD though the point is always relative (Remember that despite the sales in 2014 we still had a core of established players to fall back on: Schneiderlin, Wanyama, Clyne, Fonte, Davis. Arguably the same cannot be said about this season, even without any departures). We put further pressures on ourselves in that we largely buy players who we think will appreciate in value and can fund future transfers. That biases us towards to certain types of players who typically have great potential but are unproven and carry greater risk. It is sometimes forgotten that games also have to be won in the here and now and that sometimes buying the odd proven player or two is necessary to take some, though not all of the risk out what is a remarkably unpredictable business. I always said that the real test of our business model wouldn't be in 2014 or 2015 but future years after we had gone through several cycles of sales and replacements. It doesn't take many misses to fall out of sync and see a gradual dilution in quality.

I thought all we needed to do was to replace Puel, according to the forum intellectuals.

I think you need to check your facts: the factoid that is usually trotted out isnt that "nine of the ten poorest areas within the EU are located in the UK", it's that "nine of the ten poorest areas in Northern Europe are located in the UK". http://inequalitybriefing.org/graphics/briefing_43_UK_regions_poorest_North_Europe.pdf

Even more surprising that you were so silent about Mané, then #gulyban #stench

You said nothing of the sort. You were on gardening leave during that period pal. Looking forward to your prediction that the team is on the cusp of great things now that Puel has gone.

Uncle Les partly models himself on Jerry Jones.

Except the FA Cup.

Excellent piece by Simon Kuper. Nails everything that's wrong with the British establishment. You almost feel sorry for the poor little kipper footsoldiers on here who've been sent over the top. https://www.ft.com/content/b3d62bcc-7713-11e7-90c0-90a9d1bc9691

I know you taffies are a bit daft but seriously?

Not sure what your point is. Nobody's slagging him off. Either way, think you misunderstand the notion of loyalty, pal.

One player that will be seeing out his five years with us...

Disagree. Per his original contract, he was only 2 years through a five year contract. With three years remaining, our hand was strong enough, especially if the intention was to sell him this summer. At a certain point, having more years on a contract makes little difference to a negotiating position.

It's blindingly obvious we're a stepping stone club, though the players we sign are far from the finished article -some will kick on; some won't. Likewise, nobody here is expecting players to see out the full length of a contract when we offer long terms. You're criticising an illusory target. Rather the question -which you completely miss- is what the club can reasonably expect when a player decides to sign an extension when they are barely through their initial contract. I think there's every expectation that VVD would stay another season. If not, there is no point in the club offering an extension. Again none of this is inconsistent with being a stepping stone club as it's not the intention to hold VVD to the full length of any extension. Redslo is spot on here.

Drivel.

lol wot?

Bumpkin misselbrook proving why kippers can't be taken seriously. European markets ex UK have easily outperformed the FTSE since the referendum (and that's without the boost of fx depreciation). Would perhaps explain why Trident is comparing apples and pears and different time periods (though the f**kwit probably doesn't know any better). The large European markets (e.g. CAC and DAX) have dipped in recent months because the euro has gone from strength to strength (the DAX is particularly export-dependent) - a good thing if you believe in economic fundamentals. As Eurozone growth has been stronger than expected and is indeed outpacing the UK and US, the ECB has also been much more confident and aggressive than the BoE in signalling its intent to withdraw monetary support (prematurely IMO and the opinion of the IMF) which has subsequently weighed on markets. Again this is a good thing if you believe returning to some kind of economic normalcy following years of unprecedented central bank intervention in response to the financial crisis. The lesson being: don't confuse the stock markets for the real economy, especially in these topsy-turvy times. As usual, Misselbrook is pitifully out of his depth. It's too easy pal.