itchen

If the three days since you last started a thread counts as "ages" I'm not surprised some posters are already calling for JP's head. After all, he's had even more ages. On the more substantive point (although I couldn't understand your second sentence), do you know how much Rupert's weekly salary is (just so we know how much difference this would make)?

That's not an unreasonable initial reaction - it was mine as well. But 150 (or 300, there seems to be doubt) hours of community service is not trivial if it is properly enforced. If he's in full time work that's his weekends and evenings disrupted for quite some time. And we don't all have to pay to keep him in prison or to deal with his almost inevitable unemployment on release. But, as I say, community punishment only works (in the sense of being a punishment and a future deterrent) if it is properly enforced and is a severe inconvenience to the offender.

Sadly it has always been so. I grew up in SE London (I may have mentioned this before ;-) ) and I remember (Mickey?) Purser resigning as Chairman of Millwall in the seventies because he was sick of having all the windows in his Old Kent Road car showroom smashed every time Millwall lost. But at least back in those days board members were part of the community and, I believe, forbidden from making money from their directorships. Now, as we have seen, the richer clubs are backed by foreign billionaires or big companies while the rest of us are left to struggle in their wake. And even fans of those clubs with wealthy backers aren't happy. Look at Liverpool, Newcastle and Arsenal. Man U are up to their ears in debt since the Glaziers bought them out. Chelsea will collapse if Abramovich gets bored. And Man City may be happy now but they weren't a couple of weeks ago and who knows what their future holds. The global credit crisis looks ready to bite at West Ham both to their owner and their sponsor and I am sure as money becomes tighter that owning a football club will look like an unnecessary luxury for companies struggling to stay profitable. And perhaps that word "club" is no longer appropriate in these days of plcs and rich men's playthings. But wouldn't it be nice if we could go back to clubs as part of their communities and surviving on the income they could generate themselves?

If ypu don't mind, I'm going to copy this into a letter and send it to the board. I'm sure they've never thought about this.

I was told by the airport MD that it's the width of the runway rather than the length that restricts the size of the planes (can't have engines overhanging the edges) and that BAA has no plans to change this. But we are getting way off topic...

How many times does it have to be said that we are and always have been a selling club? It is more acute now because (a) we need the money to stay in existence and (b) contracts don't seem to be worth the paper they are written on unless we're trying to get highly paid "stars" off the books. Players and agents know that if a bigger club comes in (anyone in the Premier league) they can be off regardless of what the chairman thinks. But back to this thread. I've waited all day to come on here because I didn't want to depress myself with the all-too-predictable posts following a defeat - like the one at the top. Why do we all want instant gratification? It's going to take time for a young team like ours to get used to playing at this level and they will lose a few. Arguing that we shouldn't be playing such a young team ignores the fact that a team of seasoned pros nearly got us relegated last season. Why not give the team and the manager a chance over more than 5 games before posting banalities like this? I'm loving the football we're playing and I'm sure that the results will come if we don't panic.

Who beat Sheffield Utd.

What will we find out? Davies was never going to be playing this afternoon. I'm fairly downbeat about our prospects this afternoon. I'm slightly more optimistic if Cork is playing than Killer after watching the Blackpool game as, frankly, Killer looked too slow. But let me make my position clear. 1) I think Killer is a tremendous player who has made a brave comeback. In the first few games he looked tremendous but had a poor game against Blackpool. I hope that his knee is not in serious trouble but I'm willing to concede it might be. My challenge to Alpine's point is that merely because somebody hasn't denied something doesn't mean it's true (in this cae bebng in agony). 2) I did not want to see Davies sold but no player at any Championship club is going to turn down a Premiership offer even if it's only Stoke. Once he knew about the interest from Stoke, how interested do people think he would be in playing for us? 3) I believe we have adequate cover at centre back but, should we need someone else, not having to pay the injured Davies's wagers frees up funds to bring in a loan player. Anyway all this is stopping me from getting on with the essay I should be writing.

But, as has been pointed out on Alpine's gloomy thread about Killer's knee, we do have adequate cover and Davies is injured anyway. We all know our financial situation and we should all know by now that ANY player is for sale if the price is right. I'm disappointed that Davies has gone as I rated him quite highly (even though I think the stats show we did better when he was not playing - that's just an example of correlation, not causation). And, if Davies hadn't wanted to go, he could have said no.

He hasn't denied being homosexual, being a Nazi or having a fondness for Battenburg cake but I'm not aware that any of these things are true either.

Please could you explain how keeping Andrew Davies could have helped us in the QPR game?

I'm waiting for tomorrow.

and In fairness to Alpine, I don't think any of us would correctly have predicted both last night's results, but I couldn't resist going back to these.

He may not have been looking but no Championship player (or his agent) is likely to say no when a Premiership club is interested - even if it's only Stoke. But as he's injured anyway this has little relevance to the news about Killer.

So did the club he joined.

And getting rid of an already injured player frees up cash should we need to bring in loans to cover for anyone else getting injured.

. I think he's injured though.

The question is: is your friend in possession of a valid ticket? If he doesn't meet the age criteria on which it was sold, he isn't and ccould be refused admission and have the ticket confiscated. Therefore he needs to upgrade it by going to the box office and paying a supplement. I've not done this for a senior ticket but it's been quite easy when upgrading a teen ticket. Your friend will still be getting a cheap deal.

I ask this with no axe to grind and no agenda. Did Claus end up making or losing money on his testimonial? And, if he made some, did he keep it or give it to charity? I stress that I don't want to start an argument about whether footballers should get testimonials or whether they should keep the money. I just wonder, after we were told that the event was likely to leave Claus out of pocket, whether he was or not. For the record, I was there and had a thoroughly good evening.

It can be quite pleasant.

Have the figures taken into account which clubs have had their home games televised this season? Our lowest figure was for a televised game and that will have dragged our average down. I can't deny though that our attendances are down and I think that at least some of this is a hangover from where we finished last season. I'm surprised to see QPR with their millions and Watford getting substantially smaller crowds than us.

As long as his wife doesn't sing at half time, this sounds good (if unbelievably unlikely).

But presumably the "awful" figures for the Championship are still enough to make Rupert (Murdoch, not Lowe) some money. I can't see them doing it out of charity.

I think it will need more than one but you don't look like getting even that at the moment;-) I didn't go to the infamous play-off game so probably don't dislike Derby as much as many of those who did. But I do like to see them suffering because the only Derby fan I've known personally upset me greatly and I think of him every time they lose (so I think of him more often than is strictly healthy). I'm quite happy to believe, though, that every other Derby fan is a fine citizen who deserves better than Paul Jewell is ever likely to deliver.

I don't read too much into the low turnout on Saturday. I'd have been more concerned if it had not been on TV and we'd been playing a more glamorous team. I hope Jan is given at least the season. He's got the team performing well (in all but results!). Even if he were replaced, a new manager would have the same players to deal with and might not do as well. I can't see any of the usual suspects on the managerial merry-go-round coping with our bunch of youngsters or relishing the challenge they bring.