Red Skin

I thought the ref was great. Her body language exuded confidence, she was decisive and as other have said she got almost everything correct. Thought the aggression shown Huddersfield players in response to the penalty decision - particularly the blond lad - was out of order.

@kiwicolin Thanks for sharing that. Love a Bovril. Grealish is a top lad.

Agree with OP. On the whole he hasn't done as well since coming back from injury, though he is contributing to goals so that's a positive. I always thought one of the No 10 roles would suit him (certainly more so than Knight) as he can spot a pass and he's one of our better finishers. Quick too.

I was at the game. Leroy who?

Hi My daughter was down for Easter and I wanted to transfer a ST to her. (She used to be a season ticket holder before going to uni). Unfortunately I didn't know about the 3hr cut off before the game and left it too late. Why do we have this cut off? It's not uncommon for friends to have things crop up last minute - COVID, childcare issues - so the cutoff can be a pain. Surely, the ticketing system is bright enough to figure out a digital ticket has been already used and won't let you forward it after it has?

Leaving the field of play to dive into the supporters is one thing, and I can see why that may be bookable. I never agree with the 'antagonising' opposition fans though. The poor delicate little flowers that are able to gesture and chant abuse at players all game, that can't take it when they get some abuse back. Surely, the most antagonist thing is scoring in the first place!

Why exactly is it a booking offence? Most players wear an undershirt anyway so it not like they are exposing themselves. If it is to do with not showing the sponsors name when all the cameras are on them in the moments after they score, then surely this should be a financial penalty dished out by their sponsor rather than handled as a booking. If it's to reveal a political message then perhaps that is one thing, but if it isn't then there shouldn't be any any booking as far as I'm concerned Just let the players celebrate the moment.

@Lewisdabaron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassler_brothers_feud Do you know the history behind Puma and Adidas?

Should've at least gone with Puma.

That's funny. I live next to two dicks with a dog. Have no idea what they think of Max's goalkeeping performances, though. Very good keeper. Exudes far more calmness than Bents ever did.

I didn't realise I had to forward a season ticket 3hrs before the game. My daughter is home from uni and needs a tickets for her. Any spares?

I guess it's the 'seeing things through' aspect of what a PM should do is what he feels is a strength. Making the strategy becomes embedded in what the club does and reflected in roles and accountabilities of staff that can be actually measured against performance is makes it a reality.

Now, I can see what you're planning! Data analyst becoming Technical Directors! Seriously, though, the idea that project managers make the best directors of football I find incredibly depressing.

Stick To Football No, I'm not suggesting him for us, but some interesting stories of his work as DoF at QPR. I really enjoy the format of these with Neville, Keane, Wright and others. I always loved Ferdinand as a striker.

You and your bloody statistics! Perhaps it's one of those instances where the impression doesn't match the reality.

So in the last 10 years out of 30 teams promoted how many have stayed up and cemented a place in the PL? I really don't think it's many. Those that do stay up are usually at the bottom of the league. And out of those 30 they'll be a fair few yoyo clubs so featured many times. Every season the bookies and pundits all have the promoted teams as most likely to go down again. I haven't looked at the stats, but I think what I've said is generally the case.

And yet all promoted clubs fail to compete with very few exceptions.

The FFP should take of that though. Not saying it's works as it should, but that's what it's there to do. To stop clubs spending beyond their means. A club that gets promoted then relegated would effectively get the same extra income, but instead of getting it when relegated from the PL they'd get it a year early when they are promoted. I think it would improve competition in both divisions.

It's financial prudence to do so. I don't see why the competiveness of the Championship should be compromised to support clubs that don't do this. Any decent players that relegated clubs have are always in demand, not least by those being promoted from the Championship. They can always generate revenue in this way and still have a very good squad compared to the rest of the Championship.

My post wasn't intended as a defence of Forest's claim, but it's clear that almost every year the promoted sides languish at the bottom of the premier league and usually get relegated. Why change the model and make the competition fairer in both divisions?

Parachute payments have completely undermined the championship as a competition. They seemed to be a knee jerk response to clubs like Barnsley that collapsed after relegation from the top flight because they failed to build relegation terms into players contracts. It's been interesting to hear some of the conversations around Forest's points deduction. One defence I've heard is that as a club promoted they needed to buy a whole new squad of players if they were to have any chance of competing in the Premiership. So why not change the model? Scrap parachute payments and instead use the money to give promoted clubs a golden hello so that can have a better chance of competing in the top flight?

Fair comment, but Pearson's last 24 was with players he brought to the club (or made the decision to keep) and had built relationships with many over the a year to 18 months at least. They been schooled in how he wanted to player for a long period. Any comparisons need to be heavily caveated and aren't very enlightening really. I don't really see the point of the thread. We can all see things aren't going well, and most of us realise the top 6 claims were nonsense so why keep banging on about it? They just didn't want Pearson any longer.

Can we finally just ignore the sh1te the ownership said about Pearson going? Manning hasn't been great, that's clear, but I think it would be a fairer compare Pearson first 24 games to Manning's first 24 games tbh. New managers trying to change what's gone on before with players that they didn't bring in.

If couldn't handle Pearson, they certainly won't find Warnock any easier.

Fair enough, that wasn't clear to me. Other posters were comparing Manning's spell with Pulis' and in my view they aren't in the same league. I'm not interested at success by any means, so I'll pass on Pulis.