ExiledAjax

It's about the toughest group relevant to Ghana's ranking and level. Suspect as and when bookies odds and predictions come out they will be about the longest odds for progression. I guess we'll get an idea this month where he sits in their coach's mind and how much he might be used.

Ghana's 3 group games are as follows. Times are GMT. We play Watford at home on 12 November, then our next game is Rotherham away on 10 December. I guess he might get a rest against Rotherham, but this shouldn't affect our season unless Ghana progress.

Assuming Ghana do not get out of their group, none.

I'd hope he would entertain the possibility. Nahki Wells costing us £0 in amortisation and on £10,000 a week costs us £500k a season. That's a much better deal than his current £2m cost. Frees up £1.5m of balance sheet cost to cover other wages or fees.

Here is the team. EFL use whoscored's ratings, which in themselves are based on data from Opta. If it makes anyone feel better then Naismith is in whoscored's Champ team of the week. Wells scored a 9.3 out of ten in our game, Scott a 7.2. Whoscored rated Weimann at 7.8, thanks to two assists, Hames at 7.8 despite a yellow which is incredible. Personally I suspect it's because Scott won't have got credit for something like his little bit of control and break out in the lead up to the first goal. For that he'll get a pass completion and that's about it, but an observer will be raving about it all day. Scott also got booked, which will have dropped his rating, although most observers will ignore that when giving their own thoughts. If you are bored or care very deeply about Alex Scott's omission, then whoscored explain their ratings system here: https://www.whoscored.com/Explanations

Winger even. Ransford-Yeboah Konigsdorffer is one hell of an incredible name.

Never taken a team from the Championship to the Premier League though have they. Bald fraud and a toothy conman respectively.

World. Class. At. The. Basics.

Is there a typo in the new RO address? "Ipswich Town Football Cub Company Ltd"

If he played another 21 seasons rather than the 15 I estimated, then you're looking at him beating Giggs' record for games played for a single team (Europe). That is 963 (see court records for verification). Would mean Scott playing until he's 40 though.

If you're taking all completions then he's already on 55 for us. I guess if he stayed with us for his whole carrer, let's say he retires at 34. Stays relatively injury free, and so averages say 42 games a season (let's assume he drives us to promotion and then Europe pretty soon and so we play 8 fewer league games, but gain a few European cup gamed, let's also assume he misses a few games here and there for injury and rotation etc). He turned 19 this season, so retiring at 34 gives him the rest of this season - a further 34 appearances based on the average of 42 - plus 15 further seasons to give his final match presumably being the Champions League final in 2038. At 42 games a season, plus the further 34 I'm estimating this season, and the 55 he already has, we get an estimated total of: 55 + 34 + (15*42) = 719 appearances. Would smash the records of both Atyeo and Carey. He could probably have a season out injured and still break the record if he stayed for so long. Shall we just commission the statue now to save time?

Most impressive is that in those 49 games he's played 3,531* minutes. That's an average of 72 minutes per game. All but 5 have been starts as well. So it's not like a lot of youngsters getting 10 mins at the end of games that bolster the headline appearances number. Seriously experienced compared to most of his peers. *according to transfermarkt

Ha. Especially after this afternoon right!?

I'm expecting Reading to fade back to mid-table. -2 goal difference (-0.25 per game) is a hell of an anomaly for a team in second place. They're getting narrow wins and hammered in their losses. In general that's not a recipe for a sustainable promotion charge.

Living in Leicestershire means I'm meeting quite a few Foxes fans at the moment. Generally I get told/asked something along the lines of "Pearson is doing well with you isn't he? Did you know he laid the groundwork for our PL win? You've got a good guy at the helm there. Nah wouldn't want him back though as those days are gone?" Then I ask who they'd like and I'd say the majority say they want the bloke managing their adversary today: Potter. Just my anecdotal evidence.

And now I'm sat watching Chelsea v West Ham on MOTD. Both in home kits. Completely shit for those with colour blindness. West Hams third kit might make it look like they've had toilet issues, but at least it would properly clash with Chelsea's home kit.

Ah **** just seen what Preston's away kit is. And the third kit is black and red stripes a la Bournemouth home. So that cannot be worn. Guess it's either going to be out home kit v their home kit or our home kit v this away shite green* monstrosity. Ideally we stick our third kit on at home and make a statement. *Is it green? It might be yellow tbf.

I've not criticised the guy himself though. Others have, but I don't think he's been lazy or disinterested. My issue is that he shouldn't be here in the first place, and I think that for his cost we could do better. You're correct that this is not his fault. He's playing, and he's playing well. The £ are on the pitch. Maybe I should STFU and be happy about that. However, I hope we never again sign someone as a top earner, who costs us £2m a season, and then have to wait 2 seasons to finally figure out how to get him performing.

Yes I thought the same as I watched the highlights. Interestingly the regulations have changed this year. In previous years there was a requirement that "When away from home a Club shall play in a registered kit which is clearly distinguishable (shirt, shorts and socks) from those of their opponents. This requirement shall apply strictly in respect of shirts and socks. Where both Clubs request to play in the same, or similar, coloured shorts then an application to do so shall be made to the appointed match referee whose consent shall not be unreasonably withheld." Basically, you cannot wear the same coloured shorts unless the Referee allows it. They also removed the guidance that states "Clubs are required to resolve any potential clash in advance of match day. Match Officials should ensure they find the playing kits of both teams acceptable." The above wording is not present in the 2022/23 regulations. There seems to be nothing that explicitly prevents this. However, the guidance in the Regulations is still that "When considering selection of colours of shirts / socks, Clubs should have regard to the guidance issued by the Football Association on helping those affected by colour blindness, a copy of which is available on the EFL SharePoint site accessed via the Club Portal system." Honestly, I assumed we would play in the third kit yesterday, had I know we were going to wear the home kit I would have let the club know that was a bad idea. This is one that has slipped through the net. Sorry you had issues @Tinmans Love Child

Have just watched the highlights. Scott is key to all 3 goals. Wonderful break out through close control deep in our own half for the first. An incisive, perfectly placed and weighted pass to Wells for the second. And he takes the freekick to deliver the ball for the third. Honestly if you just watched that 9 minutes I'm not sure you'd say he's a project.

I don't see the contradiction personally. He was overrated by Mark Ashton, and by some of our fans. Overrated doesn't always mean a bad player, it's a relative term. Apologies for the rant, like most of us I've had a drink or two. And likewise, all the best, and honest to god I hope Wells gets 30 goals this season.

Yes, and as I say, that means his signing at that time was not the sensible thing. However, that can be true simultaneously as the OP's following point is true. But, personally, I don't think it's worth signing a player at a cost of nearly £2m a season because at some point we might be able to use him. Love his goals today though, the first was delightful. Viva Nahki.

Thank you for the compliment. It is reciprocated with interest. I guess my point is that when we signed him he was expensive, a poor fit for the team at the time, and in my opinion it was a status thing for Ashton to get the guy who'd scored 13 in 5 months* and was the talk of the town. He came here touted as the "20 goal a season" star.** He's been paid a reported 20k(ish) a week, and has cost us £800k a year in amortisation, so that's an approximate total cost of about £1.85m per year. The fact he's just about coming good now, after we've changed half the squad that he joined, paired him with a guy who was in nappies when we signed him, and is under a new manager, coaching staff, and CEO. That's what tells me his signing, at the time it was done, was ridiculous. So yeh he's been overrated for the best part of two years. And yeh he's the definitive symbol of Ashton's mess. I'd happily have sold him last month, and used that last year of wages and amortisation to replace him with two players. *Or whatever it was exactly. **Despite never achieving that in his career.

Oh conversations are happening. Undoubtedly. Scott does feel like a Spurs signing...is he a Conte signing? I'd be worried, I feel like Spurs have been a bit of a graveyard for young talent. Rodon springs to mind, Sessegnon is playing a bit now but has he really done what he'd have hoped? Anyway, for us, this season, so long as we loan back or just agree for the summer, we should be ok.

I maintain that his signing was unnecessary, profligate, kneejerk, and made for the wrong reasons. He's hit form, and that's good, I'm delighted for him and us. However, for his wages and amortisation cost we could have had two players of Championship quality in the side for the past two years. If we are playing to his strengths now then it's because we now have the other players to allow us to do that. When he signed we weren't doing that, and couldn't, so therefore the signing remains open to ridicule. For me he will always be the overrated symbol of the Ashton age.