ExiledAjax

I've been thinking a little. I think this is a season where an observer can take whatever they want. It's possible to look at the same facts, and see either great hope, expectations, and positivity, or signs of concern, failure, and negativity. What you see will depend on your outlook, your biases, your personality etc. There's been brights spots as you rightly highlight, but lows as well. Take these ten games. Yes great results, but one can counter that and say it was an easy run of fixtures, we got 4 (I think?) penalties, and some games were dead rubbers. It's just one of those seasons that in the moment seems very volatile and interesting but I suspect in 3 years' time no one will really remember anything bar the manager change in October. These musings may not be totally on topic, and I'm not trying to be negative, but it is just one of those seasons where there's a bit for everyone. Last season we had a spell where we got 19 points from 10 games, Birmingham - Blackpool, W5, D4, L1.

Absolutely. Absolutely. Also, I thought...I do t know if you play golf, but "Par" is actually a pretty great result. Play an entire round in Par and anyone would be delighted. So if that was what you originally took umbrage with then it's actually a compliment. As they're a client of mine I'd selfishly really quite like them to stay up for budget-preservation reasons. I can understand that no one else cares about this though!

I can't speak for others but I don't think I have personally ever said we cannot break down "lesser" teams. I think we've had issues breaking down conservative, defensive teams that sit in with a low block. A team can be low down the league table playing any style of it's not got the players to do it. None of the teams you mention are that kind of "low block team" either, so I see no real surprise in losing to Sheffield Wednesday and QPR, but beating Plymouth and Blackburn. This was an issue under the previous regime as well as the current one so it's, in my opinion, an issue with the squad rather than the coaching staff. Regardless, we're currently playing a team that was relegated weeks ago, has conceded almost 2 a game whilst scoring less than 1 a game, and is roundly heralded as one of the worst teams in the Championship for many a season. They've also rested their one good player - their goalkeeper. An easy 2-0 is a decent, but expected, result. We've done it without really breaking a sweat, and that's to be applauded.

Nice for King to get a 10 minute testimonial. Hope he enjoys it.

QPR aren't relegation threatened, and weren't last night either. And even if they were, it just shows what I mean. Leeds were embarrassed last night losing a game that they really shouldn't have, equally we can be happy with this scoreline, but it is what should be expected. 2-0 v Rotherham is par. We've still delivered the goods, done our job, and done it fairly easily. But it's still just what we should expect.

If a lion dominates a mouse is that something to celebrate? The relative quality of the opposition, and their particular circumstances at the time we play them, always has to be to be taken into account.

That's the first time I've ever heard someone extrapolate a statement of "should" from someone simply stating a mathematical fact. It's just a fact that illustrates how utter cack Rotherham are defensively. Mehmeti's too? * *just a joke, just a joke

Just for context. 2 is (rounded from 1.93) the average number of goals conceded by Rotherham this season. Par.

That is a very good free kick.

We've pretty clearly been the better side, and all whilst playing pretty lackadaisical stuff. Chilled shooting vibes in the box and some loose stuff elsewhere, but still notching decent non-pen chances, which the penalty then glosses up. I guess this is the luxury that coasting to a mid-table finish gives you.

Manning just cannot stop getting penalties. Is that 7 in 30 games now?

It's liquid football but the liquid is slurry from the local cattle farm.

And again, he absolutely deserves to be someone's No.1, as does Max. So on that basis yes I'd like Johansson here, but only if we lost O'Leary. I've liked Phillips as well over the past few seasons. But I guess he will go down to L1 as their No.1. But, if he wanted to stay up as our new No 2, I'd say we could do worse.

As he absolutely deserves. He's had one of the toughest jobs of any goalkeeper in the country this season. Not done too badly in that context.

Quite a few don't seem to understand this though!

Sweepstake on whether he mentions beating Southampton or Leicester first?

And back playing with his academy mate. Also, and this isn't directed at you, he's our player right? We signed him, and loaned him back. There's nothing to "cancel".

Probably going to equal the 12th place we achieved in 2019/20. Fewer scored as well though. But importantly the goal difference is looking better overall. That's really what matters in terms of goals scored or conceded. Perhaps. In some ways. In other ways looking quite static.

Feels almost like one we should just try. I'm pretty sure the penalty for fielding an ineligible player in a league game is simply a forfeit of any points gained in that match, plus a fine. We can take that penalty. It would have no effect on us. Could be that we try it. Test the EFL.

Largely I agree. I think Huddersfield have to at least get a draw today. They have to force Birmingham to require a result against Norwich on the last day. Playoffs are likely going to be decided today. Norwich have a much easier game home to Swansea than Hull do hosting Ipswich. A draw is enough for Norwich if Hull lose as well. I think Norwich will seal 6th today. That means Norwich v Birmingham is likely a dead rubber unless Huddersfield force the question. I agree that it's Birmingham/Huddersfield/Sheff Wed competing for one safe spot. Although having said that there is a (pretty unlikely) scenario where Plymouth are in 22nd tonight. That's the wildcard outcome that would really make next weekend interesting.

I said this a week or so ago and I don't think much has changed. "Birmingham's last game will likely have nothing on it for Norwich, and they may even rest up ahead of the playoffs. Huddersfield have a horrid last two games. Fail to beat Birmingham and I think they're in big trouble. But the massive variable is, as you say, that game between Huddersfield and Birmingham. If that goes the other way then Huddersfield probably stay up and Birmingham go down." I'd keep my money in my pocket personally - but I always do.

So it confirms Leicester's promotion right, as they can't be caught by both Leeds and Ipswich?

The length of contract remaining at the point of illness influences things as well. Making a few assumptions here but say Mowbray and Pearson were each told "you'll be too ill to work for the next 4 months". Well 4 months out of Mowbray's 2.5 year contract is less significant than 4 months of Pearson's remaining 8 months (at the time). So Birmingham would have had a harder time justifying a termination of Mowbray's contract on that basis. In our case we'd be saying "look, you're not capable of fulfilling 50% of the remaining contract" that radically changes things, and could permissably be a factor in the decision to terminate. I'm not saying any of the above is "right" or wrong, but it's a summary of part of the legal position.

Can be done, but doesn't have to be done. It is legally justifiable to terminate a contract of employment if the illness/incapacity of the employee is likely to make performance of the employee's duties either impossible or radically different. Whether or not a dismissal is justifiable depend on many factors. It's an area of law that is very complex, open to interpretation, heavily influenced by case law, and very very very dependent on the individual facts of each case. But there's far from a blanket prohibition on ending an employment contract for health reasons.

Late to this. Just listened. Probably don't have much new to add but I'll give my thoughts. God I'd forgotten how long he can talk after just saying "Hello". Although fair enough he admits he rambles, and Allardyce more than gives him a run for his money. On leaving us: "Get the exit clause [in the contract] watertight" and was it? "Yes". And there's confidentiality clauses (of course there are). So he can't tell us the official reasons that he was given, but we can assume he's been "looked after" in the settlement. But he can talk about what the club have already said in public - hence he can mention the deconditioning point and the results. It does not look good for the club that they gave reasons in public not given in private. Sounds as well like Pearson is a bit less litigious than old "pint of wine" Allardyce. Allardyce is clearly very well acquainted with the LMAs legal team! That means there may still be more to the story than we know, even after this interview. I love the bit on "success" and how it's not necessarily just trophies and wins. Absolutely true in all walks of life. There's an absolutely top example of the diversity training kicking in with the "him OR her" when talking about the man OR woman in the middle. Very enjoyable to hear that, made me smile. Finally, I'd like to apologise to Nigel for ever calling him a curmudgeonly old man. Allardyce is a curmudgeonly old man. Good lord the size of the chip on that bloke's shoulder.