chinapig

10 minutes ago, Porto Red said:

Haydn

He should be good at orchestrating the play then.

46 minutes ago, SimonD said:

Thanks for the low down on Bristol City. 

 

The £10 million hole. We should have made sales the summer before last, but they were so determined to get Beale in as manager that they let him dictate who left. 

Last season's managerial change (Beale out, Critchley out and Ainsworth in) was hopefully neutral. We also "earned" around 1/2 million compensation from Chair and Dieng being at the World Cup. Not taking up the option on Charlie Austin's contract made a very decent saving. 

 

This season, Cifuentes was end of contract in Sweden. We'd tried to get him last season, but couldn't afford the buyout. 

The generally accepted amounts are £2m for Dieng and £700k for Dickie. (He had started well for us, but we'd broken him. He definitely needed a fresh start)

We've gone to town with naming rights this season. Stadium, Away Stand, South Africa Road Stand and training ground have all been "claimed". 

The majority of the rest will be through payroll which has left us very weak, but the activity towards the end of the January window do suggest we made it.

 

 

 

Yet you passed up the chance to keep Chris Martin, now leading Bristol Rovers to a glorious promotion.

21 minutes ago, cellist said:

Any famous long shirt wearers in City colours over the years?

This is the kind of question we need answered. A job for the Former Players Association I reckon.

Yep, heard that this morning.

Football Cliches is very funny and an antidote to taking the game too seriously.

After all we need to know why some teams are given their full name in league tables and others not, which players in what positions are allowed to wear long sleeved shirts or what the threshold is for saying a team hasn't laid a glove on the opposition. Work of national importance.

12 minutes ago, Red DNA said:

Done well to get a testimonial? I think he was a youth coach as well for a while?

Thanks, he did coach the youth team for a while, I'd forgotten that.

23 minutes ago, BS3City said:

How can Wael of Fortune claim the stand was "planned financed and sorted before"?

Wasn't it financed with a high interest loan though? Fortunately they can meet the repayments thanks to the massive increase in attendances.

31 minutes ago, slartibartfast said:

Yes, about ONE game ,wasn't it ?

Well I did say it was a stretch!

A stretch maybe but Dave Merrington played for us and was later Saints manager.

12 hours ago, shahanshahan said:

Tracey Crouch, the MP who wrote the fan led review, has announced she will not be running in the next General Election

I think we can agree for those that are interested in this topic to express her thanks for getting the fan led review set up in the first place - leading to the subsequent developments

 

Absolutely deserves our thanks. She stood firm against pressure from the Premier League throughout and saw through measures that have led to them acting seriously on FFP for the first time (unless anybody believes no club had ever breached the limits until now).

It's a little out of character for a Tory MP to want to regulate the rich and powerful so good for her for going against the grain also.

On the down side Kieran Maguire will be heartbroken.

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

https://chelsea.news/2024/02/journalist-says-chelsea-can-spend-300-350m-this-summer-and-explains-clubs-ffp-situation/

Supposedly Chelsea can spend £200m this summer irrespective of sales...

...Albeit this report seems to infer large sales required.

https://www.caughtoffside.com/2024/02/12/chelsea-transfer-news-gallagher-broja-lukaku-and-more-sales/

I believe Ben Jacobs is a sports (i.e. not just football) journalist but I'm not sure he is any kind of financial expert.

I give more credence to Swiss Ramble as quoted in the article I linked above, specifically this:

For 2023-24, though, they would appear to be in big trouble, with Swiss Ramble estimating their losses for the three-year assessment period at £201m – and that was on an assumption they would finish sixth, which now looks extremely optimistic.

So they're going to have to generate an awful lot of transfer income to spend £200m. This is going to have to come mainly from home grown players as pure profit.

Spurs are keen on Gallagher but knowing Chelsea's plight may drive down the price. They're said to want £50m for Broja; no chance of getting that.

9 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Dr. Rob Wilson, a Football Finance expert reckons the following on the Everton case:

*On Appeal, the deduction will be halved.

*They (Everton) are very bullish about their 2023 Charge.

*Nottingham Forest altogether different, much will hinge on Johnson sale timing.

*PL need more clearly defined Sanctioning Parameters in general for FFP breaches.

Point 1 refers on some level to the PL not wanting to make a rod for their own back with future cases according to him but that seems weak as anything if so. A reduction to 5 would still mean Burnley were wronged however as they finished 4 points behind Everton.

Point 1 misses the fact that the independent commission makes the decision not the PL. We're used to fans not getting this but you'd think Dr Wilson would.

Point 4 ignores the fact that the PL Board proposed such parameters but the clubs voted against, including Everton.

50 minutes ago, Robbored said:

That’s the bit I struggle with (not the ‘learning’ bit tho) Maybe Boro deserve credit as being 0-2 they made it far more difficult for us in the second 45 in an effort to salvage something from the game. City ultimately coped reasonably well and it could be argued that the second half was a masterclass in protecting a two goal lead.

Given that we can't replay the second half without changing the shape we can't draw a firm conclusion either way. Which is why I posed it as a question rather than a conclusion.

Maybe we would have won more comfortably if we had not changed or maybe we would have been too open and lost. We can't know so neither of us can claim to be right.

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

But I just happened to feel differently, because I’m not analysing the result, I’m looking at things like shape, what works well, what doesn’t, etc.

Some people get irritated when managers say they focus on performances over results but your post shows why they do that. Saying we won therefore it was the right thing to do doesn't necessarily follow.

Though we deserved to win the game on the excellent first half performance alone it's worth considering whether we made it harder for ourselves than we needed and maybe learning from that. I'm sure Liam and his staff do exactly that after every game anyway.

Just now, Davefevs said:

Hardly the post of someone who knew their reaction wasn’t wholly rationale, and the recognition that time to focus on the result and the good things yesterday, hence the other threads started.

People's views often tend to be results based - either we won therefore we played well or we lost therefore we played badly.

The reality is often somewhere in the middle. I don't see any problem in pointing out things we did well despite losing or pointing out things we didn't do so well despite winning.

It's certainly better than the binary happy clappers vs moaners nonsense.

34 minutes ago, RedRoss said:

I think your just showing the over expectations of a modern day fan.

Does he really need to explain his tactics in full detail post match? Perhaps he'd prefer to keep that to himself. It might be in our interests not to share everything with our next potential opponents. Especially considering we have Southampton in a very quick turnaround i.e same context as Middlesbrough. We won't have much time to recover, we won't have the lions share of possession.

Given the vast amounts of information available to clubs these days I doubt you can keep any secrets. Southampton will have analysed our games in detail and will be prepared for a variety of scenarios.

10 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

When you see a forward looking around to see if he has actually scored, I think that suggests an element of luck.

He was clearly trying to get out of the way of the shot, which hit him and deflected in. A lucky goal then.

It wasn't entirely clear as he tends to give short answers and wasn't asked why but Liam said in the club interview that the plan was to let them have the ball and defend (which we did well).

But at another point he seemed to suggest the plan was to let them have the ball and counterattack (which we didn't do well in the second half).

So the only conclusion I can come to is - I don't have a clue why he changed the shape!

24 minutes ago, Super said:

I've never watched them tbh do they play a similar style to Liverpool?

Tuchel has never convinced me tbh.

Hard to say after one viewing but they are certainly quick and very good at pressing.

Possibly a bit more flexible than Liverpool, they played a false 9 yesterday partly due to missing players, and players were constantly switching positions.

Very much about the team not individuals but Wirtz is outstanding and lots of big clubs will be after him.

German media think Alonso will stay and wait for the Real Madrid job but we'll see.

I'm with you on Tuchel btw. 

This is from a poster who seems to be articulate but is still deluded. Why would they need another stand when they can't fill the recently opened bus shelter? And why do they need a 15,000 capacity when their gates are about half that?

The owners really need to step up PDQ and deliver at least a new East stand and improve The Quarters. A 15,000 capacity with 10,000 seats should be fine for a while if funds are tight for a complete revamp.

4 hours ago, Super said:

Doesn't look like Kane will be winning the league in Germany after yesterday's result.

I watched the game and you can certainly see why Xabi Alonso has such a big reputation as a coach. Leverkusen were brilliant, and Tuchel had nothing to offer in response.

6 minutes ago, petehinton said:

 

Have they called the 'facilities' Championship ready yet?

11 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

That’s not the point.  We were a cohesive unit 1st half, we were a mess 2nd.  The system change a huge part of that.  It’s not like we even just sat in and played on the counter, we didn’t even do that.

There was clearly a case for using our subs well given the likely player fatigue but that didn't require a switch to a back 3 and surrendering the initiative. Especially as the first half was probably the best we have played under Liam.

It always puzzles me when coaches decide to sit on a lead for an entire half but Liam is obviously keen on a back 3 and I assume we will see a lot more of it. I'm not convinced it suits our players but time will tell.

59 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Tbh I’m only stating what we heard from Nige in interviews and what Rennie said also….and giving my view of how potentially misleading it can be to state about time on the training pitches.  We saw countless Robins Uncut videos with Nige present, just not doing the coaching per se.

It’s why I also started the post with “we might”….posters can post what they like ultimately.

 

Of course they can, even if what they say is contradicted by the evidence. It's rather that their case falls down particularly if we have actually seen the evidence with our own eyes, as you describe.

But perhaps I'm being pedantic

12 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Blimey......I am not gonna post for a while..........I am fed up with   ongoing pedants analysing every iota, and picking over each semantic meaning.........I think i will stick to reading all of the balanced and constantly logical posts that appear on here on a daily basis?  Ha!     

I'm not sure what is pedantic about facts, which is what Dave stated. Unless you are a fan of George W Bush and his objection to the 'reality based community'.