Mr Popodopolous

In fact, it's hard to extrapolate but maybe their pre tax losses for last season would fall below £10m. Certainly no greater than £15m IMO- can't see Blackburn being in P&S trouble for a little while. They also seem to have a Category 1 Academy which bumps up the allowable costs.

Venkys London Limited accounts are out. It is hard to re-align as these run from 1st April 2021 to 31st March 2022 and indeed is the Reporting Period for every year but.. They will include some of furlough still the final 3 months of 2021-22, as well as Blackburn's Business Interruption claim- but also the final 3 months of the Reporting Period of the 2020-21 Covid wrecked season. Anyway £2.6-2.7m pre tax profit but this included both the Armstrong sale and the profit on the Training Ground sale and leaseback- maybe the club pre tax losses in the period ending June 30th 2022 would be £10-15m. Wage bill looks under control, after tax, NI etc £24m maybe..amortisation also seems to be on the slide.

Pertaining to Cardiff, it might depend on whether they are under a Professional Standing embargo or an Established Player one. E.g. if they have 22 Established Players then they can add two under the terms and conditions outlined. If the latter, if they have less than 24 players in terms of that category then they can sign free agents or loanees, within a wage limit and no signing on fees, transfer fees. If the former, then they comfortably exceed this already so multiple offloads would be required just to add one on a free under the limitations listed. Unsure how players loaned out are treated in either scenario- Cardiff have a few e.g. McGuinness at Sheffield Wednesday.

Covid may have delayed and the previous governance of the League didn't help, ie Harvey. When Parry came in there was more of a concerted push on these issues. Especially IMO- when it's a straight up overspend yes that is easy to pursue even for someone like Harvey (Birmingham 2018). Whereas when it is bitterly disputed accounting issues ie the amortisation issue, or which year a stadium sale should go in, that inevitably drags and requires lengthy investigation, and eventually a League Arbitration Panel to adjudicate as in the Derby case especially. There were side cases during 2020-21 too which dragged it out. EFL winning that case eventually was actually a major victory. I would say that it is brave to go against audited accounts, audit sign-off and independent experts, to push back against that as the Football League did isn't the easy option. They lost the valuation one but I wonder if a better valuer hired by the League could have steered matters in a different direction- he chose stadiums such as Morecambe and other random examples. His assessment was a tabletop one rather than having visited Pride Park and so on. Having their experts in-house should in theory improve issues. I also see a distinct parallel with Everton and the Premier League. Everton may or may not have complied but if £170-220m in alleged Covid impact was properly scrutinised they surely would not have done. One of the defences I have seen from Everton fans and the club itself referenced it I believe, was auditors and independent experts. Much like Derby, yet the Football League did not take them at their word belatedly- the Premier League however... The correct course of action there I believe would be to send it to an Independent Disciplinary Commission to determine in the first instance the validity and then if an adjustment tips them over limits, charge the club and push for the correct sanctions. In particular, certain categories- if you get a ruling about a certain category in your favour you can then push back against others who did the same.

Interesting line on Football League highlights tonight. Cardiff apparently will be under a transfer embargo in January owing to the failure to pay the first instalment of the Sala fee.

Oh absolutely. Drive, strategy, new ideas, energy to name a few- fresh impetus. I am just saying that not much would change inn the short to medium term as far as who we could attract goes, IMO of course.

What difference would a new owner make in the short to medium term- we couldn't spend anymore this season for a start. Say we are set to just about comply now, and can spend I dunno another £100k on strengthening this season to remain within FFP. Well that would be applicable to a new owner too.

Sykes never really was a wide player, we just shoehorned him in there and for a while it kinda worked, he got some form and gave us an option.

Thought we performed significantly better vs Watford and Sheffield United at home. Was it just me or did everything seem a bit flat today? Performance, the crowd. Vs Watford was genuinely quite impressed with both, we even scored first today and had little spells in 1st half. Ultimately though we were not good enough although perhaps still didn't deserve to lose.

Just on the new owner point, we're under FFP anyway. The position stays with the club irrespective of a change of ownership or fresh investment.

Agree with both of these posts. Us, England and at times in 1st half Poland, at times in and half Denmark and admittedly a dead rubber Tunisia caused France trouble at times- especially their games vs us and Morocco where France were no better than, worse than the opposition. I suppose one case for the defence might be, if France had a 3rd man in CM with say Giroud out this may give them more control- Kante, a front 3 of Mbappe-Griezmann-Dembele can be very dynamic and fluid. Possibly even Pogba who for his country and first time round at Juventus can be really good. Maybe when they beat Portugal in Portugal in a winner take a all in the Nations League in 2020 would have been a powerful, World Champion performance. However that is also perhaps down to how Deschamps sets them up as able without the ball- I think they have players to be a more dominant side in terms of performance. It's very effective right now of course. However yes it does seem like sucking up to the favourites on the part of the commentators. In the last World Cup I thought they got a bit lucky in the final, a questionable penalty not long after Croatia equalised- and indeed some fortune in the 4-3 v Argentina in 2nd Round.

Griezmann went back too and did well- defensively, in his own box. Was quite impressed certainly.

Cheers for the advice. Yes agreed. Indeed this is true, is a good venue why let a suspect experience with Person A tarnish the overall venue. I have a bit of a tendency to dwell, look back etc- that can play on things a bit with me but life goes on, it's about time. That is good, happy for you. Hope it continues to progress well.

That was a shame, thought Morocco deserved more- good technically, really gave it a strong go even accounting for France's comfort without the ball. Much better contest than Tuesday, had they scored in that little phase before HT when they hit the post, well who knows. France arguably won twice, certainly in the quarter final despite not being the better side.

It's not just 20 years of ups and downs tbh. What is a 'better' manager btw in a general sense. Capello's club record was very good indeed but at tournament t with us he made notable errors, tournament 2 he may have learned from these and had weaned us off 4-4-2 (a setup that was his fault btw) at last! Think in Spring 2011 a midfield of Parker-Lampard-Wilshere was showing some promise- Parker was that bit of glue. As we know, Wilshere was injured by then and Capello walked due to Terry gate. Him aside, the whole 20 years thing, so much longer. Euro 2000 anyone? How about 1992- group stage and longish ball game and 1994- did not qualify. 1988- Group stage again. Two tournaments, both World Cups for which we did not even qualify again 1970s.. On the flipside 1996, 1990- 1998 we were unlucky as we were in 1986. Real mixed bag going back decades. Know less without looking about 1982, 1984 etc. Probably did okay but nothing outstanding?

Excellent midfield always gives you a chance. Brazil was a major shock but they got it tactically perfect and yes had some luck, great GK.

Or Hargreaves- either might have acted as a vital counter balance, a ying to the yang of Gerrard and Lampard bombing on. We sort of tried it in 2006 a bit, he had some injuries too iirc and we looked stable or he looked one of our more important players at times. What is the CM 3 from that period then? One or both of Gerrard and Lampard? Carrick, Hargreaves or treat as a nice issue to have? Scholes- underused, underappreciated, misused and eventually lost Scholes. Hargreaves or Carrick Lampard or Gerrard Scholes Central 3, 4-1-4-1 perhaps.

I sort of agree but at same time in some ways dismissing both Italy and some of our opponents. Italy were aging in places but very good midfield. Possibly we scored top early, a bit like v Croatia in 2018, but we showed some excellent discipline in that final but they took strong control in midfield. Coming into the tournament 25 unbeaten I believe it was and quite free scoring made them a contender IMO. One last trip to the well and they got everything out- then setting up 4-3-3 helped them to control midfield too. As for us... Rice-Foden-Bellingham central 3 potentially. Perm depending on opposition 2 from Mount, Sterling, Saka, Grealish, Maddison to be up there- Kane still? It's far from doom and gloom.

To an extent I agree although their big problem appears to be the lack of a truly high end striker. In 2018, they were quite different- had both strong possession and created quite a lot of chances too. Vs Brazil their final ball left a fair bit to be desired, ball didn't exactly stick well either. Agreed,.rather difficult to break down. Rather compact for sure.

Wasn't all that impressed by then to be fair. They were solid, competent in possession not saying poor but not dazzling either. They had an X Factor in Messi and a fine support act in Alvarez but certainly wasn't blown away or anything like that.

The bit or a bit that interests me. For example, Stoke decide to drop £50m on transfers courtesy of their Bet365 backers- to what extent could, might the regulator step in? Where does the expenditure of a club on new signings become a point where it presents a risk to sustainability of the game? I choose Stoke as their fans seem quite bullish about ability to spend more next season- at what point does one club spending start to destabilise the market at our level.

https://www.efl.com/news/2022/december/club-financial-review-panel-appointed/ The CFRP has been officially appointed today. @Davefevs @ExiledAjax @Hxj @chinapig @downendcity Will they have already cleared clubs pertaining to Covid-19 add-backs and claims or is it still an ongoing review process do we know? That aside, timing coincidental given the whole Football Regulator thing?

Feel free to move this to the correct section if required first and foremost. I posted it last night but not so well. It's a bit of a question of etiquette and or form more than anything. Basically the venue in which I had the disastrous meet with someone last June that I posted about on here, hopefully that post was seen as relatively humorously. I digress, back off to that venue or planning to with someone else and doing a much better job of it. It was a venue that she suggested for completion purposes. I've decided to co-opt it in a sense and use it to go with someone else. I am comfortable with it but thought I might ask for a little advice- is there a risk or perception that I could be construed as taking the piss somewhat? My plan is that I won't run into her and vice versa and obviously won't boast or shout about it online but is it possible she might somehow see it as me acting in a manner that is less than constructive, a perception that I am setting out to wind her up? My view is that yes she should not get irked at all, no reason to. She probably won't.

Think we definitely deserved more vs Sheffield United, Watford and Norwich. QPR could have scored a few all told.in the 1st half vs us, Swansea at home maybe maybe not but we seemed to have to absorb more in 2nd.half.

Don't disagree. The claimed speed of fall, indeed the other one too about it being halved in 18 months or so just seems unfathomable to me given what we've seen with us and other clubs trying to get costs down. All those PL loan signings, plus Wilmot, Vrancic, half a season of Surridge, Gayle- and loans for Sawyers (relegated WBA) and Maja (Ligue 1 Bordeaux) and such claims are far removed. 2021-22 accounts will be interesting.