Mr Popodopolous

Fair play. Their possession game has been strong although Brazil have had a lot more chances.. I thought he had overrun it, a number of times today their final ball was lacking. Not there however! Excellent goal by Neymar also.

Great midfield always gives a chance. Post Mandzukic they lack a focal point up front IMO. They've never fully replaced him. Small nation though, who through injury or retirement have since last WC been without Subasic, Vrsaljko, Vida, Corluka, Rakitic, Mandzukic- 4 or 5 starters and the remainder reserves.

For Home Tickets- unsure how this impacts on away Tickets. Presumably charged the same. Plus a list of games by Category.. If we were Category B like they were here, it would in fact be only a couple of quid more expensive.

Agreed. Although what did we charge for the return fixture? We have more categories so it muddied the water a bit but for equivalent. £28- Adult £10- U12 I don't know if this is inclusive of booking fees? If it isn't that rises to £29 and £11 respectively. We are better for sure but I also read on Twitter that we have the highest at this level and that claim, it surprises me! This for reference was for a Category B game. Which our game v Coventry in October was deemed.

Croatia have an excellent CM 3 tbh even if Modric is aging and if you have that as a starting point, you certainly have a chance.

Having looked into it a bit further, a Bournemouth fan who has forecasted and does forecast their finances anticipated a pre tax loss of £40m last season. That would be within P&S limits of £72m probably, he certainly thinks so and I think it might- rather depends on Covid and how much they truly lost. Pre tax figures if he's right: 2018-19 -£32m 2019-20 -£60m 2020-21 £17m 2021-22 -£40m *Forecasted £125m in pre tax losses but... Adjusted for the Covid roll-up. 2018-19 -£32m 2019-20 and 2020-21 -£21.5m 2021-22- -£40m *Forecasted £93.5m as a starting point but... A) What are their usual allowances? Not so high IMO- remember that they don't have much in the way of infrastructure, didn't are much in the PL and have a Category C Academy. Wouldn't surprise me if £4-5m per year only. B) Covid losses and costs? £15m in 2 years perhaps? Plus the £2.5m in 2021-22. A rebate to the PL would be a factor, all PL clubs had to do this. C) Would that forecast be inclusive of or before Promotion Bonuses? If indeed they were a factor! Suggested too a while back that Parker basically managed to persuade a lot.of their players to take a 20 percent pay cut when he joined. That would help any club a lot...would free up some headroom for sure. In conclusion, I think that they're probably within the £72m but it could be interesting.

I should also add that if some clubs have notably larger losses than others, the EFL might naturally hone in on their Covid numbers set against their loss limits. For example, Stoke recorded pre tax losses of £142m to 2020-21 from 2017-18. 1 PL season, 3 Championship- that would be £96m if on a 4 u3sr period and with the Covid averaging that is £93.5m to 2020-21 vs an Upper Loss limit of £61m or maybe with the add 4 Upper Tariff up /4 x 3. Alternatively to 2021-22, the position is: £112m in 3 years and counting between 2018-19 and 2020-21. Or £63.5m and counting to 2020-21 once the aggregation and halving kicked in, in the period of 2018-19 and 2020-21. Cannot be bothered to go in and round etc. By way of comparison we were: 2017-18 to 2020-21 £63m in total pre tax losses. Once the aggregation and halving kicks in, we were at £39m. 2018-19 to 2020-21 £38m. Indeed to 2021-22 we were £66.5m in total and once aggregation and halving kicked in, £42.5m. Better than Stoke on a great many metrics as a very basic starting point. We await their 2021-22 accounts with some interest.. City specific, if we come out again for a 2nd year running post Covid with one of the worst sets of figures ie 2021-22 following on from 2020-21 where we were the worst and the 3rd worst for Operating Losses, the EFL would be quite entitled to ask why and pertaining to the validity of our Covid losses ie the transfer add-backs if indeed we have used them.

£72m is the Upper Loss Limit for Bournemouth. Their aggregated losses before Tax in 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 were before rounding £75m. Clearly 2019-20 and 2020-21 aggregated and halved. Think that came to a pre tax loss of £32m and £21.5m. This is before a) FFP allowances- they have a Category 3 Academy though and no major infrastructure- £4-5m per year maybe in allowables? That £12m profit was inflated for 2 reasons- a) The delay to the season meant some TV income from PL was recognised in 2020-21 and b) £50m in profit on disposal of players. Unlike say Fulham, no big claim of Covid Impairment. Losses may be £15m in 2 years? Hard to say. Their 2021-22 accounts could be interesting albeit certainly not as much as Fulham. On a side note, would make some sense from a Governing body if the real big pre tax losses by clubs were honed in on first and then work way through. Wonder about Nottingham Forest too for their new starting point was a £25m pre tax loss in 2018-19!! Albeit they have stated their compliance with all financial regs.

Well done for trying Dave. Seems transparency from the EFL- or more accurately the clubs who comprise it- has its limits! Does seem strange that the League or perhaps more likely the clubs who vote on these issues want to keep that aspect so locked down- does it raise suspicions that perhaps the League/Clubs are trying to fudge it so that everyone is within £39m to last and this season one way or another, a combination of Covid-19 and the regulatory changes that are upcoming.

Not specifically related to us, Bristol but seems a useful place for it. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2022/12/06/rfu-rejects-wasps-worcester-pleas-spared-relegation/ Automatic relegation and or suspension for going into administration? We knew already but rubber stamped. Excessive or could football learn from it.

Any update on this one, unless I missed it what with the current enjoyment of the WC?

Great goal by Leao to finish that off. Portugal remained clinical in this game, 6 goals from 15 shots (non penalty, non own goals). 12 from 54 in the tournament overall, adjusted for non penalty goals is 10 from 52. Can be a strength and a weakness. Game itself, thought they were bright, incisive, sharp and yes fairly clinical- but can be got at.. watertight they aren't.

Even that 'making up the numbers' side have a top midfield. Kovacic-Modric-Brozovic finally settled on their preferred 4-3-3 can't lightly dismiss a side with that CM platform. Are Croatia a superior side to Holland? Possibly yes, certainly Holland with their back 3 a bit cautious at times.

Clinical too though, 5 attempts and 2 goals. Good watch though. I wouldn't say so, more Portugal a bit better and tactically superior too.

Yes makes sense I guess. I'd still say with respect to us, we are more of a Cat B at this level probably.

Cancelo and Leao being benched are bold calls too, away from the obvious Ronaldo surprise. Potentially would have started Neves too.

Credit to their manager for dropping him too. Better q might be would no Ronaldo starting liberate Portugal a bit? It's not been Ronaldo plus 10 for a few years now but they have quite a strong generation. Interesting to see how they set up differently etc. On a side note, Santos is considered to be a fairly negative manager or at least excessively cautious by a reasonable number of Portugal fans.

Wouldn't resolve FFP or alter the position. We would be under the same spending limits as we are right now. New investment or ownership doesn't equate to fresh revenue etc. Okay maybe a couple of million here and there, new sponsors if fair value but that aside, fundamentally if we were on track to lose say a £38m in a 3 year position to this year under SL, the same would apply under Ratcliffe or whoever. Debt writeoffs wouldn't count towards revenue for FFP purposes or to eat into losses, profit on disposal of fixed assets is a non starter. EFL can apply such restrictions as they see fit on a new owner to ensure compliance with regulations so this season very little changes. 3.1.1 (b) plus 3.2, 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 of the Owners and Directors Test cover this quite well. Granted it doesn't explicitly state the debt write off or cancellation idea but I'm sure that wouldn't fly- QPR v EFL 2014-2018. The simple answer is that you simply refuse to accept it for P&S returns so it negates it even if the Balance Sheet a lot healthier. Potential for more free cash on hand? Absolutely. More into the academy etc? Of course! Monetarily however not much would change short and perhaps medium term.

Incredible result!! Not seen any of it but history for Morocco that, quarter finals for the 1st time.

When it truly clicks and all falls into place it can be fantastic I reckon. When it doesn't, it's all a bit samey, dull- predictable. Either possession with and heavy pressing without when it goes well, but dull and a lot of aimless passing when it goes badly.

Not seen this game but sounds like it is going the distance. Other news, Ronaldo reportedly dropped tonight?? Portugal coach apparently furious at his reaction to being substituted against South Korea.

@chinapig @ExiledAjax @Davefevs @Hxj Feel free to tag others that I may not have! Usual caveat with MPs etc but it sounds like it might be on the way sooner rather than later.

I think Jordan is letting Coventry Council off lightly but on the fundamentals yes Ashley can charge what he sees as a fair and market rent and or exploit the events potential too. They talk of no change of use but surely it already has in addition to sports, permission or license to host events too?

£28 for adult Coventry fans at AG in October when we played them isn't so different. Should £30 be cut off point at this level? £20 for U18 is clearly ott. Are we a bit surprised we are a Category A game? Would have thought that more likely for local derbies or historically bigger clubs or a big one down to yoyo back up again to PL but a bit surprised we are top category.

Bet365 (which shows Stoke until 30th March 2022) should be out by the end of the year or early 2023. So too should Venkys London Limited (Blackburn- end of March 2022), Birmingham and Millwall. We already have a fair idea about Birmingham based on the HK results although a few differences probably. Talking of Birmingham, still no sign of their Birmingham City Stadium Ltd accounts- that ran until June 30th 2021!! Covid extensions meant that went until June 30th 2022 due date wise but... Under apparent new ownership too. That last bit is old news of course but the stadium was: 1) 'Sold' in May 2019 to the Holding company. Think someone else who owned the club officially or vice versa. FFP solved, rent arrangement kicks in- Adams and Bellingham also go for FFP. 2) Rent and indeed sale and leaseback don't appear in the consolidated BSH results to 2019, neither would rent due on the sale and leaseback...all cancels out at the Hong Kong consolidated level of course but... 3)...Speculation is correct- stadium sold and leased back. All within the BSH group. Rent appears on the UK level but not the consolidator in Hong Kong. £22.8m sale price iirc, £1.25m per season rent. 4) In 2021 the stadium company was sold to the below. Speculation as to wherher it is via a proxy or truly different, nobody really knows. Club won't benefit save for maybe working capital which is irrelevant for FFP calcs. Kang Ming Ming appears to own Achiever. Was 75 pct not 100 pct of the stadium company that was sold too apparently. https://almajir.net/useful-information/others/achiever-global-group-ltd/ Oriental Rainbow Investments appear to own the other 25 percent. Vong Pech is the guy there. Unbelievably on paper at least, Birmingham neither own their ground nor the stadium company. Same goes for BSH in Hong Kong, they own neither! What a mess??