BTRFTG

As one who worked under Patel at the HO it's no surprise she and her Government continue to excel in crass ineptitude. If only they'd expended effort in ensuring Ukrainian refugees had an expedite and safe passage to these shores instead of her hiding behind self-imposed red tape. But little changes. As for RA and Chelsea. I've yet to see any reasoned, legal explanation as to how the Government believes it has the right to act as it has? There's a raft of legislation to handle breach of financial regulation, proceeds of crime et al yet, so far as I'm aware , RA hasn't been charged with any offence in this country or any with which we have reciprocal arrangements. I've seen no suggestion that Chelsea is implicated in such practice. RA is an Israeli citizen who holds Portuguese nationality, so whilst it's easy to decline him entry here if he's commited no crime (as charged) what right has the UK Government to sanction him as an individual for assets wholly held in the UK? From first hand account he, his ex-wife and family come across as quiet, reserved, considerate types. Maybe he isn't, but I've no evidence to suggest otherwise. To claims he 'stole' or benefitted from the denationalization of Russian state institutions, I've no doubt he did the latter but the former, where's the evidence? Much as with Bill Gates he exploited a naive market and became abundantly rich in the process. As one who regularly travelled to Russia in those days there were many 'opportunities' proffered by state officials looking to feather their own nests (I personally was requested to 'broker' several deals involving substantial bits of 'missing' military hardware on the basis if I was expert at shifting newspapers how difficult could it be for me to offload attack helicopters and munitions?) The 'Special Licence' fiasco this morning is straight from the script of 'Yes Minister' or 'The Thick Of It'. Sledgehammer, knee-jerk policy. Rapid realization of ill-thought and unintended consequence and more reverse ferrets than found on a Mendips coursing expedition. For a Government that's bent over backwards to favour Derby and its corrupt administration, quite how they square their attitude to Chelsea today God only knows?

His health comes first. For now, let's leave it at that.

Land isn't worth that much. Lest not forget MSD get first dibs on £20m+, MM would have to clear the site then gain permission for whatever it is he's thinking of replacing the stadium with. I don't imagine the local authority would be keen to associate themselves with whatever might replace Pride Park......

Sadly, quite a few are already dead.

Actually, it only means The Police believe the person they have charged has a case to answer, not the person DOES have a case to answer. Plenty of convicted Post Office staffs presently fighting this very point, not they were wrongfully convicted rather they should never have been charged in the first place.

No wonder with that type of attitude our railways are ****ed.

They glossed over the fact City weren't playing the most talented centre half they've EVER had, preferring instead to continue with Rodgers once he broke into the side after Collier got crocked against Moscow Dynamo. That's why he left. Tragedy was the move to Cov also 'broke' Collier who quickly decided to start again in The States. For those too young to have seen him play imagine Webster, only twice as good.....

Problems with Royal Mail? They might elaborate such we might also complain on their behalf. As is my Swansea ticket has yet to arrive.....

Nobody nominating Junior at The Swine? Hurtled half the length of the pitch bearing down on us fans to neatly tuck it away and do for them.

You could almost answer this thread with a single player: Matt Smith at The Gills, Micky Mouse Trophy Area Finals. Perfect hat-trick plus a fly-by-wire exocet. Few there to have witnessed but four more exquisitely taken goals in 90 mins I'll never see bettered in a red shirt. Given he was fully deserving of his epithet ' The Wardrobe', utter bewilderment.

And very fine they are good Sir. Best footy scran I've ever enjoyed is a toss-up between the offal brochette in Toulouse else the pissaladiere in Monaco.

Kids today haven't lived. Tuesdays (in the days when certain meat products arrived only on specific days) cycling home from school my mission was to pick up the faggot ingredients from the excellent butchers in West Street. All random sorts of offal plus the caul in which to wrap them. Into the hand grinder at home, wrapped as parcels and steaming hot for supper hours later with mushy peas. Chitterlings, of course, were Thursdays from the pork butcher in North Street. You can stick your quorn where the sun don't shine.

Intrigued by the phrase:'....which will show.....'

Thanks, were the full accounts disclosed?

How do you know this when the last accounts openly published were for the year ending 2018 and elements of those were called into question? Are you privy to the revised accounts supposedly filed with the EFL at the end of January or like the Gibson accord is that not subject to public scrutiny?

Not all, but you are mostly correct. I've never known a squad collectively as poor at retaining possession as the present incumbents.

He did play, in Hong Kong, but by then even only 30 he was well past it. Few seem to wish to accept with these players City were already hurtling over the cliff, they were either past it or never were to have it. We've had loads of talented players over the years who for injury or sometimes just age, lose that they once had overnight.

I forget the stats but The Price Of Football has highlighted for seasons that all Championship clubs, bar the odd exception, are financial basket cases. City a basket case that never even made The Premier.

Oh dear, oh dear.... I've covered this umpteen times before but as you appear not to have understood, here are the facts (as evidenced by the court transcripts that Scally published:) Pulis, as manager at The Gills, undertook a number of childish and personally vindictive actions that would normally have seen him instantly dismissed for gross misconduct. This culminated in him threatening to 'blackmail' Scally ahead of The Gills play-off final against Man City. Scally had nothing to hide and already had Pulis' measure. A few months earlier Pulis attended for interview at both City and Stoke, without Scally's permission or either club approaching The Gills for permission, contrary to EFL regulation. Pulis met the City directors at one of their homes and later that evening he was entertained by City at a restaurant in Park St. Pulis attended Stoke the following day. For the whole of his trip Pulis claimed expenses from The Gills stating he was out 'scouting players'. Scally sacked Pulis for misconduct who knew that was coming his way and walked straight into the role he'd already lined up at City. Arriving at City his first action was, knowing he had City over a barrel over their illegal approach, to look to renegotiate the deal City thought they'd agreed. Specifically, and as Pulis had tried to do at The Gills, he demanded a significant cut of all transfers out of the club. At The Gills Scally had agreed (I think it was 20%) profit made in developing a player (there it was limited to players signed by and disposed of by Pulis ). Scally honoured that in all transactions. Pulis attempted to claim monies on players already at the club when he arrived and also on kids coming through the academy ranks, both of which were excluded in his contract. He claimed likewise at City, who were reluctant to agree but who didn't want their illegal approach exposed. Recall at both clubs Pulis' first day in charge saw him enter the dressing room informing all players he thought they were rubbish and didn't figure in his long-term plans. Nothing to do with quality, everything to do with him turning a personal buck. Thereafter ensued 'The Great Bristolian Pen Crisis'. Pulis never did sign a contract with City, he was never their employee, his company retained on a consultancy basis. One might argue he was never City's manager. As soon as the opportunity arose to offload 'bad trouble' City did so, to Pompey where he deployed the same tactic. Recall, to the end, City denied ever having made an illegal approach. Much later Pulis issued proceedings against both The Gills and Scally personally for sums he claimed were outstanding. His claims were not supported by the LMA nor the EFL. They knew Scally had agreed to settle in the sums owed under his contract, but not those to which Pulis wished himself entitled. On the second day of the High Court trial there was an interesting twist. Against what is normal practice Scally's counsel asked Pulis who was underwriting his expensive, personal action? Pulis at first declined to answer but the Judge ruled it was to be answered as it was material to a test of Pulis' character and motives. Reluctantly, Pulis informed the cost of his action was being funded by Bristol City FC, a company with which he had no association, for whom he had never been an employee and who had no material interest in the case. Later, and after a character destruction of Pulis by Scally's counsel, the Judge suggested to Pulis' counsel they might wish to have a discussion with their client and, post lunch, Pulis withdrew his action. The Judge's comments in reminding Pulis was also claiming damage to reputation and as to evidenced demonstrations of his character already disclosed in court could not have been more scathing. Outside the court even the LMA were desperate to dissociate themselves from their member. Though Scally later threatened to sue both City and Stoke for costs incurred in defending actions they, not Pulis, had funded, I don't believe the cases ever materialized. Much like Randy Andy I believe Sexstone confirmed City had settled the matter out of court and 'in confidence', without admitting any wrongdoing. I did ask Steve Lansdown when he took over to confirm, given my shareholder interest, whether Pulis had repaid all costs in respect of the action? I was told to mind my own business, that it was history and should be forgotten. As an aside I, many years ago it must be said, occasionally used to drink with Scally. Fascinating character, decent, humerous bloke and brilliant story as to how he, a diehard 'Wall' fanatic, came to buy The Gills (he had no interest until approached.) Interesting that given all the issues City now suffer, the reason The Gills fans took against Scally was simply because he bought a failing business, had no interest in throwing his money away and transformed a nigh-on bankrupt club into one that for many years turned him a decent profit, if not with major success on the park. Fans hated he wouldn't push on by buying the type of players they wanted but wouldn't themselves fund.

Spot-on, save for the final sentence. City paid far over the odds for KP who in reality was never worth half that City coughed up for him. City made it an expensive purchase, wholly different from him being an expensive asset. He doesn't play because in the type of side City may now put out he's little more than a liability. Bloke cedes possession for fun.

History shows that most Championship clubs have occasionally won the gamble taken (though be careful for that you wish.) City are one of a very select band who have shown themselves to be reckless and clueless punters.

Like most in The Championship City didn't have an assured business model. Like all mug punters they gambled and lost. Covid is a red herring, it cost City last year between £8m -£9m. City signed dozens upon dozens of players, mostly crap, all costing far in excess of what they were worth, remunerated at eye-watering rates beyond that City could afford. That's City problem, nothing else. Routinely paying more in salaries than you take in turnover, what might possibly go wrong?

The Swede was the only one of the 3 who had the ability to beat players and cross the ball, which he always did out wide, rarely troubling the box. The other two couldn't beat their own proverbial, rarely enter the box and in CoD's case results either in a corner (major success) though normally sees the ball fly high and beyond the dead ball line. Even this season when the likes of Semenyo have broken into the box it doesn't help the ball's invariably yards away from his control. There's no conspiracy against us. We don't get pens because we don't create enough of those opportunities for them to be given and as I written elsewhere, our propensity to fall over in a light breeze everywhere on the park creates a reputation that negates decisions when deserved.

From both an accounts/tax perspective and also EFL's F&S /FFP I'd love to understand the logic how verified assets may be purchased/transferred at discount. After all, that was the point in Derby concocting the inflated DRC 'market' (sic) value in the first place.

Yet another utterly meaningless, faux correlation. What has 'big chances' (whatever they) to do with penalties being awarded? Nothing is the answer. Here's why: Contrast two sides, one with pacy, tricky forwards who create chances by breaking quickly into their opponents box tantalizing defences. The other, a huge team of lumps, who mostly score when they send the tall blokes up for corners and free kicks. Which of those is more likely to be involved in penalty incidents? City haven't had tricky and pacy wide men for years, nor nimble forwards in the box. We don't get awarded penalties because we rarely get ourselves into a position to be fouled in the box. Beyond me why folks are unable to comprehend the difference between correlation and causation.