Might have needed to be a later kickoff due to Hertha flying over? Could be something in the competition rules, dunno. If not, it's just dumb.

That's not true at all. There have definitely been times he was particularly good. When he first came through he looked like he was going to the top, and he's had patches of fine form. The problem is consistency. This season though he seems to have regressed when you'd expect improvement, and as much as I've defended him in the past, he needs to improve to be worthy of more than occasional cameos at present. I don't think the bulking up he seems to have done has helped. He's a bit stronger but he's a bit slower too. He was never particularly fast over long distances, but he did have a good burst of pace and change of direction. That's diminished a bit and hampered his ability to beat a man properly. Small margins make a big difference. His loss of form is down to more than just that though, he really hasn't been on it all season.

The problem I have with that is we weren't the underdogs. I believe the bookies had us as favourites.

You don't really need to ask that question, do you?

I dunno how some plastic bin liners could possibly cost thousands at this scale. If they did, you can't expect him to source plastic seats for a couple quid each. Obviously not a shrewd operator. The crazy thing is the easiest way to save money would have been to just not do it at all. It would have stayed totally under the radar. Instead he's spent money to score an own goal.

John Williams always said he knew we could charge whatever to the diehard core, but also knew that wasn't the right way to grow the fanbase. Waggott has no such understanding, or if he does then he simply doesn't care.

If only you had some sort of ability to edit it...

Came here to say this. 4 league goals and an assist in 6 games (501 minutes). Last season, 5 league goals and 2 assists in 34 games (2,178 minutes). Should be nailed on to beat last season's tally, and you'd hope we can get at least 10 league goals out of him this season now. If he can get Dack-like numbers, but adds pressing intensity and fitness reliability (fingers crossed) then it vindicates management's decision to let Dack go. Of course, if there's an injury we're hugely reliant on Moran.

I wish I couldn't remember them.

Depends on what you're putting it relative to. Relative to the league he now plays in, yes it's pretty poor.

I'm not convinced he'd have stood out as someone with a good grasp of the media by having been Academy Manager at Glimt. But I agree he does quite a good job with the media given the circumstances.

Agreed, important we start being able to at least utilise him off the bench soon. This squad will be too stretched otherwise. Also good to see Telalovic notch a hat trick. I know it's only Rochdale (probably their B team) but he's clearly not struggling adapting to his new environment, and scored more than our other youth team option for the first team, Leonard. I was a bit disappointed that Ennis didn't feature though, clearly gonna be a bit longer for him than Siggy.

Behind closed doors friendly with Rochdale, we won 9-2. Not strictly the U21s but plenty of young players. 3 goals from Telalovic, 2 from Leonard, 1 each from Markanday ('top corner screamer'), Garrett, Zack Stritch and Nsangou. 60 minutes for Telalovic and James Hill. 30 minutes for Sigurdsson, 45 minutes for JRC.

I mean, that requires further evidence. A dodgy personal property declaration doesn't mean they're committing wide scale fraud on our accounts too.

We've been losing more than that for years. We typically lose about 15-20 million each season, and until the last two seasons the result has mainly been treading water and not threatening the playoffs (plus that season we got relegated to League One before bouncing straight back). The Championship is awash with clubs making huge losses. It's an insane league distorted by the Prem treasure being in touching distance. Eh, for a freebie and probably not huge wages, I'd take scoring loads of goals but only being available 40% of the time. That's very unlikely btw. Unless your offer was a bit of a joke. If you offered him any more than 2.5k p/w, I shouldn't think we've quadrupled it. A google says your highest paid player is on 5k p/w, with another on 4k and one on 3.5k...with his record (injuries included) surely he was offered at least 2.5k? I'd be surprised if he's on any more than 8k p/w here tbh.

As far as I can see, he's never played full back. So I expect if there's an injury crisis, it's more likely he plays CB whilst Carter goes to RB.

The Spanish second tier is particularly poor, a lower standard than the Championship. I doubt he'd want to drop to that level just to learn Spanish easier. He could just hire a tutor if he's that desperate.

You posted yesterday. The last post before yours in here was the day before. Doesn't matter now though.

In the hope that financial ruin means they stop owning us. It's a gamble, as to what comes next if that happens, but I can see why people want to take it. They've not covered us in glory, much the opposite. It would be very tough to find a buyer if they wanted even half the debt back, although financial ruin might force them to accept a lot less. Or make them more likely to insist on more, which could ultimately mean administration and points deductions (but still a fresh start). But I doubt either the financial ruin or the sale will be happening. More likely we'll just continue to have strangled transfer budgets and continue to downgrade.

I don't know what they are, just going off the terminology Nixon used in his article. If he believes them to be tax authorities, that would be why he has used that title. Ok, illegally filling out forms then. I didn't mean to imply it was just a 'whoopsy daisy'.

Maybe because it's the tax authorities doing the seizing, as it will be tax forms that were filled in incorrectly?

So basically it sounds like Venkys bought Alexander House for a little over 6 million (the article seems to have confused the monetary conversion, I got a figure closer to Den's, and articles show the property was up for sale at that sort of price). I remember reports about them buying it at the time. The problem, it sounds like, is they declared in their Indian taxes that it would be used for agriculture and mining purposes (mining apparently meaning rearing ducks and hens), presumably so they could write it off as a business expense over in India, as it could be attributed to their main businesses based there. Of course, it never was, as it was just a pleasure house bought for when they visited the UK or to entertain guests, friends and clients. This sort of thing has clearly pissed the Indian authorities off, who have previously been reported a few years ago as having seized Venkys property in raids which if I recall rightly were linked to tax irregularities, and they've seized an equivalent value of properties to this latest irregularity. 6 millionish quid doesn't seem like a lot to the V's in the scheme of things, so why would it affect our funds? But keep in mind this seizure only happened on Monday. We heard Venkys and the Indian government were in talks for a while. Clearly those talks didn't go Venkys' way, but in the meantime they may have agreed (perhaps to show willing) or been forced to withhold UK investment until the matter was settled. Whether this means it's over for now as far as Rovers not being able to receive funding remains to be seen. But this is my interpretation of what's being said and happened, with a little reading between the lines. The property issue itself doesn't sound as drastic as is being made out. I don't see any links to money laundering issues (not that that couldn't also be the case, but I think that'd be in the report), just most likely an attempt to evade paying the proper taxes on a personal property by making it a business expense and/or using business funds instead of their own to buy it. Modi's government have a real hard on about foreign investment, so it's no surprise they'd try to make a statement with this. This all makes more sense now than the claims the money was held back because of the new tax laws that don't kick in til October.

Think you've miscounted the incoming there, it's 7 in, not 8.

Not sure where that definition has come from, but I've always considered a crock to be someone who is prone to injury, not just currently injured.