Exactly. He'll be open to everything as he won't want to appear negative about whatever he ends up with. He'll know that there's a chance that both will resign and he will have no real say in the matter, so why would he want to be on record saying that he didn't really want them? He'll have seen what happened to JDT. He's here to be a yes man and he'll be fantastic at it - it's the only part of the job description that really matters at this point.

I do think it impacts the overall market though. Clubs higher up are less likely to make moves until the tournament is over and that has a knock-on effect on clubs lower down. We won't know exactly which players are available on loan or on less expensive deals and even smaller clubs that we might be buying from will be holding out to see how the market develops once the tournament has wrapped up. You can see that there's been very little transfer movement across the league.

There are a couple of factors that do play into that though. Southgate acknowledged early on in his tenure that the focus was being on defensively solid as they'd analysed previous tournament winners and identified that defensive teams tended to do better. What bothers me slightly about him is that he isn't sticking to his guns and driving that point home when facing criticism. The other issues that he faces are that the overall quality of international football has rapidly improved over the last 20 years and most teams are struggling to play expansive football. The football has been awful and his refusal to make substations before the 70th minute or bring in more in-form players are both definitely a problem, but he has still turned England from a side that never really got past the quarterfinals into a team that now consistently makes the latter stages of tournaments. France have been worse to watch, but their players and French supporters as a whole have accepted that the be-all and end-all are the results. There are no medals for playing pretty football and losing in the quarterfinals and people will forget boring football when you're lifting the trophy on July 14th.

Doubt it, he has much the same image as Southgate - although he's missing all of the benefit of the culture change. France are just as negative and he's not much love in France, but he is respected for the success that he has brought. He may get a gig somewhere in Ligue 1, but he wouldn't be hired anywhere else.

But it wasn't a quick sale. All of the reports suggest that it was agreed to weeks ago and that we've waited some time down to the player deciding and, most likely, so that it falls within a new financial reporting period. Lots of reasons to be critical of sales and how money is being used, but we don't have to go full conspiracy theory on everything.

No, it won't. Even if he goes on to be a future England captain, no one will go that overboard about a player with under 20 Premier League starts to his name. There are a lot of criticisms that can be leveled at Southgate so far and this is on course to be a disappointingly defining final note to his England managerial career, but Wharton is not one of the main characters. Why do England sit back after taking the lead? Why do they not move the ball forward with pace? Why does he continue to think that Bellingham is the best option in the 10 spot? These are all major questions that are far bigger than the Wharton factor.

A bit of creativity in their tax returns and exploring tax avoidance is one thing, taking on an asset that is guaranteed to lose money year after year because...?

He makes more mistakes than he makes good saves. His mistakes are also worse than his good saves are good.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20240419IPR20586/new-eu-rules-to-combat-money-laundering-adopted Sadly, it will have zero impact on us. But it might impact some of the agents that we used to do business with...

It doesn't require quite as much effort in India at the moment.

There have been users on here who have been very on top of the financial side of things from basically the get-go. The same users who do a thorough breakdown of our financial statements each year and have also looked into Venky's statements. There have been no surprises on that front for years.

It's possible, but I think the much more likely explanation is that they originally believed that owning an English football club would be a great status symbol and good for their brand. It then turned out to be a lot harder than they had expected - and probably been sold - and now they're too proud and stubborn to admit defeat when it 'only' costs them £20 million a year. That still isn't good news for us and it might mean that they'd prefer to see us going out of business over selling us to someone else, but the conspiracy theories seem a bit of a stretch. The only one that has ever made a slight bit of sense to me is the possibility that the actual ownership of the club might not be as clearcut as originally thought, but I still struggle to believe that this would be dragging on for over a decade with very little tangible benefit to anyone.

It's an interesting combination of statements. This conspiracy theory never manages to explain why. There are easier ways to do everything you're alleging they're doing through Blackburn Rovers - and they could do them through less high-profile means. Not to mention why they would go to through all of that effort, as billionaires, to do some dodgy accounting on 20 million a year. We are a rounding error in their finances. They're incompetent, stubborn, and awful owners, but almost certainly nothing more.

I think they're negligent and incompetent, but no one is going to be able to explain to me why billionaires would be so concerned with putting £20 million a year through a business for any nefarious purposes.

Fair, although you can probably throw one of those matches against Belgium out (the group game where both played weakened sides).

You post a lot, sometimes I can't scroll that far. And no, I don't really think about something that I love being the greatest - or not greatest - in the world. If I'm being honest, that feels like quite a childish way of framing something. I appreciate that my passion for the club is subjective and it is impossible to apply objective standards to it.

No, you just post a lot, so you appear on every thread. I didn't exactly have to seek you out, just didn't agree with a bunch of things that you said.

Just a spam bot.

I do think that would change slightly now because of the prevalence of foreign managers in the Premier League and the fact that current players will be so much more used to dealing with managers and coaches who are not totally fluent English speakers, but that's only been the case for the last 5 years or so.

and he didn't do very well...

Yeah, because we're only talking about a manager who's been in charge for 3 major tournaments and made it to the QF, SF, and final. Let's start your list off by removing any manager who doesn't speak fluent English. Then remove managers who would have never taken the job in the first place (Ferguson was never going to be England manager). Oh, and then remove any managers who have disgraced themselves or would have disgraced the job (for example, remove Allardyce from your list after what he did). If you can then get to 500 managers, send me the list and I'll send you 500 pounds.

Top 500 potential England managers? Yes, absolutely.

Hard to take this even remotely seriously.

If I were betting on it I would say that Szmodics will still be playing for us when this window closes. It's unfortunate for him, but he's just a little too old to attract serious interest - unless we are desperate enough to sell at a relatively low price (5-10m).

Because Southampton paid 13/14m for Lavia from City. He was an extremely highly regarded prospect with Premier League experience. Wharton may well ended up being the better player, but there are huge differences in their CVs at the time that they were sold.