Chrysalis

I do agree with you for what its worth, not sure why people are blaming players for tactical problems. After the game Enzo should be telling everyone dont pass to the keeper when there is a striker right in front of him, and especially when the keeper is right in front of the goal.

How come? I dont think I have ever been bothered about someone's opinion on the team to whack my head against the rule. Its a game and people have opinions.

Is there a problem with sacking managers, you seem to consider it something that shouldn't be done? Maybe we should have kept Holloway on and never employed Nigel, and keeping Rodgers on for so long was a masterstroke. Edited your post for correctness, but if you have proof of the original claims for the running of LCFC feel free to post it. Not saying you are wrong in how he ran our club, but I would like to see at least a little bit of something to indicate it.

Sadly people wont get it. It was a pointless move to attempt, as he was going to kick it long anyway, unless the manager thinks the defender was incapable of doing the same kick, it was a risk with no reward move.

Just seen the goal we conceded in last game, no point passing back to the keeper like that for him to do what the defender could have done himself. It reminds me of when Arsenal under Wenger had a penalty taker pass it to another player to try and get a fancy goal and it all went tits up, Wenger stated afterwards he told his players to not attempt that again.

Also remember his interview after sacking Holloway, he said his emotions ultimately led to the decision, he was hurt as the rest of us.

I dont have an issue with Mandaric's reign, he put his soul into the club, and even started liquidating his other assets to fund us. He did something right to get the club in a state to be attractive to buy as well.

Only 2 goals, but we still won, its working.

Would you be ok with your child using pay day loans to fund their day to day living costs? of course not. These loans are taken out to fund LCFC standard operating costs, this is not good finance. The only businesses I am aware of that operate in this way I would put in one of the following categories. 1 - Not financially healthy, of course this applies to a lot of UK businesses, we have a high rate of turnover of businesses in this country. PLC makes it super easy to write off liabilities. Setup new PLC, transfer assets, liquidate old one, clear old liabilities. 2 - Owner doesnt have the means to inject cash otherwise, so borrow to grow. (better option to sell equity). 3 - Owner doesnt want to inject cash at which point you question their commitment to the business. #1 and #3 are often a prerequisite to company liquidation. KP lending money directly for infrastructure to LCFC is ok, Using this variable rate commercial third party loan to fund wages and other operating costs is just dodgy (and expensive) finance. The cost of the interest I expect is shrugged off as a non issue, like the rest of the 200m. To me its quite simple, either the owner puts up the cash (director loan or equity), or we dont spend the money.

Outside of LCFC supporters seems to be a lot, pretty much all the big 4 fans think its fairness, but even many outside of that fanbase.

I am surprised at the reaction to the changes, and the general support to the existing FFP. A surprisingly high amount of football supporters think the current FFP genuinely makes the game fairer. Whilst what it actually does is entrench an advantage to clubs with higher turnover. For this reason I consider the luxury tax a step forward, it actually will allow social mobility in football, Man City been able to compete is an example of that, if it was them or Chelsea the top division would be dominated by Arsenal, Manchester United and Liverpool right now. Same thing different clubs, but for those clubs people consider it more legitimate simply because they are buying their current success with past success. They just have huge turnover from foreign sales, and sponsorship deals (made possible by their favourable TV coverage). The ultimate FFP would be a flat spend limit whether its a squad spend limit or a salary cap, but the sport refuses to go down that road even though other sports have done it successfully. Even with that the big clubs would of course have an advantage as so many players will always want to play for them, but that isnt enough, they want as big an advantage as possible. I can understand fans of Liverpool, Arsenal, and Manchester United supporting the current FFP, but everyone else? it crazy. We need to remove profit/loss/turnover from FFP. Nothing wrong with factoring in external debt, but allow social mobility in football. -- Let me put it this way which will hopefully sound stupid and highlight the point. If Luton decide to spend the same as Liverpool apparently this is unfair on Liverpool and cheating.

Its common for rich owners who have no issue injecting cash to lend money directly, not so common for them to take out expensive 3rd party loans, there is a huge difference between the two. Its good you recognise KP might not have the appetite anymore, as you said the evidence is there with both the external loans and Top having to supply money personally.

This is on another level on the press coverage, many people dont even know we even did that FFP deal.

That first year or two, Top was on the news a lot about the decisions he was making and that his Dad let him do what he was doing, I think when we went back to Pearson is when his dad was taking more control and falling in love with the club in his own right. Also the FFP in the championship is not comparable, we were never formally charged, and we had setup some stuff to inflate our income This time we didnt do that, and have a huge clear failure.

Hello Ostrich.

Playoffs are great, if we finish 3rd and dont go up, it is what it is, it was and still is in our hands.

Looks like not nominated for EFL manager of season.

Reads as if you scared to upset KP.

Arsenal, Liverpool, Manchester United, Spurs wont be liking this, they are the ones who want PSR based on turnover and sporting punishments as it preserves their advantage. Luxury tax rule allows everyone else to become a Man City. Luckily it can be voted in without them, the bad news is we not in the EPL to now take advantage of this. If EFL doesnt adopt the same rule, then it will become harder to stay up after promotion. But this makes it easier for existing smaller EPL clubs to challenge the big ones and to stay in the EPL.

I think if the EPL next season we looking at 6 points, 2 seasons breaches 6 points each. But the 2nd set I think would be applied the 2nd EPL season unless they add some rule changes to allow cross division charges. EFL I think depends if they able to charge us for this season alongside next which would then be 12. This is assuming the penalty isnt some sliding scale based on the size of the breach, otherwise its a mockery that a club breaching but avoiding admin, is losing more points than one that does.

Yeah the 3 year rotation makes it a multi season thing if you have really bad seasons. Will take some doing to balance that loss out, I think next season which will still have the 2 really bad seasons in there will be a non compliance, but when one of the two drops out if by then we have really trimmed the fat we might avoid a 3rd breach.

Any news your side on this potential joint legal battle against FFP?

I think if anyone tried in the ground they would get overloaded with pressure to stop. I think the owners even with these figures are likely to have a majority support. I think most will accept TOP's statement, combined with Whelan's comments that Top is assuring the club isnt liquidated, and Whelan says it is just down to lower than expected results in one single season, they will be rallied by the legal action and blame it all on the football authorities.

Am I allowed to watch.

I voted they all have to go. However if Top made a statement on the website or live to the press, admitting he has got it wrong, he will now take day to day interest in the club and immediately fire both Whelan, Rudkin and anyone else who had their finger in the decision making, it would at least show recognition he has ****ed it. So in that circumstance I would give him another chance, I strongly think though this wont be the case hence me wanting new ownership. The only rationale I can get from Seagrave as that has been given some thought by me as well is either (a) they thought it would stop players wanting to leave (nicer training environment, big club type environment), or (b) they expected it to improve the squad whilst not putting world class coaches in there. I have it in vanity project category. As we seen at Manchester United, Newcastle, Brighton, Chelsea and some other clubs, upper management overhauls only tend to happen under an ownership change. So I think the most likely outcome at this point is if Top stays, Whelan and Rudkin both stay.