turtmcfly

Bizarrely no-footed. Just wtf stuff. And O'Hora... Christ. "Please just give it to Okoli" is not something I would have imagine ever thinking

You not being arsed if Man City broke rules you describe as 'specifically designed to pull the ladder up after themselves because "we don't want too many Leicester Citys."' is hmmmm inducing. By definition it would relate to rules formed from mid-2016, which couldn't realistically have come into play until 2017, which would mean they a) only cover one of the nine seasons the charges relate to and b) would be rules Man City were themselves responsible for framing as one of the 'Big Six willy pullers', a group anyone unfamiliar with English football might come away from your post thinking they absolutely weren't a member of. A minor point this, but your logic as regards the bit in bold doesn't follow through here either AFAICS, unless you're imagining a situation where it was the players/head coach who were match-fixing, or paying off referees, or doing a spot of 'corruption' (whatever that means in the light of 10 years of 'rule breaking of evil rules some of which were their own rules' obviously not being classed as corruption). It seems to me you are allowing for a club to 'belong in the bin' in cases where the playing staff specifically were innocent of charges applicable to the club management.

OK, but his deal signed was signed two owners and three years before the Abu Dhabi Group bought Man City (and four years before the first season to which the 115 charges relate)

Bit lost with the implication here, at least as it relates to the possibility Richards had knowledge of 'what was going on at Man City'. Struggling to see the thought processes he might/should have used after the initial '**** me that's a lot of money'.

Wouldn't want to give the impression the article isn't real, but I always forget the twat's name is Jon not John. Trying to edit the original and I've posted it twice now. Worracock

.

Oh aye. Your laptop makes you type absolute shite and post it half a dozen times

Oh, I know. I'm not treating as anything other than gossip. Not even got a name attached. Was just a bit out of the blue and the 'already signed' bit was what weirded me out.

No, I don't think so either! Was joking with my mate and he passed it on to the journalist.

Just had a weird message from someone I know in the footy world, who is in regular contact with a well known footy journalist. Says journo is suggesting we've already signed a manager . When I asked who: "He doesn’t know. Said it’s someone out of work & been offered a fortune to come?" The latter bit certainly sounds like us. I suggested Southgate as a pretty much worst case option and journo has come back with 'wow what a good thought'. It is not, in fact, a good thought at all, so I think that shows he is a journalist. I realise the above sounds like pretty bizarre bait but it's true, honest.

You'd like to think it would have forced their hand. But you're still left with a setup that thought it was a good idea to spend nearly all of that £22m buying Oliver Bleeding Skipp. Vardy leaving doesn't fix that. I fear the counterfactual outcome would have been Jordan Ayew signed for £15m

Sticking Fofana (uncaveated!) in with those PL title winners is mental. Read thru his thread on here. He had a handful of world class 90s, but also multiple stretches of being decidedly average for 2 or 3 games at a time. Yes, he looked like Nijinsky (geezer or horse) had taken up football (struggling to think of a more aesthetically easy on the eye player) but that plus others' remonstrations about the level he would have reached (beyond world class?) had he not got injured (reader, he got injured) doesn't move the dial anywhere near enough.

This is a world class exaggeration, parlayed from the many confident assertions at the time that he would go on to be world class.

That's a hell of a benchmark to base a 'problem solved' comment on

Presumably thinks we've won it* and saving him for Friday. * yes, I know

It's like Rowett had a 2pm alarm set. No scoreline was going to alter his pre-planned 'subs on at 70' call

Don't blame you for forgetting Winks is playing

How many touches had Winks had?

Five more and we win

Not arguing there hasn't been 'guidance' in the past, but is there any evidence that even after King left they're dictating that we must lose playing a specific style?

...and at the same time, oppo teams seem to score a goal for every five attacking moves

I'm not being flippant when I say 'being a yes man' will be top of Rudkin's requirement list for any new senior personnel, now more than ever.

If you come on after 70 minutes, at the very least half the opposition outfield players will be in an advanced stage of shagged-outness, and the others will usually be worse players than the shagged out ones they replaced. This seems so obvious to me it must be wrong, but AFAICS I watched Demarai Gray prove it.