urban fox

I was talking to somebody who claimed to know Vardy and he is adamant that he will go either MLS or Como. Probably BS but that's where my money would be on. Can't see him going to another championship side or any PL club taking him at his age.

No. Under 16 so cannot be under any contract. Can do whatever he likes and we get absolutely nothing. All we can hope is that he is still here on his 16th birthday and we get him to sign a proper academy contract.

Are the Storey family still owners of Pukka pies? They were also directors of the club in the early 2000s.

Yep. Failed the medical, deal called off. He scored a hattrick in his next game for liverpool

Thought Ruud said yesterday that he would be? Perhaps he's been a naughty boy and sent to bed early by his mum

The lad is still just a kid. Occasionally someone will make a breakthrough at a very young age but it is rare. Even our own Emile Heskey was 17 when he made his debut but he was a big strong unit even that age. As much as I would like to see him get minutes, I wouldn't expect too much from him. the first time he tries any tricks he will most likely get battered. physicality is where most of these so called wonderkids are let down.

How? Only if the obligation is not contingent on meeting certain criteria such as promotion or a certain number of appearances. No money can be accounted for until the criteria are met as the obligation doesn't exist until they are.

We haven't turned anything concrete down. Their first proposal was a straight loan deal. They came back with a loan with option/obligation which no doubt was based on certain criteria being met (most likely promotion). With no guarantee of an actual sale why would we let a squad player in a position we need reinforcements in go unless we can get a better replacement in, which would cost us money we can't spend under psr.

Just remember when we signed a certain CB in January who couldn't even get into stokes side. Not saying he is in the same class as Huth, but he is not bad.

It's close The tort of negligence requires three tests. 1. A duty of care was owed 2. The duty of care was breached. 3. Harm was caused as a direct result of the breach of the duty of care. In this case, any damages would hinge on proving 2. If indeed there were "fundamental design errors and a failure to mitigate known risks", then there is certainly a case that there was indeed a breach of the duty of care owed to ensure that their product was safe by design and construction when used in the proper manner. The latter is not in doubt as the pilots were fully qualified and, exonerated by the enquiry. As for 1 and 3, there is no debate.

I have one word. HUTH.

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of decisions made, appointments etc etc. those that think the chair or board of directors have any responsibility towards the fans knows nothing about company law. The only responsibility they have is to the shareholders, and to a lesser extent, in the case of a football club, to the rules of whatever league/competition they compete in. This is simply a hard fact like it or not. Morally, it may be wrong in terms of history and culture etc but that's life. People can protest and cry about it all they like but ultimately it makes no difference. If you feel that strongly, the only way to really bring about change is to buy enough shares to entitle a meaningful vote at the agm etc. Football clubs ARE businesses, and companies, not some sort of heritage charity run by groups of well meaning volunteers. If you don't like the product, don't buy it. There are plenty of others that will.

Fees caught wrong side of his man in the six yard box. Awful

That's probably the best 11 we an put out at the minute

The argument as to whether or not we were a efl or PL team is not relevent. The rule says the deduction will not apply if the club were an efl team during the SEASON to which the accouning period t-1 refers. We successfully argued we were not a PL club, having given up our share, however we had played that season in the PL not the efl. If we rely on this defence, the current accounts will become t-1 next year and those accounts include the season that we played in the efl. We may still need to curb spending for at least the next two years until the current year drops out of the calculation. Whilst the rules are a mess, one catastrophic year can mean three years of being unable to invest without major sales for any team other than those with the most revenue.