ClaphamFox

The prime minister - whoever it is - has to make a statement to MPs by 21 January if no deal has been agreed with the EU. MPs would then have the opportunity to vote on the government's plan to leave without a deal and although that vote would not be legally binding, it would be very difficult to ignore politically. At the same time, if no deal is agreed by early next year, markets are likely to tank, the business community will be up in arms and public opinion is very likely to be heavily against leaving without a deal. It would be highly unlikely that the government would push ahead with no deal under those circumstances. If it tried to, there could be a vote of no confidence in the government in parliament (which would be joined by many Tory MPs) and the government would collapse, which would trigger an election. To avoid this, the government would be likely to agree to a second referendum. As things stand, I think the most likely outcomes are, in order: 1. An amended version of May's deal being approved 2. A 2nd referendum 3. Leaving without a deal* *with 3 being a very remote possibility.

I’m beginning to think that the deal might get through after all. The one thing that Brexiteer MPs fear more than anything else is a second referendum – they know it could well go against them and if it does there will be no Brexit. They also know that getting rid of May could easily result in a second referendum. If they’re offered enough of a compromise on the Irish backstop that enables them to vote for the deal without losing face, they may well take up that option. However it seems very likely the DUP will NOT vote for the deal, which will leave the government dependent on support from Labour rebels in leave constituencies.

There is a strong possibility that the nation no longer wants to leave the EU, so the only truly democratic thing to do is to have another vote and see.

It's all heading inexorably towards a second referendum. The deal May has obtained from the EU is highly unlikely to get through parliament, at which point she will either resign or get pushed out. She will probably be replaced by a more 'hard Brexit' PM, who will fail to win any concessions from the EU, at which point it will look like we are leaving with no deal. However, the large majority of MPs are strongly against a no-deal Brexit, as is the business community and, increasingly, the public. There will be huge pressure on parliament to block a hard Brexit, which it will do one way or another (there are various ways this could happen). At which point the only way out of this horrible mess will be to go back and ask the electorate again, possibly with three options this time (no deal, May deal or remain).

It can't go on forever. It has to stop at some point, and now seems as good a time as any. The players have made their point. Time to move on.

This would be perfect.

If ever there was a time to rise above and ignore cheap comments from utter tools, this is probably it.

It's interesting to see so many people wanting to rush Soyuncu into the team. He played for the under-23s yesterday and was apparently awful - nowhere near close to the first team yet.

Actually the club keeps phoning me up every ten minutes or so to update me on this situation. I wish they'd stop - it's getting bloody annoying.

The Manchester Evening News is predicting that Pogba and Lukaku will start tonight.

But how would we fit them in when we've already got both Wilfred and Ndidi already as defensive midfielders?

It’s been said before, but it’s worth repeating: if Drinkwater had never played for us, and was just another ageing, injury-prone Chelsea reject who had previously enjoyed a couple of good seasons at – let’s say - Southampton, how many Leicester fans would want him? Not many. Most would regard it as an unambitious and uninspiring move. So why do so many people apparently think otherwise? Sentiment. And sentiment should play no part whatsoever in choosing our squad players for this season.

He was very good in the Championship season alongside James. But that was in the Championship. He was also very effective in the Premier League-winning season, but he benefited enormously having Kante alongside him, who did the work of two men. Personally I'm not remotely convinced he'll be anywhere near as effective again now that he's older, more injury-prone and will not have Kante alongside him to take on a significant proportion of his workload (Ndidi is excellent, but not the same as Kante). It may occasionally work out very well when players go back to previous clubs, but I can't think of many examples. More likely it will be completely underwhelming and taint our memory of how he was before. I think we should steer well clear.

I nominate you to be the laureate of foxestalk!

It's basically the model for any team that isn't challenging for domestic titles and playing in the Champions League. The best players will only see us as their ultimate destination (as opposed to a stop along the way) if we're consistently in the top 4/5 in the Premier League and are playing regularly in the Champions League.

There's should be but in many cases there isn't. The freedom to self-publish opinions on the internet seems to have been delivered with a toxic combination of monstrous egotism and extraordinary sensitivity.

In the modern age of social media, criticism equates to hate and disagreement is tantamount to abuse.

You can imagine the conversation: Mourinho: Claude! Jose here. I've just heard you've signed Januzaj from Real Sociedad. Congratulations! One thing, though - we don't want you to play him against us on Friday. Understood? Puel: Sure, Jose! No problem whatsoever. Consider it done.

Who on earth do you think we can get that would be as good as Mahrez?

Yes. We are the David Watts of football clubs.

They have lower standards than us.

Agreed. And the same goes for players of every other team. If they don't want 'em, why should we?

When considering whether we'd like a former player to return, it's useful to ask: would we want him if he had no prior association with the club? If Drinkwater hadn't previously played for us but was being linked with us now, I think the vast majority of fans would be moaning about our lack of ambition in going for an injury-prone Chelsea reject. Nostalgia is an understandable emotion, but it should be eliminated completely from player recruitment decisions.

It's a major 'if' though, isn't it? He's been injury-prone for a long time and is approaching the end of his career at the top level. We'd risk wasting a sizable chunk of the wage budget on somebody who spends their whole time in the treatment room. Too much of a risk.

If he ever considered it even a remote possibility that he would be a regular starter for Chelsea, then I can only salute his extraordinary capacity for self-delusion.