cyrusr

Dammit Tony! I was just about to answer your damn riddle and you update it! How dare you! Anyway what I was going to say.... From what's happened today: {(Ayew - (Taylor + cash) + 2 back up options at left back if it falls through) of which 1 is bought (and against the maths he does earlier - should have been a minus at the start and then a plus. How dare he not follow his own rules!} + (Tishbola out + Westwood out (!) + another out) + surprise signing + Bedeau (the bury centre back). You could swap the 2 in and 2 out potentials on % as no real idea how close; and as some have said Bedeau could not be in the equation (given Tony is not following him anymore). So potential surprise signing in: Rhodes Hogan Messi Ulloa Benteke Hernandez The mystery box! not got a clue who the likely other out though there's a few choices still... Tomorrow should be fun at least!

Considering where it was is a stone's throw from my house I am somewhat annoyed that it doesn't exist now.......

Talk? What talk? Would be pleased - seen the setlist and as good as it is, always like it when the mix it up. Particularly for the last show - would make a lot of sense!

Perhaps the words "acknowledge where he is coming from" maybe? I also see that Leicester disputed that he had gone to them which goes against what he says he did. When the allegations seem to be when he was a Leicester City scout. Indeed, you also see that Tony Brien never played for Villa. Indeed, the Villa connection is tenuous and only because Langford was a scout to us and we asked questions when it was raised. I am not sure why Villa would be saying to him about "comments from the terraces". Does raise questions which can be challenged, certainly much more to this than meets the eye. I think unfortunately because there are comments that Richardson at some point may have said he spoke with Tony Brien the programme has run the story against Villa as there is a response. If he did raise it with Leicester and they didn't do anything that to me raises more concerns. Again though, reiterate my previous point that I hope they f****** learn from it and make sure it doesn't happen in the future.

This. Don't mind Taylor coming - disappointed and confused why Ayew would go to Swansea - particularly as his brother left there in the summer....

Birmingham Mail reporting that Paul Clement has confirmed the Ayew/Taylor swap deal in his press conference... Link to news story...

I read it as (1 player at 95% coming in minus (one player at 95% leaving + "X" amount of cash) If it was Taylor plus cash for Ayew (which the press are suggesting) I think that would look like (-95% + (95% + X)) which he does do the minus at the start for the other players leaving. As I said - maybe that Ayew and Taylor are still going and coming - just not as the player swap as suggested. IMO that swap deal is us giving cash plus player to another team.

That's what I mean - the minus is the 2nd player with cash - would we really be saying Ayew plus cash for Taylor??? Ditto - Striker plus a back up/competition Left Back and a Centre Back would do very nicely

I read the first one as 1 in with 1 out plus cash not the other way round. Ayew/Taylor swap doesn't really make sense IMO. There may be something separately but I do not think that's the player swap they are talking about.

Yeah maybe they should have but we don't really know what happened behind the scenes. It might have been they had nothing, might have been they were completely covering it up. Maybe the parents didn't want anything said to the police. Maybe there were other pressures. Indeed, the abused says he felt he was pressurised to not taking it further. That's subjective. Only those present, truly know what discussions they had. Indeed, unless there is any written documentation of meetings/discussions/letters then it would be very difficult to determine. Yes, they could (and probably should) have taken the information to the police and let them deal with it. Difficult to say without getting all the facts, which will be impossible. As @Demitri_C says, it is a different ownership/leadership/club and really should look at the individuals rather than the club as a whole if they are to investigate. They speak to the Assistant Manager who has "lawyered up" now and Doug who, as we know, does not appear to be that all too "compus mentus". The abuser has now died so can't convict him for this, even though he was convicted in 2007 for other abuses anyway. However, it is important to note that, as is stated in the article: So technically the club did nothing wrong as a starting point (morally, I agree is different of course). Should that change? Maybe. Rather than simply prosecuting all of the old celebrities/footballers/etc the powers that be should learn from the lessons to make sure this doesn't happen in the future.

Different standards of proof Employment is a civil matter so the standard is "more likely than not" (i.e. 51%). Criminal standard of proof is "beyond reasonable doubt" (i.e. 90%). Whether the club could or should have done more would be difficult to judge to say the least; the fact that they did something at least should be acknowledged. However, as is often the case, you can have enough evidence to suggest that something probably happened but not definitely. Can see why they did what they did though. Agree with comments - people should read into the story - headline is there to grab the attention.

Completely agree - that would be the ultimate homecoming! It also bug me that they are at the NEC rather than NIA - easier to get to (without having to pay stupidly expensive parking costs!).

I know they say that they will do the odd show here and there, I dunno, I just get a feeling that these will be the last ones.... Cannot wait though - got Gold Circle for both shows in Brum.

Nah - Beyonce

Read the start of the Westwood thread - there is only one comment third hand from Crewe fans and he was POTY for them when we signed him and was quite promising... Nothing like "best player for 20 years" And Westwood ... Seriously though welcome Conor; glad you have joined the party!

That 98% was at 99% yesterday?! WTF happened Tony? Seriously though

Well that explains a lot. Wasn't sure of coming here and his arm had to be twisted with an Italian goalkeeping coach. I prefer players that want to be here for AVFC rather than a coach. Shame as I thought he had great potential but if he don't want to be here then bye. Given this I am disappointed we have loaned him instead of selling, but I suppose if he does do well his value will shoot up. Silver lining and all that jazz

Those figures I am sure relate to last season; however lets not forget how many first team players we have. Subject to how you describe them; I count 30 first team players (with Keinan Davies/Rushian Hepburn-Murphy with the least appearances/inexperienced). Given we have 1) now 5 "first teamers" out on loan - who knows what wages are being paid by the other club; 2) the stragglers from last season(s); and 3) Players paid to provide the quality to get promoted this season It is of no surprise that the wage bill will be out of control and why they are probably being told get rid of players. As a guess - I would fathom the wage bill of those not on loan to be £680,000 a week. If you add on the loan players (£115,000 a week). That's is just astronomical do not think that it is because of a lack of funds - it is just going to be unsustainable.

One nice pass you say? Still better than Westwood

He is mentioned in the pre match conference (along with others) by Steve Bruce - waiting on Barnsley but confirmed we are interested! Clip of Press Conference on Facebook And yes I am just listening to the catch up thing now!

Steve Bruce confirmed at press conference that he's here done medical etc so should be done today Clip is on Facebook

Why did he only starting 13 matches last season for Boro? Blackburn I give but the same could be (and was) said about Gestede. Agree with the rest

Will he though? He's strike rate at Middlesbrough hasn't been wonderful and obviously not playing at the moment. Also weren't Gestede, Ayew, Mcccormack all thought to be able to score lots of goals at this level? Hell, even Gabby was thought to benefit from the step down! Whilst Rhodes may be good for us and it might work out, I don't think he is the answer to the problems and I can see him struggling without the supply and I think the money could be better spent elsewhere rather than on ANOTHER striker. This is one that potentially is costing us double what we sold Gestede for - why would we do that?! Only Kodjia has shown he can more or less create on his own and that's the reason why he can score. Sort out the midfield and give the strikers we do have a chance to show what they can do.

Forest are still on a transfer embargo IIRC? They couldn't sign anyone to replace Lansbury. Given he's not playing the only reason to delay seems to be seeing if they can get any more money for him. Barnsley - it might be that they are trying to line up a replacement or otherwise I haven't got a clue! Can we offer them more money and Westwood to push it through?! And I don't get Rhodes - just doesn't seem to make sense - at least Gestede offered an option (and I am happy we sold) - what will Rhodes offer over and above what we have already got?

Steer was injured back in October/November time and out for the season IIRC. Sarkic I think is still on the books in case but its one of those positions I would like good cover for. Johnstone has been brought in for the number 1 role and Bunn back up. Can't see Bruce bringing in someone else. If so they would need to be an improvement on Johnstone otherwise what was the point? Clear that Gollini wasn't settled; hence the move. He is still young, particularly for a Goalkeeper. In hindsight would have probably helped having good experience GK as number 1 but wanted him to do well. An 18 month loan gives him the opportunity to play and develop whilst at the same time we can get the benefit if he does well. Seems to be a win-win in that sense so OK with it.