HanoiVillan

All this 'we'll be people's number one target' stuff seems like nonsense to me. I mean, don't get me wrong, if we don't change owner I think we'll struggle massively next season. Currently our board consists of a moron, an oaf and a cheapskate, that doesn't sound like a winning combination. But we'll lose those matches because we're crap, not because other teams 'raised their game' in some way. All SHA could possibly care about is beating us, and lo and behold they failed to do so, even in a season when we lost 95% of our matches.

That moment when you're nodding along internally, moving on, then you stop, go back, and think 'WTF is seasonal behaviour'? Are you saying he acts out in the spring? There's something about the lambing season or April showers that drives him buck wild! Or are you accusing him of being on his period? Perhaps he's a werewolf? I'm lost.

The phenomenon here, which is seen in all fields of human endeavour, is diminishing marginal returns on investment. As Chris says, there is only a very small number of very elite footballers, and most of those would prefer to play in Spain. So an extra £10m or £20m doesn't buy the top teams that much more in terms of quality. This would be consistent with a somewhat levelled playing field. Now, this doesn't mean that future seasons will be the same as this one. Firstly, more money is still valuable, and the link between revenue and final league position is bent, not broken. The law is of diminishing returns, not negative returns. Secondly, we may reach a point in time when pay in the Premier League is so good that the Suarez's and Neymar's and Bale's and Messi's and Ronaldo's want to return to the PL, at which point having more money will become more valuable again.

Sorry mate, I don't follow French football.

I don't know about that. You're not that old, are you? Early twenties or so? If you are, you've probably got more than five decades left. And it only took 25 years for Leicester to win the league once, after all . . .

Great story, great achievement, totally happy for them. Can't wait to post the picture of Albrighton holding the trophy aloft when it happens.

I was talking to a colleague the other day, who told me a story about a girl he knew who had been having her test when a massive lorry went past in the other direction really fast, and I guess somehow generated enough wind to blow the magnetic 'L' plate off the front of the car. Apparently the instructor made her stop, told her he wasn't insured any more and kicked her out the car to walk back to the test centre!

I drove about 100 metres with the handbrake on in my first driving test. Needless to say I failed

So a succession of videos of mens-rights trolls, then. Thanks for the heads up, I'll save myself the bother.

Tragically he'd probably be one of the better players at the club.

No chance at all that #DenisforVilla would be worse than Lescott, so would obviously increase the average level of talent while significantly reducing the wage bill. Get in!

To be clear, I do agree with you. It's an unfortunate sentence. And Staines is total bellend, no argument there.

I see your point, and agree (although he does point out some other selective quotation by Staines in the very next sentence). However, I don't think that sentence invalidates the article.

Thanks!

Oh look, somebody has actually bothered to investigate all of this 'Labour's awash with anti-semitism' stuff, and it turns out that it's an awful lot less than made out: https://opendemocracy.net/uk/jamie-stern-weiner/jeremy-corbyn-hasn-t-got-antisemitism-problem-his-opponents-do 'Labour has a ‘Jewish problem’. Or so it has been widely alleged. Headline after headline in recent weeks has claimed that the party, in whose last-but-one leadership election both front-runners were Jewish, has become infested with antisemitism. The outbreak has been blamed on the veteran socialist Jeremy Corbyn and the mass influx of new members who were inspired by his leadership to join. With a long-time Palestine solidarity campaigner at the helm, the party is now said to be attracting ‘antisemites like flies to a cesspit’. Respected commentators warn that the Jewish community is ‘fast reaching the glum conclusion that Labour has become a cold house for Jews’, while within the party, these are reportedly ‘difficult times to be a Jewish member’. With ‘Labour’s merger with the far right proceeding at speed’, pundits have urged public recognition of a sobering truth: ‘antisemitism is now firmly embedded in the Labour party’s DNA. . . Labour is a racist party now’. These are extraordinary claims to level against the UK’s principal party of opposition, and they have generated an extraordinary amount of media coverage, albeit no serious investigation. The common premise underlying this torrent of articles, think-pieces and polemics – that antisemitism is a growing problem within the Labour party – is rapidly congealing into conventional wisdom. Yet this basic claim is devoid of factual basis. The allegations against Corbyn and the Labour party are underpinned by an almost comical paucity of evidence, while what evidence does exist not only fails to justify the claims being made, but has itself been systematically misrepresented. There is no grounds for supposing either that antisemitism is significant within the Labour party, or that its prevalence is increasing.' It's quite a long read, but it goes into great detail. Worth a look before demonising 400,000 people by association.

True and a fair point.

You're right, it's up to each individual supporter. I don't know how much lower anyone can think the price is going to get, supposedly Lerner is asking somewhere between £40m-£75m, don't think it can realistically be much cheaper than that.

We are exactly the opposite. Love cherries, hate cherry-flavoured things. Cherry jam sounds awful.

Would you recommend it? I'm thinking of going to the cinema tonight. Obviously I know it'll be harrowing, depressing etc etc but is it worth putting myself through?

That is sickening.

I'm going to leave this mayoral election campaign thinking an awful lot less of Zac Goldsmith as a person.

He went to ITV to host The Premiership when ITV were paying more, and I think he burned a lot of bridges at BBC Sport as a result.

The tone might have been harsh, but the point is IMO fair. I don't attend games, but I'm aware enough to realise that my doing so in no way inconveniences Lerner per se, it simply means the club get one less lot of £30 with which to buy players, pay staff, reduce debt etc. As PieFacE says, Lerner personally gets nothing from the club at this point. It barely even leaves him romantically nourished.

Fair point.