Keener window-cleaner

This appeals to me, I have always wanted to own us and I could afford that. Hope I have the support of all of you!

You would make a good lawyer! I'm not sure how such assurances work, but it's hard to imagine that it's in a contract, more of a gentlemans agreement perhaps. And as the future of Bruce (and of the ownership) is somewhat up in the air, I guess such assurance wouldn't be much worth anyway. Regarding Hutton playing better at left back, I'm not so sure about that. I think he has surprised quite a few of us by adapting well at left back, and some of his movement seemed to benefit by it, but I wouldn't say he is better at left back than right back. For example in the semis he switched sides as he followed Adama and was as good in both positions. He has imo definitely improved over the last years, mainly by cutting out the wreckless tackles and by more safe passing, but that's regardless of position. I would imagine he prefers to play right back as that's what he has done all his life (except when McLeish and Bruce played him right wing :-S), so it's fully thinkable imo that he said he prefered to play right back while signing the contract, if that happened or if it was met with any kind of assurances would be interesting to know.

As long as mouth and nose is above...

But where did you find this info? (I'm not saying you are wrong)

How do you know that?

I'm not very familiar with the Supporters Trust, but I like the sound of it. I've looked at the home page but I didn't really get a grip of what it is. Anyone who could give me some more info, for example who runs it and what influence they have? Worth donating some money to?

If you would be about to employ someone and fat man with a friendly face named Keith applies, say no.

Perhaps not, he met the expectations of not contributing much at all ?

Under the current circumstances I'm quite happy with this. He is loved by many of the fans and we are crying out for some positive news. It also sends a signal that it's not a complete fire sale going on. And if we are to rely more on our youngsters next season it's good to have an experienced player in the squad, especially one with so good attitude as Hutton. Would be interesting to know how much he reduced his salary.

You want us to buy a short haired woman?

Only if you add a random anti-semitic insult to that line, or if you do a Mark Bosnich type of gesture while you say it ?

I was surprised by this as well, anyone heard anything of that?

If they have made a £15m take it or leave it bid I would like us to respond with a £10m take it or leave it bid for Dele Alli.

Selling him for £30m would be bad business as he will be worth £100m in a couple of years.

Jack or babyblue? ?

I agree, and I do think we had interest in attack. My observation and opinion is that we set up defensively, if we scored first we tried to kick on (which was a big improvement from the first season when we reverted to protect our penalty area when we scored), and in some games we scored a lot of goals, as the statistics tell. Those games were really great and I would have liked us to start the games like that. However I understand that it is a quite efficient tactic the way we played.

I would say set up defensively and set up to be hard to beat is more or less the same. I agree that we played more open and attacking in the second part of the season, and much more so than the first season under Bruce. But I would still call it defensively. Playing one striker and Jack, Snodgrass, Albert and CH is not attacking in my mind. It sure is attacking compared to how Bruce set up previously, but not compared to what I think is normal. Snodgrass and Albert are to me normal wingers (not like typical wide forwards) they track back like normal midfield wingers. CH is to me more or less an all action box to box midfielder. Even with the players you mention, we still had one defensive midfielder. Swap that defensive midfielder for a striker and I would call it a normal set up in a traditional 4-4-2. With the players you mention we basically swap one striker for an extra defensive midfielder in a typic 4-4-2, and I would call that to set up defensively. Then of course it's not just about the players and formation but what instructions you give them, but most games I would say that the style of play was cautious. A kind of direct counter attack style. Based on how I regard our tactics, I found that statistic confirming it as it says that in the most games we don't score many goals.

nope not assuming anything, just pointing out that I consider our style of play to be a defensive style of play. It quite often is a good tactic, it almost got us promoted and many teams win leagues with it. fwiw I'm not sure the RDM style was easy to beat, we mostly drew games under RDM.

You don't agree that we for most of the games set up defensively and to be hard to beat?

Until I know more about what's really going on at the club I think I'd prefer Bruce to stay to bring some stability to the mess(?).

It does count, but that statistics confirm that we played defensively in most games.

Ah, so then we don't need to sell Jack after all? Or do we still need to in order to comply with FFP?

So if we are making a loss of £5M a month, and we sell Grealish for £30M, it means it would simply keep us afloat six more months, until december, and then the problem is back.

Ah thanks, then I was mistaken. I actually don't know much about Calderwood or how he is a a coach, but I associate him with dull defensive football and wouldn't want him in charge just based on my prejudice.

A sober thought, could it be so that the gamble we took to try and reach the PL wasn't that bad a decision after all? We had a very high wage bill and would run out of money in two years, so what would be the best approach? A ) Start cost cutting the first year and not invest the parachute money. It would probably mean that we would settle for being a mid table Championship team a couple of years in order to be sustainable when the parachute money ends. Then we could build on that and try to reach the PL in a couple of years B ) Use the parachute money to make a serious attempt to go up the first or second year. If it fails we start the cost cutting and change strategy after two years. Now whilst throwing all money away on trying to reach the PL might seem to be bad decison making, but it was perhaps rather a question of when the serious cost cutting would start, year one or year three. I bet the new owner would have problems selling it in to the fans that we would directly start cost cutting and settle for being a mid Championship team. I think there would have been big discontent amoung the fans. Sure, we could have saved some more money, and we could have spent it more wisely, but the basic strategy of giving the PL a shot at the first och second season was perhaps not such a bad decision after all. And if it is correct that we have lowered the wage bill from £80-90M to arbound £50M and also made profit on player transfers, we have actually both managed to cut costs and make a serious shot of being promoted. I still in the sentiment that I want Xia and Wyness and the others responsible to be hanged, but perhaps the basic strategy wasn't that bad after all?