Episode 8 explains whyou you think she's just a drama queen (I was the same). Keep at it, it's the escalation of it all. Though quite why she never talked to anybody about it earlier is beyond me.

Fair enough I suppose, but I find it hard to believe having met the lad and from stories my nephew tells, having been his classmate throughout secondary. We all have our sources, I guess.

That's very different from 'reliably informed' tbf.

So if you were earning around £50k/year and you were offered a raise to £75k/year, you wouldn't jump at someone else offering you around £150k/year? Bear in mind your career is unlikely to last beyond another 15 years. That's pretty much the scenario he is in.

I'd forgotten about half of that! When did Messrs Finn and Goodman leave?

Erm... sad news for you, Kamy

You can TECHNICALLY leave the command out of that (although we teach putting it in), as it would be smoother to read. The lack of comma before the word 'but', however, is shocking! I hate being a teacher; it makes me do this!

It's the perception bad grammar creates, that's all. I'm offering a chance for it to be one less stick for folk to beat the new Trust with.

Honestly, I was annoyed at the errors and let him know last night told him to send EVERYTHING through me to proofread first.

Ditto. One of its previous failings was the idea that it would reject a safe owner who didn't co-opt the Trust onto the board. Safe club first! Trust involvement is ideal, ofc.

My general feeling, having spoken to John and others who are members, is that the main idea is simply to get the club into safe hands, with or without Trust involvement

I suspect it is (to a degree) an attempt at continuity for the sake of current membership, to show that what they originally signed up for is still there. I reckon new initiatives will filter in slowly, or else there's a risk of alienating folk who are still active members by changing too much too soon.

I was actually joking with that post, should've winked.

So why haven't we been fined every game?

Thing it wasn't 'knowingly in favour' of anyone. They would've rested players whoever they were against, provided there was no threat to Huddersfield. I also think Warner is above being told what to do by an opposing manager tbh. Or perhaps Villa and Steve Bruce should be fined for allowing us to win? It was all over the media and even featured on The BBC that it'd suit Villa for us to win, plus their fans almost demanded it happen.

People keep saying that Huddersfield 'played a weaker side', yet it was the side that drew with Man City. When the fans moan at a line up chosen by the manager because they don't think it's the strongest side, should the club be fined? It's an utterly stupid rule. A club has a squad and should be free to use that squad as they see fit on matchday. Simple as that imo.

I've slept on it and still think Huddersfield were in the right. Even you consider the 'reasonable excuse' factor, they have the playoffs coming up and the team that played yesterday held Man City to a draw. I don't feel we have much basis for complaint.

Wow I genuinely didn't know it was a rule! I disagree with it completely but if a rule's brokenthen punish away

If someone can give me a legitimate explanation as to why 'Team A' should be fined for playing ANY amount of different players from one game to the next in a league season, go ahead. Consequences of the game or time season are completely irrelevant as it would set a precedent of league officials essentially selecting players.

Don't understand the fuss, myself. Use whoever in your squad you wish! If 10 changes wouldn't matter at the start of the season, it shouldn't at the end. For Huddersfield to rest their players is just sound management imo.

This isn't the 'Attack poster's parenting' thread. Or the 'Commercialisation of Christmas' thread. I still reckon we're going down but this dash of hope from the Forest game is welcome. Stranger things have happened.

Imo, the exact same argument applies re: owning this club post-admin.

It looked to be more a case of the squads sharing a coach (Dunn), while the managers each have general responsibility for the team. I'm most interested to see Tomlinson step up, as he's never looked out of place. Not necessarily a star in the making, but he's at least good enough to challenge the current midfielders. We'll need his blood and guts type next season; we needed it this year imo. Mahoney looks reasonably comfortable and would be an asset next season, as does Lenihan. Also interested to see Wharton, Raya, and possibly Rankin-Costello step up next term.

And next season, we're going to lose to at least a few of them...