London blue

Foot fracture I think? I dunno. No-one knows.

Baradji out "medium term" according to VI. Laughable transfer. Call it sensible to loan him instead of buying all you want but I'll be surprised if he plays 10 games this season. Some replacement for Trav.

Trav had his best season at Rovers last year. Hyam played our last 50 games. Sure, neither are world beaters but they were without doubt two of our best players, who, before being fucked around, wanted to stay. We wanted them to stay too. Hearing people claim this was a strategic squad restructure is driving me crazy. The club wanted all of the departing players but weren't willing to pay the going rate. I'm also interested to know which one of Tavares, Baradji or Gardner you think will be better than Travis, and why.

Looking at squads, I think Spain are by far the best around. Then England are firmly in the chasing pack with Brazil, France and to a lesser extent, Germany.

They were very good tonight. Madueke is a real player. Proper ball on a string dribbler. Adding Saka, Palmer and Bellingham to this team somehow will be difficult. Some will be disappointed, which will be one of Tuchel's biggest challenges. If he can't fit in, Bellingham doesn't have to start. Can he handle that?

What are you defending here, exactly? You say we shouldn't expect any different. No-one does. That doesn't excuse the farce of an interview from criticism. Just because it's what we expected to happen doesn't mean we should deem it acceptable.

Then don't offer out questions from the fans. If their agenda was to peddle their propaganda, I'd rather they just did that, rather than feign wanting to be open and honest.

But "new or otherwise" is dismissing the point entirely. I'm talking specifically about the extension of existing players.

You said: "they've just signed 10 players, they're more than capable of penning contracts." Again, they were obliged to sign those players, otherwise we wouldn't have a squad. The fact that a number of new, low value contracts have been offered has no bearing at all on whether they either can't or won't offer improved terms to current players. They HAD to sign new players. They had no choice.

I'm begging you to state you understand the difference between signing new players and offering improved contracts to current players.

Whether Dolan was likely to go or not wasn't the question. Again, you're trying to isolate each player as a one-off, an anomaly. The truth of the matter is that the spine of our team has left and their contract status has had a part to play in all of them, to greater or lesser extents. Signing cheap players on comparatively low contracts does not disprove that. We HAD to sign players or we wouldn't have been able to fill the bench. The greater signifier is the amount of starters that over the next 12 months will have to be sold or will leave on a free. Because nothing has changed. No lessons have been learned. The king is dead, long live the king.

Sure, it's a possibility that VI was happy to let Hyam, Brittain, Trav and Dolan go. It's slimmer than a gnats pube, but it's a possibility.

No, but in my opinion it would be. We've a difference in opinion, let's leave it there.

Sorry mate but I thought it was generally accepted on this board that something being the managers decision doesn't automatically make it the right one? I understand that, literally speaking, playing all 3 is an option. I just don't think it's advisable, given the limited players in that position, and their respective injury records.

Sorry I mean the broader sense of 'play 3 centre backs' as in regularly. I don't think it's advisable to have all 3 senior centre backs on the pitch at any one time.

I disagree. You can't expect to play a formation when you have close to zero depth in 3 positions.

That's what I'd go for. Tavares scares me. Hedges deserves to retain his place and Gudjohnson seems like the type who might thrive in being thrown straight in.

We have 3 CBs, we simply do not have the option of playing 3 at the back. We've hamstrung ourselves. Can't see a win at Watford. Maybe a draw.

I don't believe a word that comes out of his or Suhail's mouth. People are free to accuse me of believing what I want/whatever suits my narrative (can we give that term a rest, please?) but I've seen and heard enough to know a snake when I see one. The combination of ego, greed and directive from above has resulted in a truly poisonous upper management within the club. In some ways I'm glad that Trav et al escaped and have fatter wallets as a result. I don't know where we go from now but I do know the club won't have a penny from me until Suhail and/or Venkys are gone.

I'd appreciate any info you have too, if you don't mind sharing.

I'm fucking livid. This is beyond the fucking pale. Cunts.

I know exactly what the situation is. He's unavailable to play and won't be match fit for some time.

If we end today without adding to midfield then we're going to run Tronstad into the ground. Foreshaw, Tavares, Kristi and sick note as midfield options should Tronstad be out is negligence in all honesty.

Sorry fella but your selective consumption of this forum is to blame here. There were plenty of people who were pleased about the win but weren't chugging the going up juice.

I understand that new signings need time to bed in. I don't think this is lost on anyone. The point is, there shouldn't be a need for this scale of the first team to be new signings who are untested at this level. Our situation is a result of the contract strategy employed by the club. At some point the fact that we sold our captain and replaced him either either a highly dubious prospect or a crocked player will dawn on people.