Still hoping someone like Chelsea is going to jump in and gazump Palace with a better offer, though it's looking increasingly unlikely. That said, I guess it would only slow things down and reduce our ability to reinvest a (tiny, probably) bit of the funds with so little time left in the window. They'd likely only bid a bit more anyway, to kick Palace out of the bidding, as they know what we'll accept. Guess the main advantage if it did happen (looks like it won't) would be that Chelsea would likely loan him back to us.

His family have two professional footballers, not just one. I reckon they're fine.

Since he seems to be valued at 2.5 million, I think I know precisely why interest died off last window.

Bournemouth did it to us...we wanted Dembele to replace Rothwell, then they signed Dembele. Of course, they didn't get Rothwell in that window. I don't think that was why though, sounded like Venkys had already kiboshed it before they got Dembele.

As I said earlier, the manager was asking for another CB in the summer after we got Hill. Since then, Hill has left (O'Riordan probably the replacement), Carter has got an injury (I'd say McFadzean is to replace him for now since it's a short term deal), so the manager would still want one more. Whether he gets that of course is up to GB and the money men. But I can see it.

Perfect! Just what we need, Pears and Wahlstedt won't want to make any mistakes with him on the pitch!

Nah it's the last thing I would be doing in FM.

He did look genuinely made up in his interview to have got on the pitch for us (could be just because he knows it's a real feat at his age) so maybe he will commit.

We still need to persuade Finneran to sign a deal when he turns 16. Then another I think when he turns 17, as you can't sign full pro terms until then if I'm remembering it rightly. Even then, he's probably not going to make more than a few cameos next season. He's super talented but super young, can't see him breaking in as a regular until two seasons from now at best.

I agree, I'd be wanting at least double that for him (more like 5 mill for me, but I rate him more than others do), with a hefty sell-on attached. Especially from a Premiership club, and especially whilst we're three important team members down already from when the Jan window started (Travis, Hill, Wharton). That's a lot of disruption and money in already to be accepting bargain basement bids. 1.5 mill would really piss me off, though I'm sure the same people who thought we sold Raya for good money would be happy with it. One thing that might change that dynamic of course is if Dolan has already indicated he won't sign an extension, meaning it's sell now or sell in the summer really. Though due to his age we're still protected by tribunal as long as we offer him a deal on equal or better terms in summer 25.

I find myself wondering if signing Ethan Brierley like we were supposed to would have set us up with a Wharton replacement (albeit probably not as good yet) in the medium term at least. Has only played one cup game for Brentford, but obviously they're a Prem team. Heard he was on their bench at least once. Ah well, we couldn't spell his agent's name and forgot to mention he was white or some shit, so fuck it.

That's always a risk with any player. His legs going at some point is a risk with nearly any experienced signing too. Being nearly 37 increases that risk, but if his legs haven't gone yet, we only need them to hold out for a few more months. If they've already gone then it's a fucked signing of course. To be clear, I'm not particularly in favour of this one. I'd have wanted someone more in the 26-31 bracket on a permanent for a few years, but this signing might turn out fine for the short term. Personally I'm thinking that (aside from the usual cheap pockets rationale) this one is about not 'blocking pathways' and all that. Since we have Carter out and O'Riordan and Atcheson we'll be looking to develop. Given the gaffer wanted a CB before the window, then we lost Hill and had Carter injured, we're still not really where he wanted us to be though. I suspect we plan to go three at the back since apparently McFadzean is better in that role. A back 3 may also mitigate the risk of reduced pace.

There's a lot in here so I may have missed it, but we're accepting 1.5 mill for Dolan?? I've seen that Luton are interested but that's all.

That risk is heavily mitigated by only signing him until the end of the season though.

New transfer policy.

Was the allusion to a carthorse whilst talking about Gally intentional?

Depressing that with all this money coming in, there's still no talk of getting a keeper that's actually worth a damn.

Does he have to be on half a million a week for his not being here to save us wages?

Potentially though, he shines anyway because he's class, and being proven in the Prem now, is sold on even if they get relegated, for something in the region of double what Palace paid. If we have a decent sell-on clause that's probably about the best we can hope for.

Ordinarily, when a Prem club comes in waving a load of money for one of our star players, we have to hold out for a decent fee but accept the inevitable. The player will want the money and prestige of the Prem, and often their contract is at very best 2 years from expiring. More often 1 year, or even 6 months, under this lot. Realistically there's only so much holding out you can do. This time, we had the very rare opportunity of it being a boyhood fan of the club, with us for the vast majority of his life, and yet we've still had to just shrug our shoulders and accept a decent fee. In the January window with 2 days left, no less, whilst sinking into a relegation fight. And he was on a 4.5 year deal! Where was this willingness to sell when Rothwell and Brereton's deals had nearly expired?! The fact we held out then but not now further shows up the club's lie that the finances aren't that bad.

Yeh that's the EFL rules. UEFA's rules for continental competition are different, or they were last time I checked...ie, last edition of FM I played! FM20...it was always quite annoying that I'd be completely compliant in the league but have to drop someone from my European side, which they'd then moan about so sometimes I'd have to sell them. There was also a rule that your U21 players were free hits in your squad registration in the league, but in European comps they had to have also been at your club for 2 years or else you'd have to use a squad space...and loaning them out stopped them accumulating time at your club. Very annoying when you want to develop a player who isn't ready for your first team yet. The loaning out thing might just be a quirk of the game, but the rest I'm confident reflects the real rules as FM are very very good at that sort of thing. But it may have changed in the last 4 years.

Isn't it still the case that in Europe you need 4 players 'homegrown' from your club and 4 players 'homegrown' from your country? Homegrown actually meaning trained for 3 years in your club or country before the age of 21.

I'd have thought they'd want to replace their best midfielder immediately really. Sorry what's him coming through their academy have to do with it, isn't it an advantage under selection rules to have players from your own academy?

Wouldn't they also want a replacement then? Or is their squad quite well stocked already? I don't really follow the Prem much these days.

In the basement licking mold off the stones.