He’d leave under a cloud.

What wouldn’t you change?

Distressed sale

You’ve got to admire the specificity of his ‘vision’ though.

I think, but am happy to be corrected, the previous hearings had the judgments published on the same day. I’m guessing the aim (as its only listed for that date) is for the hearing to be ‘done and dusted’ in one day - whether that ends up happening 🤷‍♂️

The court case isn’t against the owners - they are the ones who instigated the proceedings.

He is 70

I think they set up the route hoping: * Pog would build up a lead in the first half of the race * Vin would reduce the gap in the second half * Everything would (as you said) hinge on the tt.

Absolute lightweight right?

That’s why I said ‘can be’ rather than ‘is’

Would you not class Portugal and a Belgium as major nations?

https://careers.thefa.com/jobs/vacancy/england-mens-senior-team-head-coach-nfcsgp0377-national-football-centre-st-georges-park/2137/description/

Who will achieve the Pyrrhic victory?

Is it just me or is this starting to get boring?

I assume you mean when it becomes apparent to the owners. If they took even a cursory look at our accounts they’d already be aware of this.

I was only using the same measure you used. I think the only reason some people seem so eager for administration is because they can’t see how else the part of your post I’ve emboldened will happen. I’m sure each and every one of us would prefer new ownership to be achieved in a far less painful way.

In the financial period 2019/20 (just before those redundancies were announced) they had (on average) 221 employees In the 2022/23 financial period Wigan employed (on average) 286 It would appear the short term (and clearly painful to those affected) hit has led to more opportunities of employment now. By way of comparison our employment figures for the same period are fairly stagnant… 19/20 225 (average) 22/23 221 (average)

You’d miss out on any enhanced payments your contract allowed for but you’d be entitled to all statutory payments (both notice and redundancy).

the answers were his opinions, a journalist should provide (or at least seek to find) the facts.

Apparently talent can’t make up for where you were born.

Administrators don’t sack people they make them redundant. An important distinction as it changes what payments they’re entitled to.

I wonder whether Pep has an English gran 🤔😄

The loss limit is lower if they don’t fund us. £13 million with owner funding £5 million without

There seems to be more of them (on signing their contracts) saying they hope to progress to the first team squad this season. I put this down to one of two things… 1. They see the lack of signings as an opportunity to progress. 2. The club is trying to create the narrative that signings aren’t necessary.

Looking at Elliot’s answers to the first three questions: 1. Any precedent that has been set is in relation to ‘meeting contractual obligations’ so even if you believe that line then no, they can’t invest as they please. 2. The whole purpose of the court proceedings was to be allowed to send funds - if this is now a given why are they still returning to court? 3. The earlier judgement made clear the bond condition is to remain until the end of the Directorate of Enforcement investigation - there’s been no suggestion this is coming to an end so I don’t see how 20th August can be important in this regard.