RevidgeBlue

Not diverting away from the owners at all. All the Anderson/Shebby Singh chaos predated Waggott. The fact we were appallingly run was never in doubt. The question was whether anything illegal or sufficiently in breach of FA guidelines had occurred. Rightly or wrongly the Authorities must have decided at the time it hadn't. Why do you always leap to Waggott’s defence?

Sounds like JDT wasn't happy with the "project" on offer and the potential financial support available before he even started this time. Devil's advocate mode on: Is he the Championship equivalent of "a cheque book manager?" O Neill needs to be careful as well. As various managers including Allardyce have noted, once you're out of work, it doesnt take long before the phone stops ringing. Edit: And O Neill doesn't have anything like the track record of an Allardyce to justify being so picky.

Each to his own, Id never even heard of him until Tuchel drafted him in recently. Imo he's a solid enough player but not a Lampard, Gerrard, Scholes, Bellingham, Foden, Palmer or even a Wharton. At this stage I do have the utmost confidence in Tuchel though. If he decides he wants to play Anderson instead of Wharton or Wharton ahead of Anderson then either is fine by me.

Holy Cow. Gut reaction says that will be an absolute disaster. Edit: Can't imagine the news will be well received by the Norwich fanbase.

If Wharton was still a Rovers player you would 100% be going mad the other way round trying to convince everyone that Wharton was better than Anderson!

But what of any significance or interest was uncovered by Harris in the first place other than the fact that he received numerous Solicitors' letters from the Club at the time? What went on was examined from all sides and deemed rightly or wrongly not to be actionable. It might be the only time ever I agreed with anything Jack Straw said, but, he was right when he said "It's not an offence to run a Club badly". In fact overall if you look at the link to Harris's previous article he's broadly supportive of the owners and concludes they were well meaning but naive and badly advised in the early years and continued to be supportive for many years thereafter. Imo Harris and anyone else would be better served concentrating on the period from around the time they stopped funding to the Club, we had the Court case in India, and Waggott made the infamous interview about how it was the Club's turn to start giving the owners something back, and made the ridiculous white lie about purchasing a new team bus. The over-riding problem remains I suppose that as long as you're not doing anything illegal - it's still not an offence to run a Club badly. As long as all bills are paid etc it's not an offence to asset strip the Club, starve it of the funding required to thrive and leave it to gradually wither and die on the vine as is happening currently. The only people that can ultimately effect change are other shareholders (not applicable in this case) or the fanbase. Harris or others can serve a purpose by highlighting current or recent events which are highly unsatisfactory if not technically illegal and it might just galvanise the fanbase into a little more dissent.

Fair point. I'm aware of the distinction but couldnt care less not being a fan of either Club.

It's not ridiculous at all. What we need is an up to date Expose' of some genuine significance which might make a difference. Not a tired old rehash of ancient events which, rightly or wrongly were examined and passed off by the relevant Authorities as "nothing to see here" at the time.

Christ, what's your beef with Wharton chaddy? Your obsession with trying to convince everyone that a fairly ordinary Notts Forest player is better than an ex Rover is frankly beyond weird, irrespective of whether you're right or wrong.

What's the point of all this nearly 15 years on? A lot of innuendo from Harris without actually revealing anything we didnt already know or anything particularly significant.

Jackson now saying we're due "a payment" from Palace as a result of the start last night which is probably backtracking somewhat from what he said originally about the add on being triggered by his first start. Might be something in what Nixon said. One or two suggestions there are graduated payments due dependent on number of appearances etc. Ludicrous.

Do you think less than £10m was good for Raya? It's not 1995.

Edit - Scrub that he's 44! 🤣

The rest of the players weren't on his wavelength. He was on a completely different level altogether in the way he saw and read the game imo but it's hard to impress when you're not being picked. Had a look on Wiki and he still seems to be playing in Spain at age 34. Bizarrely also heard Tim Vickery on Talksport a while ago say "Crocky" Santa Cruz was still playing somewhere in South America at age 41!

I really dont get the assassination of Wharton on here, I thought both him and Anderson played well. They're different types of player. Adam can look a bit languid but the first yard or two are in his head with him. Anderson is the busier looking of the two but doesn't have anywhere near the range of passing ability of Wharton Tuchel wants to play a certain way and in best Sir Alf style will pick the players who he thinks will best suit his system rather than on reputation alone as Bellingham is probably finding out. If he thinks Anderson better suits what he wants to do he'll probably get the nod initially but Im sure Adam will get plenty of chances in specific games or off the bench if he continues to perform in general. I like how it seems to be coming together under Tuchel and for the first time in a long while I'll be going into a World Cub genuinely believing we can win it rather than us thinking we'll never win anything with this guy in charge etc. Edit: as I alluded to last night, the only thing that worries me is an injury to Kane - if that happens I think we're snookered.

No chance of that. He might do the half time draw at some point when in the area.

It gets more and more ludicrous if true. Kent Exile wasn't far wrong when he/she joked it would be dependent upon Adam scoring the winning goal in a penalty shoot out in a semi final in the Southern Hemisphere etc etc.......

So agreeing with me on that then. Im not suggesting they start ahead of Kane.

Calm down dear it's a joke.

Ok. I thought the Arsenal sell on was widely reported as £4m. Point still stands though, as with Wharton we gave him away ridiculously cheap initially, in that instance primarily because Mowbray didnt really rate him.

Lol. Famous last words! Kane again.

Wharton off for Chaddy's hero Anderson. I know he's just scored a scruffy goal but I can't see the point in playing Kane every minute of every game. We know he's a shoe in for selection and we're very over reliant on him if he were to pick up an injury. Others should be getting some minutes and experience. Rashford just cleared the penalty area with a cross. Im not a fan of his at all.

We didnt get anywhere near £10m for Raya did we? I thought it was £7m in total. £3m sale plus £4m add on.

No, because there's nothing to suggest that we have anything other than the standard sort of 15% sell on clause so we should have had a lot more to start with plus that. Same with Raya.

Roy Keane and Ian Wright praising him at HT though.