Chelsea Rumours Member Posts
Standard's Profile
Current Avatar:
Standard's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To Standard's Posts
To Standard's last 5 rumours posts
To Standard's last 5 banter posts
To Standard's last 5 rumour replies
To Standard's last 5 banter replies
Standard's rumours posts with other poster's replies to Standard's rumours posts
15 Nov 2025 15:47:00
New sponsor Oracle to be announced. One year deal, and for significantly less than what chelsea were expecting.
This entire debacle has been embarrassing. Egbalis first words once the takeover happened was 'this club was not terribly well managed on the football side, sporting side or promotional side'.
Many on here having been saying for a couple years now (lol) that it was somehow a good thing that we hadn't got a new sponsor, as we'd be making way more money by holding firm and waiting. Just want to see if those posters can eat there words as I said many times the beginning of this new regime will be a case study in failure on how to takeover a club. I don't suppose they will though.
anyway, not all bad, but glad this debacle is finally coming to an end.
1.) 15 Nov 2025 19:43:12
Welcome back. Always good to have different views on this site.
2.) 15 Nov 2025 22:38:35
I don’t always have the best things to say about the current ownership, but, in this case, a big issue with the club not getting what they viewed as good / expected value from sponsorship has been the ongoing investigation - with companies reluctant to go big until that’s resolved. I’m sure the current regime would have hoped that it would have been resolved by now, but they can’t wait forever.
That investigation is down to problems with / mistakes by the previous ownership, which the current lot could have brushed under the carpet. In the long term they did the right thing, highlighting it at the earliest opportunity.
Is this whole debacle embarrassing? Yes, it absolutely is. Is it the current ownerships fault? No, the blame sits with RA and his ownership.
3.) 16 Nov 2025 03:32:50
J, we have all had reason to be critical of the current owners.
Like all fans to a certain extent we are guessing about our respective club’s commercial negotiations.
If it is true that potential sponsors have been reluctant to enter into a long term sponsorship deal because of a potential club sanction then I guess your assertion holds water.
The fact that our current owners self reported the issue and have co-operated fully with the relevant regulatory bodies made me personally believed we would receive a fine and maybe a one window transfer ban at the most. I suppose there is little upside to a sponsor making a longer than one year deal without knowing the outcome of the investigation.
I seem to remember we recently got a very substantial long term shirt sleeve sponsorship deal and I guess last season we did have a sponsor for about our last fifteen games.
4.) 16 Nov 2025 06:47:54
I think it’ll be the club deciding on the deal till the end of the season, rather than a long-term one right now.
Just as an example, the sponsorship companies are saying, we’ll give you £40m per season, because of the outstanding charges, otherwise we’d give you £60m. You wouldn’t want to sign a 4-6 year deal, knowing those charges should be resolved with the first of those years. Get the £40m this season, pay the fine during that period, then get a better long-term deal after that.
Additionally, get top four this season and we’re repositioning ourselves as regulars in the UCL, rather than being back in as a one off. That won’t hurt either.
5.) 16 Nov 2025 08:05:05
J, you are using the same mathematical logic that I was using for last season.
I except your point about any potential punishment effecting negotiations. This was an issue that I had personally dismissed because I believed any sanction would be relatively minor.
6.) 16 Nov 2025 08:47:56
Charges, it's not stopping Man city obtaining sponsorships, this is red herring, let's stop making excuses for our incompetent ownership and commercial dept.
7.) 16 Nov 2025 09:36:43
Who owns Man City and who is their sponsor?
8.) 16 Nov 2025 10:25:08
J we have multi billionaire owners who are brilliant business people yet they have no clue on moving us forward whether it's to do with sponsorships ir the so called Bridge development.
9.) 16 Nov 2025 10:38:54
J, very good point.
Bill, we understandably don’t know the facts, so we are all left guessing but to accuse the owners of “incompetence” on this issue seems harsh to me.
When I look back upon my time as a supporter I have always found a topic that I could criticise all our past owners for. Some of that criticism is and was probably unfair but my guess is all supporters of virtually every club are the same. Can I just add, I did have some criticisms of RA as well.
10.) 16 Nov 2025 11:23:44
Bill, The SB development or move to another location will probably cost about £2bn, I would rather they got it right than wrong and on that I’m sure we can agree. I have been critical of our owners for poor communication either directly or via the FAB and this is an area, in my opinion, where they have over promised and under delivered.
They were due to make an internal report public before the start of the season. There may well be good reasons why this hasn’t happened but a very short press release would have updated all the fans.
11.) 16 Nov 2025 11:38:44
Tom
That is the ussue, we don't know what's hoing on because us fans get told absolutely nothing.
Thats one thing about this ownership, they live in their ivory tower, doing nothing, saying nothing.
They just seem to like owners of a large nursery company.
12.) 16 Nov 2025 14:05:22
Bill, I assume our owners are worse than some and better than others when it comes to fan communication.
I personally would bring back CTV and the old monthly Q&A that used to a good opportunity for us fans to ask questions.
13.) 16 Nov 2025 16:41:56
I think some of you are over optimistic about the potential sanctions. There are two seperate investigations one by the FA and the other by the PL. We would be lucky to get away with a financial sanction; there is a real possibility of a points deduction.
14.) 16 Nov 2025 16:56:01
I agree Tom but this crowd would never let it happen, like the Glaziers, they are in it for the money and prestige, they could not care less about the fan base, they have made that quite clear with their total lack of communication.
15.) 16 Nov 2025 17:34:32
Bill, I’ve lost count of the amount of times I have said we are a business. I have also said many times there is very little wrong with our club being run as a business. I see no comparison, so far, between our owners and the Utd owners.
Over the years we have had many different owners. The Mears family didn’t say anything and the Bates - Harding partnership ended up being a war of words against each other. I can’t remember Roman saying much directly to anyone but his Chairman Bruce Buck was iften good for a self promoting quote.
My point is silence from owners seems like a common theme at our club and probably the vast majority of other clubs.
16.) 17 Nov 2025 09:27:35
Tom
As you are probably aware I agree with you about being run as a business albeit a badly run business losing huge amounts of money due yo no FOS for goodness knows how long now and having no plans for extra revenue with a larger stadium, all the owners can do is keep putting ticket prices up to help mediate the problem if losing money.
17.) 17 Nov 2025 12:28:51
Bill, I would only be guessing again but just maybe the threat of a club sanction has been the major problem in stopping us getting a FOS sponsor.
I’m not a fan of the “blame” society we live in and without knowing the facts on this particular issue maybe we should defer our judgement.
The SB development was always going to take ages but I will continue to be critical but only about poor communication.
I can’t say I’m an expert on our gross revenues over the last five years and I’m not sure how they compare to our peers. Obviously a larger ground with extra capacity would be good but does that come with huge debt? I assume these are the sort of issues our previous owner and present owner have to consider as well as the potential loss in revenue if we move to a temporary home. I think I will just leave it to them (not going to happen in my lifetime) it gives me a headache!
11 Sep 2024 11:55:55
Datro fofana on loan for Athens. 20m buy option.
He had a good spell at Burnley, but I'm not surprised we struggled to find a better loan for him.
1.) 12 Sep 2024 10:32:51
Nope, another deal that's off. Christ, we really are a mess.
2.) 12 Sep 2024 11:54:02
Why is the deal not going through a reflection of CFC and require the comment “we are a mess? ”
I have no idea why an agreement couldn’t be reached so therefore I can’t say if any side is to blame but it’s hardly unusual that clubs can’t agree on a transfer or loan deal.
Every club must have loads of transfers deals that fell through because an agreement couldn’t be reached, they must all be “a mess. ” All very sad.
{Ed002's Note - AEK are responsible for it falling through.}
3.) 12 Sep 2024 11:59:35
Ed, brilliant mate thanks.
4.) 12 Sep 2024 12:31:00
He is trolling again Tom.
5.) 12 Sep 2024 12:48:12
It’s just non stop criticism of the owners without knowing any facts.
Be critical when it’s deserved.
6.) 12 Sep 2024 22:23:27
Thanks for that info Ed.
And we're a mess because we have copious players we're unable to find clubs for. We still have chilwell, Washington, fofana, kellyman
and chukwuemeka and casadaei at the club, none who will see the pitch.
I personally think that's a fair criticism, as I've said before we simply have too many players.
7.) 12 Sep 2024 22:56:16
Your criticism was about a player not getting a loan with an option to buy. You jumped to a conclusion because you believed it worked for your continuous narrative against the owners.
Your very pointed criticism on this particular issue was wide of the mark and now you bring up a different topic to try and justify it.
As I posted “be critical when it’s deserved. ”.
8.) 13 Sep 2024 11:49:17
I see he has secured a loan now. I think the bigger question regarding DDF is whether he is a better player and therefore more useful to Chelsea than Guiu?
Personally I would have said yes.
9.) 13 Sep 2024 12:15:03
I can’t say I’ve seen a lot of Fofana or Guiu but if had to choose, I would go for Guiu.
How amazing our owners must be to find a club for Fofana on agreeable terms. ?.
10.) 13 Sep 2024 12:32:46
Tom lad it had nothing to do about an option. It was the fact that another deal fell through.
Looks like we were swift to get him another loan, but I think even the club will be dissapointed to not sell him on for a profit this year after a decent loan spell at Burnley. Though, as I said, I believe it's complete naivety to believe we can flip these players after a year for a profit. A belief that maybe true depending on your outlook. We have copious players we have been unable to find a move for.
11.) 13 Sep 2024 15:44:25
You said in reference to the failed loan of Fofana “Christ, WE really are a mess. ” Your comment had zero to do with any other player but you couldn’t wait to have a dig at the owners. That is just a plain fact.
As I understand it we have sold, loaned or released 41 players so far in this window. Of course it would have been good to sell or loan a few more but 41 seems an above average number to me but then again I’m not a transfer expert.
Anyone can “hunt” out a reason to be critical. I guess the reverse must be true.
12.) 13 Sep 2024 22:15:29
Mate, getting really tired of you telling other posters what they're thinking and the reason behind there posts. You have no idea what my reasoning was and if you want to make up a reason, go for it. It's getting very tiresome though.
It is literally very obvious by reading the reasoning behind we are a mess and that is because the players we've been unable to offload or have paid to offload.
And further, part of my post was actually edited out. So again, please stop assuming you know other people's reasonings and get off your high horse.
13.) 14 Sep 2024 02:54:21
Maybe stop coming on here and talking rubbish then. The eds have said numerous times that it wasn't chelsea that was the issue.
Re Gallagher "he didn't want to sign a contract"
Fofana "it was Athens issue"
You come on here like a petulant child as soon as you here some bad news. Then change your mind in what you actually said.
Re calling caicedo a "donkey" so in my eyes your the one getting tiresome.
14.) 14 Sep 2024 06:28:41
No problem jsfinchy. If you don't want to have a discussion with people that disagree with you, interesting choice to go onto a forum discussing a football club. In the real world people disagree, you should maybe get better at talking to those who disagree.
And to reiterate my point as you clearly misunderstood, I'm criticising chelsea buying 100's of players and struggling to offload them. It's completely irrelevant whether it's an issue with us or the other party. We wouldn't be having issues offloading players if we had a clear and concise plan in place.
15.) 14 Sep 2024 06:58:27
I wouldn’t have a clue what you are thinking and response was clearly about and only what was writing your post.
I repeat. Supposedly Chelsea have sold, loaned or released 41 players in the last window. Yes it would have nice to find playing homes for just a few more but there is another window in a few months and I’m sure some more transfer business will be completed.
16.) 15 Sep 2024 07:28:29
Which is a big feat tom so well done to them for them sales/ loans.
However, if we didn't buy so many players in the first place, we could have spent more energy building cohesion and chasing targets who improve the team.
17.) 15 Sep 2024 08:36:58
I’ve lost count of the times I have said to many signings done to quickly but generally I think our old squad looked tired or maybe to comfortable.
18.) 15 Sep 2024 10:49:07
You are correct Tom. The old squad needed a refresh and with the sanctions it was also a very difficult time. Yes, too many signings in too few windows but that will now slow down. Players will come and go and these owners are not shy to spend their money and I fully expect 2 more windows of activity. They are winners and highly motivated by success and won't stop until we return to the top table.
19.) 16 Sep 2024 09:23:56
WSOTS, I think the signings might well slow down but I still think we will be selling a few with the likes of Noni, Disasi, Chilly, Sterling and maybe Mudryk all likely to be sold or loaned over the next two windows in my opinion.
20.) 18 Sep 2024 07:48:34
FFS Standard, " buying 100's of players " as per your quote on here, get real mate, the club and the people they have employed are much more aware than you or i could ever wish to be!
27 Aug 2024 14:28:37
Chelsea making a move for Toney! If osimhen is demanding wages too excessive toney will be an excellent option! Him and Jackson can compete and after Jackson's performance against wolves, toney will have to be at his best.
Hope this one happens!
1.) 27 Aug 2024 16:02:49
Perhaps Saudi Arabia is a more probable destination.
Is there any truth to Calwert Lewin rumours? Wouldn't be a bad back up striker although I like Guiu for that role too.
2.) 27 Aug 2024 18:51:29
Toney would be way down my list of CF options. Mind you there is a gap between Osimhen and the rest in my opinion.
3.) 27 Aug 2024 22:50:49
I’d be happy enough with Toney within the wage structure - if we have to buy someone! I’m still a fan of Jackson, but I think Toney has a good all round game.
4.) 28 Aug 2024 02:01:51
Not sure Toneys wage demands are any less than Osimhens.
5.) 28 Aug 2024 16:57:39
Tom, Toney wouldn’t even be on my list. His numbers aren’t that good particularly if you strip away penalties. His first touch is poor; he is not an 18 yard box striker he goes deep and would clutter up our midfield. He has averaged 1.3 headed goals a season over the last 4 years. If Oshimen is out of reach stick with what we have and look again next summer.
6.) 28 Aug 2024 17:43:28
Jimbo, I agree. Plus It’s early stages but Guiu loooks ok to me.
7.) 28 Aug 2024 20:55:55
400k a week is on offer for Toney in Saudi. He can have a lot of fun gambling with that kind of money.
26 Aug 2024 23:39:27
Hey Ed around last week you said there would be plenty of departures and about one a day. Since then, it looks like a couple have been agreed but nothing concrete. Now, it looks Iike broja has fell through.
Are we still confident in selling over 10 players before the window shuts?
{Ed002's Note - Players will continue to depart.}
1.) 27 Aug 2024 13:13:37
Three players out the door already today . Kepa, Anjorin and Lukaku.
2.) 28 Aug 2024 09:28:30
And Gallagher gone too of course.
22 May 2024 09:31:09
Again, seeing many links to tuchel. Surely not true.
I've calmed down a bit, but still massively dissapointed. They have to get this appointment bang on.
1.) 22 May 2024 13:00:25
Young manager they said.
Ruben Amorim --- the club must have met with him?
Hansi Flick --- nope
Vincent Kompany --- nope
Kieran McKenna – yes, but I hope he stays with the tractor boys
Jose Mourinho – Turkey
Julian Nagelsmann ---- His contract with the German team expires after the Euros
Michel Sanchez – meh
Thomas Tuchel – yes, but I cannot see it
Roberto de Zerbi -- nope
Massimiliano Allegri --- has been lurning English for years, but nope
Carlo Ancelotti -- extended his contract with Real Madrid to June 2026.
2.) 22 May 2024 13:21:25
Pretty sure nagelsmann extended his contract with Germany celery.
3.) 22 May 2024 14:07:46
I wonder if the Amorim flight to the UK was linked to Chelsea - the club were very quick to deny it at the time.
Another name in the frame could be Porto boss Sergio Conceicao.
I would like Flick, but that's because I think he has the experience.
I'm also disappointed that they chose not to continue with Poch, I was looking forward to a summer of stability while other big clubs chopped and changed, now I feel we're a bit back to square one.
4.) 22 May 2024 14:15:41
How does TT fit into the remit of a young progressive coach? Plus he plays the most boring football ever.
Mind you hecdid great things at Bayern, never finished so low in their league, marvelous achievement from TT.
5.) 22 May 2024 14:45:02
Same Standard i've just about managed to calm myself down, lol.
Standard's banter posts with other poster's replies to Standard's banter posts
14 Mar 2026 19:39:54
I know we lost, but the worst part of the game was that semi circle team talk with the referee in the middle. We're making ourselves look utterly ridiculous lol.
1.) 14 Mar 2026 20:50:27
Thank you, Liam, for bringing the semi circle team talk to the party. The bloke is beyond clueless. Grass greener? Do me a favour.
2.) 14 Mar 2026 21:27:07
Yet, LR's average points tally in the EPL is still a fair bit higher than EM's.
Possibly, neither is good enough for an EPL challenge, but quite probably neither have had the squad quality and depth in all positions for this. Still, what can we expect, as it's not yet 2030!
Buying good prospects is not the same as buying the finished, proven article.
3.) 14 Mar 2026 21:39:52
The way we play is making us look stupid.
4.) 14 Mar 2026 22:09:33
JBS, I believe your stat is correct.
5.) 15 Mar 2026 09:35:32
Apparently, this was an idea by Reece and not LR, although he should intervene and tell the players to concentrate on what they are good at, getting yellow, red cards and losing.
6.) 15 Mar 2026 09:48:20
Could be the kitman's ideas, it's still ridiculous.
7.) 15 Mar 2026 10:02:57
I honestly can't see what difference it makes about a so called huddle or its location. If we were winning a doubt many supporters would be making a comment.
Mind you, I did think it was funny that the ref got trapped in the huddle yesterday.
The huddle carrying on with a man in yellow stuck in the middle was one of the few things that made me smile yesterday.
8.) 15 Mar 2026 12:15:52
I'm sure ITV will be on Sky's Christmas playbacks.
9.) 15 Mar 2026 14:43:07
Tom, yes people would be talking about it if we lost. Has nothing to do with that. We beat Villa and still thought it was ridiculous.
10.) 15 Mar 2026 15:21:55
Did we do at the Villa game? I certainly can't remember. It's much ado about nothing.
It was funny yesterday though.
13 Mar 2026 14:23:46
New 6 year contract for Reece James. Very well deserved.
26 Feb 2026 15:33:07
Quite damning. In the 3rd full season under the new owners, chelsea booked an english record of £342m pre tax loss. Without the selling of assets to ourselves, it would be £582
If chelsea finish below 5th or don't win the UCL, it will be 3/4 seasons without UCL football. In Romans 19 years, we finished outside UCL twice (and won the Premier League in that season).
I won't even mention the FOS sponsor issue. To me, 3 nearly 4 years in, its fair to criticise.
1.) 26 Feb 2026 17:27:36
I guess other fans of other clubs have been critical of their owners when it took them ages to win anything. I'm sure someone will remind how long it's taken new owners to win things at other clubs. I have no idea how our loss is presented to the regulators, as far as FFF is concerned, but my guess is the number mentioned will improve considerably for the next few years.
Of course, some fans couldn't wait to be critical of our present owners. I wonder who fans will be critical of if we get a points deduction, massive fine or transfer ban for our 74 supposed offences?
2.) 26 Feb 2026 17:51:06
My main problem under the Roman years was that after we won a trophy and looked set to dominate for a couple of years, we'd make some woeful moves in the transfer market. I think it was around 2017 or so when we'd won a big trophy, and were linked to Alex Sandro, Naingollan and some big striker, and ended up with Drinkwater and Zappacosta.
I'm definitely getting mixed up, but I feel like we had a few chances to dominate for a few years, but just couldn't get it over the line.
3.) 26 Feb 2026 17:57:07
Tom Let's start with the last one first. Whatever we get with regards to points deductions etc., is entirely down to Roman's ownership, nothing to do with our present owners. Now onto our present owners. They should have taken their time settling in and working out what we needed; instead, they went on a spending spree, taking advice from people they should have ignored.
They moved on from that mistake and went straight into buying youngsters, some excellent, some not so much. What they should have done was bring in some experienced heads. Now with the huge loss, perhaps an injection of £100mil plus through having a FOS might have somehow helped the situation. Hopefully this means the trading slows down and we have a settled squad.
4.) 26 Feb 2026 18:09:04
I think we got £40m for our in-house FOS solution for the first year, and approx £20m last year, and apparently the same this year. I agree the rush for change was a mistake, but as I guessed at the time, my concern was always them trying to make supposed statement signings instead of logical signings.
It was a complete horlicks, but as ED02 they are getting better advice now. All clubs make transfer mistakes, and that first season was a complete disaster except for Cucarella. I also think sometimes about how many mistakes RA made.
5.) 26 Feb 2026 19:24:45
I know ed2 said they're now getting better advice but really? None of the signings other than Jaoa pedro look that good.
6.) 26 Feb 2026 19:56:19
Why wet your knickers and be a drama queen? Surely wait until the club publishes their accounts?
7.) 26 Feb 2026 21:28:09
Greenaway and Tom are right, let's just keep waiting. Things may magically work themselves out. Ignore the warning signs, these owners know what they're doing - Todd even runs a successful baseball team! Trust the process - our team of 14-17-year-old wonder kids might just wake up as Barca 2009 in 5 years, and won't that be wonderful?
8.) 26 Feb 2026 21:42:41
Kazblue, well said. Standard, I know we all always want an example to support an argument, but if you honestly think Pedro is our only decent signing, then I am just not sure what to say. While we all might have different ideas about players' abilities, I think a hell of a lot of supporters would think Caicedo, Cucarella, Palmer, Neto and Enzo tick most boxes for most supporters.
I also personally believe that Caicedo, Cucarella and Palmer get into most top European sides.
9.) 26 Feb 2026 22:03:23
UEFA's report details Chelsea as having made the biggest loss in English football and having the most expensively assembled squad ever. However, there are also bits left out. Simply, Chelsea have had a major corrective season in the transfer market.
They won't be selling stars to survive, and expect to stay compliant with UEFA rules going forward. Standard (and your new poster mate ?), try not to fret too much.
10.) 27 Feb 2026 08:38:09
Greenaway, can you please enlighten me as to what a corrective season in the transfer market is?
11.) 27 Feb 2026 08:40:46
Tom, I'm referring to the last window in which Pedro was signed. I don't think they've set the world alight, and I cannot understand the Garnacho and Gittens signings. Greenway, I'm not fretting, it's just football, just highlighting the new financial report by UEFA.
I'm sure we will be fine, but I just started a discussion about why I think the criticism on here is justified. You seem to think not, which is fine.
12.) 27 Feb 2026 09:26:32
If one casts one's mind back to when we were purchased, there were even doubts that we would exist. The new owners have made mistakes. The early transfer splurge was a poor but understandable attempt to make an impression. The lack of a shirt sponsor is most baffling, and ground capacity is a difficult problem to solve for anybody. On the plus side, we have a young squad, the most highly valued in football. I like the idea of buying young players and seeing if they grow. There will be more success than failure, and money will be made on most of them.
Although some were clearly purchased to be sold, Garnacho was only purchased because of price. I read somewhere that the UEFA loss doesn't take into account the women's teams or the hotels. In general, I think financially, apart from the shirt sponsorship, these guys appear to know what they are doing. On the pitch, with Palmer, Caicedo, Neto, Cucu, James, Estevao, Colwill and Pedro, we have the makings of a top side going forward. As with all these things, time will tell.
13.) 27 Feb 2026 09:26:35
Bill, in answer to your question, mate... A "corrective season" in the football transfer market refers to a period where a club or the overall market adjusts its spending behavior, usually following a period of overspending, unsustainable high wages, or financial instability. It is a proactive effort to align player trading and squad costs with actual revenue and regulatory requirements (such as UEFA Financial Fair Play or Premier League Profit and Sustainability rules).
In layman's terms, it means "we used that accounting period to dump all our mess and baggage in one hit to clear the decks going forward", having already taken the UEFA punishment and agreed a plan going forward.
14.) 27 Feb 2026 09:56:15
Seymns, the 382m figure includes the women's team and the selling of assets to ourselves. Otherwise, it would be the 500m figure I posted. Massive, massive losses, which is why I don't buy into the 'player trading' idea some have speculated on. We've lost a massive amount on players, and overall we're at a loss (with some like Palmer massively offsetting those losses).
15.) 27 Feb 2026 10:17:58
Standard, you are looking at one set/season's figures; next season they will be much improved. Of course we will have overpaid on some players, but got good deals on others. That's the same at every club. Of course we will only find out about profit and loss on player investment when, and if, we decide to sell a player.
My valuation of a player is meaningless, and will no doubt be different from other fans'. Palmer, or any current squad player, does not offset any potential club loss until they are sold.
16.) 27 Feb 2026 10:18:24
Seymns, really enjoyed your measure post.
17.) 27 Feb 2026 10:37:14
Seymns, a great post, articulate and factual and without agenda, a pleasure to read. Hope you are feeling better now as well.
18.) 27 Feb 2026 14:26:32
Sure Tom, but this was in the 3rd year of ownership. You are aware we posted heavy losses in the first, second, and now third consecutive years? Without much to show for it. Apparently I have an agenda. Can't win with some.
19.) 27 Feb 2026 15:53:01
Standard, I'm not sure why your posts always make you sound like some sort of persecuted victim. I certainly have an agenda, and the vast majority of people have "certain" agendas, in my opinion. I can't see anything wrong with it. As far as the previous CFC losses, my guess is the present owners have only presented two sets of "new co" audited accounts. The first one may well have been more of a reflection of the previous owner. I certainly don't keep track of these things, so I have very little knowledge on the timings of these audits. I have said many times, with these owners and the previous owners, that I do NOT care about the financial results, other than if they break the (in my opinion) stupid FFP/PSR rules. I also think that longer financial reporting/performance is a much better way of judging a company's BP.
If you and others feel they in some way reflect poorly on these owners or previous owners, that is entirely up to you. I have made my opinion on our early player signings numerous times. I have also made my opinion very clear about the club's signings since we appointed our SD's. Some people rush to judge players, I do not. I think Hato and Gittens will prove themselves to be top players. I was not a fan of the Delap signing, as I wanted us to sign Sesko. Garnacho, I strangely knew nothing about, and I still haven't made up my mind. My player judgement is based on what I see over a period of time. Other fans prefer to make, what I consider to be, snap judgements. We all judge and see players' abilities and weaknesses differently.
20.) 27 Feb 2026 16:44:25
Tom, those accounts will also have included losses taken on the likes of Lukaku, who were hangovers from the old era of Roman, but the headline hunters and bed wetters will always ignore those facts, as that doesn't fit their narrative.
21.) 27 Feb 2026 16:56:21
Greenaway, I honestly have no idea or care about audited accounts. Some time ago on this site, I laid out a broad alternative to FFP/PSR. Strangely, a mate who is a ST holder and chartered accountant liked my alternative to the current rules. He also suggested that players within a squad (I think he referred to something called "Nett Present Value (NPV)") should also form part of a club's financial position.
It sounded complicated, and like a club could mark its own homework, so I switched off. I guess my message is, lots of people seem to think the current rules surrounding FFP/PSR are not fit for purpose.
22.) 27 Feb 2026 17:08:37
Not a victim at all, but on every post of mine the other poster in this thread has constantly said, or at the very least insinuated, I have an agenda. Nothing to do with you. Doesn't bother me, but it gets very, very tiresome.
23.) 27 Feb 2026 17:26:50
Tom, you are 100% correct in saying FFP/PSR needs improving, but what is the solution, as something needs to be in place?
24.) 27 Feb 2026 23:26:33
Standard, I'm honest enough to admit I have an agenda. I repeat, I can't see what the problem. I also believe most people have an agenda, and, again, I couldn't care less.
25.) 27 Feb 2026 23:54:17
Greenaway, my proposal - and I did send it to the FA and Premiership - involved each owner putting a bond into an escrow account. The bond was to cover one year's contractual obligation for every member of staff. A club could go out and sign whoever they liked on whatever salary they like, but they obviously then had to increase the value of their bond.
This would probably make a club like Newcastle the biggest club in the world. I personally don't care who is the supposed biggest club. It makes beating them all the sweeter.
10 Feb 2026 21:31:09
That was very poor, and unacceptable. That game encapsulates why we need some god damn experience. We could be 3-0 up and I wouldn't be comfortable.
Dissapointed with caicedo. he's made a lot of silly decisions again this year and still hasn't ironed it out of his game.
Too early to say but with liverpool and united finding form, that might be the UCL dropped.
1.) 10 Feb 2026 21:59:48
Twelve games to go and at the moment we are 4th. I think that is a Champions league qualifying position.
The amount of saving tackles Caicedo makes plus the amount of times this season he has been MOM, I can personally forgive him the occasional hiccup. I would think he is nailed for POS yet again.
Palmer taps in that open goal and the comments are different but that’s all “ifs buts and maybes. ”.
2.) 10 Feb 2026 22:26:35
Caicedo well below best tonight and is looking tired and made that gatal. mistimed tackle that let Leeds back into the game. We also need a settled CB pairing and if Fofana had come on for young Josh at half time and Cucurella left o we might have seen out the game ok or got a third goal. Obviously some blame on attackers for not taking chances and there we put in some v dangerous crosses but as said when we signed him that Delap not that good in the air despite strength and height.
But Pedro probably should have added to his tally and Palmer certainly shpuld have scored in last minute or so. missing from a yard out albeit ball delivered at pace and came to him. on the half volley. But miss looked dreadful for most watching. Woeful to drop 2 points at home against a side with such poor away form and who we had been so well on top of until Caicedo gives away the penalty. Painful result.
3.) 10 Feb 2026 22:44:50
JBS, I’m still not happy it was given as a pen.
4.) 10 Feb 2026 23:19:09
I thought it was a pen Tom but also thought there wasca handball by a Leeds player in build up to their scrambled second.
I think United last minute equaliser. means we're now 5th. arsenal, city, villa and united ahead of us.
5.) 11 Feb 2026 06:47:31
I will stick with my 2nd-4th prediction.
6.) 11 Feb 2026 11:49:33
I would always hope you would stick with that prediction Tom! I still stick with mine of 3rd to 7th! if only allowed three place prediction would probably go for 4th-6th given fixture list ahead of us. Will certainly hope you're right though!
7.) 11 Feb 2026 13:12:35
In my opinion Villa will collapse and so will City when the penny drops that they can’t catch the gooners. I expect Liverpool to hit form but I’m on the fence with Utd.
07 Feb 2026 21:54:16
Solid start to life under Rosonier. Long may it continue.
11 Feb 2026 17:02:28
Too hot, atleast for me JBS :)
10 Feb 2026 21:57:50
I'm in the north west of england and i really don't understand the weather thing. I got more rainfall a year in Brisbane Australia. Plus when it rained in aus, it actually rained. Here I can walk to work in the 'rain' and ill be dry. Makes no sense to me lol.
24 Jan 2026 09:21:14
No brainer for me.
22 Jan 2026 19:00:09
We do need a body, but would prefer a younger player from the academy playing. I think Acheampong should be playing a lot more than he does.
Shame about lavia but you guys dodged a bullet there ed001. What do you think is wrong with him? 3 years in and hasn't completed 90 minutes. Think there's still a chance he turns it around?
{Ed001's Note - considering the amount and length of his injuries, it would seem to be a genetic problem. It can't be all bad luck.}
18 Jan 2026 20:03:30
Hope so.
15 Mar 2026 21:28:24
I also didn't want to see Maresca go, but again, I cannot understand how people are only blaming Rosonier. Delap, Lavia, and Hato as subs when we were chasing a win against the opposition is horrendous squad depth.
We're so badly balanced, it's unreal, and, still, 4 years in, have not dealt with the glaring issues in the squad. It did not help that we made zero lateral moves in the summer, only sideways moves with no improvements.
15 Mar 2026 14:43:07
Tom, yes people would be talking about it if we lost. Has nothing to do with that. We beat Villa and still thought it was ridiculous.
15 Mar 2026 09:48:20
Could be the kitman's ideas, it's still ridiculous.
15 Mar 2026 09:45:29
I do think a good rule change would be a 0-0 draw, gaining neither team a point. No one wants to watch a 0-0, and it is a barrier to more people getting into the game.
14 Mar 2026 20:23:34
Nice to see you these last couple months, Melbourne. Take care, mate.