Generic small time football blather thread FOREVER

[ewerk 30217]

4 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

Yeah but fitting players into positions where they can’t show their absolute best under the instructions of the fuckin English football media needs to stop if England want to win. 
 

That means Foden starting sat in behind Harry Kane. I’ll let Bellingham play beside Rice because he absolutely will but if you ask me that should be John Stones  

 

Pep is happy enough for Foden to play wide left and Bellingham has played No.10 all season so keeping them in those roles would be the least disruptive.

[LondonBlue 749]

4 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

Yeah but fitting players into positions where they can’t show their absolute best under the instructions of the fuckin English football media needs to stop if England want to win. 
 

That means Foden starting sat in behind Harry Kane. I’ll let Bellingham play beside Rice because he absolutely will but if you ask me that should be John Stones  

 

agree on Jon Stones, assuming he's fit and assuming we can rely on those behind him

 

[LondonBlue 749]

did you see Foden's positioning for both of his goals against west ham. he started in a midfield 3.

[PaddockLad 17053]

4 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

Pep is happy enough for Foden to play wide left and Bellingham has played No.10 all season so keeping them in those roles would be the least disruptive.

I’d play Englands best player in his best position. There’s been a drop off from Bellingham after his literally unreal start. Look at the World Cup in 66. Englands greatest ever goal scorer wasn’t in the XI for the final. Why? There was a blend of players available better suited to winnning… 

[Dr Gloom 21792]

11 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

Pep is happy enough for Foden to play wide left and Bellingham has played No.10 all season so keeping them in those roles would be the least disruptive.

 

i heard bellingham has been playing a deeper midfield role lately

[PaddockLad 17053]

It’s 33 to be cut to 26 on June 7th. Hope one of them is that despicable little cunt Maddison  

[Ayatollah Hermione 13766]

Lads, we barely have a decent centre half that we can put WITH Stones. I’m not sure putting him in central midfield and having an untested centre half team of Maguire and whoever the fuck is the best idea I’ve ever heard 

[Dr Gloom 21792]

left back is one glaring weakness in an otherwise good-looking squad. i'm pleased he's finally picked players in form instead of old favourites such as henderson and rashford. 

 

bowen, gordon and palmer all deserve to be in. 

 

lewis hall looks a better option at left back than an undercooked shaw or half-fit trippier playing out of position 

[Toonpack 9163]

3 hours ago, Dr Gloom said:

i reckon eddie would be good value over a beer. he's a self-confessed introvert who probably warms up and after a couple of pints, revealing an impish and dry sense of humour. 

 

klopp on the other hand loves the smell of his own farts, and after a couple of attitude adjusters would even more crushingly boring than he is in his post-match interviews

Can you imagine the scenes if you got the round wrong

[ackas 311]

3 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

left back is one glaring weakness in an otherwise good-looking squad. i'm pleased he's finally picked players in form instead of old favourites such as henderson and rashford. 

 

bowen, gordon and palmer all deserve to be in. 

 

lewis hall looks a better option at left back than an undercooked shaw or half-fit trippier playing out of position 

 

Trips really shouldn't be anywhere near that squad.
He's got more in common with Henderson and Rashford.
 

Edited May 21 by ackas
typo

[PaddockLad 17053]

13 minutes ago, Ayatollah Hermione said:

Lads, we barely have a decent centre half that we can put WITH Stones. I’m not sure putting him in central midfield and having an untested centre half team of Maguire and whoever the fuck is the best idea I’ve ever heard 

Youve spelled Fikayo Tomori wrong. But that’s ok

[Ayatollah Hermione 13766]

9 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

Youve spelled Fikayo Tomori wrong. But that’s ok

Aye because he’s in the squad, isn’t he?  

[PaddockLad 17053]

1 minute ago, Ayatollah Hermione said:

Aye because he’s in the squad, isn’t he?  

[Dazzler 9346]

10 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

Youve spelled Fikayo Tomori wrong. But that’s ok

Some kid for Liverpool over Tomori is criminal tbh. You'd think when we're fucked at LB even Burn would be getting a consideration (I know, I know!)

[Alex 34766]

1 hour ago, ewerk said:

 

A fit and on form Luke Shaw starts for England but he hasn't kicked a ball since February.

33 man provisional squad that needs to be finalised / trimmed by 7th June I think I read. So it kind of makes sense to give him the chance given it’s a problem position 

[Holden McGroin 6471]

 

So my boy Gareth needs to trim 7 players from this fine squad. Im going with:

 

Trafford

Quansah

Branthwaite

Eze

Wharton

Bowen

Maddison

 

I personally wouldn't take Shaw or Trippier due to fitness issues. I bet Southy ends up playing Gomez at LB. We are so light there.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 21 by Holden McGroin

[aimaad22 4103]

2 hours ago, LondonBlue said:

Accounting firms are careful when they know theres an issue as their reputation is on the line

 

Having spent years in one, it doesn't necessarily work that way.

 

1. Statutory audits and other audit engagements aren't designed to detect fraud, if you pick up official audit engagement paperwork you'll see disclaimers around that. 

2. Auditors and big firms know the sum of feck all usually, they occupy themselves with filling checklists and forms, and rarely know much about whats really going on at the company. They also dont want to upset their big money clients. Big firms are routinely fined millions of dollars for lack of care and substandard work, just google it if you wish. 

[Gemmill 44242]

Aye I meant to come back on this. I worked in audit for 6 years, and would spend weeks out at a client finding a bunch of shit they'd done wrong/bent in their favour. The partner would come out on the last day, spend an hour with the CFO, and come out in agreement that none of what we'd found was material and they could stick with what was there in the first place. 

 

Auditors work on materiality. The sums that we're talking about might not even have registered as worthy of testing, never mind been flagged up. 

[LondonBlue 749]

37 minutes ago, aimaad22 said:

 

Having spent years in one, it doesn't necessarily work that way.

 

1. Statutory audits and other audit engagements aren't designed to detect fraud, if you pick up official audit engagement paperwork you'll see disclaimers around that. 

2. Auditors and big firms know the sum of feck all usually, they occupy themselves with filling checklists and forms, and rarely know much about whats really going on at the company. They also dont want to upset their big money clients. Big firms are routinely fined millions of dollars for lack of care and substandard work, just google it if you wish. 

 

fair enough. is that also the case when auditing a company that is accused of fraud?

 

[Isegrim 9707]

4 hours ago, LondonBlue said:

 

obviously i have to defend that load of tripe.

 

 

UEFA case

 

the PL case appears to be based on those self same emails.

those emails were stolen.

they were also edited.

and they were mis-interpreted.

they were out of context and CAS saw the rest of the emails putting them in context

many further points such as - It was demonstrated that the sheikh referenced by initials was not in fact sheikh mansour (thats why you need the whole picture)

the emails were declared as admissible by CAS.

the time barred charges were the same as charges that weren't time barred (just different years). no evidence was provided for any of the charges.

even with the emails it was repeatedly ruled that there was no evidence of wrong doing (bar non co-operation)

an excerpt from the CAS ruling littered with highlighted no evidence statements.

 

 

The non cooperation fine was reduced from 30m to 10m for one simple reason.

we co-operated fully up until UEFA leaked business sensitive information to the press.

we then stopped cooperating and stated to CAS that we didn't feel we could trust UEFA anymore.

CAS accepted that but the fact remained that we didn't cooperate so they reduced the fine from 30m to 10m

 

Premier League Case

 

stolen evidence is inadmissible under english law.

The PL is a club following club rules but they still have a duty to follow English law and it states as such in their handbook.

presumably the PL are looking for us to give them the evidence that shows we've done wrong.

City are understandably saying - but we haven't done wrong so that evidence doesn't exist. so tell us what documents you want. PL say they want everything and City say you can't have everything as some is confidential so be more specific.

PL want to see documents from Etihad but Etihad have no such obligation. However Etihad are being floated so all documents will be available then (if we're guilty that would seem a bad move on our behalf)

PL haven't even spoken to Mancini

Its widely reported that the PL is David and city are Goliath. But the PL are represented by the finest in the land so thats poppycock.

Its widely reported that City tried to keep the case private because they've done wrong. But actually the City AND the PL wanted it kept private.

can't be bothered with listing more.

 

Man City's Crime ?

 

At the end of the day, win or lose all city have actually done is put money into their business.

 

I won't lose any sleep over that.

 

They haven't committed murder. hello liverpool fans

They aren't drugs cheats. hello liverpool squad and your asthma, hello man united, rio, etc

They haven't passed PL rules to stop competition, hello cartel

They haven't hacked rival club databases - hello liverpool

They haven't committed fraud - hello man united and all.

They haven't taken money out of football - hello man united

 

i had minor surgery this morning and needed a mini rant, let's hope i never have major surgery

 

mini rant over - sorry lads

 

I think I covered this before but it does still not look very good for City that they didn’t win the UEFA case because they actually could prove not having done anything wrong but the case got list in legal technicalities and formal stuff so that in the end time was running out. Actually not too dissimilar what Trump is trying to achieve at the moment and how some FIFA officials as well as German officials got away with crimes related to the WC in 2006.

[Isegrim 9707]

https://x.com/craighope_dm/status/1792974802598174930?s=12&t=7EP1snWKh3ho3iDGAoo5gw
 

Throw the book at them.

[Gemmill 44242]

Poch leaves Chelsea.

 

Boehly is a full on dipshit.

[Gemmill 44242]

 

[trophyshy 7066]

Off to Sunderland. 

[ewerk 30217]

Oh aye, just after overtaking us. The absolute cunt.