Rayvin

I'm wondering if that's why it's all quiet on that front at the moment - that it'll be defined by which way this lands.

They've been forced into it because we're about to walk away I would guess.

Aye the Mbeumo one I flat out don't get. As soon as it was clear he wanted 250k we dropped it, because he's not worth anywhere fucking near that. We didn't 'miss out' to him choosing them, they were just the only club stupid enough for pay that. So yeah, the fact that they've tanked their wage budget isn't our problem.

I really think it's this - Man Utd haven't stepped up to the table because they can't yet, and everyone is trying to draw this out to give them time to do that except us who want it done. It doesn't necessarily mean that Sesko prefers them, simply that he might only want to review all of his options. For all we know they haven't discussed terms with him either.

Did we not just give him 24 hours yesterday? We're gonna get to midweek and then go to 72 ffs.

Does Miley not count as a midfielder in the first team yet? I mean yes it's ridiculous even if he does mind, but I'm curious.

In which case who knows who he was meeting Can't wait for this nonsense to end tbh.

Do you remember why? Not sure I ever paid enough attention to pick that up.

Is Alan Robson still going..? I used to listen to that show as a teenager when I was trying to fall asleep. Which isn't a criticism of it, I found it interesting sometimes, but just the time it was on

So the rest of the team has the day off, meaning Howe has presumably given himself the entire thing to deal with this mess. Not a bad idea.

They didn't go on like us Sure. They're 'going on' more about Isak than we are and he's not even their player.

I don't know the show but I can imagine the gist

Ah sorry, I see your point now - yes, I also expect this will happen. But then I think that's what Howe is saying too, no? Isak is a solid professional and for all that has been made of this, I do believe that they'll find a way to repair it if we aren't selling him. So yes, fair.

The other thing that I suspect many fans of other clubs won't believe but for me at least is true - Howe is a bigger deal to this club than Isak, at the very least from the takeover until now. The latter going would be disappointing, the former going would be a catastrophe. As good as Isak might be, he's not worth more than Howe.

He can't just let him swan back into the team after all this - but that said, I do think that he will make every effort to resolve the situation to a satisfactory level or ultimately just bin the guy off and accept the sale. But I don't think there's really a scenario where he just bends over and lets Isak do what he wants. For one thing we've actively recruited players on the basis of their professionalism and attempted to avoid Ronaldo style personalities. If he abandons that here he loses credibility with the rest of the team. Man management does matter in the end, and while Isak might well be a great player, he's not worth unsettling the rest of the team. They need to believe in and respect Howe's authority, ultimately.

I think part of the difficulty on our side is that we had an initial amount of enthusiasm from players because they thought we were the second coming of City. That's clearly been proven not to be the case, and so now we're back to looking like a team fighting to establish themselves amongst the legacy teams with all the up hill battles that implies. Players might look at us and go, yes, this season they have CL but... do I really think they can hold that? Whereas Man Utd have years of reputation behind them showing that they can, and the financial muscle to back it up. We've traded on PIF's name for a while but it seems that period has ended.

I'm assuming Gurru is a Liverpool fan from the interactions so far? - if so then he's probably doesn't actually follow the club closely enough to understand why we would all believe Howe in this.

They don't seem to be an organisation which is particularly good at strategy. Probably too many spinning plates and poor command structures as a result of the general nepotism that must exist within it. I think they probably need to be led by the club more than the other way around - at least I hope that's the issue.

He strikes me as a pretty impulsive guy but I'm staggered by the idea that he just went and did all this without talking to Howe. Surely if he had done, something useful could have been achieved here. I wonder if having him back with his 'family' at the club might soften the situation somewhat though, get him back into Howe's hands again since Eddie is clearly the only person at the club who has the first clue how to manage anyone.

Hopefully it would at least mean that we end up with something incredible in terms of a fee.

They're empowered by the government though, and their task force has several MPs involved in it. I already withdrew the Labour point, I'm very happy to throw the Tories under it too, but nonetheless it is a mechanism for advancing government policy via ensuring media compliance with existing legislation. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jun/24/bbfc-asks-government-to-extend-monitoring-role-to-include-online-pornography There you go - they sat down with the government a month ago and argued that they should have the power to start banning things. From what I can tell it's still in discussion, but that the government is supportive and just negotiating on funding. So I suppose I can wait a few weeks for Labour to wave it through, and then complain about it The BBFC can't do anything, can't expand its remit, unless it is empowered to do so.

The taskforce was set up under the OSA which Labour have backed and implemented. Fair enough it's not their brainchild but it appears to be cross party anyway. If you prefer we can simply say 'the government'.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/aug/03/uk-pornography-taskforce-to-propose-banning-barely-legal-content-after-channel-4-documentary-airs Did Labour travel back in time to the 1800s? They are exploring banning the concept of 'barely legal' porn (i.e. 18 year olds..?) after that Bonnie Blue situation which potentially exposed a large number of young men to whatever harm Labour is claiming this to be. I actually think that entire set up was beyond pathetic and degrading to everyone involved - I've not watched it but what I've read makes it sound like the sort of thing that no one anywhere would find sexually arousing, and that it was done explicitly for clout. But be that as it may, I'm not sure it's up to Labour to police what grown adults are doing in their own time, even if they are young adults. So I have two issues with this - firstly, if they say you now have to be 21 to do porn, then surely all that means is that 21 becomes the new 'barely legal'. So if the issue is that the participants are too young then just fucking address that point. Raising the age there would be much easier for people to get on board with than banning shit left and right. Secondly they seem to be saying more broadly that the intent is to target porn that has people dress up as schoolgirls or whatever else they decide is unacceptable. Irrespective on anyone's views there, where exactly is the line going to be when they're satisfied that they have purified all evils What the fuck is this timeline.

I honestly wonder if Man Utd have done anything more than the absolute bare minimum to remain involved here, and we're trying to move up the timeline in order to cut off their chances of waiting until they've sold someone. It sort of makes sense in a way - if he's not prepared to commit to us in the next 24 hours then he clearly prefers them and would choose them if they got their act together. The risk then is on his side. Bird in the hand or...

I'm talking Sesko here rather than Isak mind. Agree with you on Isak but my point was more than if we were going to offer that to Isak, we should be able to offer it to Sesko.