David Kelly

Very true.

His disgraceful way of treating his employees (Keegan, Shearer, Jonas, zero hour contracts etc) are unforgivable in my eyes. He could go on and do something unbelievable for the club and I could forgive the relegations and the stadium name change and all the other shit. But I won't forget about how he's treat people.

Aww happy birthday for yesterday Dave.

On Jonas's birthday it's easier to remember that than ever.

Interesting what he says about no real interest in Hart, Clukas or Grosicki. I'm inclined to believe Caulkin a lot more than the rest of the Journo's.

I'll be really upset if we don't hit around the £20m mark on a couple of players but I can't see us getting to £30m+ this season. Maybe next year if we stay up.

Was always just a savings fund that bet.

Don't worry, we're not.

Aye the first episode was difficult to follow. I just went with it and it made more sense as it went along.

To be fair the article offers a lot more depth than I did. It's clearly not written by Ryder.

Ha no I saw he linked to the chronicle and didn't bother reading it as I assumed it would be bollocks. I actually found it on a City blog. Took me literally minutes too!

Done a bit digging over lunch and it appears that Girona have some sort of tie in with City and it looks like he signed for the them in an attempt to stop Girona from leaving them. They immediately loaned him back to try and help Girona's promotion push. That wasn't successful but he played well and caught Eibar's eye and they activated a release clause that he had. City made a million on a player that quite possibly never set foot in England and had never been intended to play for them. Apparently Arsenal were linked with him in December.

Took me a minute to get that

Would also be interesting to know if it's thought that his release clause has meant we've got a bargain. It sounds like he had a good season with Eibar, these days that usually seems to add up to £20m.

I'm sure that's part of it but it seems a bit strange they didn't have him spend any time with them at all by the looks of it.

The stats about most clearances and headed battles won are positive things for me. Obviously he wasn't playing for one of the strongest sides so he would have been under more pressure but those are the type of things he needs to be good at in this league for us. It'd be interesting to find out more about what went on with City.

Of course Butler has done nothing for Lancs. I think they opened with him last week and he might have even went for a duck.

I think the issue here is more my use of comic book films as a comparison. I can't actually think of a poorer film I've seen in a long time than Transformers. If Hopkins can be made to look like he's never acted in his life then it's obviously doing something very wrong. Yet I could still find some fun in it (maybe actually because it's so bad). I really struggled to that with the Marvel/DC films that I mentioned despite wanting to.

Aye, I'm sure Hameed will come back but there's no way you can pick him at the moment. For me, we should have either went with someone like Stoneman to open and play Jennings at 3. Or play a different keeper and move Bairstow up the order as a batsman.

I thought Civil War was terrible. Totally bloated and almost completely lacking in fun (Spiderman aside). Despite the action sequences I was bored to death by it. I found it very similar to Age of Ultron. Cap 1 is just like Wonder Woman without the benefit of Gadot. Obviously I realise it's a bit more original but I really don't go for the superhero films set in the past (except the recent X-Men ones which I thought did it well). It's a shame because I really enjoyed The Winter Soldier. I don't want it to sound like I rate the Transformers films though. The first one was ok but the rest are pretty much dross. It was just that I went in to the theatre (I've got a limitless card for the Odeon or there's no way I would have gone to see it) with really low expectations for this one. Even my mate who I usually go with, who will watch any shite, said he was expecting us to walk out of it part way through given the reviews it got. There was loads of things wrong with it but despite that I found it reasonable fun. The thing is, I see the Marvel (and even now the DC) films getting decent to good reviews (Ultron, Wonder Woman and Suicide Squad got 4 stars in Empire, Civil War got 5) but they're giving Transformers a mauling. I'm certainly not going to defend Bay, who I don't rate at all, but those superhero films, while better made, aren't that much more enjoyable. Even when I do like comic books.

You can say that Ballance deserves another chance given his superb county form and he did have a pretty good test record before he was brought back at a stupid time when he was out of nick. But it's daft bringing him back in the top order. I thought Stoneman might have got a chance. It was interesting to hear Nasser say on Saturday that he'd spoken to Bayliss about him and he'd said that he'd just not had the chance to see him play.

The ones I said in the post you quoted. The second avengers and Civil War. And you can add the first Captain America, the second Thor and the third Iron Man too. All of those are turgid.

Ding Dong, Len, Karzi and Cone are probably their only saleable assets. They think they can get £20m + for the last three. I think they're being ambitious given Borini has gone on a £5m loan with a view to buy. Mind you after they got £30 for Prickford who knows.

First one was canny enough I thought. I've never had the urge to re watch it mind.

I see they're claiming they have £20m + any future sales revenue. From the rumblings that have been coming out of there that seems optimistic. But even if it isn't, they have no strikers, barely a defence and midfield full of crocks. It'll take some doing to create a squad capable of mounting a promotion challenge with that money given some of the other teams they are up against next season.