Ne Moe Imya

You are correct to say that Virgil is back to his best. Or he's close, at least (his best was RIDICULOUSLY good, perhaps the best in league history), but the numbers strongly suggest that he will drop off significantly over the next two years. He could be playing at a high level still 3-4 years from now, but it will not be as high as his level is right now. The question will be whether he will accept that and be OK with a pay cut, or whether he will think that he deserves to be one of the highest wage earners in the squad out until he's 36 or so. I agree with you that we will definitely offer him a new deal, even under Edwards, probably heavily incentive-based and with a reduced base wage. The question is whether he will be inclined to accept it when he can likely earn more from another club elsewhere.

This won't be popular but I think one of the things that will infuriate our fans is going to be the fact that this is the exact kind of deal Edwards will NOT sanction. I actually think one of the main falling out points with Klopp that led to him leaving was re-signing Henderson, wasn't it? It would have been hugely unpopular to let him walk that summer, but Edwards was ready to do so and then Klopp insisted on giving him an extension. I would contend that history has borne out Edwards' instincts to be correct, but it's arguable. At any rate, I think we'll see VVD and Salah let go (not necessarily this summer) earlier than we would have under Klopp. "Let their legs go on someone else's pitch" and all that.

I've been amazed at just how good the academy lads have been this season. Normally you're lucky to have one big hit, and then a few here and there who can do spot duty and be third choice and do OK in 5-10 games a season. This season has been remarkable, to have Bradley and Quansah come through together, just as we needed them with the injuries. It took me 5 games or so to really see Quansah as the quality player that he is, you just keep thinking "he's doing OK" over and over, and then by the end of the game you realise he was actually consistently brilliant.

Nah, not having that. City are very good, as are we. Arsenal are good, but definitely a level below either of us. I think they will require quite a bit of bounces going their way to win it. They got one yesterday with our draw but I doubt they'll get enough of them over the next couple of months. I think it'll be City over us by a point or two in the end.

Have a mate who follows the academy quite closely and he told me that he'd be surprised if Koumas didn't make it at the top level. Born after Istanbul and he's finishing like that on his debut? You wouldn't bet against him, would you?

Interesting one, this. Obviously he's a brilliant lad, which colours our view of him as fans, but honestly, if the price were right, I could see us accepting something for him. While he still brings value to our squad, his legs do seem to be starting to go and sometimes when that happens the player falls off a cliff quicker than we're ready to admit. We will probably be looking for a starting-quality left back in the summer anyway, and if we had a good offer for Andy and we thought it could make the difference in being able to afford someone really good, I could see pulling the trigger on that and going with Tsimikas/Gomez/Beck as the depth options.

It is true that sometimes a really good midfielder can make his partner(s) look much, much better than they are, isn't it? Thankfully our data department seems very good at determining which of them is actually offering the real value! I'm thinking of us going for Fabinho when Bakayoko had just gone for more money to Chelsea because they thought he was the star of that Monaco midfield. Or when Chelsea (again!) thought that Drinkwater was worth 35m, just because Kante had made him look so good at Leicester.

If we're taking players off Chelsea the only one I want is Cole Palmer. Yes, he was stymied by Kelleher in the final, but for my money, he's the only player there I'd actually want. Only 21 and rumours they'll have to sell as he's the only player they could get positive FFP profit from in their squad.

The original is brilliant but this is just ... surreal.

Russia taking no chances on having the poison revealed this time. They learned their lesson after they poisoned him last time and then let him be transferred to a German clinic too soon after thinking that there wouldn't be any traces of it left (they were wrong). I'm sure whoever is in charge of his body this time was shown what happened to the person who made that mistake and will be quite eager not to repeat the experience.

Was running around like he was 52 out there. How on earth is he still in the Premier League?

Is it just me or does Danns move just like Nunez when he's running?

Elliott is a weird one. If it's a question of touch, he makes the right one more often than most. But if it's a question of physicality, he loses out more often than most. Just depends on what he's being asked to do in any given moment.

We've been the better team, but the combination of all the changes is what's killing us IMO. Elliott or Gakpo are fine when they're in there with Nunez and Salah, but the two of them together, when the other attacker is Luis Diaz is just lacking a cutting edge. Same in midfield. We are really missing Jones and/or Szobo, the combination of the three in there today just aren't quite up to it. Bradley and Quansah (maybe Virgil?) have been our best players, which is not a great sign.

Sorry to bump an old thread for a player who never came here, obviously, but what a disasterclass this lad's move to Chelsea has been! I know they drew and took points off City, but I kept my eye out for Caicedo yesterday, still trying to see the player we offered over 100m for and ... he is just not there. Endo hasn't set the world alight, but been solid enough (and for the price, has to be seen as a decent buy) but he's been MILES better than Caicedo this season IMO. Still torn between thinking Klopp would have turned him into Fabinho Mk2 and thinking he is just average and we are so, so lucky that Chelsea outbid us.

I take it you favour a different Russian opposition member, RP? One that has acceptable views on every issue, yet is simultaneously popular within the country of Russia itself? I don't think anyone has said that he was perfect in every way or never made a mistake. But in the ways that really mattered, he was one of the very few people willing to stand up to the corrupt regime, call it what it is, and then have the balls to back it up with his life. On the whole, he was an incredible person and anyone familiar with him can't help but admire his courage.

Collectors of high-end basketball shoes are famously a very pro-MAGA group of people.

I totally agree with you about the celebration and lack of spontaneity. But I think it is ridiculously disingenuous to pretend that there weren't FAR more injustices before VAR came into being. If your argument is "yes, we had a crucial match-deciding decision go wrong in an obvious way every other match, but it's worth having that to be able to celebrate goals in the moment more" then I can respect that. I disagree with it, but I can respect it. What I can't countenance is the idea that there are just as many bad calls now as there ever were, so what's the point in VAR? Personally, I think there's a middle ground somewhere, since the VAR genie is not going back in the bottle. There is simply no way the public and the media would tolerate important games being decided by obviously wrong offsides decisions like the one I posted above any more, not when there's a simple solution just waiting to be implemented. I think the best solution is probably that VAR will be used exclusively for handballs and red cards, they will develop an automated offsides technological solution (a la goalline technology) and we won't see VAR used as often any more.

This is spot on. If you live here in the US, you realise pretty quickly that no one cares about foreign policy. Well, a few people in DC and New York care, but the vast majority of Americans have a few foreign policy talking points they can regurgitate and other than that, care very little. Biden is unpopular because he's super old and most people think he is going senile. Has nothing to do with Gaza.

This was the best part, especially in light of the fact that it seems to violate the Russian laws against rehabilitating the Nazis. It was almost comical to see him trying to argue that of all people the POLES were to blame for starting WWII! Of course the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact got nary a mention.

"Some of the Myanmar rebel groups have had enough" is really burying the lede. The truth (which is way down in that article) is that the Chinese are sponsoring them as THEY have had enough, and the rebel groups are just doing the bidding of the people shipping them arms.

The real issue is how social media and both sides being terrified to lose (plus a terrible primary system) has led to an election between two of the least-qualified presidential candidates in history. I saw a poll where Nikki Haley was leading Biden in a hypothetical matchup by 12 points, and one would suspect that even someone as unpopular as Kamala Harris would beat Trump by 7-8. It's almost mindblowing how we've managed to get a repeat of the Biden/Trump matchup, given that reality.

The anti-VAR crowd seem to have completely forgotten how terrible the officiating was in the pre-VAR days. Does VAR get it wrong on occasion? Yes, and we should work to reduce that. Is it anywhere near as bad as it used to be? Not even close. There are millions of examples of egregious calls in extremely important games, but I always remember that but for this absolutely outrageous offsides call, Gerrard would have won the league and lifted the trophy as capitain: That sort of thing used to happen ALL THE TIME.

Tucker must be devastated. If there's one thing he does actually understand, it's how to manipulate dumb people. And the key to that is ... definitely NOT 45 minutes of boring historical minutiae.

Mate, just admit you were wrong and our transfer business last summer didn't come back to bite us - you can be as doom & gloom as you want to, but the purchases we made (and didn't) have obviously borne out to be pretty much all correct. The one thing I do have some questions about (and I was 100% wrong about this as well, to be clear) was Caicedo. Whoever suggested we should offer 105m for him needs sacking. He was always a "pretty good" player that for a host of reasons started to be hyped up as better and better than he actually was, leading to the insanity that happened on the day of his move. Watching him closely the other night was instructive. I know it's Chelsea and they have a number of players who aren't really performing but Caicedo is right at the top of the list for me. Just looks an absolute shell of the player he was at Brighton. If we had paid 105m for him it would have been a COLOSSAL mistake!