So this new football regulation thing was leaked. I haven't seen the article but heard it discussed. Don't believe there's any real interest in proper regulation because it's been said many times before and we still end up with dodgy owners. But forget the technicalities of it. All I want to know is that if this proposed system was in place, would the Saudis still have been able to take over Newcastle? Because I suspect there would not be any criteria disqualifying them, which makes the whole discussion pointless. Plus all you need is the football authorities asking such questions as: Football Authorities: "So Mr Saud, although it gets all it's funding from Saudi Arabia is the organisation running Newcastle anything to do with Saudi Arabia?" Saudi Prince "No it isn't" Football Authorities: "That's good enough for us" Because as long as they are prepared to accept such ****, it doesn't matter what you write in a regulatory agreement.
Neil Redfearn went on to play over 1,000 professional games, none of which were for Forest! That letter was prior to his last year there as a kid. His missus, who posted the tweet, also played hundreds of pro games. None of them were for Forest, either.
Aubameyang removed from Chelsea’s champions league squad… Lol. £35m new boy, Badiashile also misses out.
I understand that there's going to be a Chelsea team meeting in a short while. By which I mean their team is going to be meeting each other.
There’s even rumours Chelsea are trying to force Aubameyang out . Think the Turkish window is still open, perhaps they’re holding hope someone from there has interest, Turkish clubs have had a penchant for signing poor performing/ unwanted Prem players.
And in light of that, Istanbul Basaksehir have just cancelled Ozil's contract. He's retiring from the sport, apparently. Now he can spend more time with his best man and Turkish dictator, Recep Erdogan.
Tonight's entry to "subtle things that will not be mentioned because they didn't become relevant" is that the ref added on time for time wasted in extra time. Absolutely nothing wrong with that, should happen all the time. But it doesn't. The general label for this is "inconsistency" but the problem is it's inconsistent in favour of certain teams (which is not the same thing). How often do we see the refs blow the instant extra time is over, regardless of what has happened in extra time? Call it what you want (I call it bias), but can only be served by independent timekeeping. No, not the officials version of independent, but perhaps a clock on the screen that we can all see stop and start.
There are definite culprits for time wasting. I didn't see any time wasted in that match though. Fulham were at it from minute 1 to minute 97.