OhForAGreavsie

Mario never persuaded me that he was good enough but Chelsea is in his past now. Good luck to him..

Oops. I better make myself scarce.

Never earned one. That said, I think I read recently that he has no regrets about the Chelsea move. It's been a while, but he's found the team for him. I hope he goes on to have a storming career. Good luck Mario

Isn't going to happen. Far too old to improve his basic talent level. He's got what he's got, and will have to work with it. The comparison which keeps coming to my mind is Fernando Torres. Our former player had flaws in his game which some people overlooked but, Timo seems better than Nando to me. I don't believe we've bought the next galactico, but we've got someone who can contribute for us.

You have to remember I was reacting to the observation that Michy's absence was evidence that he isn't wanted. I simply pointed out that it might only have been evidence of SFL not needing a second striker on the bench yesterday. If Mando had been there in preference to Bats, then that would have been further evidence that Michy is done.

My point was just that Mando is next in line after Bats, and the youngster may even be ahead of Michy now. If Frank wanted a second striker among the subs it would have had to have been one of these two. Given that neither was there, it looks like Frank simply preferred a different balance on yesterday's bench. So, although it's obvious that Michy will be gone as soon as we can find someone who wants him, that's something we knew before yesterday. His absence against Villa is not, in itself, evidence of that fact. I'll give you this probably wasn't a point worth making.

Might be worth noting that Mando wasn't among the subs either so it's possible that Michy's absence was due in part to the balance Frank wanted on the bench.

All four with Werner & Havertz playing the roles of Henry & Berkamp from the Wenger glory years. Two strikers; one part winger, part centre-forward and the other part second striker, part playmaker. Don't think the two Germans are quite in the same league, but I can see similarities in the way they might be deployed.

I wasn't convinced before he arrived but he won me over. For me he is first choice, even if Havertz is added to the squad.

Listen to @Vesper folks.

Not watching. (Father's Day) How is Ruben doing? Edit: No need. Just been able to read a few comments about him.

I like your suggestion but I admit I have always been against the expansion of the numbers on the bench because i think it favours the richer clubs and they/we have enough advantages as is. Insisting on some kind of academy representation is potentially the compromise which would make me buy in to the plan. Without such a provision I'm dead against the idea. After all, the nine names on Man City's bench would be an entirely different kind of list to the one Norwich could muster.

As far as I know, his move to Leeds was only held up by the lockdown and is still on the cards. The club is always tight lipped about these things so I can only hope there was no disciplinary reason behind his departure. It is standard for scholars who will formally be released in June, to be told in January so they have plenty of time time find a new club. Like most academies, CFC work hard to help youngsters find the next step.

If there is no room for Lewis Bate on the subs bench today then Frank should really have suggested that there be ten players on the bench for these games, not nine. The three points are paramount of course, but it would be nice to see Lewis get his first involvement with the squad.

The incoming additions already improve our midfield and attack from their lowest points of the Roman era. If Kova and Pulli are only to be rotational options then that group starts to sound powerful. With Mando, Tino and Lewis Bate as squad fillers, the direction of travel would look pretty good. I'm not sold on Tammy. Nor am I convinced that there would be no place for Kova in our top team, but there would still be lots to feel positive about in this scenario.

Frank's comments about N'Golo seem very genuine to me so I can see him wanting the world cup winner in his prime position. In addition he'll want to maximise the forward power he's assembling so I can see SFL looking at 4-2-3-1.

The info on Fik and Callum came in response to a general question about injuries. Hopefully it's a good sign that Frank did not mention Reece when he detailed the problems the other two are suffering.

Paying fees in instalments is perfectly normal and would be factored in to any calculation. Anyway, we've signed two players for next season already. We all at least respect them both, and want them to do well. I especially love Timo's pace. I'm looking forward to seeing how frequently we can create opportunities for him to exploit it. It's a heck of a weapon.

They all do but I used a harsh word when I said lie. Perhaps they'd say that their public statements are diplomatic or commercially sensitive.

No, of course I don't have evidence. I also had no evidence that Arsenal lied when they said they only had £40m to spend last summer. Until they spent £70m+ on Pepe that is. Clubs say convenient things for public consumption.

I watched a video within the last week purporting to explain why VVD turned down Chelsea. Who knows the truth of it, but Chelsea's interest was widely talked about.

I think this is a nonsense excuse. If they wanted him, they'd have made it happen.

I agree but i wasn't commenting on the accuracy of their claim. Indeed i was rather implying that the evidence so far suggests that they were not right. I was simple comparing their attitude to the Pepe deal last summer, with our attitude about todays announcement. We've both read posts in the transfer forum claiming exactly that about this player, or that player. We have also read many statements claiming that Van Dijk to Liverpool was indeed a bargain. Well, we can pick a number and call that the cut-off point but in the end it comes down to player performance. Were the fees we paid for Bats, Timoue and Alvaro bargains, or even acceptable because they were all £50m or less? Player performance, not player cost, is the true yardstick. I do think we have bought two players who will give us something. I will be shocked if either is a bust, but we need to judge them on how they perform, not on how great we want to believe they will be.

Not factually accurate. We were reported to have made an offer for Van Dijk for example. The plain truth is that if Liverpool had wanted Werner they'd have paid the fee and satisfied him about the game time he could expect. They did not want him enough to make the deal happen however, and there is a reason for that. Perhaps it's as simple as they believe that their existing front three will all be ahead of Timo for the big games. Fair enough, but that is at least one club whose assessment puts a firm ceiling on expectations for Timo's contribution. There is a reason no club who Timo might have preferred to play for pushed through a deal for him. This is an inescapable truth. I like Timo, but let's not go overboard with our expectations.

There was a video in which several AFTV regulars were raving about the Pepe deal. They talked about it being the biggest deal of the summer but how, relative to the quality of the player and the list of clubs who were said to have been in for him, they had done a great deal on the fee. In essence they were saying what you're saying now; they felt they had a bargain. I was like you, I'd have liked Pepe to come here, and was unhappy that another PL club got him instead. A deal can only be judged a bargain if the player meets or exceeds expectations however. They spoke too soon last summer, and I'm suggesting that we should avoid doing so now. I remember those Arsenal fans being absolutely stoked that they'd 'beaten' all the top clubs in Europe to capture the Lille man. None of them stopped to wonder, "Hold on a minute, why have we beaten them?" I'm suggesting we at least bear that question in mind.