Official Premier League 2010/11 thread

[Dan]

On the subject of waving imaginary cards and swearing.

I wonder would it make a difference, if, like in rugby, referee's had microphones and you could hear what they and the players are saying to each other?

I'm sure they tried that once 20 years ago or so, Tony Adams spent the whole game calling David Elleray every name under the sun and it was all heard live on air. Adam's even went as far as shouting 'Cheat' towards Elleray in the game and for everyone to hear, they promise never to mic up the refs again after the incident.

[Lineker]

So Steve Kean has been given a long-term contract, until 2013.

Watch out top 5! Here comes Blackburn!!

[9 to 5]

As much as I didn't like Sam being sacked, if Kean is the guy the Venkys have total faith in and so far his results have been decent, then fair enough I am willing to give him my full backing.

[Starvinho]

I personally thought Blackburn would struggle when they got rid of Alladyce, but they've had a couple of decent showings since. Didn't know much about Steve Kean before hand but the Indian owners must see something in him to give him an extended contract. I think Blackburn will have a big summer, not sure how much exactly they'll have to spend but I'm sure it'll be more than recent years, but will they be able to attract the players?

[Lineker]

I think it can only end in tears. Anyway, we'll see soon enough.

Some stuff on the Olympic stadium:

Crystal Palace have unveiled plans to move from Selhurst Park to a new 40,000-seat stadium at their original home - now the National Sports Centre.

Palace chairman Steve Parish told BBC London: "This is where we started playing in 1905 and we want to bring Crystal Palace home."

UK Athletics have backed the plans providing they include a running track.

The news could have a major impact on plans by Tottenham to relocate to the site of the 2012 Olympic Stadium.

Spurs want to demolish the 2012 stadium and start from scratch while revamping the NSC for athletics.

The NSC in Crystal Palace Park is currently a 15,000-seat athletics stadium and hosts the annual London Grand Prix meeting, but it is in need of major refurbishment work.

Ed Warner, chairman of UK Athletics, said they would back Palace's plans providing the NSC's athletics legacy was retained.

If you build a stadium with football and athletics in mind [at the start] you can arrive at a much better compromise

"On the proviso that the Olympics stadium retains its athletics track and any redevelopment of Crystal Palace maintains a community athletics facility on or nearby the park, we would be supportive of the plans of Crystal Palace," he said.

Parish added: "We wanted our plans to go into the mix of the decision making process.

"There are issues out of our control over what people deem to be an Olympics legacy.

"Once the decision has been made we'd look to work with whoever else wants to do something here [at the National Sports Centre] and see if we can make those two things compatible.

"It's important people realise what our plans were and that we went public with those.

"We believe we can put the funding in place. We own Selhurst Park which will be the cornerstone of that funding."

The park was the original home of Crystal Palace FC when the club was formed in 1905 and they played there until the outbreak of World War One. They have been at Selhurst since 1924.

Tottenham's plan to build a new football-only stadium on the site of the main venue for the 2012 Olympics in east London has caused controversy as an athletics legacy was part of London's successful bid to host the Games in 2005.

To fulfil that obligation, their plan involves refurbishing the NSC as a 25,000-capacity athletics venue.

However, Parish would not commit to keeping an athletics track at the NSC should the Eagles move happen.

"Everyone in football would prefer a purpose-built football stadium," he continued.

"If you build a stadium with football and athletics in mind [at the start] you can arrive at a much better compromise.

"We would explore all options, but a football stadium would be ideal."

Premier League side West Ham have submitted their own bid for the 2012 stadium, which would involve them retaining the athletics track for use in elite events as well as by local communities.

The Olympic Park Legacy Company has a board meeting on Friday, 28 January when it is expected to decide on its preferred bidder.

Its recommendation then has to be ratified by two government departments - the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, and the Department of Communities and Local Government - and the London Mayor's office.

Palace were taken over by new owners CPFC2010 last June, when the possibility of relocating from Selhurst Park - parts of which are also in need of upgrading - was raised.

Politicians, Olympic officials and athletes have all had their say over the battle between Tottenham and West Ham to win tenancy of the London 2012 Olympic, but what about the group of people who would be most affected by the move?

Fans of both teams have told BBC Sport that they feel let down by a lack of consultation with their clubs over a decision that could have a massive impact on their lives.

And while the move is proving a divisive issue among both sets of supporters - with blogs, message boards and forums revealing a vast range of contrasting opinions about whether it would be a good thing for their team - one thing all fans seem to have in common is a passionate interest in the outcome.

"There has been absolutely no formal or informal consultation regarding the move to the Olympic stadium," said Spurs fan Alan Fisher.

"On the club's website, there's lots of detail about how the board are very proud of consulting the fans on things. But since the move to Stratford became an option, not a dicky bird."

Sam Haseltine, author of the West Ham Process blog, tells a similar story.

"The club have done very little to include the fans and that is a frustration to a lot of people," he said. "I don't know how they can go ahead with it without consulting the fans."

A Spurs spokesman, who declined to be named, told BBC Sport that the club would begin consulting if they are identified as the preferred bidder by the Olympic Park Legacy Company next week.

West Ham, who are believed to be following the same policy, insist fans groups back the move, highlighting a recent Premier League poll showed that over 50% of Hammers supporters had positive feelings towards the proposed move.

Dave Boyle, chief executive of Supporters Direct, says clubs considering changing their stadium should canvas opinion among fans as a matter of course.

Boyle cites the example of Everton, whose proposed move to Kirkby was approved by season-ticket holders, only to be rejected by the government.

"Any club looking to move stadium should consult the fans because it changes the lives of every one of them," said Boyle.

"In the case of Spurs, the whole identity of the club is up in the air here. The people who have the long-term ownership of the club should be involved in the decision."

Like many Spurs fans, Fisher is shocked by the prospect of his beloved club abandoning their north London home to set up shop five miles away in the east end of the capital.

A White Hart Lane regular for 40 years, Fisher was delighted by the club's original plan to build a new stadium adjacent to the current ground, but became increasingly horrified when it became clear that the club were actively pursuing the alternative option of adapting the Olympic stadium.

'We can't renege on 2012 promise'

"That wasn't just a canny back-up plan, it felt like a betrayal," Fisher added.

"This club is over 125 years old, this is where we are and who we are. Stratford may only be five miles away but it is not where we are and it is not who we are."

When Fisher expressed his anger at the proposals in a blog, he was staggered by the response, reflecting the strength of opinion on both sides of the argument.

"Normally I get 10 to 15 comments maximum and they are fairly sedate," he said. "But this time I had over 70, and some of them weren't for the faint-hearted. There are genuine and profound disagreements about the move and what it means to be a Spurs fan."

Tottenham fans in favour of the move to Stratford tend to argue that it makes financial sense.

The cost of the club's plan to demolish two-thirds of the existing Olympic stadium and rebuild it as a dedicated 60,000-seat football ground has been estimated at £250m, £200m less than the projected cost of the new stadium at White Hart Lane.

"Our history doesn't disappear because we move stadium," wrote MJBSpur on spurscommunity.co.uk. "Do your fond memories of childhood no longer exist once you move out? It's called progression and personally I'd take that ahead of sentimentality any day.

"Besides history is all relative. We are creating it every day and if we move stadium it just becomes another chapter in our club's history. It doesn't erase the past or mean that we can no longer be proud of past achievements."

The divisions among Spurs supporters are mirrored at West Ham, despite the switch involving less of a geographical upheaval.

Unlike Spurs, the Hammers are proposing to retain the stadium's athletics track and create a 60,000-capacity venue for football, athletics, concerts and community use.

"It's a hugely frustrating feeling that the club seem so keen to please everybody else except for us fans who will use it the most, for football," said Haseltine, an Upton Park season-ticket holder for 10 years. "We should feel we're in our football ground, not borrowing the space during winter.

"We do not want to be watching football over a running track. That is the main crux of the issue for many people."

Sean Whetstone, a West Ham fan for 30 years, believes the running track issue could be overcome by covering the surface with retractable seats during football matches.

He can see positives in the move, providing fans' interests are taken into account.

"We all want to make sure we have the best seat available, we all want good facilities, our pie and mash and our beer at half-time," he told BBC Sport.

"Nobody really embraces change but if it came with a promise of better gate receipts, more ambition and more money then every West Ham fan would say yes."

Back at White Hart Lane, fans opposed to the move have formed a protest group called We Are N17. A protest was staged at Sunday's 0-0 draw with Manchester United and some fans are threatening to boycott home games if the bid is successful.

However, Fisher concedes that even the five-mile trek to Stratford would not stop him supporting his club.

"Spurs are my team for life, for better or for worse and I would follow them to the stadium," he said. "In a sense I am aware that I am part of the problem because if enough people don't want to go then we could really make a difference."

The head of world athletics says London will have told a "big lie" to get the 2012 Olympics if the Olympic stadium is converted into a football ground.

West Ham and Tottenham both want to move to the venue after 2012 but under Spurs' plans the track will go.

"They'll have made a big lie during their presentation," International Athletics Association Federation chief Lamine Diack told BBC Sport.

"There will be no credibility... of a great country like Britain."

And Diack, a member of the International Olympic Committee, suggested that if the athletics track was scrapped Britain's chances of hosting future events would be severely compromised.

"[There would be] no way to comeback as far as my generation is concerned," he stated.

"You can consider you are dead. You are finished.

"This nation has a number of heroes in athletics. I could spend an hour, listing one by one all those who've achieved fantastic things in athletics. They are still there, involved. And this country, this city saying that I'm not able to have a stadium of athletics?"

Tottenham and West Ham will make their final submissions to the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC) on Friday.

The OPLC, which can ask either club to provide more details of their proposals, has a board meeting on Friday, 28 January when it is expected to decide on its preferred bidder.

Its recommendation then has to be ratified by two government departments - the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, and the Department of Communities and Local Government - and the London Mayor's office, with a decision expected by the end of March.

West Ham have pledged to retain the running track while Spurs intend to rebuild the stadium without the track.

In an effort to counteract any charge that the Stratford venue would lack the intimacy of football grounds that do not have running tracks, West Ham stated: "There are seats at Wembley stadium (regarded as having great views from every vantage point) which are further away from the pitch than any seat in our proposed stadium."

Labour's former Olympic minister Tessa Jowell has suggested that having a football club as the main tenant of the stadium would not be ideal, though her desire to see the track retained has seen her favour the West Ham bid.

"Newham Council, together with West Ham, commits to keep the athletics track, commits to external community involvement and is apparently commercially viable with partners Essex County Cricket Club and [entertainment provider] Live Nation," she said.

"Therefore, they meet the five tests that we applied for the legacy use of the stadium, to the commitments we made in the bid book and the heavy commitment to community engagement."

When asked how it would reflect on the bid, and Britain as a whole, if the athletics legacy was not kept at the stadium, Jowell simply said: "Badly.

"I had to pull Britain out of hosting the athletics World Championships in 2005 because we didn't have a suitable stadium and we couldn't afford to build a stadium in time.

"When we set about bidding for the Olympics, at the very heart of that was putting that right and making amends by saying part of our legacy will be a world-class stadium that can host world-class athletics events.

"When we made that commitment in the bid book they were carefully considered commitments that were in the interests of sport in this country.

"They were also persuasive in winning the bid for London 2012 so they can't be taken or set aside lightly."

West Ham's proposal of retaining the running track but reducing the capacity of the stadium from 80,000 to 60,000, which had looked a more legacy-friendly option, came in for heavy criticism on Wednesday.

Both Simon Clegg, the former British Olympic Association chief executive, and Michael Cunnah, Wembley Stadium's former chief executive, believe football and athletics cannot both be held successfully in the same stadium.

"It is quite obvious that the only viable model for the stadium is to have a football club as an anchor tenant, but football fans in this country want to be as close to the action as possible," said Clegg.

"I articulated this to Sebastian Coe a couple of years ago but the issue has become even more acute for me since I have been involved in a club.

"The entire bid was based on the principle of sustainable legacy and not creating white elephants and only 17 months out from the Games we have still not resolved the thorny issue of future of the stadium.

"It's madness to suggest we should keep a track just on the basis we may get an athletics world championships or European championships say once every 15 -20 years."

Former Tottenham chairman Lord Sugar told BBC Five Live that he understood why the issue of a possible move was hard for some fans to face up to, but they needed to think about the long-term security of the club.

"I can understand their hesitance, we're great traditionalists but I think what we have to consider is that we have to do the right thing for the future of the football club, to go to the next level," he said.

"To try and do that in Harringey is starting to look financially prohibitive.

"We don't have planning consent [to redevelop White Hart Lane], we have it with lots of caveats, and when you add up the cost of trying to comply with all of them, you see an unviable financial proposition.

"It's not a simple exercise. Fans need to understand that the first priority was to keep home where it is, but if it's financially unviable, what do you do?".

Former BOA boss Clegg prefers Tottenham's bid, but believes that rather than offering to redevelop the National Sports Centre at Crystal Palace as part of their plan for moving into the Olympic Stadium, Spurs should be focused on providing a sustainable athletics legacy in east London.

A group of former British Olympians, including double gold medallists Dame Kelly Holmes and Daley Thompson, are against the north London club's proposal to get rid of the track, writing in an open letter: "We urge the decision makers to ensure the track remains post 2012."

UK Athletics head coach Charles van Commenee also warned: "If London doesn't have a stadium where we can organise major championships in athletics, that puts you in a category in Europe that I can't even think of."

Monaco

Lamine Diack's comments on the future of the Olympic Stadium are the strongest and most significant intervention yet in the battle between West Ham and Tottenham.

The president of the International Association of Athletics Federations is the first to admit that English is not his strongest language. But no one involved in the process to select a legacy tenant for the £500m stadium can be in any doubt about what he believes after his interview with me earlier today.

Diack told me it was "unacceptable" that Britain was even discussing an option which did not include athletics at its heart. He added that the country's credibility would be "dead" if London reneged on its promise, given five years ago in Singapore, for the stadium to be retained as an athletics venue after the Games.

Just for the avoidance of any doubt, this is exactly what London said on page 23 of its bid book:

The 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games will provide an opportunity to deliver much needed sports infrastructure to the UK - and London in particular ... Specific plans for the facilities to be retained in the park include:

Olympic Stadium - conversion to a 25,000 seat multi-purpose venue with athletics at its core.

To be clear, neither West Ham or Tottenham will be offering to fulfil that promise when they submit their final plans to the Olympic Park Legacy Company on Friday.

Both clubs are bidding to rebuild the Olympic Stadium as a 60,000 seat football ground.

The crucial difference, in so far as the "Singapore promise" is concerned, is that West Ham will keep the Olympic running track, which would allow London to host a future World or European Athletics Championships.

They will also have the ability, they say, to reduce the capacity to 25,000 for smaller track and field events like an IAAF Diamond League meeting.

Tottenham will rip up the running track and instead fund a refurbishment of track and field's current home at Crystal Palace, which is in desperate need of investment and transport improvements.

At the centre of their argument is the belief that football and athletics will simply never be compatible in the same stadium. So, rather than crunch two sports together in an unhappy compromise, their option would give Spurs the new home they want at the same time as allowing athletics a permanent 25,000-seat stadium which could be expanded for major international events like the World Championships.

It is a dilemma for Baroness Margaret Ford, chairman of the OPLC, and her American chief executive Andy Altman, who are aiming to recommend a preferred bidder to their board next Friday. But the OPLC finds itself in a much happier position than it might have done when this process began.

Will Diack's comments make a difference to their deliberations? Probably not. Both Baroness Ford and Altman are not likely to be swayed by the noisy campaigns which have been mounted by both sides in the last two weeks.

Throughout this process they have made it clear they will make their choice based on five criteria - flexible usage of the stadium, a symbol of regeneration for London's east end, speed of redevelopment after the Games, commercial viability and value for money.

Although each has equal weighting, there is no question the last two are more important than any promises to athletics made in Singapore.

But are Diack's remarks potentially embarrassing for those who made those promises? Yes. Do they matter for Britain's credibility? Yes again.

It's worth remembering that Diack was one of the key IOC voters targeted by London's bid team back in 2005.

A Francophone who studied in Paris, Diack was naturally thought to support their rival bid for 2012. London was already in his bad books after they scrapped plans in 2001 to stage the 2005 World Championships after money for a new stadium at Picketts Lock could not found.

He needed a great deal of persuasion to get the athletics lobby on board and, as he told me today, if he knew there was even a chance that those promises to his sport would not be kept, he and others from track and field would never have voted for London.

Some will argue that, while that is all very well, the IAAF has not come forward to pay the £5m it would cost to keep the stadium as a 25,000 athletics venue.

They can't afford it because, like it or not, athletics offers one event (a World Championships) which would fill a 60,000-seat stadium once every 20 years for a given country. Premier League football does that at least once a fortnight.

So, with the athletics-only option long since buried in the rubble of the Olympic Stadium construction site, what this decision boils down to is this:

Is it more important to take a risk on West Ham's offer, the majority of which is publicly financed, but which nevertheless allows London to keep a promise?

Or is it better to opt for the safer financial bet of Tottenham, which is privately funded, but which will see Britain and London lose face?

A local council has arranged a £40m loan to finance West Ham's potential move into the Olympic Stadium.

The club is going head-to-head with Tottenham Hotspur to take over the site after the 2012 Games.

Councillors at the Labour-run Newham Council voted in favour of the loan, calling it a "strong package".

A BBC London investigation had raised a series of concerns about how the decision to loan the money was reached.

West Ham will have access to the loan, secured by the council from the Treasury, if they are named preferred bidder by the Olympic Park Legacy Company at the end of January.

Council chief executive Kim Bromley-Derry said: "We are unable to comment on financial aspects of the Newham Council and West Ham United bid for the Olympic Stadium because of a confidentiality agreement with the Olympic Park Legacy Company.

"However our proposal offers a strong financial package with no further call on the public purse."

It emerged before the vote that councillors had been unable to examine all the financial details until the last minute.

A "significant number" of backbench councillors were known to have reservations but were said to be "afraid" to speak out over fear of losing out on highly-paid advisory roles.

There were also impartiality questions over dozens of gifts from the club to Mayor of Newham Sir Robin Wales.

The council has insisted the mayor had "nothing to hide" over hospitality he received from the club, although it meant Sir Robin was unable to take part in the vote.

It did not comment on the advisory roles.

Speaking after the vote, Mike Law, a former Labour councillor who defected to the Conservatives, said: "I am not surprised it went through - the whole vote was just window dressing.

"If you look at the constitution the mayor is the sole decision maker - so it makes a mockery to say he's not involved because he didn't vote.

"Elected members in Newham had not been briefed properly, and they have been hoodwinked into ratifying a decision that had already been made."

After the vote a council spokesman refused to say whether it would be liable for the debt if West Ham defaulted, citing commercial confidentiality.

[HailtotheYo]

Isn't Crystal Palace like one foot in the administration grave with their money situation ? Or has that changed recently.

[Lineker]

They got taken over by a consortium a couple of months back. Taken from Wiki:

The next owner was entrepreneur Simon Jordan, who had made his money as an owner of Pocket Phone Shop. The club spent much of its time in the Championship over the next 10 years with a brief spell in the Premier League, but the club went straight back down on the last day of the season. Jordan was unable to put the club on a sound financial footing after 2008, transfer embargoes were put on and off the club a few times. Crystal Palace had to sell players like Victor Moses for £2.5m and José Fonte for £1.2m, but the club still went into administration again in January 2010, owing Jordan himself around £20m. The Football League's regulations saw the Eagles deducted ten points, and survival was only secured on the final day of the season after a memorable 2–2 draw at Sheffield Wednesday. During the close season a consortium, consisting of several wealthy fans, titled as CPFC 2010, successfully negotiated the purchase of the club stadium. Led by Steve Parish, the vocal representative for the consortium that included Jeremy Hosking, on completition of the deal for the football club iteself, Parish became club chairman. The consortium swiftly installed George Burley as the Eagles' new manager. However a poor start to the season saw him unable to take the Eagles out of the relegation zone. On 1 January 2011 after a 3–0 defeat to Millwall, he was sacked and Dougie Freedman was given caretaker Manager duties, which many expected only to last for a few weeks until a new manager was appointed, but the Palace legend was officially appointed as manager of Crystal Palace on 11 January 2011, signing a two and a half year deal.

[HailtotheYo]

Did a search for Parish and found this article:

My link

August is when they came out of Administration so I wasn't that far off. Good for them. I liked 'em when they were in the Prem.

[britneyspearsisgod]

With the man known as Lennie Lawrence coming in as their Assistant Manager, they've got a great deal there. Much of Bristol Rovers' recent success can he attributed in some regard to his influence on Paul Trollope and the team at the time. He'll help Dougie Freedman settle into the role of Manager very well.

As for the 2012 stadium? It should be an athletics stadium. Tottenham can redevelop White Hart Lane with little problems and West Ham can just go fuck themselves in many regards. Crystal Palace moving to their spiritual home is something I can support (seeing as Bristol Rovers would love to do that, but can't because IKEA occupy the space we use to have). I don't see how West Ham can logically have a running track around a football pitch either. That is pretty much a cardinal sin, as far as football goes.

Well, not really. But it would be shite.

[ChrisSteeleAteMyHamster]

Daniel Levy has to show willing because ENIC will want to "save money" if they can with stadium investment for Spurs. Tottenham have made their plans more and more outrageous. Harry doesn't want it, the fans don't want it, Tottenham council don't want it....Reading Levy's letters to the Spurs fans it sounds like he doesn't want it it's just he "must explore every possibility". West Ham DO want it and they're happy to bend over backwards.

If either club gets it then West Ham will get it.

"However, on 1 October 2010 Chairman Daniel Levy advised that the club had registered an interest in bidding for the stadium in conjunction with AEG (Europe) to keep its options open whilst there remained uncertainties about the success of the Northumberland Development Project." (wiki which is of course biased but that pretty much sums up what Levy has written).

[Starvinho]

So the Premier League fixtures are upon us again. United play Birmingham at Old Trafford tomorrow afternoon 3pm, and I fully expect to win. I think we'll run out easy winners and I predict 5-0 to the mighty Red Devils!!

Other fixtures this weekend are;

Saturday

Wolverhampton v Liverpool, 12:45

Arsenal v Wigan, 15:00

Blackpool v Sunderland, 15:00

Everton v West Ham, 15:00

Fulham v Stoke, 15:00

Man Utd v Birmingham, 15:00

Newcastle v Tottenham, 15:00

Aston Villa v Man City, 17:30

Sunday

Blackburn v West Brom, 16:00

Monday

Bolton v Chelsea, 20:00

On a side note, does anyone do the Sky Sports Fantasy Football? I've got my own mini-league and was wondering if there was any other leagues I could join??

[Starvinho]

Rafael has been fined £8,000 following his sending off at Spurs at the weekend. That's pocket change for players these days.

[Starvinho]

Tottenham manager Harry Redknapp 'mugged' in Madrid

Tottenham Hotspur manager Harry Redknapp has revealed he was mugged while attending a football match in Spain on Thursday.

Redknapp, 63, was in Madrid to see the Spanish capital's two main teams, Real and Atletico, play in the Copa del Rey.

He said two men fell to their knees in front of him and tugged at his trouser legs to distract him while four others took money and items from his pockets.

Redknapp said he did not report the incident to police.

He said he was at the match with his assistant manager Kevin Bond and had to borrow money from him to pay for a taxi back to his hotel and for dinner before returning to London.

'Got some sweets'

The former Portsmouth and West Ham manager said: "I'm walking round the outside of the stadium, it's a fantastic atmosphere, there's all little stalls there selling sweets.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

I just probably looked stupid or something”

End Quote Harry Redknapp

"I got some sweets, me and Kevin, and it was so packed. The next thing there's two guys on their knees in front of me and I felt someone pull my overcoat.

"I thought 'what are you doing?'. The next thing he's got my keys on the floor.

"I thought 'is he a blind man or someone having trouble walking properly?' What are they doing, these two blokes?

"I'm going 'let go of my trousers', pushing them away. While I'm doing that they're rifling my pockets, there were about six of them. And then they went.

Cristiano Ronaldo scores the only goal of the Atletico Madrid v Real Madrid game The Spurs manager was in Spain to watch Real Madrid beat Atletico Madrid

"I thought 'what are they doing?' I went to put my hand in my pockets and realised what they'd done.

"They took everything. All my money, credit cards, everything really."

The Spurs manager said he did not believe the muggers knew who he was.

"I just probably looked stupid or something, and they thought 'here's one here, he's not Spanish, obviously and we're looking for a foreigner'."

Real Madrid won the match at Atletico's Vicente Calderon Stadium 1-0. Redknapp said the incident unsettled him and he left about 15 minutes before the end of the game, which he attended to watch potential transfer target Diego Forlan, the former Manchester United striker.

A similar thing happened to my Dad a couple years ago in Spain, they got his wallet with about 400 Euros and he'd only been in the country an hour. They prey on the foreign the bastards!

[therockbox]

Not particularly pleased we've gone with Johnson at left back again. Seems like we're just bottling making a choice between him and Kelly at the moment, especially with two left backs on the bench (even if one of them is Konchesky).

[Hobo]

Torres makes it 1-0! I'm calling someone blames the female linesman for getting it wrong!

[therockbox]

No no, she got it right

Commentators on my stream were absolutely desperate to have a go at her though, until they saw the replay.

[Szumi]

Wow. That was incredible!

[DavidMarrio]

What. A. Goal.

[ChrisSteeleAteMyHamster]

Sian Massey!

Brilliant.

Hopefully more ladies to come.

[Pesci]

Meireles is awesome, it's just a wonder we didn't sign somebody like him sooner.