jimsleftfoot

To wildly celebrate does seem quite mad but I can appreciate why City fans would like to see Melbourne do well. I don't see too much of a problem with ownership when the clubs are in such diverse locations, another club inside Europe would be too much.

Agreed, I would say this has been our most on-topic summers in a while. I actually think that's a pity.

So we agree a deal in principle before the trial. We are then impressed so wish to sign him. Player then asks for more. Yes see how that works.

In fairness, i've started to take notice when you've said something as your record has been good. Keep it humble and let the record speak for itself.

You are coming across as being a little big headed about it.

It's weird and unconventional and perhaps something has gone wrong, but at the end of the day does it really matter?? Not really.

Edit - Especially if you add 'for Oldham'. At the end of the day, he was an all round great player which is much much than just a prolific scorer and one of the reasons the team scored lots of goals.

In fairness, we had a mini rivalry before that.

The argument is not what he has done, but what he might yet do. He might not of course do much at all, but its worth giving him a try and see what happens.

Given his comments after Melbourne i.e. is JCH our 20 goal striker, I think he wants to give JCH a chance before bringing anyone in.

That's right, we're unlikely to have any VAT costs ourselves, but if Liverpool shelled out a headline figure of £7m, its likely that the gross inclusive VAT amount would actually be £8.4m. However, as Liverpool are making fully taxable supplies e.g. sale of tickets, merchandise, catering, booze, players etc, they should be able to pay City the £8.4m but recover £1.4m from HMRC through their VAT return. City would have also had to pay over the £1.4 m VAT to HMRC that they collected. Assuming Latics recieve 20% of £7m = £1.4m, we would invoice City for £1.4m + £280k VAT = £1.68m, we would pay over £280k to HMRC but City would be able to recover £280k themselves.

Yes but the buying club can recover the VAT incurred and so the VAT can be ignored. Only generally sticks at end of the line e.g. Sale of tickets to consumers.

Still the Oldham badge pic on his twitter feed

A stewardess missed the earlier tragedy by swopping shifts at the last min. Her husband was on the most recent one because he also swapped shifts last min.

Back to Yorkshire, Ryan is spitting his dummy out as the FL have issues with the fact he and Louis have no money.

I think it could have been handled better for PR purposes but you've got a point and it was best for the club that Dickov walked rather then was sacked. On the other hand, the media were also unfair to SC in having a go at him. As good as the Liverpool game was, it merely highlighted what we weren't doing in the league.

I never really understood Corney there. It did make him look a bit of an idiot really and provided the perfect getaway for Dickov, unless that was his aim in the first place?

The people who work for Deloitte and the like are often young but get a lot of exposure and experience by the time they are mid-30's. As Glossop says, I doubt he will have the sort of money to invest but he might no a few people. My boss is ex-Deloitte so will ask about him.

They are talking about total merchandise sales of $1.5 b

I can only assume it hands over a lot of power to Adidas as otherwise, I don't see the sense.

Good fun, nice one Stevie. After doing bugger all in the knock out stages, the one and only thing I did right was predict the winner.

Have you got a website for donations?

A bit of social responsibility = good PR and free advertising. I don't think we will be replacing the NHS anytime soon .

Yes though we didn't make the league cup final last season.

3 at the back with wing backs?