I think we'll better 52, we should be good for three or four more wins and wouldn't put it past us to nick something of one the top 4 teams we have to play.

If we can beat West ham and Villa though we'll give ourselves a great chance. At least its a damn site more interesting than anyone really expected it to be.

The real issue for the remainder of our season is getting back to nearer to a full strength team, particularly the forward line. If we can keep Cunha fit from now on and add Bellegarde and Hwang to the squad then we won’t be far away from a European spot. If we can hold our own in those run of 3 games against claret and blues, maybe get two wins then we would likely be at least 8th. And we still have a game in hand against Bournemouth at home

As for our terrible defence we have conceded the same number of goals as Brighton and less than West Ham, Newcastle and Chelsea - the teams we are competing with for league position

Not turning out so good for Broja and Fulham. A clause in the loan agreement says he has to start 10 games or Fulham pay a penalty of £4 mill. He hasn't started 1 with 9 to go.
Bullet dodged.

comment by Zombie Wolf (U8869)
posted 3 minutes ago
Not turning out so good for Broja and Fulham. A clause in the loan agreement says he has to start 10 games or Fulham pay a penalty of £4 mill. He hasn't started 1 with 9 to go.
Bullet dodged.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

That is a ridiculous deal they agreed to. Prem clubs shouldn't be agreeing to start anyone on loan.

We have also conceded more than Everton, the same as Fulham. 44 goals in 28 isn't particularly good and we have all seen the total chaos consistently over thr season at thr back bar a good game here or there.

Last season we kept 11 clean sheets this term so far only 5

Strange one at Fulham is Muniz who hasn’t scored goals for them or on loan at Middlesbrough but now suddenly he can’t stop scoring every game. And with Jimenez now fit, Broja may well not get games.

Have to say I saw on tv, Broja come off the bench for them last week. And I thought he looked pretty good. Mobile, strong and pretty quick. He’ll likely be a decent signing for someone next season

comment by Cinciwolf----JA06 NFL Fantasy CHAMP 2023 (U11551)
posted 1 minute ago
We have also conceded more than Everton, the same as Fulham. 44 goals in 28 isn't particularly good and we have all seen the total chaos consistently over thr season at thr back bar a good game here or there.

Last season we kept 11 clean sheets this term so far only 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Congratulations on finding Everton’s record, the only team outside the top 6 to have conceded less than us. Mind you they’ve only scored 29 cause they’re so defensive. As for clean sheets in case you haven’t noticed we’ve been a more attacking team this season which inevitably has lead to us leaving some gaps defensively. Chaos, of course not, but we only have the joint eighth best defence in the league. Shameful. Maybe you long for us going back to scoring less and conceding less, despite the fact you’ve spent the last few years moaning about that very thing.

My bad, we have looked solid as feck.

It's not like a few years ago for sure when we scored a ridiculously low number of goals to finish 7th, we currently have a GF and GA for a team in or around 9th. Two things improve that, lower GA and higher GF. We've all acknowledged that although we're scoring more we need to improve up front and need a decent CF so why shouldn't it also be suggested that we need to improve at the back when we're conceding more?

(1.56 conceded per game this season versus 1.52 last )

comment by Cinciwolf----JA06 NFL Fantasy CHAMP 2023 (U11551)
posted 1 day, 8 hours ago
Just glad everybody is finally on board, blew my mind when people would trash him. His crossing has been excellent as well lately and his durability has improved, full 90s commonplace now.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just got back from vacation and read most of the comments on here. In case I'm included as one of those who "trashed" RAN, let me make myself clear. I've always maintained that he is not a full back and is better suited as an attacking WB. (the same goes for Semedo, by the way). I even suggested that he should maybe play up front as a forward last week. As of late he has been our best player and I congratulate him. I hope he continues his vein of form. I'd also like to see more of Hugo Bueno playing behind RAN, if the latter plays as a winger.

comment by Oldgoldilox (U17303)
posted 11 hours, 20 minutes ago
It's not like a few years ago for sure when we scored a ridiculously low number of goals to finish 7th, we currently have a GF and GA for a team in or around 9th. Two things improve that, lower GA and higher GF. We've all acknowledged that although we're scoring more we need to improve up front and need a decent CF so why shouldn't it also be suggested that we need to improve at the back when we're conceding more?

(1.56 conceded per game this season versus 1.52 last )
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course we want to improve in all areas of the pitch but surely it’s the case that we’ve made great progress all over the pitch this season.

This time last year no team in the league had scored less than us. And only 5 teams had conceded more.

This year there are 8 teams that have scored less than us and only 7 teams that have conceded less.

That’s the progress GON has made

We've improved this season, no doubt about it. Now let's improve a little bit more.

Anyone disagree with that?

Forest deducted 4 points.
We may as well have spent a bit more if that’s all they are getting.

In relegation places now.

Slightly surprised that Forest only penalised by 4 points. Everton got 6 and reports were suggesting that Forest had broken the limit by a bigger margin

Wouldn’t it be sad if MGW were to be relegated

The worst thing to me about this whole palaver is that appeals against the deductions given to Forest and Everton may not be concluded until after the season has ended. Which means who goes down may well be decided by men in suits not by what happens on the football field. Surely that process should be timetabled to finish by mid April so the clubs go into their last few games knowing what they need to achieve

comment by Spangles (U17289)
posted 52 minutes ago
The worst thing to me about this whole palaver is that appeals against the deductions given to Forest and Everton may not be concluded until after the season has ended. Which means who goes down may well be decided by men in suits not by what happens on the football field. Surely that process should be timetabled to finish by mid April so the clubs go into their last few games knowing what they need to achieve


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Tantamount to a VAR check that goes on for three months. The games gone crazy.

The whole PSR set up re sanctions is a farce. I'm guessing now that the four point penalty probably comes with an implied message " don't bother appealing because you'll get no joy from that" in the hope that they'll take it on the chin and it's already sorted. There's still an outstanding judgement on Everton too.

I have some sympathy with Forest here: they spent significantly as they knew they were in the Prem for the following season. They should be assessed in the same way the clubs they are then competing against are. Did they know the limits on losses doesn’t jump up just because they were promoted? Presumably so, and I guess the reason the rules are set like that is to stop clubs in the championship gambling to get there. But one you are guaranteed to be in the Prem the rules do seem to hamper you when it’s clear you need to invest to compete so I don’t see why the threshold doesn’t jump up immediately.

Conversely, I think relegated clubs should have a transitional period to get their finances in order as it is much harder to immediately jump to the stricter losses that Championship clubs are assessed against, even with parachute payments (can’t say I know what happens in that situation).

whole thing is a farce

As far as I understand it with Forest they were assessed based on two seasons as a championship team and one as a premier team. So the limit they were measured against was much less than the one we or Everton are measured against.

It is reasonable that Forest would want to invest when they got promoted but they may well have gone over the top. In 22/23 they brought in around 30 new players, over 20 signings plus some loans. Their outlay was about £200m plus a massive hike to their wage bill.

It’s a difficult balance to reach between ambitious investment and getting into too much of a financial commitment. But the measures do seem to make the top 6 into even more of a closed shop than it already is.

The new proposals will widen the gap even further.
We need a much bigger stadium to increase our revenue.

Everton exceeded their limit by £19m, Forest exceeded theirs by £38m. Everton’s penalty was fixed at 6 points because as part of their defence they submitted incorrect information. Forest meanwhile never contested the charge and supplied all the information requested so they only got a 4 point deduction.

so if proven guilty, Man City will be relegated to division one.