I think he knows exactly what he is doing, I wouldn’t be surprised if he gets advice on what he puts on twitter to get reactions. It’s red top media tactics.
I'm not so sure. Not that he's not trying to get a reaction,he obviously is but I think he's genuinely gone down a rabbit hole. I don't follow him but some of the shit he posts still ends up on my timeline and he's about 3 more YouTube binges away from posting anti vax conspiracy theories or articles on chemtrails. They take the piss out of him on the Guardian podcast over his opinions on climate change and posts like that one on the coronavirus,rightly or wrongly have the potential to cost him his job at Sky. If his main goal is to generate outrage then he's playing with fire but I think he's just an entitled idiot who'll blame PC culture if it all blows up in his face.
Player of the month for February which is impressive for a foreign import into the league to hit the ground running like that!
He's looked good but POTM is pushing it. He registered two assists and a goal, the goal which was a penalty against Watford. In same amount of games Calvert Lewin scored 2 goals and an assist and Aubemeyang scored 3 goals lone of which were penalties. I know its not all down to goals and assists but if Fernandes wasn't playing for Utd I don't believe he would've won it.
Ah but credit where it's due, he has looked very good. Has come into the league and team and hit the ground running and to be fair, changed Utds fortunies a bit aswell. No losses in 5 I think
I'm not saying he didn't deserve it because I honestly couldn't say either way but I do think the reaction to him in general is a bit like the priest on the mountain of sugar. Man U have been crying out for an eye catching midfield player for a long time and he's certainly that,but he stands out a lot more because theres been such a shortage of creativity in their midfield for so long.
Do Utd win a lot more of these awards than other clubs, I actually didn't realise that. #3245 edcarroll02, 44 minutes ago No they dont mate. They've won a sum total of 3 since Dec 2016. Liverpool players have 8 in the same timeframe. Utd have the advantage of the fact that because they are so bloody ordinary, any time one of theirs plays anyway decent he looks like a superstar in comparrison to the rest of the jokers there.
I wonder how the cash payments in football are circulating at the moment. Most clubs are probably never far from being a month or two from going bankrupt due to the level of costs involved. The kind of financial merry-go-round that could start with clubs missing payments on transfers and wages not being paid might see a lot of clubs in a lot of trouble in a matter of weeks.
Dont think theres any doubt that we will see some clubs go to the wall. Once you get outside the clubs hoovering up the big Sky/BT tv money, the vast majority of clubs rely completely on gate receipts, merch on match day, and sponsorship just to keep the lights on. Theres already one club (cant recall the name) who put everyone but the players on protective notice. Cant see banks wanting to extend lines of credit to football clubs who will have no clue when they will be in a position (if ever) to start making money again. What intrigues me is waiting to see if any "big name" clubs have been living week to week and how much trouble they would be in
What I'm actually wondering is what happens if that money were to dry up? Every club in the world has a cost base that is out of proportion with all reality with the amount that footballers are paid. If Sky aren't receiving subs because they're not showing live sport for an extended period they're going to run out of cash quite quickly too.
I'm thinking that due to the fact of the season being as completed as it is, that the contract that Sky/BT have with the PL has to a large extent been fulfilled. They commit to showing every team a certain amount of times as a minimum - I havent a clue what that number is, but for argument sake lets just say 10 times. That basic 10 games shown live would probably be worth 80-90m of the supposed 100m each PL club gets. The broadcasters would most likely want that commitment taken care of asap in the season, so that when we get to the business end of the season (the last 9-10 games?) they can then pick and choose the teams and games to put on, to ensure they have product people are interested in - relegation and European battles etc. You are bang on though Ed, that if Sky/BT decided to get nasty about it and say "we arent gettting games - you aint getting money", I'd imagine there'd be collective strokes and heart attacks at board level league wide, because theres no doubt that the 100-120m that tv rights bring in are a huge part of clubs balance sheets and frankly without it, you find it hard to see how ANY club would be sustainable in the PL
Just say it is up and running again within the next 5/6 weeks. How likely would you be to travel to the games considering the measures or lack of measure taken in England so far ? Obviously depends on how things go and what further measures they go to, but we look like we are miles ahead of them and will more than likely have leveled it off or contained, way before them. Risky business
If you go, you should then have to be isolated for 14 days after so can't see why someone would be irresponsible enough to do that.
Newcastle place all non playing staff on "furlough". Not like Mike Ashley to try save a few quid......oh wait
https://www.skysports.com/football/...on-sir-alex-fergusons-man-utd-transfer-policy "He very rarely ventured into the world of buying the complete star, and it's not far off Pep Guardiola's tactic with Manchester City right now Players such as Veron, Berbatov and Van Persie come to mind at all Gary? Ferguson broke records for transfers numerous times throughout his 27 years at the club and the main reason his 'policy' worked because he had(and spent) a lot more money than his rivals and kept picking off the best talent in the PL like Bayern do nowadays. It wasn't rocket science.