Search results

By that comparison they've done brilliantly - no argument from anyone. He wasn't comparing them to those clubs though, but to Rotherham, who haven't had a bean to spend all season and got relegated as a result. In fact when they did find themselves one decent player on loan, they lost him at...

Not according to the Hudds chap, but yes, I'd suspect so. Depends largely on the terms of all the loan deals - unless the parent clubs are heavily subsidizing the wages of Mooy, Brown, Palmer, Ward, and Kachunga, you'd think it must have gone up a fair bit.

They've done very well, but 27% higher wage bill, and 600% more on player acquisitions isn't really 'the same as Rotherham' at all.

No he isn't.

Whilst you're here, what is your take on the claim above that their budget is 'the same as Rotherham'? They've hugely over-achieved without question, but surely that is a stretch?

This owlstalk poster has it:

Haha. What a cocking bellend. The 'extra man' in that game, wasn't some figurative concept - they strolled it because they had an ACTUAL extra man!

Do you think? I reckon that the fact they spent £10m on a striker, and he bottled even TAKING one, is even funnier than if he'd missed!