RamLad1884

I run a lot... And I've always read that advice about running for time not distance, so it must be right... 
But I find the opposite motivates me. If I know I am going to be running for 60 mins regardless, I find it disheartening. I choose to run 4 miles, 5miles whatever to build up distance but with no pressure to be 'quick' but I know the sooner I'm done the better! 
In general though, I do the opposite to what the books say!! I would use your car to measure 1, 2, 3 miles from your house and build up to running the full 3 miles there and back. (or use your phone if you want to go cross country and download Strava app or similar which will measure for you). Mentally I prefer to know I'm heading home rather than driving somewhere after. 
My tactic is to go at different times of the day so you are able to respond to different situations. I think you need to go and run when you aren't 100%, when you are tired, aren't really ready... So I also don't take tons of water, or buy all the best gear and do tons of stretches  or only run after I have eaten the perfect meal etc. This means I am able to run the distance with ease, then on the day I suddenly feel the benefit when it all comes together. 

Get used to being out on the road for an hour. Don’t worry about distance to begin with. Go out for an hour and run/walk as much as you can in the time.
Gradually build up the running proportion.
Get a watch/phone app that measures your progress. 
Don’t get too down on yourself after ‘poor’ run. You will need those amongst the good ones. Congratulate yourself instead for having got out there.
On the day, try not to get caught up in the mad dash for space at the start. So easy to run too fast in the first mile and spoil your run later on.
Keep hydrated and run empty as far as toileting is concerned. 
 
Good luck!

Not sure it quite works like that, looking at Brum when they had a similar embargo a few years back. Pretty sure we could sign 4 trialists and start the season with them. If we then promote Cashin (or any others) from the youth squads it just means we're above quota for the next transfer window (ie we'd have to move two players on before we could bring one in). 
If Cashin was promoted to the first team squad end of last season they'd probably say different but right now he's a youth player and will start the season as it, whether he starts the Huddersfield game or not. 

Things to take from today's game...
Defence: sign Jags and/or Davies and that's a solid back line for the year. Cashin has the physical attributes to play and I'd expect playing alongside the older heads he'll only improve. 
Midfield: Hutchinson looks a tidy player, Watson to grow into the role. Signing Carroll and/or Ravel and our midfield is probably as strong as it has been for a few years. 
Forwards: absolutely crying out for a hold up striker. Stretton looks good but he'll play alongside CKR rather than instead of. Need a player for the number 9 role desperately as CKR won't be able to play a 46+ game season. Wingers seem pretty well stacked perhaps with the addition of Aluko. 
If it's true we can only sign four players then two defenders/one midfielder and one attacker might just be enough to keep us up this year. Realistically 6-8 signings are probably needed to be mid-table. 

Forest can duck right off

Cybulski to break through from the under 23s in October/November. Closest thing we have to a target man as we've had in the academy for a long time. 

Cybulski to break through from the under 23s in October/November. Closest thing we have to a target man as we've had in the academy for a long time. 

Difference being the previous deadwood were players we paid high fees and high wages on extortionate contracts. 
Nothing wrong with older players if they're on reasonable wages (has to be in our case) and short term deals. Some of our better signings of the last decade have been older players on frees:
Eustace
Davies
Warnock 
Baird
CKR
 

Difference being the previous deadwood were players we paid high fees and high wages on extortionate contracts. 
Nothing wrong with older players if they're on reasonable wages (has to be in our case) and short term deals. Some of our better signings of the last decade have been older players on frees:
Eustace
Davies
Warnock 
Baird
CKR
 

Forum post count of course. Pretty obvious really.
The pubs all book using tik tok, snap chat or my space too, so the young girls get an unfair booking advantage.
I wrote to my local Firkin pub on Thursday requesting a place. Posted it before 4pm too with a first class stamp. Got there tonight at 7.50 and all the seats were taken.
It was actually someone's house now, they converted it into flats in 2002. Unacceptable.

So once every 8 weeks with the possibility of a third one in the winter? ?‍♂️

So once every 8 weeks with the possibility of a third one in the winter? ?‍♂️

So once every 8 weeks with the possibility of a third one in the winter? ?‍♂️

Never a story I'd posted before... But one none the less. When we got tanked against Rotherham back in Feb saw him at a bank in Derby. Heard someone ask him what happened against Rotherham, he told them that Rooney had them playing a formation that they had no idea how to play and no players knew their role. Hearing a player say that, no ownership for being s*#t that day and all the blame on the manager. 
Not the kind of footballer we need at the club. 

Never a story I'd posted before... But one none the less. When we got tanked against Rotherham back in Feb saw him at a bank in Derby. Heard someone ask him what happened against Rotherham, he told them that Rooney had them playing a formation that they had no idea how to play and no players knew their role. Hearing a player say that, no ownership for being s*#t that day and all the blame on the manager. 
Not the kind of footballer we need at the club. 

In all fairness the Wigan deal was criminal rather than a bad deal. The owner had the money but deliberately destroyed the club. 
I'll wait for more details who the Americans are before any real comment but gut instinct is we might see some of the previous American owners return in a different consortium. 

In all fairness the Wigan deal was criminal rather than a bad deal. The owner had the money but deliberately destroyed the club. 
I'll wait for more details who the Americans are before any real comment but gut instinct is we might see some of the previous American owners return in a different consortium. 

In all fairness the Wigan deal was criminal rather than a bad deal. The owner had the money but deliberately destroyed the club. 
I'll wait for more details who the Americans are before any real comment but gut instinct is we might see some of the previous American owners return in a different consortium. 

In all fairness the Wigan deal was criminal rather than a bad deal. The owner had the money but deliberately destroyed the club. 
I'll wait for more details who the Americans are before any real comment but gut instinct is we might see some of the previous American owners return in a different consortium. 

In all fairness the Wigan deal was criminal rather than a bad deal. The owner had the money but deliberately destroyed the club. 
I'll wait for more details who the Americans are before any real comment but gut instinct is we might see some of the previous American owners return in a different consortium. 

Interesting that Cocu and his team are their clients too, suspect the club may have still had more links to the group even after the events with Sam Rush. 

New amazon prime series? Might as well make some money from all the craziness at the club 

New amazon prime series? Might as well make some money from all the craziness at the club 

I'd be concerned if they aren't asking those questions. 
Source of funds is an important part of any transaction.