Feel regret realizing you were demonstrably—and obviously—wrong about momentous issues?
Step 1: Sit down
Step 2: Shut up
Step 3: Hand the microphone to someone who wasn't wrong

My Fair Lady

Please do not embarrass Farage by reposting his 'Happy Birthday Mr President' tweet. Be careful not to draw attention to the fact that he's holding a bottle of Trump wine, it would make him look like a fawning sycophant, and we wouldn't want to do that ... would we?

"When shit gets too bad"?

You think it may start to get bad?

Also, the premise is false
bsky.app/profile/did:...

Depluralize a movie:

Jaw

The board are focused on drama, on excitement.

Scrambling from the precipice, at the last minute, to safety, then shooting to the top of the table next year.

Can't wait to see how they do it!

Do whatever you want with Magnificent Ambersons; it was already spoiled by the time it was released.

Why, yes!

That seems to be at odds with OP's claim that the swing is largely due to persuasion.

What have I missed?

And yet, I insist that you say "satisfying."

As I see it, a Nolan Ryan fastball, or a Koufax curve, is effective because it's overpowering.

The changeup is satisfying differently, not because the hitter is fooled, but because he can't adjust. So it is with the eephus.

Surely the eephus pitch (at least) rivals it, no?

I agree that the board are the problem. And yes, Daniel Levy was chairman. I'm just suggesting that:

1. during his 20 years, he built Spurs into a formidable financial force, and

2. with Levy gone, the problem remains.

Perhaps the Lewis heirs will make everything OK.

"Financial mismanagement" is a deceptive term.

Daniel Levy built us into a financial powerhouse. We are among the top 10 worldwide in revenue and in valuation.

He didn't manage the sporting side very adeptly. But financially he barely put a foot wrong.

In order:
1. Krazy Kat
2. Pogo
3. Far Side (not a strip, really)
4. Calvin and Hobbes

For me, please commit to attacking, possession-oriented football.

*Then* hire the best director of football available.

…but you think this isn't a regular day, right?

I concur.

But we do know where the buck stops.

But…but…if Lange's orders were to recruit a manager who represents the opposite of Ange (stable-predictable-boring vs dynamic-risky-entertaining), you can see how Frank (at that time) would look perfectly suited.

It was a bad strategy, but was it Lange's strategy? Or Vinai's? Or the Lewis kids'?

Gotta be the Lewis kids.

We haven't been building a possession-oriented attacking side; that can only be because directions from the top don't direct that.

(Doesn't mean Vinai & Lange are the right people but, if they aren't, their presence points to the same issue—Kim has that right.)

I confess I've enjoyed watching Man Utd's floundering incompetence this last decade.

So now, as a Spurs supporter and connoisseur of floundering incompetence, I should be perfectly positioned to savor the coming weeks. Or months. Or years.

Lange might be competent.

If he were instructed to recruit for a possession-oriented attacking side, he might be able to follow instructions.

Of course, appointing Frank doesn't represent that plan, but we don't know what direction Lange received—maybe he was told to build a stodgy defensive side.

If Spurs intend to field a proactive attacking XI—The Game Is About Glory—we need to recruit personnel (including manager) who understand that intent. That's why Ange's appointment seemed such a hopeful sign.

Vinai might be capable if he had direction from the top. The Lewis heirs must direct.

Yes, this.

It's crazy to feel hope—or even relief—while the Lewis heirs and the board remain unchanged.

We have an intellectual capacity. We can perceive:

1. Some people of color *really do* commit crimes, but we don't infer that it's OK to violate the human rights of all people of color.

2. Some boomers are racists, but we don't infer that they're *the same boomers* who support(ed) civil rights.

Half of his 4 red cards have come in 22 games with Thomas Frank.

Is that because we don't attack, allowing opponents to run at our defense for 90 minutes?

When we set up to defend for 90 minutes, then losing our best defender with 60 minutes remaining, is unlucky.

Anyone can be unlucky, and I can't blame Frank for being unlucky.

But not everyone sets up to defend for 90 minutes. That's been our principal tactical approach since Frank arrived.

Hm. I'm inclined to count the adoption of a consistent philosophy as "the start of the rebuild."

Or perhaps the appointment if Vinai's successor (tomato/potato).

Either way, I don't think we've seen the "start" yet.

Match day revenue could soften if supporters don't buy season tickets—which would be analogous, in a way, to the way the club approach transfers.