DraytonBoy

I think it's purely a business decision to cash in whilst Liverpool are still able to compete for trophies, they have an ageing first team and a re-build will take time with no guarantee of success.

If sacking Farke was correct a year ago then the same must apply now with Smith despite the league position. I think he paid the price for poor recruitment after promotion, none of the loans worked out and two of the big signings completely failed.

As an experiment I'd buy someone like Kings Lynn to see how quickly you could rise up the leagues and at what cost.

What's in it for Bielsa?

Is Smith really the problem or are the players just not good enough and making too many mistakes.? Pukki scores the penalty on Saturday and Hanley keeps his arm away from the ball on Tuesday and City are one point off top.

Ultimately it's the people who decide whether the monarchy stays or is replaced and as long as they don't step out of line or abuse their limited powers then I can't see any real change happening in my lifetime.

If you're going to get rid of the Monarchy then everything must change - make the House of Lords a second elected chamber, bring in PR and have fixed terms for the president. The change will of course cost shed loads but it will be worth it in the long run because they'll be more money for the NHS, schools, infrastructure etc, etc.

Anyone been watching the series about the Academy at C Palace, that's what you call a 'world class' set-up.

The fact that there are 540 billionaires in China shows that capitalism is thriving in the country surely? Any thoughts on the Rohingya muslims?

It's an historic event for the country whether people agree with the monarchy or even care, her successor will not engender the same feelings so the period of mourning and massive state funeral will not happen again. IMO this is the beginning of the end of the monarchy as we know it which in itself marks a place in history.

Any expansion of the capacity has to wait until the club are established in the PL or receives significant new investment given that it will cost maybe £50 million to bring it up to 33K.

Look at the different expectation levels, Schofield will have been tasked with keeping Huddersfield in the Championship whereas Smith will no doubt be aware that he's expected to get promotion or at least reach the play-offs.

Just look at the teams you've referenced, Watford and Burnley got relegated whilst Southampton, Everton and Man Utd collectively have got one point from six games so far, only Brentford have done okay. As for strengthening the squad that's a matter of debate, City have needed a back-up for Pukki for the last two seasons and haven't bought anyone, all of the money has been spent in midfield but until they're fit and playing it's impossible to say they're an improvement.

Smith is right though, the season has only just started so there's plenty of time to sort things out. I still circle back to same question - is it the squad or the manager?

It's back to the 'is it the players or the manager' for me assuming Smith has little say in recruitment and I think ten games isn't enough to judge, I'd give him until the WC shutdown in November by which time Hayden, Ramsay and the two South Americans will hopefully all be fully fit and will have played a substantial number of games.