@umirf1 You’d be fantastic at it mate, not only are you a great thinker around the game, you also show the empathy and care required for people development side of it. Would love to follow your journey into that side of things.
Introducing: Volume II., our second magazine of 2026, featuring an exclusive interview with Adam Wharton.
Now available to pre-order in print and download in digital.
🏴 Adam Wharton, the Anachronist
📈 Mapping the future of midfield
🇳🇱 Smitten, the Kees Smit story
🇪🇸 Pablo Barrios, Fire and Ice
🇩🇰 Victor Froholdt, Monster
🇩🇪 Kennet Eichhorn, Nuts and Bolts
🎨 Cover by @danleydon
Go get it, right now: https://t.co/BxONUPvHQQ
Anyone with a remote interest in how Chelsea are funded by Ares, please put aside 10 minutes to read this. Probably the most in depth analysis I have done. Frankly, it's scary... #Chelseafc#CFC https://t.co/1YjdIRUJAK
The EFL has sanctioned Sheffield Wednesday consistently since 2018.
Over that period, the club has been hit with multiple transfer embargoes spanning nearly a decade. By October 2025, Wednesday were under six simultaneous embargoes — the most any club has ever faced.
On top of that, the club has suffered repeated points deductions. A -12 deduction in 2020/21 severely damaged recruitment and momentum going into that season. Although it was later reduced to -6 on appeal, the damage had already been done — those points ultimately proved the difference between survival and relegation to League One.
In 2025, the situation worsened further. The club received:
•-12 points for entering administration, after the former owner failed to meet basic financial obligations such as paying wages and bills on time
•A further -6 point deduction, again due to the owner’s failure to uphold his responsibilities
This is not a case of a club gaining an unfair advantage — quite the opposite. The club has been placed at a significant competitive disadvantage for years due to sustained mismanagement.
Sheffield Wednesday has endured one of the most damaging ownership periods a club of its size is likely to experience. The former owner’s approach has not only harmed the club financially but also created a toxic environment for staff and supporters alike.
And yet, despite this, there is now an expectation that the same owner should be repaid — while the club continues to face further punishment.
How can that be justified?
The new ownership group should not be penalised for the failures of the previous regime. They should be given the opportunity to restore stability to a club that has lacked it for nearly 26 years.
Imposing further sanctions — such as another -15 point deduction, spending caps, business plan restrictions, and transfer limitations — would only deepen the damage. It risks condemning the club to yet another relegation and prolonging the cycle of instability.
At some point, there has to be recognition that continued punishment is no longer corrective — it is excessive.
The club, its staff, and its supporters deserve the chance to move forward.
#FairDealForWednesday
@storchyowl
On social media it feels like you always need to be working and posting to stay relevant. To do truly excellent work though you need to sit with material, absorb it and produce things deliberately. Striking that balance is hard and one I'm always wrestling with.
@NickBuckleyMBE Making football a welcoming place for Black people, Muslims and the LGBTQ+ community isn’t an attack on the working class. Believe it or not, working class people can also be Black, Muslim and gay, or an ally to each. Working class ≠ bigot.
@PPetrov_FR This is a brilliant visualisation mate. Making sense of this number of data points, in a way that tells the story at a glance is excellent stuff. If you don’t mind me asking, what software do you use to create the visuals themselves?
@jamesallcott Duo feels closer, more intuitive, more dynamic. Pairing seems more about lining up to next to someone on the team sheet. But as I was typing this, I saw @Baaaaary's definition of defensive vs offensive, that also resonated.
A homemade bomb was thrown into a crowd of thousands in Perth during an Invasion Day rally on Monday.
Four days later, authorities are only just now investigating it as a ‘potential terrorist act,’ yet the story has been missing from most major Australian news bulletins.
So, why is an attempted attack of this severity being treated as a footnote rather than the national headline it should be?