Mercedes's driver dilemma

When discussing Mercedes's drivers for next season, Toto Wolff was recently quoted as saying, "Until the summer break, everything is going to be done."

This is just a theory, but maybe Toto's statement mentions the summer break because that is when the wording of Max's reported release clause comes into effect.

Presumably Mercedes will know after the summer break whether Max's contractual release clause has been triggered. If it is, they'll sign Max for 2026. If it isn't, they'll stick with George and Kimi.

Personally, I'd love to see Max and George as team-mates for all the drama it would deliver, but all the noise seems to suggest that if Mercedes do sign Max, it will be in place of George.

GOAT man bad

I've just read the race report of the Austrian Grand Prix on the BBC website, and for a race which was dominated by McLaren, it's incredible that around half the top comments, or maybe more, are sniping at Max.

Seriously people, why can't you just give credit where credit is due? Lando drove excellent all weekend. How about focusing on that? Lando deserves his moment in the spotlight. Why can't people be positive for once, instead of letting negativity control them?

How to avoid getting sacked if you're a Championship manager

The three teams that got promoted from the Championship in 2023/24 all got relegated the following season, leading to two of the three managers getting sacked.

Of the three teams who got to the play-offs this season, but failed to get promoted, two of the three managers have since parted ways.

If you get relegated from the Championship to League One, the manager will generally get sacked.

So the secret for all Championship managers wanting to avoid the sack is ... finish midtable! 

Fixture rescheduling

Following the announcement of the 2025/26 Premier League fixtures, the FA have cautioned that due to the increased number of teams playing in Europe, "There is an increased likelihood of Premier League fixtures moving at relatively short notice."

If a team wants a game rescheduled to give them more time to recover for Europe, or to recover for a league match after a European game, then that's fine. No problem. In the interests of fairness, the FA should definitely try to help try to help out by rescheduling games when European matches are a factor.

However, they should only do so on the proviso that the club agrees to pay all additional travel costs incurred by fans who have already made travel arrangements for the previous date.

After all, why should the fans be the ones hit in the pocket? If rescheduling a match is genuinely an issue, then I'm sure the club won't mind covering the additional costs incurred. Alternatively, if they're not prepared to reimburse the fans, then perhaps rescheduling the match wasn't that important after all?

Double figures

Bayern Munich beating Auckland 10-0 in the Club World Cup kind of highlights the pointlessness of a Club World Cup. In all probability, pretty much every tournament will be won by a European team. Maybe a South American team might win an occasional tournament, but that's still not a 'world' cup. The standard of club football throughout the world is vastly different, so having a world cup of club football - with teams from every continent - will inevitably leads to a mismatch of standards.

If FIFA want to stick with the Club World Cup, then the next time they need to have a preliminary stage to avoid such massive mismatches happening again in future. You could have the top 24 teams automatically qualify for the group stages, and a further 16 teams play a preliminary stage to decide which 8 teams from the 16 make it through to the tournament proper.

That way amateur teams would still get the chance to play in the Club World Cup, but they would be playing teams a little closer to their own level. And that in turn would limit the possibility of extreme results like the 10-0 we saw today.

Infantino deliberately distracts

"They criticize FIFA if the prices are too high, then they criticize FIFA if the prices are too low. Then they criticize FIFA if we make ticketing promotions with students. Students! When I was a student and I didn't have money, I would have loved FIFA to come to me and say: 'You want to come and watch a World Cup match?'"
...FIFA president Gianni Infantino

Gianni, people aren't criticizing FIFA for giving away tickets to students. People are using the fact that FIFA are giving away tickets to students to highlight that there is little interest in the Club World Cup.

Jack Grealish's problem

Apparently, Man City are yet to receive any bids for Jack Grealish, and I suspect that few fans will be surprised by that.

It's not that he's a bad player. He's clearly exceptionally talented. However, Grealish's problem is that when he was at Villa he was an excellent counter-attacking player, but Man City don't do much counter-attacking. They generally dominate play in the opposition's half.

So for Grealish to be able to play to his strengths, he would need to go to a counter-attacking side, and counter-attacking sides are generally struggling sides or mid-table at best. That creates two problems; Jack is hardly likely to want to leave Man City to go to a struggling side, and secondly, struggling sides wouldn't be able to afford his wages anyway.

So perhaps the most likely scenario is that Jack will either remain at Man City and warm their bench next season, or Man City will agree a loan deal with another top half of the table club where they end up paying half his wages, and he once again doesn't get to play to his strengths.

Formula 1 rules comparison with football

The Max Verstappen/George Russell controversy at the Spanish Grand Prix could all have been avoided if the stewards were still following the rules of a few years ago.

The whole controversy was caused because Red Bull had to guess what the stewards' decision would be regarding George's collision with Max at turn one. The team guessed, incorrectly, that Max would have to let George past (as it turned out, the stewards decided otherwise, because George was not in control of his car when he hit Max), and this is what angered Max causing him to get an attack of the red mist.

Under the rules of a few years ago, the stewards would have advised Red Bull, and Mercedes, that there was no need for a position swap. George would still likely have overtaken Max at some point, but Max's resultant angry move into George could have been avoided.

To go into more detail, a few years ago the stewards used to inform teams when they needed to let a driver through or give the place back. The teams had to follow this instruction, otherwise they would get a penalty. Similarly, if there was no need to swap positions, then the stewards would advise the teams of this. Now though, stewards don't advise the teams, so instead the teams have to guess what the stewards' decision will be. Given the number of variables involved in a decision, that means you have teams and drivers having to guess who was ahead at the apex (and where the apex even is), whether drivers were in control, whether they left enough room, etc. They basically have to guess the stewards' decision.

Imagine if in football you had to guess whether you were offside or not, and if you were offside but played on, you got a yellow card. It would be ridiculous. Well, that's formula 1 right now. They need to go back to the standard of a few seasons ago, when the stewards would tell the teams whether they needed to give the place back, rather than the teams having to guess.

The chink in Max Verstappen's armor

Here's my opinion on the controversy at the end of the Spanish Grand Prix involving Max Verstappen...

Verstappen/Leclerc contact: Charles moved across onto Max's line (causing contact), but Charles was entitled to because; a) he was clearly ahead, and b) he left Max space. Charles therefore did not have to give the position back, so Max was incorrect in his radio messages to his team.

Verstappen/Russell turn 1 contact: George hit Max and because George was not in control of his car, George was at fault, therefore Max did not have to give the place back.

Max's response to Leclerc contact: When Max said Charles had to give him the place back, the stewards correctly disagreed. Charles was ahead and although he moved over, he still left Max plenty of space between the edge of the track.

Max's response to Russell contact: Max was understandably angry at his team for telling him to let George pass, because George was the one at fault (Max was ahead when George hit him), so there was no need to switch positions (as later confirmed by the stewards). However, if Max disagreed with the instruction, he should have made his case to his team, then ignored the instruction, rather than slide into the side of George when he was letting him past.

By sliding into George, Max has cost himself 9 points which could prove costly at the end of the season. His anger should have directed at his own team, rather than at George.

Virtually every race has a controversial decision from the stewards which divides opinion, so a formula 1 driver will inevitably feel angry at times. However, when a decision (or team advice) goes against you, you need to control your anger, rather than let your anger control you. Max is clearly an exceptionally brilliant driver, but arguably the one chink in his armor is his composure.

How to get rid of the parasite owners from football

Here's an idea...

Bring in a new rule that PL owners aren't allowed to pay themselves a dividend, i.e. all profits must remain in the club. To ensure no financial shenanigans, make it a rule that owners also can't pay themselves (or family members) a salary of more than £100,000.

That would soon get rid of the parasite owners from football.