BBC running a piece on the fire sale at Man U and how much some key players are valued at. Obviously everyone can debate values and really a player is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for them - but I always have 1 big bug bear with this. Players who cost an absolute fortune and fail to deliver in any way at all seem to still carry a value based on their previous transfer value.

Anthony for example, he cost Man U £90m, here he's valued at £63m, obviously a decent drop off from where he was quite rightly so. But if Man U had signed Anthony for a much more reasonable £20m, would he be valued at £63m based on his performances for Man U? of course not, so why his valuation of £63m is based probably 90% of his previous transfer value not his realistic value and current ability.

I would suggest that the actual values of the top 5 in that list would be 50% of what is shown here. The same for Onana and McTominey.

So does Khan stay this week or go? What do we reckon

How many Spurs games do you see where Ange basically subs out his entire central midfield? It happens all the time. Its clear to me that all of them are far too inconsistent