Top News

Football365

·28 May 2026

Football365

·28 May 2026

Forget the debate about who’s the best in the Premier League right now—could Bruno Fernandes actually be the finest No. 10 the Premier League has ever witnessed?

We’ve also got reactions from Crystal Palace fans, discussions defending Jordan Henderson, and much more. You can share your views at theeditor@football365.com.

Now that Bruno Fernandes has officially broken the record for most assists in a single Premier League season, isn’t it time we have an honest discussion about him possibly being the greatest No. 10 in league history?

The extent to which people go to deny him that recognition genuinely baffles me. Let’s remove the club bias for a moment and look objectively. Every Premier League side would gladly welcome Bruno, and most managers would instantly build their system around him.

Let’s stop pretending otherwise. Wirtz? Maddison? Eze? Guimarães? Cherki? Palmer? Bruno outperforms every one of them in that position. Creativity, productivity, consistency, leadership (well, perhaps debatable), and risk-taking—he delivers each aspect at an elite level, year after year, often while playing in inconsistent Manchester United teams.

I mentioned this in the mailbox earlier this season and many dismissed it as exaggeration, but at some stage, the statistics, reliability, and influence become impossible to overlook. You might dislike his complaints or emotional outbursts, but personal irritation shouldn’t stop anyone from acknowledging greatness when it’s right before their eyes. Gaptoothfreak, Man Utd, New York (If Roy Keane happens to read this, Bruno will probably need to clarify in three separate interviews that this email wasn’t “disrespectful,” just “misunderstood.”)

Sorry Badwolf, didn’t you realise he managed to defeat all those teams and world-class tacticians simply because he played Bruno in the No. 10 role and put his arm around Kobbie?

If you’re confused, don’t worry! Every pundit, writer, and broadcaster has confirmed this as the reason. It’s crazy how often that same line has been repeated over the past few months.

Following the supposed master–apprentice tradition in football, since Carrick worked under Ole, he’s apparently only allowed to use ‘vibes’ and a supportive shoulder. No need to analyse Ole’s tactics either—he just had a good playlist in the dressing room and reintroduced rondos.

Considering that our two least tactical managers seem to keep defeating all the so-called GOATs, perhaps other teams should try using vibes and logical positioning instead?

Amateur YouTube analysts over mainstream media any day. Moses (I forgot that Fergie supposedly had no tactics either, so that makes three managers… and to be honest, Arteta-ball looks more like GOATSE than GOAT, but belated congratulations to Arsenal fans 😉)

This is exactly why the Conference League exists.

What a night for them. Paul

…At this rate, Crystal Palace might have to consider rebranding themselves as Silverware Palace.

An incredible accomplishment. Pound for pound, it’s hard to think of many English clubs that have consistently outperformed their financial means over consecutive seasons. Brilliant work by the Eagles. Parm from Gravesend

…Congratulations to Crystal Palace. It’s heartening to see a club like Palace thrill their fans by lifting a European trophy and securing Europa League football next season. Eat your hearts out, Forest fans.

It also highlights the Premier League’s depth, with EPL clubs winning both the Europa League and Conference League two years running.

Not sure that was the expected outcome… Paul McDevitt

Only clubs based in capital cities have ever lifted the UEFA Conference League trophy.

This year was the first time the losing club (Rayo Vallecano) even had a chance, as both finalists came from capital cities.

Poor Fiorentina might as well not have turned up for their two finals.

*Admittedly stretching the definition of ‘capital’ a bit in Olympiacos’ case. Jayraj (isn’t geography fun), MUFC

I’m writing as a long-time football fan who’s grown increasingly uneasy about your coverage of Jordan Henderson following his move to Saudi Arabia.

Let me make this clear from the beginning: this is not a defence of Saudi laws, nor an attempt to dismiss valid concerns about human rights issues. People have every right to criticise Henderson’s decision or highlight contradictions between his earlier advocacy and later career move.

However, what I find most disappointing is the repeated shift from fair criticism to outright moral grandstanding and personal vilification.

Terms like “moral vacuum” no longer sound like football journalism—they read like moral prosecution. There’s a major difference between saying:

“This move seems inconsistent with Henderson’s previous public stance”

and

“This man is morally bankrupt.”

Your coverage often crossed that line.

What makes this even more uncomfortable is the hypocrisy within modern football. Saudi involvement runs deep across elite football—through Newcastle United’s ownership, sponsorship deals, broadcasters, competitions, and governing bodies. Yet the outrage aimed at Henderson has felt unusually personal and vindictive compared to the scrutiny of institutions that have normalised these same financial ties.

In fact, many readers are left with a strange message: if Henderson had never publicly supported LGBTQ+ causes, the backlash would have been milder. Ironically, the fact that he once tried to stand for something seems to have made him an easier target for prolonged criticism.

That should make any serious journalist reflect.

There’s also something deeply unhealthy about how personal football commentary has become. Criticising decisions is fair; sustained moral attacks on someone’s character are another matter. Football media often promotes mental health awareness and condemns online abuse, yet sometimes engages in the same behaviour when certain figures become socially acceptable targets of ridicule.

Humans are flawed and inconsistent—footballers included. Yet, too often, football media positions itself as a moral authority passing judgment on individuals instead of providing balanced analysis of football or context.

Criticism is fine. Disagreement is fine. Even disappointment is fine.

But the continued tone of contempt toward Henderson from some parts of the football media, including Football365, has felt sanctimonious, selective, and unnecessarily dehumanising at times.

Football journalism shines when it informs, challenges, and provokes thought. It fails when it confuses moral superiority with genuine insight. Leonard (LFC) Singapore

…It’s one thing to question a national team coach’s selection, but Will Ford calling a professional who’s achieved everything in club football “the haggard face of a moral vacuum”? And Football365’s editor publishing this on a globally read platform?

Either Will Ford is F365’s nepotism hire who’s guaranteed a weekly column, or the site simply can’t pay salaries without him, or maybe he’s holding the website hostage.

Either way, I’ve loved this platform for years, but this feels like a new low for F365. Absolutely disgraceful.

Hold your writers accountable or change your editorial team. What happened to expressing opinions without trashing someone’s name? (And why is this even a Henderson-bashing exercise!?)

But I suppose it’ll be the same editor (or team) who approved Ford’s earlier piece that was equally gross about a respected athlete—so this mail probably won’t even reach the readers. Mihir. (Oh, and by the way, Will Ford, England won’t get past the Round of 16—doesn’t matter who starts in midfield.)

I’ve noticed Premier League fans recently discussing Luis Enrique’s future, and honestly, I find it confusing. Liverpool supporters (assuming Slot gets sacked) and Manchester United fans (before Carrick got the full-time job) are debating whether he’d suit their club—but why would he even want to leave PSG right now? They’re one of the richest clubs in the world, he’s surely well paid, they play brilliant football, and their squad’s age profile suggests they could dominate Europe for years ahead.

As far as I know, he attended just one match at Anfield to experience the Kop atmosphere, and somehow that’s convinced Liverpool fans it’s his lifelong dream to manage them. And a Manchester United fan in today’s mailbox even hopes PSG lose on Saturday to prove United were right not to pursue him over Carrick—that’s some truly wild reasoning.

I could be wrong, and maybe he’ll want to test himself in another country someday, but surely managing the quality he has at PSG right now must be one of the most appealing roles in world football. David Horgan, Dublin

Peter, Andalucia, I’d expect that Liverpool have already quietly sounded out Nagelsmann.

The general belief seems to be that Slot will lose his job if results dip in the autumn, and that could be the perfect time to hire a manager fresh from the World Cup in the summer. Whether he’d want the job or prefer to stay with the national team is uncertain, but it’s not an unreasonable suggestion.

Many are comparing this to the Brendan Rodgers situation, but when he was replaced by a German coach who’d been on a break, it turned out quite well. Tom, Andover

I’ve lived in Los Angeles for two decades now—a city not unfamiliar with the occasional drive-by shooting—so catching a stray this morning (even though I didn’t write in) feels about right. While Keith Reilly didn’t mention me by name, his words were clearly aimed my way. Instead of reacting impulsively, I took a moment for introspection. Am I really that loud here, and is my club loyalty somehow more offensive than anyone else’s?

Back in university, I wanted to be a journalist. I ended up doing something far less exciting but hopefully more lucrative. A writing teacher once told me that to be a writer, you must be well-read, knowledgeable, articulate, and write from experience. Well, one out of four isn’t bad if I can manage that last part decently.

David Foster Wallace was a brilliant writer, though perhaps troubled. JK Rowling’s made a fortune from books I can’t stand, but maybe she’s a lovely person—who knows. I’m not loud in real life, nor do I aim to be here. I have a lot of affection for this mailbox and followed it for years before deciding to write in.

I don’t think I’m better, luckier, or more special than anyone else—I just happen to think my football club is. Eric, Los Angeles CA (and to be fair, Keith Reilly’s letter was excellent.)

Sorry if I’ve missed something, but what’s the situation with ticket pricing for the World Cup matches in Mexico (and to a lesser extent, Canada)?

It’s appalling that FIFA has priced out many fans from what should be an inclusive tournament. They justify high prices in the US by comparing them to major concerts, which is absurd but at least somewhat consistent logically. However, how can they apply the same rationale to Mexico?

I’ve only visited once years ago, but it was much cheaper than the US. Mexico’s GDP per capita ($14k) is significantly lower than the US ($85k) and still well below Canada’s ($54k)*. So, following their own logic, FIFA should sell a larger percentage of cheaper tickets for games in Mexico and Canada. Of course, they won’t, and they’ll argue that pricing is uniform across the competition, which completely contradicts their justification.

I’m still excited for the World Cup. I understand why some fans feel alienated by the greed, corporate influence, and disregard for supporters, but once the football begins, I tend to focus purely on the sport and enjoy the spectacle. Still, the actions of those running the game make that increasingly difficult.

*Figures based on 2024 World Bank data.