CB Fry

That desperate to see Cambridge v Luton, huh? Bad times.

I think a typo - he meant she wasn't dragged kicking and screaming.

Don't blame you. We're going round in circles.

We do need someone saying this every 50 posts. Thanks for being there.

I think other people have addressed this anyway. Rape (and serious sexual assault) is a clear one for me, and if the authorities find a way of enshrining that thinking into guidelines all clubs in the two leagues sign up to, then great. You can blather on about speeding tickets if you want, but I am quite happy to deal specifically with sexual violence as I have said numerous times on the thread.

So is the "main issue" the fact we rarely ever even sell 3,000 away tickets, let alone 6, 7 or 8 thousand? Or is the "main issue" that there is a simple reason why this "patently unjust" situation is allowed to carry on. A very simple reason. Ask yourself why Arsenal, Liverpool and Man City haven't challenged the "patently unjust" 10% rule and demanded their "fair" 8,000 seats at Old Trafford. Have an ickle tiny little think about why they haven't. It shouldn't take long what with you being jolly clever and all. Answer the question, then maybe you can shut up about this utter horsesh it you are coming out with.

Which was what? The role model thing? I answered that - it doesn't matter if no other industry does it for that reason, I think it should apply to professional league football.

That's one hell of a strawman right there. Well done on that.

You don't think professional football should set an example, I do.

Stop pretending that the experiences and governance of Manchester City is identical to the Dog and Duck. The Leagues with the PFA and the FA could write guidelines they sign up to. Not rocket science.

There are already professions that you can't go back to if you've been convicted of rape, so let's not pretend this is some hare-brained idea I have just made up. People convicted of rape serve time in jail and then have to rebuild their lives in society. Just as a doctor can't stroll back into his old surgery, they need to find a new life someplace else. It's kinda a way to make raping people a less attractive option, you know? Consequences of one's actions. its weird people just think it finishes at the prison gate and anyone just picks up an exact Xerox of their life before they went in. That right is never there for the victims, is it? Anyway, don't worry, he's getting his contract so his little life won't be "completely destroyed" because he can't be a pro footballer anymore. So happy days all round, the rapist wins.

We don't need or deserve 10% of all stadiums. We still have tickets on sale for Old Trafford so let's safely assume we won't sell 7/8,000. An allocation of 3,000 is perfectly fair. As for rights you're the one bleating about 4,000 theoretical Liverpool/Arsenal fans who can't go to Old Trafford but I still don't understand why those people have more of a right to go than the 4,000 United fans (some Season ticket holders) already in those seats. Clubs don't expand stadiums for the benefit of effing away supporters. Bigger clubs having more supporters and bigger grounds is not an "unfair advantage", it's a perfectly fair advantage. If we want a bigger ground, we need to get more fans and then build a bigger stadium - you've told me so often about our huge catchment area, and the fans that will flock to us once we're challenging for Europe so only a matter of time before your predicted expansion takes place, ain't it? And no, your "solution" doesn't impact SFC because they don't need to change anything, but, how convenient, other clubs do have to change things that would directly impact their own supporter base. How "fair".

Maybe not, but the PFA having a different stance to now - making it very difficult for those convicted of sexual violence to return to professional football rather than the complete opposite - would be huge step in the right direction. Oldham are leaning on the PFA to support them right now so probably fair to assume they would be far less likely to bother if that wasn't the case. Of course The FA (and the two leagues) should make the ruling, but the PFA should support it. Your point about being paid to play for a pub team is a pretty pointless one. There are plenty of Chedettes around I imagine eventually some sap will pay him a grand a week to play for their pub team just to "prove a point". In fact, what the Oldham chairman and his girlfriend's dad seem to be doing is effectively just that at a richer scale. But anyway, it's looking like he's going to get his contract soon so Chedettes start the party.

I see the club on twitter today saying tickets on general sale for the United trip. But yeah, we desperately need a 10% allocation of 8,000 seats at Old Trafford. So patently unjust.

So people not being allowed to pursue a career in professional football is a life "completely destroyed"? Interesting, especially in the context what has happened to his victim. There's plenty of other things one can do with ones lives, I have never said he can't work. He can, and should - it's fundamental to rehabilitation. But being a professional footballer is not a human right. If it was, I'd be banging on the door of St Marys demanding the number 11 shirt and a six year contract. Let's hope the campaign to stop those guilty of sexual violence from being pro footballers is successful but unlikely it will be with the gutless weasels running the PFA.

The wailing and gnashing of teeth of those theoretical 'plastic' Man U fans won't match the grizzling and whining from you about our perfectly reasonable and fair allocation for Old Trafford. And, what a surprise, your solution to this "patently unjust" problem is something that has no impact whatsoever on SFC but a significant impact on other clubs and their supporters, whose home fans it turns out have less of a right to go to games than away fans. That's nice and fair then. But hey, fuc k them. Clubs should be punished for daring to have bigger grounds.

What should the percentage be, then? 5%? And presumably you're okay if Man Utd, Spurs, Arsenal reciprocate and only ever offer 1,500 tickets to us? Don't understand what relevance Old Trafford being bigger and Man U having more fans than other clubs has to this debate. The 10%/3,000 rule is fair and perfectly logical.

If it takes a "mob" (lol) to change football's rules to stop convicted rapists playing professionally then so be it. I wouldn't want a rapist at Saints. That article is classic newspaper columnists trying to "move the story on" through boredom. Comes from the same thinking of "I like equality for women but it's gone too far the other way now" pub bore bulls hit.

I think the "but why isn't every similar situation in history not the same as this" angle has been well covered by Batman. I look forward to reading your thread demanding Rolf Harris is back on TV the minute he walks out of his prison doors.

Not really. Poch would never conceivably have made that jump from mid table Saints to Real. Koeman to Barca is a more realistic move because of his affinity to the club, and the fact that while Real only really appoint Galactico huge name managers, Barca are less inclined to do that and more inclined to appoint "one of their own". I wouldn't lose much sleep over it, but along with the Dutch National job there are the couple of roles I think RK would walk for.

Ha. I've just had an email from the original Ched Evans petition author to sign another one directed at the PFA/FA to ban people convicted of sexual violence from playing football professionally. I done gone and signed it. Quite fun to weird an electronic pitchfork for a couple of minutes. Basically I am up there with Rosa Parks.

Lots of reports of "Barca in crisis" so Koeman as replacement is an easy and fairly logical rumour to start. Let's hope there's nothing in it, or at very least Ron doesn't walk out until we've lifted the Cup in May.

You seem very upset that Luke McCormack is allowed to continue his career but also very upset that Ched Evans isn't. So, in true Delldays style, like, how does that work? If McCormack working is so wrong, then what's happening to Evans is the right thing, right?

Some people eat sandwiches all the time and don't get done for murder.

Not like you to take the "everyone's a hypocrite" angle on an issue. Oh.