CB Fry

They love him in Derby, he has done an astonishing job so far. Really want to see them up tomorrow, and not just because it is an easy away for me. He wouldn't leave them if they go up, and not sure he would if they don't. It's a little bit of a 'spiritual home' for him. If Poch went, he'd be a great choice.

Surely it started before that, you know, when the government were planning the mass murder of hundreds of their own innocent people? Come on, I know you struggle with gathering up your little pieces of straw but come on.

I'd rather it didn't happen, yes. Luckily, it won't so I can carry on supporting the club I do have, not pining after winning the lottery.

That is pretty easy to understand but the impact is so utterly marginal to be non existent in an global team sport played out over 9 months of the calender year, by teams with huge variances in resources. And so utterly marginal that no major clubs in my memory have switched to plain red and seen a direct correlation to success. Leeds switched to white and did okay, though. It's hardly up there with the advances in diet, nutrition, conditioning and our Clive's old eye - gym now is it? The only people struggling are the parade of divs that think our ten-a-penny template red kit is some holy grail of competitive advantage. It aint. All the martial arts research on the planet isn't going to change that.

Quoted.

This is, conveniently, English football, not the four top divisions of Europe as someone claimed. Would you believe it, Liverpool, Arsenal and Man United at the top of their little table. But Real Madrid and Barcelona wouldn't be top of a similar study in Spain? And who would be at the top in Scotland? For a study based on human psychological reactions to colours in sport the idea that the thesis would collapse the minute one gets on a easyjet to Barcelona kind of weakens the theory. And, in that 2008 study Saints are classified as "red" so the stripes/non stripes thing is irrelevant, as someone claimed further up the thread that it was "all red". The study defines striped teams alongside their plain brothers. But hey, that's science for you.

Actually what swung it for me was the strength of all that large sample sourced scientific evidence making all those football clubs all over the world change their kits to red. In terms of how evidence based science changed behaviour around the world, the red kit thing is up there with smoking causes lung cancer.

Hang on, Dr Strawlock has the evidence, sourced from a large sample. He's a scientist, you know. Coming right up.

Where is this scientific study you speak of? Must have a large sample and everything because someone as clever as you has swallowed it.

If "the point" is demanding we have an owner spending hundreds of millions of pounds to make us Man City Two, then no I "don't see it". If that is "the point" for you then I suggest you are supporting the wrong club, sunshine. Support Man City - they've got, like, loads of money. You'd love them.

Pap, your post is a Strawman you fool. The entire 9/11 conspiracy is a strawman. Yoking together post 2001 increased defence spending/tighter police controls and the attacks on the twin towers and then concluding that the US government planned, carried out and then covered up the greatest terrorist atrocity in history as the only means to achieve those measures is frankly the strawiest strawman in the history of straw. And your evidence is whimsical, flimsy, half thought through nonsense fragments about things you know nothing about, because you know absolutely nothing about what would happen if a commercial airliner hit a skyscraper. Miniscule fragments of inconsequential "inconsistencies" (lets call them straw) that you and your conspiro-idiots then have worked up into a whole heap of meaningless man of straw. The US government did not plan and execute mass murder by flying planes into the world trade centre. You calling that statement of fact a strawman shows what a deluded and gullible child you really are. Strawman me up.

Your point being the only way the US government could facilitate an increase in military spending was by planning, organising, executing and covering up the greatest terrorist atrocity in the history of mankind, killing hundreds of its own innocent civilians. Why couldn't they just increase military spending without doing that, like Reagan did? A few scare stories in the paper, bit of media briefing, that kind of thing. You know, just a weird way of planning stuff really. At best, unnecessary and ill thought through, you know? I reckon they could have got away with buying a couple more warships without the whole organised mass murder of own people thing. But I'm a brainwashed-by-the-mass-media idiot, so what do I know?

Well it clearly isn't true in Spain, or Italy. And not true in France. It would be in England, and possibly Germany (but it's one successful club in red, and there is some variation in Bayern's kit over the years). The biggest clubs in Holland, Belgium and Scotland? Nope. Portugal you have one, but two other big clubs struggling on in not-red. Like Champions League winning Porto. And those red-kit wearing world cup winners in full - Spain (for years, despite being a red kit wearing winning machine were perennial underachievers) and, hang on, I know this. Okay, you can have England who wore red in the final, but not in other rounds. And barely any red countries have even made the final. Red teams have done okay in the Euros but the non-reds - Italy, Germany, France, Greece - still win out. And no team in red has ever won the Copa America. Not one. But yeah, apart from that it is pretty much proven beyond doubt.

Your long post was entirely cherry picking from your usual grab bag of random geo-political/national security issues and rolling them up to the spurious conclusion that the US Government decided to brutally murder hundreds of its own countrymen purely to then bring about an apparent police state. If they wanted to bring about a police state, why not just do it. Why blow up the twin towers? You can quote that "catalyzing event" quote for the umpteenth time but it is just disingenuous and frankly dumb to suggest that means the US government were planning on carrying out the "catalyzing event" themselves. Unless you can bring about how the US state planned, organised, executed and then covered up that catalyzing event with not one person, not one single person at any point speaking up "umm, I get that we want to increase police controls on the people, but remind me again why we have to blow up the twin towers and kill hundreds of New Yorkers to do it? It kinda doesn't sit right with me. Seems a bit sledgehammer to crack a walnut to me". Not one person in the decision making chain of this state organised mass murder "catalyzing event" has ever spoken up. Every person involved in the initial idea, the brainstorming of what the best catalyzing event should be, the deciding on the city or the landmark to go after, the decision to do explosives and planes, not one or the other, the man who contracted the explosives person to lay explosives all over the WTC, the man and his team of other men who actually did lay explosives all over the WTC, the people tasked with finding people to hijack the planes, and so on. All these people. All brought together to construct a "catalyzing event" and how lucky that every single contact, every single person went along with it, not once did anyone of the tens, probably hundreds of people involved not once did any of them think "this isn't right". I wonder why? As with all conspiro-idiocy, it only makes sense backwards. It never ever hangs together going forwards from before it happens. Try it Pap. Just try it. It's January 2001. The Neo-cons are all in a room planning how they can invade Iraq and Afganistan and increase police controls on people. They are struggling to agree the best way of approaching it. Then someone pipes up and says "what we need is a catalyzing event, and I have had a brilliant idea....". Then what happened?

...and absolutely zero potential to be the next Man City. No one is going to buy us to plough hundreds of millions in. They are better off buying one of several other clubs with at least a chance of being a global brand. We ain't and never will. Face it Alpine. Those unrivalled years of success, those triumphant days of slaying that footballing giant Carlisle United in what could be our finest ever hour for our greatest trophy, that unrivalled season of finishing fourteenth in the Premier League like we had never done before. Face it. It's over. 14th in the Premier League might never happen again. Just a crazy unrivalled dream.

Because they're not sheep brainwashed by the evil mainstream media like what I am and you is. They're, like, special and clever and freethinking and stuff.

You are wasting your time. Pap is only interested in splitting pointless hairs about manufactured inconsistencies in stuff he knows nothing about: the conspiro - idiots' failsafe "a skyscraper wouldn't fall down like that" routine. The bigger picture - the how and why - he will swerve and run.

It's been pi sing it down in the Midlands. Turnout won't pass 40%, probably nowhere near.

You are right. I am asking for impossible proof, or as it is known on earth, the utter fantasy land guff you and your conspire - idiots **** into a sock about. So you have no theory whatsoever about why the American government would wilfully kill its own people, and no theory whatsoever about how they planned, executed and subsequently completely covered up that heinous crime. Maybe you and your chums should start there instead of blathering on about dust particles and bags of sugar. It's called having some perspective. So, lets start thinking. Someone had an idea. Let's see if we can kill hundreds of New York Civilians on one day. That person takes that idea to his boss. His boss says good idea, I like it, but we need to check with x. X says yes, I like it but have you thought about Y and Z and by the way A is an expert on this kind of thing you'd better speak to them. A gets involved and says yes great idea, I like it, but I need a meeting with B and C because I'm not sure those bits are feasible. C says he isn't sure but has a chat with D and after D checks back with the guy with the original idea and his boss, just for clarity on the timings and resources needed. And suggests F might be a good help. F also brings in his deputy G to help out. G mentions casually to B about how lucky it is that all these people in the early planning stages of staging a mass murder of hundreds of millions of new yorkers by flying planes I to the world effing trade centre have not for one second thought it was a bad idea or considered trying to stop it. B agrees and hastily writes "don't tell ANYONE " and circles it in his notebook.

Stop engaging Pap on miniscule details he can half argue with his ragbag of artificial assertions and strawmen. The planes never done it. Fine. Pap wins that one hands down. Who dun it, Pap? Who was in the meeting room when they flip charted options for mass civilian murder, and who made the final decision of "yep, lets go with the sky scraper plane thing. I like it better than the subway gas attack. Better for TV. Right, who is project managing this one then? Oh, and don't tell a soul or nothing, remember. " Who dun it? And why?

Where has it been proven? Spain? Italy? World Cups? European Championships?

This. Easy life, and a few cracks at the Champions league to get his European eye in. Then back down south in a few years to Newcastle or Villa or some other big club basket case.

SaintRichmond talking out of his arris again? Well I never.

Lallana's stag do is happening now in Miami. Adam Lallana is with the England squad. Pretty common knowledge now.

£52.7m from the shareholder according to the last set of effing accounts. But yeah, I'm the "dumb feck", Drunko.