Special K

From what I say at the WC and the crappy warm up games a team with Old Man Gerrard, Henderson, Sterling, Sturridge and Lallana (minus that flesh eating **** Suarez) in the team is nowt to worry about. They'll be too busy slapping each others back telling each other they are great.

Good money for him, Shaw and Lambert. Big kitty for the new manager. Hope we are in advanced talks to sign players though as waiting a month for the first signing when there is a fair to middling chance of Lovren and Schneiderlin going before then will feel like the Board are poncing about. Hopefully with his new big wedge Lallana can afford a razor to shave that f*****g stupid velcro off his boat.

Pile of f@@king shyte. Useless tossers. Beaten easily on saturday and very poor tonight. World cup over. Despite the tedious hype England just not good enough or motivated enough.

I think your post was arrogant - at least in part - saying that it was clear that "a lot of people on the forum know nothing about football". If that isn't arrogance, then i'd welcome a suggestion as to what is?

Without Jagielka and the crossbar it would have been 4-1 and the performance would have counted for f all as the focus would have been on the score. For me, Italy won at a canter, doing enough to get the points without stretching themselves and with important first choicers missing. I wasn't overly impressed with the team performance although individuals did well. I also don't get this "performance is a substitute for result" nonsense. Major tournament progression requires wins, not fluffed lines. Hopefully they will play better on Thursday and put themselves in pole position for second place.

Easy win for Italy. Didn't really get out of 3rd gear. We huffed and puffed but were well short. It will be very difficult to qualify from this group now.

It doesn't matter what language he speaks, if the words "draw" or "loss" feature more than "win" in his first 20 games, he'll be down the road quicker than you can say "two faced lying c*nt".

Escorts Bestcorts! Come in if you're saucy! Classic. As was Dirty Movie and A Fist full of Travellers Cheques. Loved the comic strip and pretty much everything Rik Mayall did. Sad loss indeed.

I do run a construction company and have for the last 5 years, as well as, previously, working as a consultant on the employers side. This point I was trying to make on SG's post was that site "over run" costs are not simply a case of pro-rata addition of site prelim costs - there are many other factors that go to make up the heads of claim for loss and expense when there is a valid EOT - something it sounds like you are familiar with, hutch. Your post is interesting, but any client would be foolish to terminate a contract where there is no breach, just because he has changed his mind on the scope of works - no benefit in that at all. It is always preferable to agree variations with the guys contracted to do the original works, or simply tender the new works separately. It sounds like the original project was completed, but the variations have skewed the cost. I don't know the extent of them, but on a D&B contract (which I believe this was) with a (presumably) tight set of ER's, you've got to go some to double the original contract sum. I suspect a lot of the cost was wasted due to prolongation, but this is only an assumption. I agree entirely with your last sentence - we are an easy target for being knocked. I've lost a good few jobs over price, only for the selected contractor to go bust, f**k up the works or just do a poor job, and the client or CA to then whinge that they didn't choose someone else.

Did you work on the site then Goaty?

Prelims are only (sometimes) a starting figure for assessing Prolongation and Loss and Expense claims under a JCT contract. If you've ever got involved with trying to settle a L&E claim for legitimate Client delay, you'll realise it is a lot more involved than simply assessing the site preliminary costs per week and adding it pro rata. I can tell you from experience it certainly isn't that simple. I know one of the site team who told me of a few Cortese "pearlers" during the build duration (e.g. having drawings delivered and then refusing to open them because they were folded and not rolled up! and subsequently delaying making an important decision), but i've not spoken to him for a good few months. I may try and find out a bit more on the over spend. I don't doubt that a lot of extra work was instructed, but to double the cost of a project takes some doing, so i suspect it's not all spec upgrades and new turf. And just because on the face of it, something is affordable, doesn't make it good value for money.

I don't understand what the problem is? Granted, I don't read the Mail (print or online) as a rule so I'm not familiar with the hack, but there didn't seem to be anything particularly wrong with that article. Certainly not anything "defamatory" or anything that may get any knickers twisted.

And he obviously enjoys his smut. Good lad!

Doesn't seem like that to me at all. He's acting like a bit of a c o c k and needs telling he's acting like a bit of a c o c k. Lambert went about things the right way and everyone's happy (ish!) with the circumstances, but this does not seem to be the case with AL. He's the Team Captain but seems to be acting like the Team Sulk and is not offering what a Skipper should offer.

Exactly. Selling Lambert so easily has resulted in Lallana wanting to see if he can do the same. So **** him the monkey faced ****. He obviously wants a move and as well as getting it big time from the scouse tarts in the England squad, will stamp his feet if he can't get what he wants, when he wants. That contract was worth ****. Glad the board are holding out on this one.

Nice compilation. The most gutting bit for me is the obvious team spirit between the lads at the very end, which seems a million miles away from what we have now. Good luck Lambert, just don't score against us next season you donkey!

I agree Pancake. IMHO the change in the leadership of the Club has caused more damage than I initially thought. The new Board certainly haven't picked up the momentum promoted by NC and progress has come to a grinding halt, something that the shallow, saccharine platitudes of Kruger fail to gloss over. The Club is now in decline, only a week after its best ever season, and before anyone jumps down my throat with accusations of pant-******ing, it is a considered opinion. Often negativity causes it's own momentum and the main perpertrators are the media. NC had a few run ins but learned how to deal with them (from the relative safety of L1 and Championship status), the current Board appear to have no idea how to deal with them and the subsequent speculation and furore that surrounds any story adds weight to the notion that we are defenceless and rudderless, until it becomes a reality - which it appears to be in the process of now. We all know what they need to do to placate the fans and provide some leadership to alleviate this perception of meltdown. Whether they can remains to be seen.

Could be anything from buying a lucky scratch card to being asked out by Barry Sanchez.

Liverpool Echo reporting too. £4m with add-on's (whatever they may be). Worth much more to us than £4m. Very sad to see him go, even if he is only likely to have 2 more seasons left in him. Proper footballer who didn't ponce about, played through pain and knows where the goal is. Good luck to him. £4m for an England international in WC year is **** poor business by the way, even if he is 32.

There's not much the Board could have done imho. Poch went because he wanted to, no other reason needs to be thought about. Nothing to do with SFC lack of ambition, money, faith, status, birthday cakes, etc Purely because he wanted to go to a bigger club, for more money and increase his profile and bank account. For Poch, it's like if you're in the pub and a bird with bigger tits and a nicer @rse than your current bird cracks on to you offering you a nosh if you leave your missus. You're gonna go with it. In this instance i'd equate the bigger tits to transfer money, nicer @rse to managerial profile and nosh to European Football (your current missus thinks nosh is filthy, btw, especially in Sunderland). The Board are like your parents, telling you that you shouldn't ditch the nice honest bird to go off with the slag, but you won't listen to them because all you can see is tits and @rse. Us fans are feeling like the jilted bird and no amount of being told that this new bird is a slag and will **** off with someone else in a few weeks will matter. Some tart tugged your todger and you couldn't resist. But the jilted bird can't blame the parents for the split - there's nothing they can do when the head gets turned. The only thing you can do is go off and nick another persons partner and f++k someone else off! Had a few tonight, so apologies if this sounds like bollix!!

I'm not shocked by the response to Richmond. He sounds like a right knicker p#####g melt to me.

Evans would be superb for the pie eating training regime, the false accounting of players salaries and the hard abuse of opposing players and officials. Not to mention he'd get to show his tapered little cock on MOTD instead of to some poor lass who works for Rochdale. Japes a-plenty, don't get me wrong, but about as good a fit to "the southampton way" as Rolf Harris in a school governors chair.

He's not the only manager in the world and not the only manager who can do good things with a young squad. Yes he's been good for us as we have for him. If he goes, then he has decided to go, so bollix to him. There is not much we can do apart from give him a load of grief/banter/whatever when he comes back down next season.

It's quite simple really. The weak points in the design (within allowable design parameters, it has to be said) were the angle clips which held the floor joists to the columns at the perimeter of the building and the core structure in the centre. As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them fell. There were about ten floors above with a combined weight of approx 45,000t which came crashing down on the structure below and the angle clips gave way, causing a domino effect collapse. As for the "straight down" collapse of the building, there are a number of point to consider. The building is not solid hence can implode on itself, there was no lateral loading on the structure at the point of collapse and also had no time for the collapse to "incur" any lateral velocity, so a structure of that size and weight has too much inertia to fall any other way than straight down. Also worth considering that the building would contain a number of services which will use a multitude of fuels and chemicals, not to mention the 90,000lt of jet fuel that were present in the aircraft. Steel loses half it's strength at about 650 deg C, which is entirely consistent with the expected temperatures of the fire within the WTC. The fire was caused by the jet fuel mixing with oxygen causing a "diffuse" flame which is a fuel rich flame, the fuel molecules that do not fully burn turn to soot, evidenced by the billowing black clouds coming out from the structure. This in itself is enough to raise the temperature of the fire by decreasing the radiative heat loss. It was expected that the temperature of the fire inside the WTC was about 800 deg C which, as stated above will cause steelwork to lose well over half its integral strength. It's not very difficult to understand, really, it's not.

The steel columns didn't melt though. The collapse was caused by the failure of the steel structure due to a loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire (it loses strength before it "melts" - which it doesn't do anyway) and the loss of any structural integrity as a result of the distortion to the steel from non-uniform temperatures of the fire. If a steel column (lightweight in this case) has different temperature fires on opposing sides, it will produce different stresses which will result in failure of the column (it expands differently) i.e. buckling of the column. Once a number of failures occur, then the integrity of the structure is compromised and the whole design fails.