aintforever

Rickie's personal terms being he wants to play for a decent club that plays a good brand of football that's not at the arse end of the league.

this

what's he tweeted?

Losing Cortese is a blow but I think we should be more concerned about who the Liebherrs sell us to and what debts we will be left with.

yeah obviously. I would hate to be a Man City fan at the moment.

Being a rich person's plaything is the best option IMO, look at City and Chelsea.

It will be a shame if he does leave but we should be more worried about being left with a Pompey-style debt than replacing the bloke who signs the cheques.

Didn't he do this last time he wanted money to spend on players?

It wasn't sold out, there were thousands of empty seats.

I agree we should focus on the cup but i am still thoroughly enjoying the League campaign. With a bit of luck we could catch some of the teams above us and it's great to be able to enjoy the football without the pressure of a relegation scrap. Watching team like West ham and Fulham slug it out is hilarious.

Great, more f*cking traffic lights!

When people start banging on about politics in a science debate you know they are talking agenda driven bullsh!te. Left wing, right wing, it makes no difference, the conservatives, Labour and Lib Dems all share more or less the same views on climate change.

I don't think Cortese wants to sell our best players full stop. He has big ambitions, we are not the saints of old where we have to sell to buy. If Luke tries to egineer a move that's a different story but I don't think we will sell this window regardless.

If you were really clever you would have known that before.

No way. You dont get anywhere by selling your best players, we don't need the money.

I think we can safely say that politicians cannot predict the future, neither can scientists no matter how good their computer models. Doesn't mean that climate change is not happening though. If you have an open mind probably best read the science. There is no serious scientific debate about wether man is influencing the climate any more (despite the fools on here), the only debate is: a. By how much b. What will happen c. What can/should we do about it

No but they should be certain they have a gun before shooting IMO. It sounds like this guy was holding a mobile phone, pretty hard to mistake that for a gun unless you are thinking irrationally. It is split second decisions but that is what they are trained to do and are supposed to make correct. Remember in these situations the odds are stacked hugely in favour of the armed police. The copper has the professional training, the bullet proof vest, armed back-up, reliable weapon and in this case the element of surprise. Even if Duggan had exited the car with a gun he would be lucky to lift the gun, take aim and get a round off if the coppers had him in their sights.

The fact that the copper thought he saw him holding a gun when he wasn't suggests to me that he panicked and shouldn't be dishing out lethal force on our streets. For what it's worth I don't have an issue with the verdict, the bad guy is dead. The problem is nowadays the coppers don't seem capable of saying "we ****ed up" without there being all sorts of repercussions so they end up closing ranks and cover up.

I would prefer to have police who actually use their eyes. You cannot see a gun that is not there, sounds to me like the copper either panicked or just executed him. Like I said I couldn't care less about Duggan, the intelligence was obviously correct and he was a scum-bag. But police intelligence can often be wrong so it is preferable to actually see a threat before shooting.

I still think the plod shouldn't shoot people who are not carrying a gun. You can't blow someone away because "he may have another one". I have sympathy for the officer who shot him because it is a hard job but that's his career choice, if he is not capable of acting calmly under pressure he shouldn't be doing it.

I couldn't give a monkeys about Duggan but questions need to be asked about the incompetence of the police. You can't see a gun in someones hand that is not there and it's not right to go around shooting unarmed people.

I lived around Southgate, Palmers Green and Wood Green. To be fair 3 of those was as a student and the other two at the start of my career not earning alot so I wasn't best placed to live life to the full in London. Me and 4 of my mates moved back to Southampton and none of us miss London one bit. It's a fun and exciting place to live but there is no dressing it up as a friendly place. The contrast in cultures and disparity in wealth means people put barriers up, the locals we got to know said themselves that you need to put up a "front" just to get by.

I lived in London for 5 years and agree with your teeth sucking Southampton friends. London is a fantastic place to visit but I found most of it is a unfriendly, sh!te hole of a place. I often said in London you could be lying in a pool of you own blood dying and people will just step over to you on their way to work. It may have just been where I lived (North London) but on a night out there were always gangs of ethnics who hate each other, and the locals who hated everyone. There is so much to do which is why it is great to visit but you are never too far away from a street where you could get stabbed for your trainers.

A guy I worked with just phoned in sick then didn't bother turning up again. He probably lost a months pay but i expect it was worth it. If you want to do it just do it, I doubt there is much your company can do.

There's been a massive change over the past couple of decades. People, and our governments inparticular, are begrudgingly accepting what some scientists were saying 30 or 40 years ago, and what virtually all scientists are saying today. It's like the tobacco industry finally admitting that "cigarettes might cause some cancer".