um pahars

I would have to agree with you on that one. I very much doubt that NI's name was just pulled out of a hat and giving a banning just for a laugh. But the crunch is whether the reason is justified, proportionate and verifiable. Additionally, as the IFO report states, "this power should be exercised reasonably and in conformity with the good customer care philosophy extolled on the Club’s website." Let's be quite blunt here, IMHO NI has pssed off Cortese with some of his views relating to certain issues (primarily the season ticket renewal issues) and NI has aired some of these views privately, some publicly and probably some to Cortese's face. Cortese's taken umbrage at this and hit back in a way that he knew would affect NI. By the time the season came round Cortese probably knew he had acted in haste and couldn't justify banning him from the stadium, so just allowed him to buy a ticket on a match by match basis.

If we're to castigate him, then at least let's kick him in the right places. The UI merchandise was actually pretty decent quality (made by the same supplier that One True Saxon use) and in no way called be called rip off. The designs were pretty decent as well.

No idea! But I do think it's a rather large leap to try and bring the apparent farcical silverspoons gig in to being a potential reason not to sell someone a season ticket. Our coach organiser might be next, hell, given the moans on here about the database maybe baj and Granth could be next!

As much of a farce that that event seemed to have been, I'm not sure NI was trading off of the back of the Club's good name. Surely no one confused it with an Officially sanctioned event?? The bloke whose coach we went on promised us an executive one. When we got on it it was a clapped out thing with a barely functioning toilet!!! Obviously wasn't happy at the situation, but not sure I would accuse that fella of ripping off loyal fans and trading off the back of the clubs good name.

What does this refer to????

After reading (and re-reading the report) I am more than happy to accept the findings of an Independent Third Party who is obviously more privy to the facts (and both sides of the story) than anyone on here, including myself. With this Ombudsman concluding that the Club should apologise and allow Nick to purchase a season ticket, I don't think it's unreasonable to agree that the Club has acted in an unwarranted manner and that it was a therefore an unnecessary incident that should either never have arisen, or been resolved earlier. Of course we could adopt an attitude of denial or ignorance & ignore a ruling by a third party and adopt an attitude of "No one likes us, we don't care", but I would prefer us to be a little bit mature and accept that sometimes we as a Club have got things wrong. As for the dig by stealth, then I'm afraid you're tilting at windmills. I have been unequivocal in my praise for Liebherr, the Liebherr legacy and all those that came to the rescue of our Club (including Cortese who obviously played a major role in the pre and post purchase era, and continues to push us onwards). It is eminently possible to be supportive of someone (or the Club) and yet be mature enough to accept that sometimes it is possible that they have made mistakes.

Can I add a postscript of "also where kids are allowed/tolerated!!!". CHEERS

Really enjoyed that result, even if I was awoken from a snooze with a barrage of texts screaming about Lambert's late winner. Dozed off disappointed that we appeared to be heading for a defeat with our rivals all semmingly winning, only to be awoken from my slumber with the positive news. Really can't stand listening to away games on the Radio!!! In person at the Posh on Saturday, so hopefully another 3 points (although would settle for a draw there).

Couple of boring opening gambits. I've now read the report three times (I do find these things a tad long winded and all in the same kind of "lawyer" speak. Additionally, as I have stated before I have utmost respect for Liebherr, the Liebherr legacy, Cortese and everyone else for rescuing our Club and hopefully turning us around. I certainly support their vision. However, on this occasion it is my belief that the Club have acted unreasonably and most annoyingly, unnecessarily. It smacks of pettiness and vindictiveness. We're not talking about a report by The Echo, instead a report by the IFO. In additionto the petty act, the Club's unwillingness to discuss the reasons with the IFO does not bode well. I missed the furore first time around, but have to say this really should not have got to this stage. As with some of the other scrapes we seem to be getting ourselves in, I have to say some banging of heads is required and a quiet word in Cortese's ear wouldn't go amiss. It's just all so unnecessary.

Mottisfont Cricket Club are looking for players for their Tuesday (Border League) and Saturday (Hampshire Cricket league) teams (as well as Colts for their under 19 team on a Thursday). Good set up and good bunch of lads, average standard (certainly not top class cricket!!!) in a very pleasant setting. We have Indoor Nets in April with games starting in May. If anyone fancies a game, feel free to PM or reply on here.

An honourable vision and one that I'm sure many could/would buy in to. However, there are a number of obstacles to fulfilling this dream, not least that it would take some doing to produce enough youngsters on a regular basis that are capable of playing in the first team. And as you go higher through the leagues than their ability has to be even greater. And of course another obstacle is the minute anyone shows a degree of talent, then the big players and big chequebooks will attempt to lure them away. Nothing wrong with having a strong development system (both to play in the first team and to earn money from - my priority would be for them to be playing for us, but I'm not naive to think we can hold on to every star!!), but I think a team primarily made up of home grown talent may never be achievable.

Roughly how elitist do you think a University Education should be???

I think they're as broad as they are long. From the Walker & Gibson types of financing (see attached link http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/nov/10/venkys-blackburn-rovers-takeover-proposed and http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/jun/25/premierleague.blackburn1 for info relating to Blackburn loans, conversions to shares and funding after Walker's death) to Abramovich http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/may/19/roman-abramovich-chelsea-loan-debt which is still a little unsure (loans or shares) through to Directors loans at an advantageous rate (to the Club), commercial loans (at going rate) and then shark loans (at Pompey's rates)!!!!!! Donations aren't generally the order of the day (for a number of reasons).

Going back to the beginning, from my fag packet calculations I would be surprised if we were running at break even. Obviously don't have access to any of the figures (wages & costs changed, "mortgage" interest gone, attendances up), but judging from the gap last time around I still think we're running at an Operating Loss. Net Transfers (in or out) are then on top of this. As for how we're funding that deficit (and any terms), then no idea (apart from it's coming from someone's pocket), and have been interested in some of the snippets here.

The Graduate figure has shown one of the highest rises of all categories, but I do think it has to be taken in context. It is in line with the overall 16-24 yo unemployment rate so it would suggest that a degree is no guarantee of future employment. Just under 50% of 16-17 year olds are unemploymed, but in the 21-24 age group Graduates are still less likely to be unemployed than their peers without degrees (something like 12% v 15%), which indicates there might still be some real benefit. It's a very tough market out there for jobs and the specific Graduate employment market has been hit like many other sub groups. After you strip out the minority of "noddy" degrees (David Beckham's fashion course etc) and also when you accept that a number of areas are over subscribed (when I worked in TV one executive stated that as many people leave Uni each year with a Media degree as are already employed in the TV industry), I do find it strange how we as a country sometimes seem to deride education and its value to society (particularly for the future). Of course, it's not a pre requisite for success and no substitute for hard graft, but an educated workforce & society has to be an asset (even if some of the courses are a tad shallow). I do think we have to look at educating & training (and the split between Uni for all and decent vocational and other training) in a new light and this does include the funding of both, but I'm not sure many other countries would see it as a negative that so many young people are continuing their educational path through University.

Apologies if seen before: http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/world-of-sport/article/29220/ Although I'm not sure everyone was totally happy (note the congratulations for the first goal and guy who is itching to make a tackle as the player goes to score unopposed!!).

Matty could ring up this morning and get his ten!!!!!!! Restrictions now lifted and anyone on the database can get more than one ticket.

We were forever sticking things off balance sheet to hide them in the companies I worked for!!!!!! PS not even sure I'm a leftie (more Ken Clarke meets David Owen type LOL).

I'd happily applaud dear old Ken, much maligned but IMHO a very astute fella and decent Chancellor with a decent record during his tenure.

Is PFI really that big???? Additionally I'm not sure I would hold it against the last Government, when it was first introduced by Major (or whoever in the early 90's). As for Public Pensions, whilst I accept it is "off balance sheet", it's hardly something to whip the last Government with.

Rumours also going round that Murdoch is preparing to swing the axe around Wapping and Rebekkah Wade is up for the chop.

I'm not so sure I'd call it the biggest economic crisis since WW2. If you look at the debt figures here (I accept only one feature of many by which to analyse your claim), then the position pre the sub prime meltdown in 2007/8 was comparable with previous years. Even allowing for billions being pumped in to shoring up banks, overspending etc etc etc and the 2010 figure isn't that bad (particularly when compared to earlier years). http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/downchart_ukgs.php?year=1950_2010&state=UK&view=1&expand=&units=p&fy=2010&chart=G1-total&bar=0&stack=1&size=m&color=c&title=UK National Debt As Pct GDP

I think it depends on what you're shrinking and what you're willing to accept in terms of shrinkage. I personally think any drive for efficiencies (and the money being saved or recycled) should always be welcomed and often agree with some of the things that groups such as Taxpayers Alliance are saying as I often think too much is wasted on initiatives/ventures that people wouldn't spend their own money on. After that you start getting in to ideological arguments. Defence (wink, wink), health, protection and education make up just under half of the Total Government Spend so if you're going to cut here, then someone will probably get hurt somewhere along the line. I'm not one for a bloated and inefficient public sector, but I can appreciate that a decent one contributes much to our society.

Have to say Johhny I think you have missed the point in the latest twist of the argument (IMHO). I actually agree that a degree (or any other qualification) isn't the be all and end all. However, in the context of trying to have a debate with the rather ridiculous Dune and his warped view on teaching it is relevant. Some of his arguments are so nonsensical that it beggars belief.

That's a rather strange interpretation/observation of what people have posted on this and other threads. Which posts and posters do you think exhibit that point of view???