Adman

So the Boro CEO is on the EFL board, who pick the commission, picked 2 people with connections to Boro to decide our fate. And we didn’t object. How very SR. We gave Boro the oppo, but that have properly tucked us up. And our lot did nothing.

Even the Monkey Hangers are embarrassed by your carry on. Punishing saints doesn’t mean rewarding Boro for appointing a weak manger who took you from challenging for first to fifth, nor failing to address your shit strikers or inability to play for more than 45 mins. Derby fans are desperate for you to go up. They think the record could go.

This may be why they are getting lawyers, if you believe he account in the Mail. On the assumed facts, the likely regulatory outcome is that the hotel would face the greatest immediate ICO risk, with the club also exposed if it knowingly received and used the information for its own purpose. The relevant infringements would likely include Article 5 principle breaches, possible Article 6 unlawfulness, Article 32 security failings, and breach-response failings if notification duties were missed. ICO enforcement tools include warnings, reprimands, assessment notices, enforcement notices and penalty notices; serious principle breaches can attract fines of up to £17.5 million or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is higher. The fining guidance emphasises gravity, intentionality, mitigation, the categories of data affected and the degree of responsibility. Intentional misuse of payment data would be an aggravating feature. The PCI/commercial outcome could be severe even if no criminal prosecution followed. PCI SSC guidance says suspected cardholder-data breaches may require independent forensic investigation and immediate coordination with acquirers and brands. Visa’s published materials require suspected or confirmed compromise events involving unauthorised access to payment data to be reported, and UK merchant-acquirer materials warn about non-compliance charges and card-scheme fines. In practice, merchants can face forensic costs, remediation obligations, higher fees, tighter oversight and, in extreme cases, the loss of card-acceptance privileges. For affected customers, the civil outlook is comparatively strong, especially if there is evidence of onward media leak, fraud risk, or publication. Unlike the representative-action model rejected in Lloyd, an individual claimant with their own distress, anxiety, financial exposure, replacement-card inconvenience, or actual fraudulent use of the card has a conventional claim. Privacy and confidence claims also become stronger as the dissemination becomes wider and the information more intimate or financially dangerous.

Great point. Shall we report the Hotel. Because why the fuck not.

Yep. Really shouts not content. Skate.

You talk so much shit you either know fuck all about football, are a Sports Republic employee or a skate. No saints fan would ever be content with less than 3 points against them. Maybe it’s all 3.

It’s a back 4 or the mad bastard is playing Bree right side of a three and Matsuki RWB

You need to untick the unemployed box Rasmus. A few names will pop up then.

I did. It’s true.

Ok. But we have.

New shirt sponsor next season. Not a gambling brand.

Totally self-inflicted. Got every decision wrong, whilst spending an astronomical amount of money. Imagine if we had this season’s transfer kitty during the Poch and Koeman eras. They’re incompetent or skates, or both. No one deserves to stay. We’ll only keep Lavia if Pep tells him a year in the Championship will do him good, then they can activate the buy back.

Under the Welsh PE teacher we were certain to go down and played awful aimless hoofball. It may be too late to save us, or he may not be good enough, but I’m hopeful of at least enjoying a performance now (due to his RB background), and if we can get a few results in Feb and March, who knows. I’m in.

It might be his favourite, but we’ve been very poor playing 3 at the back for the last 2-3 years, even against league one opposition. I’d rather a 433, albeit it’s slim pickings for the front 3.

Hope the board follow him out the door, they’re all to blame for this shambles

No. Merely the change in formation suited us better and that change still counts as his tactics

So the 4222 is only Ralph’s when we lose? Not when it works?

This is embarrassing. We’re not entitled. And we have to take the rough with the smooth. No need for over reaction, we’ve tried that. It didn’t work on our way down the leagues.

Couldn’t agree more. If people don’t think le tiss could cut it, they never saw him play, and the comments above are exactly the same BS spouted by Rodney Marsh, Phil Thompson and George Best on soccer Saturday in the 90s. He could turn a game in its head with skill and flair unlike the modern day run fast, can’t pass, shoot or cross, but can press forward.

He played out of position, in a team with 10 men, calm down

Bit harsh. That was the norm in the 90s. Not necessarily a sackable offence.

Perhaps booing an anti racism gesture isn’t the best way to protest a political ideology or movement. It doesn’t give people a lot to go on and it makes the people booing look racist, whatever their disagreement. Perhaps giving more constructive feedback would help like “down with maxismim, up with capitalism”, “laissez Faire”, “we hate violence”.

Yeah let’s ignore the reason for taking knee has been clearly expressed.

You’d best call kick it out and the FA snowflakes too. They’ve described booing as an act of racism. But I’m sure the political objection will save people booing from being labelled racists just as statements like “I’m not a racist, but” and “I have a black mate” have done so successfully previously.

FA distanced themselves from the BLM movement in June 2020, this has nothing to do with that. If you’re opposing the knee due to that you’re about a year out of date. The reason is clear, this isn’t an excuse to boo.