Holmes_and_Watson

AA!!!!!

KWP lost the ball, but raced back and fought to get it back. Their player just fell over. Hopefully that sort of determination will make the difference today.

We started with a couple of minutes of energy. They've had a fair bit of possession in our half in the last five. But both defences not overly worried as yet.

COYR!

It was preseason, and I wasn't paying attention too closely. But the comments I first heard from the club indicated that not going up this season wouldn;t be a disaster. It was a little later before I was hearing that going up this season was the aim. Now, they're not mutually exclusive. The goals can be to go up this seasojn, while appreciating that it could be a bit of a rebuild and that finacnes were in place should it take longer. With SR being a project club trying to do things differently, they have invested in a philosophy that they think will build longer term success. That's a lot harder to tear up than just getting in the next availale manager with a decent track record. If we don;t go up, and next season follows a similar pattern, then I can't see Martin departing. There's lots of angles to this that are all valid. Could a different style got more out of the players? Perhaps Has Martin developed players? Yes he has. Would ANother style found it even harder with SR's dismal record of getting fit strikers in the door? Maybe Has Martin done a good job in reversing the mentality of the club? Yes A while back a peek indicated that Championship managers last on average just over 2 years in the job. That's always in the background.

Christophe never finds out that the 1885 group have built a lovely cardboard version of Southampton, like Blazing Saddles.

Dancer

Russell Martin felt the manner of his firing could have been handled better by the club.

I knew it! Races off to tell... hang on, this isn't the MLT thread... Every penny helps that PSR. Thanks Moonpig.com! (can't type it without singing it)

Peanut

Reverend

I thought the 1885 group was a bunch of backbench supporters who could vote out the Present Manager. Now I've got vuvuzela practice two nights a week and flag sewing every second Wednesday.

Scotland do have McAdams, McArmstrong, McFraser and McLochNessMonster though.

Dan James misses.

Left X to found Pedant Social in a quest for billions? Incredibly fortunate that being punted off social media platforms to the joy of many, is exactly how Trump's ended up getting potential billions to pay of the other sordid things he's been involved with.

Communist

Go up Get Prem pennies MartinBall makes Pep cry with jealousy Pompey don't get close to promotion. We get better the following season, and they are relegated again.

Party

Or just to get away from the paperwork. I don't envy them. They 've still got the complaints from both sides, that the vicious hate crimes that simply offered an opinion, aren't being investigated properly - ie leading to charges. Then there's all the FOI requests on the number of reports. Then there's the Subject Access Requests for anyone worried about having a non crime hate crime against them. Then the legal action to get all that removed from people's files.

Managed 8 Won 1 Drawn 2 Lost 5 Not ruling him out as Martin's replacement though, as it's all about the possession % 🙂

Stigmata

Give me my shoes back!

It's added to the characteristics already protected under the Public Order Act 1986. Under this one, should a reader in Scotland arbitrarily deem that criticism “abusive” or “likely” – even unintentionally – “to stir up hatred” they can report it as a hate crime. The offence of stirring up hatred includes "insulting" behaviour – not just that which is deemed threatening or abusive – as well as behaviour "likely to result in hatred being stirred up", regardless of intent. From Police Scotland:- Hate crimes can be verbal or physical and include: verbal abuse or insults including name-calling online abuse on sites like Facebook or Twitter There aren't many online platforms without any number of people who'd like nothing more than be offended by it. The police have to investigate it. And they have previously said their training was not fit for purpose. Sex is not protected under it. So, there's disparity when it comes to discussing issues relating to that, specifically because transgender identity is protected. Despite there being some mitigation regarding opinion and criticism, it's not clear what the thresholds are and, considering the group's supported by the SNP (tax payers paying for advisory groups entirely peopled with only one view, with the SNP happily using that advice). It's not likely Police Scotland will be going to Tahiti to arrest someone. £800k of that public money has gone to Edinburgh Uni, to go to Samoa and Hawaii to "decolonise" the works of Robert Louis Stevenson. However, if the post from Tahiti is read in Scotland, it could still be deemed a Hate Crime. They're not likely to go after JK Rowling either. It will be interesting to see if they stray south of the border for anyone else though. The worry is that you're going to have extremes on both sides of a number of issues making stacks of malicious complaints. It's not clear how the police retain the data and how it will impact those being investigated. They are going to be logged against individuals as Non Crime Hate Incidents, at the very least. The SNP has made it very clear which side it's on, in a number of these issues. The worries are that it stiffles debate, with people fearful of repercussions. And this might just be the start. The wings article outlines the impact of repeated investigations, even if no crimes have been committed.

Style

I've been keepoing up with the incoming Hate Crimes Bill that the SNP are going to be introducing. As horrific as the last links were, it gets worse and worse. Since social media is covered by the bill, I had wondered about what would happen if someone in Scotland happened to be offended by something posted elsewhere. I thought that would be the end of that. At least it would be contained. Not so. It turns out that anything that appears on the internet and is read in Scotland is deemed to have been published in Scotland (Apparently this is the same in England and ales. Except they don't have the hate crime bill looking to selectively target (because there will be countless offences) individuals and organisations who the scottish government and the funded groups that they go hand in hand with, will go after. https://wingsoverscotland.com/into-darkness/ and the link in it to https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2024/03/scotlands-hate-speech-act-and-abuse-of-process/ From Craig Murray's article. "So a person in Tahiti who publishes a tweet which is opened by and offends somebody in Scotland because it offends a protected characteristic, had committed a crime in Scotland, even though they never left their home in Tahiti and may never have been anywhere near Scotland. "If you think that is bad, let me tell you it gets infinitely worse. In addition to holding that Scots courts have jurisdiction over anything published on the internet anywhere in the world, because if it can be read here it is published in Scotland, Scottish judges have also invented the doctrine of “continuing publication”. As it is the act by the reader of opening the matter online which constitutes publication, every time it is opened by someone in Scotland from the internet that constitutes a new publication. So any “hate speech” that has been online for ten years constitutes a new offence if you read it in Scotland now. “Hate speech” as defined in the Act, anywhere on the Internet, no matter when or where it was published, is going to be a new crime in Scotland if someone opens it or reads it after 1 April." It's pretty repressive, regardless of your views on some of the topics most likely to be part of this. The Wings site certainly has views on gender/ sex. It was also key in getting the funding of the SNP investigated, leading to the (still ongoing) Operation Branchform and the resignation of the Sturgeons. Even though it's based in England, its now concerned about it's future. It gives an example of the costs of this, even without this upcoming act.