trousers

They won't do anywhere near 4 years. They will appeal it down to a few months. The judges are (IMHO) simply starting as high as they can (within existing guidelines) as a short term scare tactic to warn off other halfwits with similar ideas during the holiday period, in the full knowledge that it will end up much lower after appeal. Maybe.

Depends what made up words you're putting in my mouth this week. Sigh. ;-)

Plums

Totally agree. Quadruple the sentence for all those examples above so that the 4 years for "pretending to incite a riot" is fairer. We must all stop agreeing like this.

My thoughts too. Having a club like Brighton aspiring to be as good as us will inadvertently help us in this league. In their endeavours to keep up with us they will take points off our promotion rivals here and there whilst not being quite good enough to overtake us. Win win. ;-) (this post was brought to you by the Tongue-in-cheek Party)

Plums

^This It's not about the money per se, although charging for a service, whether it be £5 or £500, understandably raises the bar of expectation. All those people who can't get to a game are asking for, after c.2.5 years of trying, is a football club forum that works on days when said football club are playing that game they call football. Yes, granted, it's a quaint and old fashioned view that something should work well all the time, but that is the radical notion that people are asking for. Simple as that. Now, where did I put my pipe and slippers...?

Aye. And last season f'sure

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14559294 PM defends 'tough' riot sentences handed out by courts Prime Minister David Cameron has defended courts for handing out tough sentences for those involved in the riots across England. Some MPs and campaigners say some sentences dealt to the 1,277 people who have appeared in court are too harsh. On Tuesday two men were jailed for four years for using Facebook to incite riots. One of them, Jordan Blackshaw, 21, is to appeal against his sentence. But the PM said it was good that the courts were sending a "tough message". Speaking in Warrington, he said: "It's up to the courts to make decisions about sentencing, but they've decided to send a tough message and it's very good that the courts feel able to do that."

If rapists got 40 years + castration, would some of the looting sentences seem so harsh? It's all relative.

Yep, agree with that. Significant deterents + education works together as a solution for me.

£15m

Put 3 in a cell together.

They didn't catch me....because I chose not to get involved in the criminality....

To me, the "proportionality" is not the key consideration here. The important thing is to make it absolutely clear to people what the punishment/deterent is upfront. People can then decide whether they want to commit the crime in the first place. If people are "inciting riots" whilst ignorant of the penal consequences then the governement should start a national advertising campaign to raise awareness. How many people would have "incited riots" if they knew, in no uncertain terms, that the punishment was having their penis chopped off? People need to have an element of fear in doing wrong. I think we've gradually lost that fear factor over the last 50 years.

Would this single mum have stolen the shorts if she knew (in no uncertain terms) there was a likelihood of being locked up for 3 years? I think we agree that the deterent/punishment needs to be made clear up front. Maybe we disagree on how 'harsh' that deterent should be (of course, the less harsh it is the less of a deterent it becomes)

Fair point. I agree, the "deterent" should be known at the time that someone decides to commit the crime rather than the goalposts moved before they are tried and sentenced. For example, if the "deterent" for breaking a 30 MPH speed limit by 5 MPH is 3 points and £60,I'd feel somewhat aggrieved if someone changed the "deterent" to instant castration after I'd been stopped for doing 32 MPH. However, if I knew the "deterent" was instant castration before getting behind the wheel, I'd make damn sure my speed was nearer 20 MPH than 30 MPH at all times! All crime should have a hefty "deterent" IMHO (Cue the "what if you're wrongly convicted?" counter-argument....) :-)

How much income tax do you want to pay to have to process them every 6 months when they get let out early and re-offend? £20 a week?

Being the first to be subbed when the game is safe could/should be seen as a compliment. It means the manager sees you as a key player and thus wants to protect you from injury, burn out, etc. See, this sports psychology malarkey is a piece of cake!

What would you say is the right level of punishment? (I prefer to use the word 'deterrent' rather than 'punishment')

The latter

I think that tells us all we need to know about Chelsea's youth coaching system...

Tough.

I must admit, I've been having "getting ahead of myself" thoughts this morning about how many of this team would be able to hold their own in the premier league. With the self-belief that Adkins is drilling into this side and the bonds that are developing in the squad, the answer is probably a pleasant surprise.

Ok....hands up...who else has woken up with a huge fixed grin on their face this morning....? *pinches self*