Matthew Le God

Can't name anything then!

What is wrong with it?

Read the rest of it rather than highlight one sentence out of context.

I didn't say it wasn't important. But that is a lot easier to fix than having owners that do not invest and don't care for the club. Neither of which we have evidence for about Sport Republic.

Countless player/staff recruitment disasters, but now new person in charge of that and he shouldn't be tainted with mistakes of others. They invest money into the club and heart appears to be in the right place. If recruitment is finally sorted out then there are no real other issues. Other clubs have much bigger issues with owners than something fixable like recruitment.

It is frustrating of course, but fixable. At least SR appear to care for the club and invest money into it. Very different to having owners that don't care and do not invest. Or even take money out of the club.

Only thing they've really done wrong is recruitment of managers and players. That is fixable. At least Sport Republic appear to have club's interest at heart and have been investing money into the club. As far as things to be unhappy with owners for we do not have it too bad. Sure, recruitment has been a shambles, but they have tried to fix it this summer.

Sounds of the 70s!

Money is not the issue. We have spent £260m+ in the last two Premier League seasons. The issue is what that money was spent on! Spending the money in a better way can be fixed... hopefully.

Selling now when the club value drops due to relegation would be a strange time and makes little sense. They'd be better off waiting to see if they can quickly return to the Premier League and value return to the club value. A sale now would sell them make a loss on all the money put into the club. Plus as the club is the keystone club of the group, the group falls apart without Saints. The club have denied it according to the Echo.

A) Some people claim that those scriptures are evidence for their belief. So by questioning it I'm questioning the evidence. That makes it a discussion trying to identify the validity of the evidence claims. B) Strawman fallacy. I did not ask why I can't ask hypothetical questions. A question about if the actions in a story were justified or not is not hypothetical regardless of it being fiction or non fiction. The question was about the word for word actions in a story, there is no hypothetical element to the question. C) If the death of those babies, fictional or not were not justifiable then it is a flaw on any claim of a loving, fair and just God as described in scripture.

Try answering the actual question.

Ignored my question.

Some Christians claim they are factual and those things happened word for word. Even if they are fiction. Why can't we discuss fictional characters and events?

Yes, it is an example of a joke. So is this from yesterday... Do you find that mildly amusing at all? As for posting news about Saints others benefit from seeing and positively contributed to the forum. I do it all the time. You just focus on my other posts.

How does it take focus away? Other candidates can still be interviewed.

Where as you have more glass embedded in your feet than John McClane!

Is there any glass left in your house?

It is not hypothetical. Regardless of if it is fiction or non fiction did the babies deserve to die in the story? Did Hans Gruber deserve to die in Die Hard? Fictional character but we can still say if we think it was right to let him die.

We can add not being very observant to working out %, counting and all the other things.

I'd ask why they think newborn babies deserve to die and do they think it is the action of something good or evil.

No, and I didn't say they did. Question still works if it happened or not.

Did first born babies of Egyptians deserve to die? Or the babies in the global flood genocide?

How does it negatively impact the club to plan for the future?

Why is future planning not a sensible thing to do?