FloridaMarlin

A statement about a person is defamatory if it tends to; a) expose the person to ridicule, hatred or contempt b) cause the person to be shunned or avoided c) Lower the person in the estimation of right-minded members of society d) Disparage the person in his business, trade, office or profession. d) is the one that fits. HTH.

Blimey, Bradley Wiggins' sideburns are coming along nicely.

Apparently they are in a special auction with several sets of emperor's new clothes.

Poor little bugger probably doesn't realise he's agreed to hand over his pocket money to the players for the next 10 years.

Think of the added income from shirt sales with the number of letters in his name.

General rule of thumb is don't sign players from relegated teams. Granted, some individuals within those teams might shine in a relegation season. But there is a reason teams go down and it's generally because their players aren't good enough. Caveat emptor.

No, please tell me about it. I'm always interested in innovative, new ideas. Even allowing for some of the fantastic investigative work undertaken on this thread, and elsewhere, you wouldn't trust the vast majority of what purports to be "journalism" on t'interweb as far as you could throw it. Yes, newspaper sales are declining in the face of online news providers, but that might say something more telling about society; how we are developing a generation which has over-inflated expectation levels, and their demands for instant gratification and instant fame, spurred by reality TV, means they share little interest in the world around them. As somebody said to me recently; the internet is supposed to be a wonderful tool to widen people's knowledge, but it in fact does the opposite. Because all knowledge is instantly available with a few key strokes to the nearst Wikipedia page, people feel they no longer have to learn. They can concentrate solely on their own narrow interests, and if they do need to learn something or find it out, they can just go to Wikipedia.

We should not knock or deride the potential demise of any newspaper, no matter which one. Each newspaper that folds is a nail in the coffin of free speech, and the means of holding those in public office to account. I am most certainly not a fan of the rabid, frothing-mouthed, mad-staring, pop-eyed loon Richard Littlejohn in the Daily Moan. But he's got it dead right in this column (dons tin hat to protect against incoming from this forum's newspaper haters). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2573442/Do-really-want-live-country-No-10-aides-arrested-secret.html

That largely hinges on what Duncan said above. Anybody who had witnessed the previous spineless, craven performances borne of apathy towards the club, would not have recognised those tigers in white last night as being the same players. As Duncan says, they were so obviously putting themselves in the shop window it would have put a naked mannequin in Selfridges to shame. It will be interesting to see how they perform in their next outing against Cheltenham when instead of a nation's rapt interest, the only eyes on them will be those of another (mythical) sell-out crowd at Blu-Tac Park.

There's a club not far away who would happily ditch their long-established shirt colour, change their name, park any morals that might remain attached to them in the nearest waste receptacle, and otherwise prostitute themselves for another opportunity to be owned by an Asian chancer who might give Ronnie Barker the financial wherewithal to spunk on another collection of overpaid journeymen and give the bestest the team they deserve which could rip up League Two, pass through League One quicker than grass through a goose, en route to the Championship which would be a mere inconvenience en route back to the top table where they belongs.

As a teenager in the 70s, it was possible to have good night out most days of the week, and we were creatures of habit. Monday - couple of pints in the Sun Inn at the bottom of the High St (remember the old wooden clad pub) before nipping across to the Mecca ballroom on the pier. Tuesday - Couple of beers in The Pensioners, then up to the Top Rank for Metro (upstairs, 10pm-1am, after they had kicked the youngsters out from downstairs). Wednesday - probably the only night in. But then Sportsnight with Coleman would have had some football highlights on. Thursday - A good night to start the weekend. During the football season, we would train, then wander up to The Ark in Townhill Park to pull some old slapper, or couple of beers in the Red Lion in Bitterne, before heading into town. Outside of the football season, it would be beers in The Pensioners, then up to the Top Rank for magical Thursday nights. If we failed to pull, it was either a curry in Bedford Place, or our preferred burger of choice was Pat's, a van in the shadow of Arundel Towers. In later years, Fridays was the destination to throw a few shapes. Friday night - winter months, we would come into town and start in the Palmerston (because it had a good jukebox), wander up to the Park Inn in Pound Tree Road, I remember we used the Lord Louis as a mid-point staging post before heading off to Fridays. In the summer months, we would start in the Palmerston, and then the Park, before moving to either the Bellemoor or the Bassett, giving us an out-of-town feel, before heading back into town. Saturday nights - we would start in the other Park Inn, at The Junction, before moving to the Pensioners and the Top Rank when it was open. When the Top Rank closed, we tended not to hit the dance floors on Saturday nights and instead continued our pub crawl, often getting down the High St as far as The Southerner, or The Queens (opposite the Dolphin hotel). Of course, all Saturday night bets were off if you pulled on Thursday or Friday night, as you might be otherwise occupied. It's sad the old watering holes we used that no longer exist and our social world revolved around such places. The Spa Tavern, The Running Horse (which morphed into The Wig and Pen), The Centre Inn followed by Barbarella's down the back of Arundel Towers or if you couldn't get in there, you could wobble across to the Birds' Nest. I mentioned the Lord Louis but around the Hants & Dorset bus station you also had the Windsor Castle (if my memory serves me correctly). Every neighbourhood had its pub(s) and if sometimes you took your life in your hands as a stranger wandering in, they invariably had a bit of life in them. I mentioned The Ark, and earlier somebody mentioned The Saints pub in Millbrook. But you also had The Swallow in Thornhill, The Shield & Dagger (previously mentioned) in Shirley, the Highfield was quite upmarket. Not as a night out, but as a kid, I have memories of getting off the train at Southampton Central and walking up the road to the Hilltop Inn, if I remember, where my dad would wash away the strains of taking us brats to Bournemouth or London on the train for the day with a pint, while we stood outside with a bottle of Cream Soda and a packet of crisps with a little blue bag of salt. Perhaps that's worthy of another thread; Pubs you stood outside of as a kid with a bottle of Coke and a packet of crisps. Now we're talking as that opens up a whole new realm; The Red Lion in Portswood (before it became the Talking Heads), The Ship Inn at Woolston, The Swan at Woolston, The Manor House along Portsmouth Road, The Sun Inn at Weston, The Cowherds, The Eagle in Palmerston Road, The Stile Inn in Burgess Road, and those pubs which at least had a garden and a couple of swings - The Sir John Barleycorn at Cadnam, the Sportsman at West End (which had one of those Witches Hat iron carousels), the Maypole at Hedge End, the Sir Walter Tyrell. I'm wallowing in nostalgia now, so I'd better stop before I drown.

Potentially libellous. By hinting that Defoe manufactured a situation which would make him more attractive in the transfer market by deliberately making himself unavailable for selection for a game in order to ensure he was not cup-tied, he is disparaging him in his business, trade, office or profession. If Defoe did sue, he does not have to prove the veracity of Allen's statements. All he would have to prove was that the statement made people think less of him, which it clearly does. It would then be down to the defendant to prove what he said was either true (which might be tricky) or that this is honest comment, based upon known facts. That might also be tricky.

See Roy Hodgson has asked GB Olympic cycling performance director Dave Brailsford to speak to players in England's World Cup warm-up matches. According to the BBC; "Hodgson told BBC Radio Five in October 2012 that he would draw on the experiences of the country's other top national team coaches to help deliver success in football." Surely that can't be right. The England national team manager asking people from other sports to get involved? It's the end of football, and the world as we know it.

There are some interesting paragraphs in this that should resonate with the phew. Bill Archer and David Bellotti anyone? http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=13373

You're right what you say about soundbites. The whole dynamic of press conferences and interviews has changed because of the requirements of Sky Sports News. Sky Sports really only needs 30-60secs to fill its slots and as they are the Premier League paymasters, clubs bend over to give them what they want and the rest of the media can go to hell. Consequently, everything is now condensed to short, sharp soundbites, and rarely is there any in-depth interviewing carried out. It means that print (and web) journalists who still have loads of space to fill, have to make the most of the soundbite scraps they get along with everybody else, and the result is that they have to over-dramatise things.

I think you've spelled that incorrectly. It should be Listing Building

Steve Bruce is that rare beast, a manager who calls it as he sees it. Regardless of the praise he gave Saints, what impressed me about his post-match presser was his view on the corner that led to the goal. The assistant clearly got it wrong, it should not have been a corner, but when the interviewer asked Bruce if that was valid, he said: "Perhaps it shouldn't but we would be clutching at straws." His view was that while it might not have been a corner, Hull still needed to defend it better as if it was a properly awarded corner. There should be no difference to the way you defend a correctly awarded set piece to the way you defend an erroneously awarded one. I'm sure we can all think of plenty of managers who would have been all over that as their excuse, blaming the officials, and saying how a bad decision cost them the game.

The thing to watch in that Gif above is both players' eyes. They both look at the referee. Chico Flores looks at the ref to make sure he is watching before clutching his face in mock agony, and Carroll's first reaction is also to look at the ref. I initially thought Carroll was unlucky, that he caught Flores a glancing blow with an arm that was naturally flailing after he landed and that he didn't know where Flores was. But I think it's the eyes that give it away. If Carroll had caught Flores accidentally his first glance would have been to see where Flores actually was, and then he would have moved off in pursuit of the ball. Carroll's first reaction after catching Flores was to look at the referee. It's a look of guilt which says 'I hope you didn't see that.' It's the kind of look a toddler gives a parent who has just come into a room to find jam smeared all over the walls. Flores' behaviour is disgraceful but retrospective action can't be taken against him because the referee saw the incident and chose to take no action. The only question for the FA disciplinary panel to decide was whether there was intent on Carroll's part. The fact that the contact made was so slight it wouldn't have knocked the meringue topping off a dessert is irrelevant. As long as there is intent, no contact needs to be made. The FA panel clearly thought there was intent. As I said on another thread the other day, whether Carroll got off this charge or not, it shows he will be a risk in the World Cup. You can see the scenario now. Woy throws him on against Italy with 20 minutes left, he clashes with Chiellini or one of the other Italian defenders, who goes down as though he has been silenced by the Mafia. Off goes Carroll, and he's out for three games, by which time England are out of the competition.

Compare Rickie's contribution to his team's cause on Saturday and Carroll's. Carroll - two knock downs from hoofed balls, plus a dismissal that might rule him out for three goals. Lambert - two wonderfully astute passes to set up goals, and a goal himself. Whose cause will the media be championing to go to Brazil? Probably not Rickie, because he's slow (apparently) compared to the fleet-footed Carroll. Even if you consider Carroll's dismissal on Saturday to be a bit harsh, that's a reason why you can't risk him in a World Cup. He might only be guilty of reckless use of his arm on Saturday, but you can see a scenario where England chuck him on in the first game to try and unsettle the opposition, he flails his arm, an Italian defender goes down holding his head, and off goes Carroll. Fifa tend not to rescind red cards, so that's Carroll gone for three games.

A face in the crowd tonight. As previously reported, not even on the bench. Let's see how long he stomachs that situation.

I think you've answered your own question there. At this stage of the season it would be a gamble to bring somebody in. Patently, Osvaldo could not remain at the club and had to go, but are Juventus taking a gamble on him? Similarly, if Juve offered one of their strikers in exchange would we be gambling on an unknown quantity at this stage of the season? We are in the almost luxurious position of being able to ship out dead wood, bad apples, and be able to conduct a stock-taking of exactly what we have. Gallagher has pretty much half a season to justify the faith MoPo has placed in him, which means he's not under undue pressure but can ease his way into the side. Besides, at the risk of being branded a happy-clapper, is there that much to fret about where our goals are coming from. We scored two and could have had more against the best defence in the Premier League, without our main striker.

Oh dear, they haven't got long to sell the hottest prospect since Joan of Arc, Jed Wallace for squillions of pounds. They won't be happy when he walks in the summer for nothing.

Ahem. Financial Fair Play rules anyone? Man City/Chelsea? Here's a coach and some horses, please feel free to take a drive through these rules.

Lawrie Mac may be yesterday's man and a bit of a dinosaur but he made a valid point to a mate last week. He said there are only 20 Premier League jobs and although sackings might seem a regular occurrence, they don't actually come up all that often. PL jobs are quite precious things and if you've got one, you do all you can to hang to it. Walking out doesn't help your reputation. It might seem an honourable sort of thing to do, but club chairmen aren't that big on honour, and the manager you get because he did an honourable thing at another club might do something similar to you. MoPo will know that although we've had a good season, he hasn't made that much of a reputation yet that will guarantee him another PL job if he walks. There's the prospect that he could go abroad, but the PL is still the place to be, and he would be a fool to walk out of a job. All this, of course, from a man who walked out on us years ago for Sunderland. But no doubt over time he has seen the error of that.

If I was a cynical person I might think that Steve's generosity was a cunning ploy to get his leg over with the lovely Kora.