hypochondriac

It is concerning because it is how Leeds went bust, it is concerning because it signals the end to our much publicised (at the time) method of doing business. Taking loans out on future income is not a good path to go down (see Rangers and the skates as prime examples.)

Is there an option to put training ground improvements on hold due to creative differences? If not then there should be.

This isn't good news at all. Unlike Portsmouth fans, I suspect the majority of saints fans have a brain in their nut and so understand why this would be of concern. Questions need to be asked and we need to know what this is.

That is very concerning news. I hope there is a simple explanation...

You've changed your tune a fair bit.

Big lol

These stupid builders they are so unreliable. Well done to the club for not taking any nonsense and being decisive,

Interesting considering the rumours on here about other contractors. I wonder who is at fault.

We should dig up the corpse and posthumously hang him ASAP.

Who? How else can we tell if someone is guilty or not than through the courts? It isn't perfect but if there is no trial and someone is not found guilty of a crime then there is no other way of saying if they have done anything whether they are innocent or not.

Not sure how exactly they can prove it though?

No one has said Jimmy is innocent. Plenty of people have given him the benefit of the doubt until such time as he has been proven guilty. That is the sensible thing to do.

Erm you said: of course people are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, we live in a society that says that someone is innocent until proven guilty.

Who? Many said innocent until proven guilty. If you want to change that then probably best to go and live in China or somewhere similar.

Nope, no one has jumped to that conclusion. I find it sad that people like you immediately jump to the conclusion that he is guilty.

It would be if that is what I had said. Quite obviously, questioning the 'support' for someone who has 'apparently' abused kids is wrong, as is suggesting that 'plenty of evidence is coming out' when in fact no evidence has actually been presented anywhere.

Again though, how do we determine who is guilty if they are not convicted? It is impossible unless you witnessed it yourself.

All allegations of this nature should be investigated, I'm not sure that is ever up for debate. I'm still not sure what it will achieve though, I mean now he is dead they aren't going to find out the truth anyone short of video evidence or something like that. It will be just their statements of what happened.

I agree but egg said: Which is just totally wrong.

Also think you need to make a clear distinction between those who are guilty and those who are accused of something. As someone else said it's innocent until proven guilty I am afraid and even if you suspect someone and they are not convicted then should we be treating them as if they are guilty without any proof?

Right so I'm going to go and accuse someone then. No smoke without fire he must be guilty because I said so.

A disgusting phrase that ruins people's lives.

Correct

Where is this evidence? An old teacher of mine had three people come out to say he had molested them in the eighties and they were at the school at different times (over an 8 year period.) It destroyed his life and he was entirely innocent. There are scum out there who make untrue allegations, particularly now Sir Jimmy is gone and can't disprove all of this.

Exactly. What good is this going to do even if it is the truth? It won't change anything. The man is dead so what is the point?