hypochondriac

You don't pay five pounds for the OS. Glad the problems seem to have been sorted at last.

We played better against Ipswich.

Are you talking about results? Or the fact that he left? If you mean results then you are very much mistaken.

I disagree with quite a few of them. Why have you marked them out of 20?

De Ridder was available and fits on our bench. He is good enough.

We have three CBs (not including Seaborne.) If Martin and one of the others is injured we are screwed.

Was the quietest I have ever seen a stadium. Was like a morgue.

A CB and a pacey striker would be good (as well as Jos in permenently).

Guly was superb today and basically won us the match.

Just home. We were fantastic first half but Coventry were also rubbish and gave us so much time. Second half we took our foot off the gas and totally let them back in it. It was like Peterborough all over again. At 2-2 we decided to start playing again and beat them easily. Fonte was rubbish (what has happened to him? He doesn't pass like most of the other players and gives the ball away too much.) Gully and Schneiderlin were awesome but Guly was MOTM for some classy touches and a great goal.

Order another one through my referral link (and activate it ) and you get five pounds free credit: http://giffgaff.com/orders/affiliate/hypochondria Reception for me is perfectly fine. Never had any problems.

You do realise he is referring to you...

Helps a lot though so he does have a bit of a point TBH.

Possibly ML's dosh that enabled us to attract Adkin's interest and support him properly...

Would be good to hear if the person who bought it was attracted to the sale because of the ebay ad. The way it was written certainly suggested that that was the case.

He has a point in some ways. Of course our fanbase and management has had an effect on our position, but also none of this would have happened had we not had relegation and administration.

Everything I said stands. The only point that was contentious was the point about the SORN which I retracted when told it was not illegal. It seems that it was in fact illegal and thus the point does stand. What bit do I not know what I am talking about?

Now I am confused. Can we have a definitive answer on whether this is illegal or not?

Thanks for the clarification. I detract my previous detraction.

Far enough. I detract that comment but you are still an a*se for what you have done.

Take it up with angelman not me.

My post was just a copy and paste of what angelman wrote. Was the car roadworthy when you sold it? Yes or no?

To add to the above.... as the car wasn't sold without a SORN then it must be considered to be roadworthy, whether you said it was for spares or not. As it had no SORN then it has to be roadworthy. That it has 6 months MOT left is irrelevant - MOT does not give carte blanche to drive a car in an unroadworthy condition. It is merely a statement that the car passed on the day of the test and it is up to the owner to keep the car in a roadworthy condition. You are stuffed and potentially a criminal.

He says himself he sold it without a SORN which means that legally it must be roadworthy. It wasn't so he has broken the law.

So is the spelling.