hypochondriac

Great news on Bree. Our team starting to take shape a bit for next year. If we take at face value what Dragan said about new signings only leaving if we get a bumper transfer fee: Peretz Bree Stephens ? Manning Fellows/Matsuki Downes? Bragg Scienza? Azaz Larin

Good shout that. Probably only cost a few million.

Time for Archer to step up a bit? I reckon he stays now and we can use him next year.

Probably didn't want to sign him if we got to the Prem which is fair enough.

Done alright with Larin.

Also exciting as it means we are sure to bring a new striker in. Always the most exciting signings up top I reckon.

At least I don't have to support any part of Scotland at the world cup.

Agree. Didn't get nearly enough out of him to justify the outlay. A terrible signing.

Is he? Seems like negotiations are ongoing but no confirmation he is definitely staying as yet.

I've made my peace with it. As long as we get top dollar -and we've been pretty good at that-the THB , Charles and Jander can go. Maybe even Scienza too but I hope not

It's at times like this that I'm just thankful we managed to get breakfast clubs up and running.

Brentford fans liked him and he was injured a lot. I expect he will be adequate backup to Bree and may mean we don't have to waste tight resources on another position.

I wasn't suggesting the player listed first is first choice, simply one of the options but yes I agree.

If we did lose THB and Charles you'd surely have to be happy with Peretz Bree/roeslev Stephens/quarshie Wood/new signing manning/Wellington Fellows/Matsuki Downes/bragg Jander/Jwp Scienza/edozie Azaz/new signing Larin/Archer/new signing

He's not wrong. One of the flemish clubs would take a punt I'm sure.

Losing THB ilwoild be a blow but given that some of them have to go I'd rather lose Charles than some of the others.

Totally bizarre and I bet Rob edwards is regretting leaving boro. Personally if we have to sack Tonda I'd consider him here.

Agree with that. I'd be happy to have time limited benefits in certain limited circumstances like you describe. It would remove them as an incentive then.

I believe there is much we can do on a policy level in order to reduce (though not eliminate) our reliance on unskilled immigration from abroad. The first thing I would do is stop all benefits to anyone who isn't a British citizen. I also believe that if we were much stricter and quicker about removing people who shouldn't be here then the general public would be on average more welcoming of the immigrants who are grateful to be here, seizing opportunities presented to them and being a benefit to the country.

I can't speak for others but I am pro immigration and pro controlled immigration as a priority.

Of course I want less immigration. A majority of the British people want that too. More of particular types of people will equal a higher rate of crime. Not difficult to understand but I'm fine with you tapping out.

That wasn't my point. My point was that allowing levels of legal and illegal immigrants into the country at a rate that the electorate has repeatedly voted against is going to cause problems. One of those problems is that a percentage of them are going to commit crimes. It is true to say that immigrants from certain nations will commit crimes at a higher rate than the average brit and that some immigrants from certain nations are on average more culturally incompatible with our country and its values. Of course the word immigrant encompasses a wide range of people but when someone who enters our country illegally, is given leave to remain or is here whilst the slow process is made to deport them and they commit a crime then of course people are going to be upset by that. Those atrocities are largely avoidable and if these cases were being properly dealt with it would reduce the chances of them happening. They are clearly distinct things from native brits being scumbags- as objectionable as that is.

Not sure what you mean by a red herring, I was stating a fact. If you view our country like a house, well we already have some existing scumbags inside our house doing terrible things that we need to deal with. If we invite more people inside and then a percentage of them commit crimes as well (often at a higher rate depending on the country they come from) then obviously that's going to get people more animated. The first load of scumbags committing crime is unavoidable. The second lot commiting crimes is a conscious choice made by governments of the day.

The rate or illegal and legal immigration is still massively too high. Illegal immigrants are still allowed to rock up here and we are too slow in dealing with them. A percentage of them will commit crimes whilst here.

Maybe that's true. If it is then surely the answer is still to deal with the immigration issues in a meaningful way to prevent idiots from being given the opportunities to cause disorder. We know in other incidents of violent disorder there was a percentage of mindless thugs but also others who swelled the numbers who wanted to protest and express dissatisfaction at the situation.