hypochondriac

A player who is hard to love. Too unreliable and I'd have questions over his attitude. With Bragg, Jander and Romeu I'm not sure we need him.

I remember being at the den for a classic Lambert header from a cross. Great performance. Hope for similar today.

She's blatantly done it in order to appeal to her back benchers and keep her job. Country before party is a load of old bollocks.

Some talk online of Reeves having to leave as she's blatantly lied about this most recent black hole in order to push through big tax rises. I expect it's exaggerated but interesting to see if noise grows over the weekend.

Bazunu is still a crap keeper and we still need to replace him. I don't think we will mind but we absolutely should.

According to Adam we would only have to pay him off for a year max whatever contract we give him so the length doesn't really matter

I'd take that over the current mess. Conservatives and lib dems weren't great last time but they weren't the worst.

I mean if you win your first four games in the manner he has the I can see why people would immediately reevaluate (me included.)

Will be interesting to see how the u21s do now.

Who was that bellend of an analyst who said he had a bad attitude? I'd love his thoughts now!

I'd say it's maybe surprising for Labour but not surprising at all for Starmer the technocrat and his style of politics. I do wonder how much longer he will survive though and if any of these ideas he's floated or had a hand in will actually come to fruition (assisted suicide, no trial by jury, ID cards etc).

I'll look at the summary at the end. I can't be bothered with all the waffle.

You think I think that every move labour makes isn't reacted to enough? I'd say there's a fairly reasonable outcry for a large number of things labour have done. It's one of the reasons they are so unpopular and why they've frittered away their commanding election win in a year and a half. I've seen plenty on the left of politics react with consternation at this move against Jury trials though. I don't think it's a left or right thing. I'd consider it a very bad idea no matter who was proposing it.

So no one from the legal profession could object to this for any other reason?

Corrected for you.

You think every move labour makes is overreacted to. I would suggest you aren't entirely neutral here.

Leo Scienza is our king.

Like you say it's a separate issue and not one being proposed at the moment unlike this one.

Fine as long as we agree that this proposal is not the answer. Imagine what certain groups would be saying if Farage had proposed this. No surprise that Starmer wants to give more power to judges though.

Release some to make room for the social media villains the judges will Convict that jurys generally don't.

Sounds like two tier justice to me.

But Riel Karmy-Jones KC, chair of the Criminal Bar Association which represents criminal barristers, said the proposals would not solve the crisis in justice. She said: "What they propose simply won't work - it is not the magic pill that they promise. "The consequences of their actions will be to destroy a criminal justice system that has been the pride of this country for centuries, and to destroy justice as we know it. "Juries are not the cause of the backlog. The cause is the systematic underfunding and neglect that has been perpetrated by this government and its predecessors for years."

Why is my anecdotal evidence of my mixed race wife receiving almost no racial abuse despite living in this country her entire life less valid than your anecdotal evidence?

Plus I see Streeting is busy torpedoing his leadership ambitions by green-lighting child experimentation.

I'm genuinely shocked that Labour are planning scrap jury trials for offences under five years. I find it mad that governments can just do whatever they like with seismic law changes that weren't in their manifesto and the public were never asked.