hypochondriac

Kane almost nailed on for the Golden Boot now which is a great achievement.

Hammonds is still there.

Lol.

Ohh get her. Doesn't like being called out for bullsh*t evidently...

Exactly! It's a fact now! You realise that when he's great, people will be linking to posts like this in a couple of years as proof that he was written off and called rubbish before he'd done anything.

"and I turned to my friend and said who is that black defender? He is so dominant".

Who is underwhelmed? No one has said that at all, it's going to be one of those infamous saintsweb myths again. I reckon he's a good signing.

Danish Darren Powell?

Can't agree with that I'm afraid. I'd rather live in a poorer country governed by ourselves than be dictated to by a third party with no input. Might as well live in a dictatorship if that's the attitude

Hard to argue with that. I mean even those who ardent remainers must agree that this fudge is even worse than a hard brexit. How can it possibly be acceptable for a country to be forced to follow laws set by a third party with no influence on those laws?

He's a real slimy toad. I can't believe he keeps getting promotions etc.

What is the point of this idiotic plan that pleases nobody? If you're going to leave then leave or just stay in. At least if May came out and said that she was staying you could respect her honesty and knew where she stood. If we are going to do this half in plan where we are dictated to by the EU then we should stay.

The positive of such poor performances last year is that almost every player is replaceable. Some of these new guys may work out or they may not but they'd have to play terrible to be worse than what we saw last season. They seem like good buys so far and surely have a good chance to be more than insipid and uninspiring which means they have improved us. Even tadic was pretty rubbish for most of last season.

If we had gone down then I wouldn't have worried too much since we deserved it and made a number of terrible decisions that in many other years would have had us nailed on to go down. I would have felt very sorry for the backroom staff, many of whom would have lost their jobs and the saints foundation which I am told would have been pretty much shut down.

Thankfully enough of a spotlight was shone on in by the likes of the greens and ukip that they narrowly avoided the prospect of it being pushed through and negotiated in secret. Thank goodness that there was enough noise made that certain people got nervous.

The Belgium Brazil game will determine the winner for me. I think Uruguay could best France though who have looked poor for me. Who the hell knows in the other half, I'd love us to get to at least the semi.

There's plenty of articles but here are a couple. Also the letter from the 70 luminaries themselves mention censorship. https://gizmodo.com/the-end-of-all-thats-good-and-pure-about-the-internet-1826963763 https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/eu-article-11-13-latest-gdpr-link-tax-internet-juri-censorship-a8407566.html "We support the consideration of measures that would improve the ability for creators to receive fair remuneration for the use of their works online," the letter reads.*"But we cannot support Article 13, which would mandate Internet platforms to embed an automated infrastructure for monitoring and censorship deep into their networks." There's plenty more articles explaining it if you need them. With regards to the secret debate, see post 6144 on the trillogue process.

I made one reply- not sure why that equates to being "triggered" and verbal wilfully misinterpreted me as an excuse to prove his vast knowledge of consumer protections for some reason. All my posts since then have tried to clarify what I assumed was an easily understood point. Not by verbal it seems but then he has been shouting about jihadists all over the place so he does appear slightly unhinged.

You didn't understand my point then and went off on a rant about consumer protections that I didn't talk about. Never mind...

The sarcastic post suggested that the reason we don't want the EU to increase our consumer protections was because we "enjoy being ripped off." The implication is that stupid English people have voted against the EU despite the good legislation it passes to increase consumer protection. The point I was making was that regulations like this are not why people voted to leave and if the EU confined itself to these sorts of things then they wouldn't be nearly as unpopular as they are.

The point- which you missed- is that the cuddly EU are not confined to decisions which protect consumers- which was the implication of the post. If that was all they did then no one would have voted to leave.

We will see if it goes through the "opaque and undemocratic" trilogue process behind closed doors between EU legislators and member states. There's a vote against it tomorrow so lets hope for everyone's sake that they are forced to conduct these "discussions" in public. And there's a bit more to it than simply not being able to use an avatar. On the one hand we have buctootim assuring us there's nothing to worry about and on the other we have a letter signed by over 70 luminaries including the father of the internet. Personally I'd prefer to listen to them when they say that the implications of this sort of legislation are a lot more than simply copyright protection.

Maybe have a look at article 11 and 13 of the new Internet censorship regulations and the link tax, legislation possibly being debated in secret and opposed by a host of people including Tim berners Lee.

Tbf it's not like you've set a good tone for any 'debate' with your constant use of jihadists and comparisons between those who voted to leave and terrorist organisations.

You seriously don't understand the dislike? He's our record signing for goodness sake and for the money is now statistically our worst ever value for money signing and possibly the worst prem striker ever on a contribution to cost ratio.