hypochondriac

So the answer is you are going to ignore them then. All you did was quibble over semantics about Henry and ignored my overall point and the other examples I gave. I think it's really obvious that there are some decisions that aren't debatable and I gave you a couple of examples to illustrate that. Debatable decisions shouldn't use var to decide but travesties of justice like Maradona should absolutely be overturned, particularly when the stakes are so high and so much is riding on it. To have a game decided by blatant cheating is totally wrong and I support measures which would remove that sort of thing from the game.

What abiout the the decisions I highlighted earlier that you have ignored?

And the other two decisions? Regardless the Henry goal should jot have stood, it was a clear and obvious decision that no one would give having seen the replay. That's what VAR is for.

If someone punches the ball into the goal like docoure or Henry or Maradona then var would be useful to overturn those very obvious wrong decisions. Absolutely no one who watches those replays would have any doubt at all saying they should not have stood.

It really isn't subjective. If a clear and obvious error has been committed then use it to rectify them. I'm thinking of Henry in the world cup qualifier for example which was a travesty of justice. If you used it in that way then most games it wouldn't even get used.

I meant for things like that Watford player against us. I also said if there is any doubt then it reverts to the referees original decision. It looks to me like the refs are judt calling in var to relinquish responsibility for their decisions at the moment.

Yeah I don't think it works well St all in its current form. Should only be for specific decisions such as handball abd if it crossed the line. Any doubt at all and it should go back to the referees initial decision. They need to shown it on screens as well so the crowd know whats going on.

Various Labour initiatives over the last few years clearly indicates that they will do something similar to Canada and prioritise "diversity" and "equality" over the health of the actual economy. Its what always happens when someone is as ideologically possessed as Labour clearly are- most recently when employing a racist as an advisor. In Canada, equality of outcome is prioritised over growth and given the types of people in positions of influence in the Labour Party and some of the things we have seen and heard already, its really likely that they would walk a similar path.

Take a good look at the Canadian budget for examples of what the UK will look like under Corbyn: http://nationalpost.com/opinion/andrew-coyne-the-liberals-deliver-a-federal-budget-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-budgeting-or-the-economy/amp?__twitter_impression=true

But that's clearly not what he meant.

I don't know why people got so hung up on the transition period anyway. A few extra people coming in is nothing compared to the unlimited immigration from the past 20 years.

But if the EU know that is the intention then why would they not just be as unreasonable as they possibly can because they don't want us to leave?

How will they get "kicked out?"

She has my sympathies.

Exactly. Hypothetically if corbyn fails, what is to stop momentum members from electing another candidate like Jeremy and just trying again?

There's still time. You could argue it's hastened the death of the Labour Party as it used to be. With the twerp Red Ed changing the voting, there isn't going to be a non hard left momentum loving socialist as leader for the foreseeable future.

I think it's fine to discuss the many failings in the Tory party but to bring it up immediately following a critical post about corbyn gives the impression that you are trying to mitigate Jeremy's many problems by shouting about the conservatives - a tactic regularly employed on here by the way.

I just think it's amusing that pointing out Tory failings on a thread about Corbyn was the first response to my post. It's not particularly relevant when discussing the Labour Party's inexorable slide into the divisions of identity politics, misandry and racism. I do agree though that both of them are awful representatives for this country.

Lol. I was waiting for the response to that to be finger pointing at the Tories saying "they're bad too!" The absolute stock response from any Labour supporter to anything like this as if that makes anything Corbyn does better.

There's no doubt about it, Corbyn is absolutely the party leader everyone should be hoping gets to power. Here's another example of his impeccable judgement...

A few reasons really, the toxic atmosphere in the dressing room before he left which led to our relegation was led by him and then after he retired, his antics out in town and sone of the things he did at weekends. I'd rather not say any more.

Or when someone dismisses the entire episode entirely like the BBC https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/the-bbcs-coverage-of-ben-bradleys-apology-to-corbyn-is-fascinating/

Great player for us. Not a great human being.

There really is no excuse in this day and age for living in an echo chamber. Loads of opportunity to see opposing viewpoints if you want to.

Just want to say how much I enjoy your write ups every week and also how much I agree with them. Entertaining as always.