hypochondriac

If you have nothing to hide then what's the problem is the line of argument for every bit of abuse of power ever.

It's not mandatory to have a smart phone or to give Google your information if you don't want to.

I'm not scared of anything. I don't want the UK to go even further towards a surveillance state than they already are which is already pretty far. It's likely inevitable with technogy in the end but the slower we get there the better from my perspective. Requiring people to carry and produce ID on demand undermines the principle that people should be free to go about their lives without interference from the government unless they have done something wrong. It will only encourage arbitrary checks of identification that I don't support. Additionally I don't want the government having more of my data than they already have and giant databases would be ripe for hacking or data theft.

Didn't we spend something like 15 million on Charles last time?

Driving a car and whether I bring my license with me or not is entirely optional.

Statistically that appears to be the case.

We use the best ones who may be suitable for the prem or we replace them in the prem and use them as squad players or we sell them back to the championship to the teams who have just been relegated or we loan a couple out. Let's deal with the championship first and then have a proper plan if we ever get promoted again.

I would just object on principle if it becomes mandatory to bring an ID card with me and be forced to prove who I am in order to live my life. I also don't want to go e the government more data on me than they already have if I can help it. Just a personal thing really.

Surely the point is that getting a passport and then travelling is a choice. A future ID scheme would be mandatory which is rather different whether you agree with it or not.

Almost certainly we won't accept that. 25 million maybe we would consider it.

Personally I'd like to see us use some of our financial superiority over almost every team in the league to bully them for some of their players. Teams like Norwich and Middlesbrough have some quality. I'd like to see us bring in some proven Championship performers.

I hate this question as it isn't my job to bring in the best possible players, that's for the club to do as they did pretty successfully last time in the Championship with the likes of THB and Downes, both of whom I felt at the time were exciting and ambitious signings-albeit loans with options to buy - not that that matters for the season. Think I've mentioned before I would have liked us to try to get Sargent but I also saw Tommy Conway a few times last season and he looked great. For me he would be a more exciting signing. Possibly Richard Kone as well although he was obviously in a weaker league.

Maybe not to you but it's all about opinions maybe I have higher standards. Just about reaching double figures in a league a fair bit weaker than the Championship isn't particularly exciting to me. Our attacking signings are really the ones we need to be top notch this season. Is this bloke better than Che Adams? I wouldn't say so on an initial impression but it is just first impressions so maybe he will be good.

If it is downs then I hope he turns out to be great obviously but I have to be honest that on the face of it that's a pretty underwhelming signing as our main striker signing. Maybe we are saving the big quality move for our attacking midfielder.

I can't remember the first year of the Tories being substantially worse than this so still time. The reason the Tories were so poor is because they had such a long time to do so many things wrong. Labour just haven't had as much time yet. The fact we are even discussing who has been worse is telling. For those who voted labour, are they doing how you expected so far?

Labour have been shite so far. To what extent they have been worse than the woeful tories really doesn't matter.

Hopefully we do both.

Could he be the Armstrong replacement? He does look promising to be fair.

There isn't prem interest it's championship and European teams and very few if any of them would consider that a sensible use of limited funds.

5 foot 9 so I doubt it as doesn't meet the criteria.

Seems like an odd thing to make up. We definitely talked to him extensively so were clearly interested in him. The reported amount from Chasiri appears to be correct and so we obviously made the right decision. Has that compensation not been there, does anyone doubt that we wouldn't have done our best to make him manager?

I think it's more to do with compensation for rvn being stuck in this seasons accounts.

I think Rohl was our first choice but the chairman made it difficult and we wanted things sorted early to capitalise on our early relegation. If Leicester do get him it will be really interesting to see how they get on. I haven't heard anything about points deductions as yet.

Exactly. It's also clear that if he can stay fit that the club intend to use him a lot this year.

I find it odd that he got elected and then junked a lot of the stuff he said prior to getting elected (that's not odd loads of them do that) but then when he wasn't getting the desired results, he got a new chief of staff and then started saying a load of right of centre stuff. I'm not sure who he's trying to appeal to. He's never going to get people on the right to vote for him by being diet Tory or Reform Lite, he's only going to succeed in driving those on the left towards the lib dems and greens. This will only get worse if Corbyn starts a political party. He's also gone out of his way to piss off farmers, people who go to private schools, pensioners and now the disabled. A quote from a Labour MP said something like "the public rolled the dice with Brexit, rolled the dice with Labour and then if we don't deliver why would anyone be surprised if they rolled the dice with Reform?"