egg

And even then, completely different facts. Bielsa isn't a comparable. The Canada case is.

I'm feeling benevolent today Whelk.

It's the aggressive words in your posts which irritate me as much as your views. "Stealing" is just ridiculous. If your point is that the triple lock has caused an unfair (and unaffordable) increase, then yes, it's a fair point, but the daft language is just daft. I'll buck the trend and say that you're brighter than that.

Yep, but having failed to cooperate initially with the EFL, hiring non sports specialist solicitors, a non sports specialist barrister who was replaced prior to the appeal, and calling the kid (who should have been so distressed he couldn't possibly have attended), approaching the matter on the basis that a fine was a given, etc, I don't have a whole lot of faith.

I'm not sure you're reading too well. I said I can't see anything north of 8 games being justified. The FA, however, may feel otherwise.

Eh? I'm not trying to prove anything! The facts are known. We admitted sending a bloke on 3 occasions, and caught once. That has nothing whatsoever with the conduct of other clubs. It's our admission of our actions.

Maybe, but what's that got to do with what we did? That they may have been expecting us is utterly irrelevant.

Because we sent people there. It's not complicated.

Although, on average, an international women's team apparently plays 8-12 games a year. For me, that's the benchmark, but with a discount for our co-operation (presumably/hopefully) with the FA. I can't see anything north of 8 games being justified, and see this penalty coming down to whether it's period of time or games penalty, based around the Canadian precedent.

I think that's more indicative of Parsons naivety than anything else.

FFS, there was no entrapment. We sent a bloke to watch matches. That's on us, as is us getting caught, not the other clubs.

But is your IQ as high as Donnie's high IQ?

And some seem content with having a masters in being a cunt.

I suppose it's possible that there's been a punishment with a stay of execution pending appeal. Feels unlikely, but it seems that anything is possible in football.

We could do a lot worse than him, he's got a bit about him.

Indeed. I'm firmly in the if you're safe in France you should stay there gang, but can't fathom the mindset of anyone agreeing that they should be left to perish if they jump on a dinghy to come here. That's just messed up thinking.

Agreed, but should they be left to struggle and drown at sea? Yes or no.

And calling something a "hack" when they're just doing something correctly.

It's even better than that... "The only control or 'guardrails' that AI needs is a STRONG AND SMART (High IQ!) PRESIDENT, and the U.S.A. has that, in spades!" That's got to make the Trump top 10 surely. Hight IQ 😂🤣😂

Yep. Whitey has previously come across as a decent fella, but being comfortable with people drowning is a disgrace.

Are you suggesting that the top down orders were from above Tonda?

It didn't for me, and made the obvious point that there was no other sporting sanction (points wouldn't bite if we went up) so exclusion from the play offs picked itself as the only available sporting sanction.

The circumstances around the spying will doubtless be a factor.

Jeez Whitey, I didn't have you marked as a leave people to drown kind of guy.

I think the only answer to that is that we will never know the answer. It doesn't alter the fact, however, that we can't leave them to drown at sea just in case they're wrong uns.