egg

Yep, bond markets are shitting their pants. As I said the other day, they're the fortune tellers, and they don't like our tea leaves. Unsurprising. Yields above the 2008 and Truss levels are a huge concern. We're on a very sticky wicket. More tax and growth slows. Ditto cuts and the impact of austerity. More borrowing and even twitchier markets. It's a perfect storm of issues.

Yep. Grilled or shallow fried, sometimes with just a squeeze if lemon, and the jobs a fish as they say.

Pollock is very similar. I reckon she'd be hard pushed to notice the difference.

Yep. We rarely buy it now. Fish and chips for 2, with peas and a curry sauce, costs us north of £30. Difficult to justify when we can get a feast from an Indian takeaway for that sort of money. The owners will talk of the overheads which have gone through the roof, but they're pricing themselves to closure. There's a chippy in Shirley which does alunchtime/afternoon menu. Chips, sausage, fish cake (home made, delicious), peas, curry sauce, and a few other things, all at 99p an item. It's crazily busy, and the owner says he makes money at those prices.

Basa is great. Very good as a smoked fish too. There's loads of alternatives. I remember years ago regularly eating hoki. That was when we were trading more with new zealand, and it seems to have disappeared.

You can add Ling to that list. At least as good as cod, but a bottom dweller so not easy to fish.

If he is aware, he'll ignore the reality. That said, the fact that consecutive governments haven't taken steps to ensure that we're energy self sufficient, and have established and continued a system which ensures that corporations benefit from the fact that we are not, is probably the biggest failure of recent times.

Indeed...debt and pension promises are easy to create but aren't the nicest of inheritances.

Indeed. Some people talk as if Labour inherited a healthy balance sheet and created the mess we're in via it's own policies. Sure, they've had a shocker, but they inherited an absolute shit show.

So you think a bloke hiding behind a tree, at distance, was meant to be seen. Bless. I don't enjoy building a case. The whole thing was a farce, but we made the case against us. Fortunately, the clubs legal team won't be as naive in their approach as you, and some of our fan base.

You've highlighted the similarities. Both involved spying when it wasn't allowed, filming via a device that wasn't meant to be seen, and with the intention of getting a sporting advantage. I'm not sure why people struggle with this.

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.