egg

Agreed. Archer is a confidence player. Downs and BBD just aren't players.

Yep. We don't need any more distractions. If the penalty is draconian, appeal, if not accept it, draw a line, and build.

Are you ITK about people who are ITK about ITKers?

It's interesting to note that those previously supportive of Israel on here have gone quiet. I hope that means that they now acknowledge that the behaviour of the IDF (in Gaza, West Bank, and Lebanon) is and has been an utter disgrace.

All football activities is exactly that. If you're right and there'd be a technical bypass, I think Saints would be wise not to look for one - we just need to play with a straight bat.

A ban from all football activities would catch the friendlies.

Or time period ban. It's the first of the month so perhaps banned from all football from today until X date. Not ideal.

Yep. Years back I got regular info, as I know tyou did. Posting the occasional bits up got shitty responses so I stopped bothering. I love a good bit of itk stuff, but we all know that things change, that the source has misunderstood, etc, but it's a sad state of affairs when people rip into others for passing on what they've heard.

That was ridiculous. Trumps mate got the $2m contract (painting a pool) for a mere $12m, chosen of course by Trump. Nothing fishy there. Did a crap job, so some poor fella got the blame and hit with litigation. Crazy, and very sad, times.

I think you need to lighten up tmate. Not all whispers come through, and I suspect many people prefer posters who offer up what they hear rather than posters who come down on those that do.

The tribunal hearing was not fixed at 12 hours notice. The appeal was quick, if that's what you mean. In law, urgent appeals, sometimes same day, are common. You shouldn't need time to prepare for them. Appeals are based on the court/tribunal getting it wrong, and the legal team will have known how they say the decision was wrong. The difficulty we had is we got it wrong. We acknowledged that by sacking counsel and bringing someone else. He wasn't on the hearing, won't have known every detail, and was playing catch up. It was a disaster from the club from the off. That's undeniable.

Good point! Spanish Omelette surely.

Indeed. And doing it to begin with.

That's nice. If I go to Morocco, have a little swim and go to Ceuta, does that make it easier for me to live in Spain permanently post Brexit?

The timescale thing is a red herring. We knew what we'd done, we knew the rules, we knew the case against us. Our only decision was what to accept, what to fight, and what mitigation to put forward. We then messed up some more. Evidence against us included from the kid himself. My understanding is we called him to give evidence. That lad should have been so upset that he couldn't possibly give evidence, not ponied up to point the finger at the club andTonda. We then took the whole "it ain't serious, it only warrants a fine" line. Pissing off the investigation team, hiring non specialist lawyers, calling the kid to throw us further under the bus, then pissing the panel off some more with an unrealistic stance, then ditching our counsel after the hearing (presumably as she was shit) giving the new bloke 5 minutes to prepare, etc, etc. But yeah, let's just focus on some 12 hour point.

As has been said, this is wrong. We lied to the investigation team. Twice as I understand it. When we came clean, we then took an unrealistic approach, which was compounded by our lack of honesty and good faith. We brought the sanction on ourselves by our approach before and during the hearing. In contrast, Chelsea boxed clever and self reported. Sure, they knew they were in trouble, but grassing yourself up is a whole lot different than lying. The difference between our approach and and Chelsea's couldn't be wider.

Yep. He and Osvoldoramo thinks UK liberalism, where there's a broad political spectrum, is the same as US liberalism where there's a binary left and right. His/their fascination with pigeon holing people as left or right is just a bit weird. I think it's to make "debate" easier for them - the actual issues and questions can be ignored, and issues merely hit with a "you lefties" retort. All a bit daft and silly.

Left of centre on some issues, sure, but socialist and left wing is altogether different. How did the research go?

You keep saying this. In your left/right world anyone who isn't aligned with your views is left. You're assessment is based on your erroneous understanding.

It was on X mate - what more verified is there than that?

Fuck me, I think you must be American and have this odd belief that liberal views are left wing. You obviously have a simple left / right view of politics. If you follow this link: https://www.google.com/ And type in "explain the centre ground of UK politics to me as I don't get it", a whole new world will be revealed. Think if it as the sea of grey between your black and white understanding.

Agreed. He's a bright bloke and has enough about him to know what to say and what not to say. He had a chance to clarify and repeated the one murder point. He was trying to minimise the situation to make his point, and didn't take the opportunity to clarify when he had the opportunity.

So 3 or 4 people hijacking the forum with aligned political views. I have no issue with that, but question why you see differing views from 3 or 4 people as such an issue.

I think some of us have a less binary view of the political spectrum of you and a few others. Your opinion that anyone left of your thinking is a raving leftie is pretty tragic.

Some of us have worked hard mate and work when / if we choose. The rewards of capatilsm. Your time may come.