egg

Yep, although to be fair, Tolkien does describe some characters by colour. I'm still reeling from tiny Tom Cruise playing the massive Jack Reacher.

Good shout. I'll retrain as a bricklayer if that happens.

The current system is based on historic rateable value. The new idea being floated is based on an updated rateable value. The concept is well established. What do you propose instead? No flannel please, just your proposal.

Acting

Close the channel? What's your plan? Nigel can't either?

Calling a shovel a shovel isn't a political stance. It's an objective assessment.

That highlights your misunderstanding - no centrist is bang in the middle, and I'm certainly left of centre on some issues and right of centre on others. I'm left of you though, so in your view I can't possibly be a centrist.

Nice deletion mate...you mentioned "your side of the political spectrum". That says it all - anyone to your left, even a centrist who's ever voted labour like me, is a lefty on your view. We're not the US with a simple left/right division, but we seemingly are to people with your simple political outlook. I was going to retract my earlier comment re your simple views, but you've justified it yourself.

I'm right on this petal.

I disagree. Burnham hadn't said anything meaningful about his policies pre his coronation, and I've criticised that process. Had their been an election involving him, I'd have wanted to know before deciding whether to cast a vote for his party. Having never voted labour, I'd have taken some persuasion though. Farage, in contrast, has said plenty. Playing the tape forwards, I think he'll be a disaster. That's what all voters have a duty to do imo. If he's elected, heaven forbid , I'll give him a chance - what other choice is there. Back to your initial point, I can't be partisan towards a party I've never voted for, or a bloke I've never voted for.

There's plenty Farage has said which alarms me immensely. Nothing Burnham has said, yet, does. There's a distinction between foresight and being partisan.

Most of your points are very simple.

Or perhaps just give the bloke a chance and see how he does. Sensible people do that, and don't over analyse.

Yep. Pathetic thing to get worked up over.

Possibly bring last season's black kit out?

Target

Lateral

Yep. The average international female football team plays 8 - 12 games per year. If the FA follow that precedent, it must right that any ban should match the games played in that 12 month period, not the time period itself.

Personally, I like the idea of reformative justice, but for all criminals. The whole system needs a top down review - prevention, policing, process, courts, judicial appointments, sentencing, life after, budget, etc.

Juries aren't the issue. There's insufficient court space and judges, and that doesn't change with more judge decided cases. It was a pointless move and I'm glad it's being reversed.

Because he's not the club. The get have been punished for what they did. Tonda will now be punished, as an individual, for what he did. Is anyone disputing that what he did doesn't amount to misconduct?

I'm not sure who's telling anyone to "get over it". Accepting the reality of what we've done to ourselves is different. Re the rest. We haven't been "treated" in any way by the FA. Sure, Tonda has been charged, and any suggestion that he shouldn't have been is unrealistic. We can only hope he gets off lightly. The EFL treatment was kind of inevitable, and despite what you suggest, no other club has been caught trying to cheat their way through a play off final and lied through their teeth to the investigation people. As a fan, I'd loved to have seen us get off lightly, but given what we were trying to achieve from the cheating, I'm not sure what other penalty they could have given. The club will have learned from their botched approach to the EFL charge. Fortunately that'll mean being more realistic than fans inevitably will be.

Nobody "accepts" the punishment as fair, but the initial charge was obvious, as is this. We've got people telling us to defend something that we've already admitted, and with findings that we're stuck with that concluded this to have been a top down issue. What we need to accept is that we bought this on ourselves, Tonda bought it on himself, that the club made a proper shambles of the investigation and EFL process, that it doesn't matter that Bielsa got off with a warning, and that we're simply here to mitigate the damage.

Not being charged isn't a precedent. A precedent is what's done after charge, and for something comparable. If I get caught doing 50 in a 30, but get waved off, it doesn't mean that others will get away with similar.

Err, ok mate. One bloke getting away without a charge doesn't create a precedent for people not to be charged in the future.