egg

Yep. It's a proper mismatch. I've got a friend who's a retired pro. He once told me about a bloke he knew who'd fought AJ. The bloke was taller and heavier than AJ and was unbeaten in 20+ fights. Got blown away in less than 2 minutes. Apparently he said he'd never felt such power, and whether linked or not, he had to retire a couple of years later after he failed a brain scan and had his license cancelled. Boxing is bloody dangerous, and the issue always has been that you get big heavyweights and smaller ones. Can't really do much about that, but the smaller guy, if he's decent, can win and stay out of trouble. David Haye for example did well against much bigger men. The difference is that he was a good boxer.

The pun and amandaland are the only good things on that list.

Feck me, the drivel you post. There's a world of difference between appreciating a classic programme from the 70's and liking a shit programme that's still made but is stuck in a time warp.

Yep. It's an embarrassment to boxing. Ditto the press conferences. AJ should blow him away within a round or two, but I have a feeling he won't.

Agreed. Trigonometry isn't much use in life, but money / life skills are essential.

I'm not sure about that. Invest well, and they'll be ok. The issue is doing that as property will take priority and getting started there isn't easy.

I'm very much on the camp of supporting all those in society who need it, pensioner's included. Getting it right won't be easy, but it's doable.

Two kid cap I'm somewhat torn on, but on balance I would have kept it on affordability rather than moral grounds. The whole welfare system needs overhaul - state pension included. What grates with me is people shouting to slash welfare, but never the part of the welfare system they hope to benefit from.

Where did I say that? Triple lock for ALL pensioners is not the same as a means tested supplement for those who need additional income.

You can blame Snicko, but bad form not walking when you know you've hit the ball.

Yep, should have binned the triple lock - an unaffordable welfare spend. Should also have kept the 2 kid cap. Otherwise, they didn't have much to work with.

Seemingly Mauritius had a claim to the islands, hence the deal and lease. Re spy shit, I think it's widely acknowledged that Chagos is vitally important to the US for all sorts military and similar purposes. Some conspiracy theories will tell you that's where that missing plane from a few years back ended up. The whole carry on is odd.

Very literal! The masses are skint.

I'd hazard a guess by next summer. It's a political hot spud, so just get on with it.

On the face of it, giving land to people who never owned the land makes so sense, but equally it doesn't feel right that we retain land that we've stolen.

I'm not sure they'll be that brave, but it's necessary. I spoke with a Showman friend yesterday - business has never been so bad, everyone is skint. 0.5% is a needed boost.

You've yet to come up with a solution. Problem - easy to identify. Solution - easy to demand but not easy in reality.

Too lenient. I'd brand them.

Blimey, that poor girl. The sentences are ridiculously light.

I vaguely recall the discussion. I think there were reasonable assumptions that a big deal wouldn't have been left as the kind of interim deal that the union seems to view it as. Staggering that the door has been left open.

Domestically yes, but internationally the extreme interpretation of Islam is something that's out of our hands.

The truth is we can't. Internationally religion will be taught and practiced in a way that we can't control. We've tried regime change time and time again and it never goes well. Domestically we could perhaps legislate but I'm not sure any government, even Reform, would have an appetite to do that.

I'm not sure what part of I'm not engaging with you is difficult to understand.

It's not "interesting". It's a response that says I don't want a wider debate - I'm focusing on the narrow issue of what happened yesterday and the issues around that. On that, could you please answer Farmers point "I'm assuming you don't think that persecution of people's can lead to extremism then?"

I'm not sure what part of I'm not engaging with you is difficult to understand.