egg

You're obsessed with stats. I prefer what I see. Good creators only get assists if chances are taken, only play key passes if players make the runs, etc. You stick to your stats, I'll stick to spotting a good player. I'll finish on just one question - is your opinion that Buendia is no better than Redmond? To answer your question, no he isn't, but he's better than many believe him to be. Anyways, we've digressed enough from the subject. Hopefully Ralph is staying, but there's enough at Villa to tempt him imo.

That's true, but he likes a good 10 and he's better than ours with perhaps the exception of S Armstrong.

Skin

Agree on that, but suggesting that he's not a good player is a bit stupid. He'd walk onto our team.

You're focusing on parliamentary attendance on being the primary job of an mp. It isn't, and we'll plainly have to agree to differ on this. For me, an mp spending his / her time sat down travelling to then sit down heckling in parliament or listening to some debate that they won't be involved in is not serving his / her constituents. If that MP uses that time doing actual work in that constituency, or for the constituents do you not agree that (even if part of that day is spent doing another job) that the mp is not doing more for his/her constituents?

Blimey. That's a tad ridiculous.

Are people really doubting that Buendia is a very good player?

That's a blanket statement. You're suggesting that parliamentary attendance, or lack of, is what mp's should be judged on. If the mp for hartlepool chooses to spend a day in the constituency working some with and for the constituents, and other time in another role, surely that's better than sitting on a train to London and back only to sit there heckling someone in pmq's?

I have no issue with second jobs. If I was elected an MP, I'd maintain my professional job and CPD as there's no guarantee of a continuing role as an MP. Where it becomes an issue is where the second job a) creates or potentially creates a conflict of interests, or b) it means that the MP role (in and out of Parliament) is not getting the time it needs. That's all aside of the facts that all ministers have ministerial jobs in addition to their MP role.

Touching

You can't judge MP's on parliament attendance alone. Spending time with constituents, lobbying and working on their behalf, supporting businesses in their communities, etc, is much more beneficial to those they represent than sitting in the back benches for PMQ's or a debate on something that they will support anyway.

Kids computer games aren't what they used to be. In "theme Park" back in the day you could put extra salt on the chips to make the punters buy extra soft drinks, which you could water down to make more profit. 35 years later you'd have thought they'd have 1, 2 or 3 ply bog roll option in the toilets, and bungs to agents etc to add a bit of reality.

I trust the ads emphasise the equal opportunities to all applicants?

You mean it's not a feature already? Pah.

Different

Yes...I'm sure you can you too...agents...stoking up interest...leverage...pay rise...loyalty bonus...cut of the spoils/fee.

Cheers, got to admit, that passed me by. The whole thing is a bit of a car crash.

Boat

In the summer I'd have paid for his taxi up there, but credit to him, he's got us playing this season, sorted the defence, and shown more tactical flexibility. Yep. I'm fickle, but on recent performances, I'd want him to stay. If he's offered a massive pay hike, money for transfers, and still plenty of autonomy, I wouldn't be surprised if he was tempted though.

Maybe, but it got so little attention so as to not to be understood as a problem on this scale.

It was given very limited focus, and certainly not with any detail. Had the issues that now present themselves were put out there, I think it would have made a significant difference.

Is that a serious question?

Port

I'm with you on the variety of ways point, but let's not be dismissive of two of those ways.

Why resist the urge? Aren't we back to pride and ego?