egg

This was Merrington. I heard the minibus story years ago from one of the young players on the minibus when the lads were talking about Higgins behaviour. He told me that Merrington stopped the bus that day to find out what had been going on, and blew the whistle sharpish. Massive credit to him, and his actions led to Higgins resignation and stopped him abusing other lads at the club.

Just suppose you get some answers, what will you do next? All your worry and angst seems completely futile to me as it won't change a single thing.

Yep. Sad thing is I doubt that they'll play unless there are injuries.

Why does it? Does a **** shirt really change how you feel about the team you support? Really? it's a kit, ie the uniform that the players where when they play for the club. I get the feeling that I am in a minority of not giving a monkeys what that kit looks like - I'm only concerned about what players are wearing the kit and how they play.

Get a grip. Decent video, and a bit of fun. A kit is a kit, I'm more concerned by the players wearing it.

Amen. Grown men moaning about a footy blouse. Bless em.

Your earlier post, and this, are bang on. Our decision to hold onto VVD was ridiculous and that decision made that season more difficult than necessary. Our recruitment post the VVD sale has been shocking and one factor in that imo was the decision to hold onto VVD. Any player with potential who would once have seen us as the stepping stone club that we are (or were) is bound to have been put off by the clubs stance re VVD.

That was hilarious, the bloke wouldn't have it that you either win the league or you don't.

Agreed. My issue in that mess was with the club. Trying to keep him was pointless posturing that achieved nothing bit disharmony and disruption. Back to the thread, they both will have moved for nights like that as well as the dollars, and fair play to them for being part of one of the best comebacks football has ever seen.

Yep, it's a no brainer. McCarthy won't take the gloves off Gunn. Neither will Forster. McCarthy has value. Forster doesn't, and is costing a fortune.

Can't agree. The change was logical and tightened us up, pushing JWP further up. Redmond offered pace up front. Sensible change for me.

And that's exactly why he went for Valery.

He's slipped backwards imo. I'd take a fit and firing Lemina over JWP all day long.

We disagree. Turkish explained it well so please read what he said. In summary though - someone can be a decent footballer without being a good defender. There's no debate that Stephens is a decent footballe, the issue is whether he's a good enough centre back.

He's a talented lad and a decent footballer, but imo he's not a centre back. Right back in a 4 perhaps, or holding midfield, but just not a centre back. He's so bad in the air for a big lad, goes to sleep, and his positional sense is shocking. His confidence is clearly shot and he needs a move but moving him on with his wages won't be easy.

I said "In this case its you who assumed Evans was innocent." That followed your post, just a few posts above, where you said "I don't like seeing individuals convicted of a crime when I'm not sure they have committed that crime" You have/had clearly formed an opinion that Evans had not committed a crime. Please do not call me a liar when I quote your own words! I'll leave it here as this is futile so fill your boots in having the last word.

Ditto, although my assessment was also based on seeing him play for us, both in the 1st team and reserves/u23's before and after that Reading spell. I didn't see a premier league player in him but in his matches under RH he's done well. What's surprised me is how he seems to have time on the ball and use it intelligently - he took his time before his ball in for Redmond's first and he put it on a plate.

We're on different pages clearly. A not guilty verdict does not aways mean a man is actually innocent. In this case its you who assumed Evans was innocent and take great pleasure in his guilty verdict being overturned. I offer no opinion because I don't know.

Cheers and understood. I'd never label anyone a "rape apologist" but by the same token I'd never seek to protest someone's innocence in a rape allegation when there is insufficient information to form a view one way or the other. In this case I can see why there was a trial, but can also see the weakness with the initial verdict.

Do you really think that a conviction being unsafe because of the application of the law is the same as someone being innocent of the crime? As I say, court's apply the law, and that is different to justice being done. I had a successful criminal defence practice at one point with a high acquittal rate but I never acted for an innocent person.

I'll focus on just these words. I wouldn't call you a rape apologist but you protest a hell of a lot on behalf of someone who was convicted of rape but later acquitted. I've read enough of this thread to note that you have played judge and jury without knowing the full facts and/or what Evans was thinking that night - you say that you don't feel that Evans committed the crime. question why you feel you can say that and/or why you feel the need to. Sure, the conviction appeared unsafe, but to lurch from that to protesting his innocence is a big step and one can see why the label has been attacked to you. Soggy hasn't come out of this looking like a "fool". He seems to understand that rape is hideous and that people who are acquitted may well have committed a crime. There's no "justice" in that. Indeed - the application of the law and justice rarely reconcile.

I really can't be bothered to do that, I have less time on my hands than you seem to have. However, it is very clear from the tone and content of your posts (eg that you're "glad that justice seems to have been served and that he has been found innocent") that you seem pleased that he's finally been acquitted. Why? You are unconnected with the fella so why such belief that the initial verdict was wrong, and such relief by the ultimate verdict? Frankly it's all a bit bizarre, and quite why people feel the need to do a forum lap of honour cos a bloke is acquitted of rape of a young woman I cannot understand.

None of us know if justice has been served. None of us know if this was the correct outcome. All we know is that he was convicted, but that another court later felt that there was sufficient evidence to support the initial verdict. In terms of this thread, the fundamental difference is that the likes of soggy take the view that a victim of rape is the victim. The likes of you and Hypo take the view that the accused is the victim.

"Grind em down" politics mate. She's not as daft as people think.

Had that have been the position throughout we'd have know by now. That's an opportunistic stance to add to the fear around no deal. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but had we the balls to bargain hard, and adopted the position from day 1 that we're going on wto terms, that we'll keep our borders open to the EU for trade so long as its reciprocated, that we'd allow all EU citizens to remain here as long as its reciprocated, that we'll pay for what we're benefitting from pending departure (and what we have committed to) we wouldn't be in this mess. The EU would have come to us. As it is we've played an appalling hand and parliament can't commend any way forward cos they're all sh1te.