Lord Duckhunter

To be fair to the skates , they have done a fantastic marketing job over this nonsense. When meeting fans of other clubs , they do seem to know we're "scummers " . When discussing football with other supporters they must spend half their time whining about us. It has happened to me a lot, on hols ect , get in a discussion about football and it comes up.

It's shocking , terrible standard, particularly the keepers. I'd see a better game watching the dog and duck on a Sunday morning. It's like the emperors new clothes , everyone in the media is so polite and encouraging over it , but deep down they know it's terrible. It wouldn't be so bad if they were pretty fit and wore beach volleyball type get up , but most of them are dog rough . I'm not an old dinosaur that doesn't want women involved in football , the women Lino is great and Mrs Duck would make a good ref as she has eyes in the back of her head and seems to know exactly what I'm up to. But , I don't want my licence fee going on this rubbish . I'm afraid to say it, but women commentators are rubbish as well. That Oakley women has a real nagging voice and I've stopped listening to "The Game" podcast as that annoying Rudd bird seems to be on every week. Fat bald middle aged men , like myself , should confine themselves to watching the game and so should the fairer sex. It's political correctness and quotas , nothing to do with ability. They wouldn't televise a veterans walking game, so why televise this nonsense.

Why does Gerrard have to take that free kick, we've seen Rickie bang them in from there

Lol What we need is more owners like Whelan and more British managers like Malkey , who do these foreigners think they are commenting on our racist Brits?

Surely putting a picture of a voters house, without their permission and seemingly in a sneering manner is a spectacular lack of judgement. Can you imagine the uproar Labour would have made if a Tory cabinet member did this. What made this so toxic for Milliband is that it plays into the narrative that they are London elite that doesn't understand the working people.

The polling expert on By election special last night said that UKIP will present a greater danger to the Tory party in May, but long term from 2020 onwards could cause Labour real problems.

The labour fightback begins, Ed has just said he "feels respect" every time he sees a white van.

Nice to see ukip's Suzanne Evans on election special. Shame the establishment parties went for white middle aged men all night. Looks like Daves vow to kick Reckless' fat arse off the benches was wrong . lol at lib/dumbs , 349 lol

Got to laugh at Alan Johnson on This Week." Emily came from a poor background herself" . According to some on Twitter her Dad was a prof, from kings collage who went on to become assistant Secretary General of the UN , my the poverty she must have known. Poor girl . What makes it funny is that "she's done nothing wrong" according to senior labour figures, why resign then? Like Browns bigot moment it's more proof that this elite labour leadership despise the working people they claim to stand up for.

What, accept that the burden of proof is " guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" ? Yes they should. You're not proposing a lower threshold for rape than other crimes are you? What about " maybe he's guilty" or " perhaps he did it" .

And here lies the problem with rape convictions. The women's lib lobby try to point to low conviction rates as proof of some sort of institutionalised sexism, that victims aren't taken seriously and police officers are some sort of Sid James types . The reality of the figures is that by its very nature a lot of rapes are going to be hard to prove " beyond a reasonable doubt" . Consent will be one persons word against another. Whether people like it or not there is always going to be grey areas. Consent is very often implied and a testosterone filled male could easily misread signals. I believe schools now do a bit of education around this, which is a good thing. There must be situations where the bird is convinced she was raped and the fella convinced she wasn't. I'm sure that some are not even sure whether they were raped or not ,and there must be plenty of women who blame themselves for a misjudgement rather than see themselves as a victim. Alcohol will play a part in many situations , which again muddy the waters.It must also be very difficult to prove rape were a chick has been up for certain things,ie oral, but draws the line at penetration , as any witness to her earlier behaviour in public could say she was kissing , holding hands , willingly went home with him ,etc . All these factors added together make it the difficult crime to prove beyond a reasonable doubt except in the most violent of cases and the prosecution and conviction rates prove this. It is not because of any failings with society, just the high burden of proof required.

For me there are a few differences . After the summer it's great to prove people wrong , it's also great that Poch , Lovren and Lallana are below us and Rodgers is making a twt of himself. We have a manager who seems humble and respectful and I also love Sammy Lees enthusiasm . It's great to see Jose getting international call up and settling in so well as skipper But the main thing for me is we're winning games we can win. Every one eyed supporter in the land will look at every game bar the top 4/5 and predict a win. It never happens normally , but it is for us. Bar west brom at home we've won every "winnable" game . Long may it continue .

Oh FFS , it's a well known seduction technique . Maybe I'm old fashioned , and I admit I haven't been on the pull for over 20 years , but come on, stop being such an old woman.

What I am saying is you can be convicted of raping a women who has willingly had sex with you over a 20 year period , but was incapable of consenting one time due to drink . Doesn't the thought occur to you that this is perhaps a lesser degree of offense than a stranger jumping out of a bush in the middle of the night. Half my sucsessful pulls involved chucking drink down the birds throat to loosen her inhebitions . Some of them probarely regretted it in the morning , but I doubt they'd consider me a rapist

I've had sex with Mrs duck thousands of times over the years ( poor women) , but can still be convicted of raping her if she's ****ed up and claims she didn't consent that one particularly time. This is clearly less traumatic than a stranger forcing himself on her. Surely there are different degrees of rape as there are with most crimes

Very strange what's going on with him. I find it a bit suspicious to be honest.

I started off my first post on this thread by saying I wasn't going to comment on his guilt or otherwise . Only the jury sat and heard the full facts and only they are in a position to judge his guilt. However, there is an important principle at stake here. Once offenders have served their time should they be allowed to play football? If you watched QT you would have seen the ridiculous argument that they shouldn't earn a lot of money and shouldn't be allowed to play in front of thousands. Why? , and who decides how much they can earn and how many people they can plays in front of? If a football club are willing to pay him and their supporters are willing to watch him, why shouldn't he earn a living. Taking the personality out of it, somebody who is appealing their sentence is hardly going to admit their guilt are they? Unless you have a law that only ex convicts who admit guilt can work ,its irrelevant whether he admits it or not. I always thought that admitting guilt was part of early release, but obviously its not.

Number 1, I didn't bring up the plumber some politician on QT did. Her point was he could earn his living as a plumber but not a footballer, I was questioning this logic. It really isn't coherent. Of course Ennis is entitled to do what she wants. Just as he is entitled to play football if Sheff Utd believe he is good enough. Unless you're trying to say ex convicts shouldn't work if someone is willing to employ them. Everybody is just jumping on a bandwagon , I don't recall this amount of fuss when that keeper killed those kids. As for the entertainment profession , Pete Townsend seems to make a decent living after accepting a caution for possessing child porn, and everybody was wilfully blind when it came to Michael Jackson. Nobody stops ex convicts playing guitar or acting, why should they be stopped playing football? Whether anybody will pay to watch them or buy their records is irrelevant, part of their rehabilitation is being able to try and earn a living .

That Robertson looks good, weren't there rumours we were in for him?

I'm not going to comment on the rights and wrongs of the conviction as I didn't sit in court or receive guidance on the law from the judge. My first point is that convicted rapists should serve more than two and a half years. Had he served a " proper" sentence this wouldn't have arisen because after 6/7 years inside I doubt he'd be capable of resuming a career. Second point. Unless you work with kids , you really can't start legislating what excons can and can't do. Rod Liddle was a lone voice on QT last night , some ridiculous arguments were put forward by other guests and audience." It was OK if he was a plumber" but not a footballer was one, as if its OK to call round women's houses to mend the boiler, but not to play football in front of them. Another guest claimed he shouldn't play in front of thousands. So therefore its OK for him to play for Eastleigh, but not sheff utd ( what happens if his team with 100's of supports plays a big club in the cup, does he get dropped). The simple fact is you can not start changing your mind depending on who it is or what he does. You either believe ex offenders are entitled to work or their not. They are either allowed to play sport or they're not. The size of the crowd or the league you play in is surely irrelevant. Thirdly, why is it impossible to discuss rape in a rational and sensible way. This type of rape is clearly different than a masked stranger jumping out of a bush, yet to say so will get you no end of trouble. There has been so much moralising nonsense over this. I read that this Charlie bird who resigned her position had previously tweeted her excitement over meeting mike Tyson . The BBC employed Dirty Den who killed somebody, yet some paxo wannabe was desperately trying to humiliate Gregg Dyke over the fas response.

Long started well, looks lively and a couple of good chest lay offs.

During Red Ed's 6th relaunch yesterday he said he was going to take on UKIP, said that it was time somebody stood up to them, " we must debate them " he said, before adding he was going to take them apart. Nigel is obviously up for it, what's the betting Ed will bottle it. If you're going to call someone out and say you're going to debate them, that's what you need to do.

Haven't seen this on the forum today, so thought I'd post it. Alan Brazil tweeted that there are whispers that Judas will walk if Adebayor isn't moved out of the club in Jan. Now, it is Fri afternoon and Brazil is a drunken Scottish bum , but he did play for spurs and has provided useful info before

My point wasn't whether I agreed or disagreed with Nigel, just that it is a legitimate debating point. The original post on here struck me as implying " what a moron Farage is, he's so ignorant over this ". It's a valid opinion , not some sort of crackpot 9/11 , Boston marathon type pony.

Its a legitimate historical debate . John Pershing and later on Roosevelt both put forward the same argument.