Lord Duckhunter

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/the-ashes-forget-it--this-side-would-be-lucky-to-beat-bangladesh-20101207-18oct.html For anyone who thought the English press where harsh on their national teams. It makes wonderful reading, let's hope we rub their noses in it.

Not cheaper in the family section,normally pay £19 for me and £8 for my nipper. Just booked tickets and they are all £20 and £10, even in the family section.

This could be a really good show if it was concentrated on pure talent, however it is designed to make money and therefore better acts are thrown out on the basis that they wont sell any records or generate publicity. The format could be tweaked and it become a genuine talent show and it would still pull in the viewers. I would like to see differant judges, people like Feargal Sharkey or Elton John rather than the no marks we have now.Mrs Cole has got to be the most annoying person in the music business and the fact that she comments on acts whilst she mimed on the show, shows what a joke she is. The young guy with the hat and Rebbeca are pretty good, but that Cher and her blubbing all the time, is grating on me. As for the boy band, what a talentless bunch they are. However my 10 year old girl has Cher and One Direction as her favs, and I guess she's the type of punter they're after. I'm not a big fan of the show, but Mrs Duck and the kids like to watch it, and we dont get much time together so tend to watch Sat night TV as a family.

However, they are part of UEFA.

Personally I dont think you can beat carry on films. Screaming with Harry H Corbett is proberly my fav. Looking away from Carry on, The Rutles is a great film.

I've no problem with Russia getting the world cup, when it's Europe's turn it's not fair just to share it around the Countries of Western Europe. For all the Journo's banging on about how the FA should withdraw from FIFA ect, our game is hardly whiter than white, look at the blind ey the PL turned to what's going on at the fishy end of the M27 ..

My first point was quoting another poster, my second one was showing him how what he claims is good for Britain is another area where we have no control over our own laws. Sorry for any confussion.

Clapton's off his head in the Bangladesh concert.If you haven't got it the DVD is well worth buying, a must for all Beatles and 60's/70's music fans.

A) This is not happening here without a warrant - how is this relevant? How many fugitives are their on the so called Costa Crime that can't be arrested without going through extradition procedures? If there was a paedophile from Belgium here or a fraudster from the UK in Italy surely we should be making it easier for their extradition..the EU parliament gives that a fair chance of happening. If I was to go on British TV and deny the Holocaust ever happened, the German police could come and arrest me. Holocaust denial is not an offense in England (maybe it should be, but it isn't) but is in Germany. Under the new EU treaty the police force of a member state can issue a warrent, arrest me and there's not a damn thing my MP, my local police force or anyone in the UK can do about it.Who gave away the right of the British people to determine their own laws, surely it can not be right that I can be arrested in my own country for something that is not illigal in my own country?

There was nothing new in the programme, the events took place 10-20 years ago. The timing was a delibrate commercial decision to attract viewers and publicity, not to weed out corruption in FIFA. If that was the case then they would have aired the programme with enough time for the corrupt members to be investigated and even suspended (like the Times story did).If the BBC want to act like a commercial outlet, then fine, do away with the poll tax that funds them. My issue was not the content or the right to investigate it was the timing of the programme.

Do you think the Canadians would put up with the US police force arresting Canadian citizens on Canadian soil for something that is not a crime in Canada? Would they put up with as many Mexicans (another member of NAFTA) as wanted to, having the right to settle in canada, and there was not a damn thing the Canadians could do about it? Would the Canadians give away Jurisdiction over vast swaythes of their domestic laws to NAFTA, without consulting the people of Canada? Who elected Herman Van Rompuy, because I didn't get a vote, did you?

We can be in a loose community of trading nations without having laws and other European dictates forced upon us by an unelected body. The choice is not EU or protectionism/tarriffs. The Canadians are in NAFTA without the US imposing laws, an anthem and a foregin minister on them.

+1, spot on.

I happen to believe that anything that affects the sovereignty of a nation is for the people to decide, it is not for politicans to give away to unelected faceless officals in a foregin country. The Euro loons wont give people a say because the people will reject their vision of Europe, even when they do vote no, they're bribed and told to vote again.The history of British membership of the EEC has been built on deceit and lies and if the Euro loons vision of Europe was laid before the people in 1975 they would have voted to leave. The vote was about an Economic union not a union where German police can arrest an Englishman in England for something that is not illigal under English law. Where we have no say in how many Europeans can settle in our country and where it becomes an offense to sell goods in pounds and ounces.

Nobody is denying the right to publish what they want, the issue is the timing. They had this info 3 weeks ago, why didn't they run with it then. Had they, it may have stopped the 3 alledged corrupt members from voting. Had the programme stopped these 3 voting, then that would have been a good outcome, as it is, it's too near to the vote for that to happen. Why was it broadcast in the week of the vote and not before, for maximum publicity and viewing figures thats why. Personally I dont think an organisation funded out of taxation should be putting publicity and viewing figures to the forefront of their programme timings,especially as it means the 3 members still vote. The Times ran their story weeks ago and as a result some delagates lost the vote, the BBC left it so late that the corrupt ones they exposed, still vote. Had the Times ran with their story today and harmed our vote, they may have lost readers in protest. The BBC have no such worries as they rely on a compulsary poll tax. If they want to base their programmes on maximum publicity and viewing figures they should be subject to the same constraints as commercial broadcasters and media outlets.

This is a typical pro EU arguement, we can not ask the people because they dont really understand the benefits. Why dont we go all the way and let people like Ken Clarke and Mandleson decide the Govt, after all some people vote for the wrong reasons and dont understand the manifestos.

It's only been a few years, so it's way too early to start saying "it's worked". The latest German opinion polls show 51% want the Deutschmark back, if the Germans or French say it's finished, it's finished. Come back in a generation, then tell us it's worked.

As the BBC is funded by a poll tax and is not a commercial organisation it should not act like one. It is in the nation's interests to have the World Cup and therefore the BBC should have braodcast earlier or after the vote.They have an obligation to their stakeholders (us) that is wider than any "journalistic terms". They are either the state broadcaster or a commercial broadcaster, they can not be both. Had Sky pulled a stunt like this and it cost us the World Cup I would cancel my package and not watch them ( and so I suspect would countless others), if we do that to the BBC we'd end up in prison.The BBC want their cake and eat it over this and I hope the FA reward them by giving the Premiership highlights to ITV next time round.

If the Euro was such a great thing, why were the peoples of Europe never given a vote on joining? 2 Countries were, Denmark and Sweden. Guess what, neither are in the Euro.

Yesterday was the 9th annivesary of George's passing, I cant believe I posted last night and forgot (it's not that I'm an anorak, but he died on my daughters 1st birthday and she was 10 yesterday). I found this fantastic clip of him on Youtube, playing with his mates (what a band) and really enjoying himself. You also get the added bonus of a glimpse of rock and rolls greatest pair of tits and ass, Claudia Lennear. Enjoy and RIP George.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwVAvnYKLJE&feature=related

You're spot on. The BBC took a commercial decision but they are not a commercial broadcaster. Had ITV or Sky ran with this yesterday, that would be understandable as they have to maximise viewing figures, for the BBC to use our money to do so was shameful. The other point is that Sky and ITV would have had a decision to make as to whether running this so close to the vote would have a backlash that would affect their profits. Sky viewers could cancel or advertisiers could pull out. The BBC has none of this to worry about. If we dont get the bid because of this programme we can hardly withhold our licence fee, as we'll be put in prison.Had Sky run with this, then anyone disgusted by the timing could have hit them commercially by withdrawing from their services. The BBC is either a commercial broadcaster or a national broadcaster run in the interests of the nation, it can not be both.

The retirement line was a bit tongue in check . I had the pleasure of seeing Johnny Cash at the Albert Hall in about '94. However for every Cash there is the Chuck Berry gig, seen at the BIC around the same time, when he did 25 mins and then ****ed off without an encore. I've also seen Paul Simon in fine form,but I find 65 year old Roger Daltrey singing "hope I die before I get old" a bit weird, and as I said I think Mick and Keith should call it a day. I just felt that all though well meaning, Elton John parading a clearly unwell Leon Russell ( a hero of mine) on BBC 4 a bit distasteful. Back to the Beatles and argueing over who was better is like argueing over Mick Channon, Matt Le Tiss or Terry Paine, all were great but it just boils down to personal taste.

We need an in or out vote to sort this once and for all. The reason we dont get one is that the EU doesn't do democracy in case the Euro Loons lose, they want a Superstate piece by piece, inch by inch. The people's views are an irrelevant to them. Grocer Heath lied to us and the Euro loons have been deceiveing us ever since.

I would have thought coming second above the Lab and Lib/dems parties was pretty decent, hardly "nothing nationally". The way I read the results was thus; in a European election the mainly Euro sceptic Tories and the withdraw from EU UKIP, came first and second.

He hasn't performed at the same level this season and that's plain for all to see. Whether it's a blip, he's not fully fit or it's his attitude is for NA to work out, that's what he gets paid for. Personally I think we've seen the best we're going to see of him and I'm starting to think he's "gone".Not based on any insight, just a gut feeling. I always felt he would get us out of this League, but would need replacing if we want to challange at the top of the Championship.I like the guy, but there's no way he's good enough for the Premiership.