hutch

You don't have to count teenage boys. They don't use water.

Professional "Surrogate Offendee". It's one of the few lucrative career opportunities left now the bankers have tightened up. Some of our newer "Metropolitan Universities" are going to be offering degree courses starting next year.

If we on here can be considered to be a reasonable cross section of the public ( ) then that does appear to be the overwhelming concensus, particulary if you take into account that it is the widely held view IN SPITE OF the huge amounts of time effort and money expended by the McCanns to gag the press, media, police and anybody else who might doubt their story.

At a reduced price because it can only be used by the purchaser. Any person who is knowingly trying to get entry to the game using a ticket he or she knows is not valid for them to use is stealing from the club. There is a reason cheap tickets are cheap. They come with restrictions.

Totally inadequate market research there. I'm afraid. What about: The only child ("The only way to find out if you like it is to give it a go, eh?") Twins ("Me first" "No, me first") Mum ("I just need to make sure that you're good enough for my daughter")

Norman St. John-Stevas, Baron St. John of Fawsley. He was definitely a Saint. The record is a bit vague on whether he actually played the game professionally, but he was a firm left-footer, and did lecture at Southampton University for a while.

I'm always astonished that people are so blasé about posting their intention to steal from the club on a public website.

I'm not sure you need to go that far. I'll pass it over to the Association of White Lawyers for their opinion.

Do we get Catholic nuns on here? Do they log onto the match threads for fashion advice?

Maybe we could answer it for you here then, to save you the trouble of asking them again. Charges don't just disappear, you have to pay lawyers to make application have them removed. In Pompey's case they probably have other priorities. Removing that charge won't improve their position in any meaningful way, it will only rearrange the queue of other creditors waiting to get their hands on FP. If it was the only charge it would be a different kettle of fish. The fact that charge is still there doesn't tell me whether they've paid back the loan or not.

I remember he did that once before, and the interpreter repeated it in Spanish

You can get 12/1 on Pochettino for Manager of the Month. If we win I should think he would be in with a huge shout, so probably a much better bet.

Eric, I use Stay on this page>cancel post>refresh page Usually works [Just kiddin']

Eric, I use Stay on this page>cancel post>refresh page Usually works

An oldie I know, but anyway... I got a bill from my exorcist this morning. He said if I don't pay him by the weekend he'll repossess my house.

Based on that report above, the Met aren't saying that they have any superior or more compelling evidence that Madeleine was abducted, what they are saying is that abduction is their default assumption until proven otherwise. "In the absence of any clear evidence to the contrary we maintain our belief that Madeleine may still be alive."

In my opinion it's up to Rickie. He's not at the top of his game this season so far, but if he get's up to last season's levels he has a chance. The bookies, however, see it differently. Oddschecker has 4 strikers odds-on with all the bookies (Rooney, Welbeck, Sturridge & Walcott). Rickie is currently the shortest price of all the others, ahead of Defoe & Carroll. Interestingly they have 4 Saints players in their list of 92 candidates, Lambert, Shaw & Lallana as you would expect, but they also have Jack Cork at 25/1 and no odds for Clyne. But in case you think the bookies know what they are doing, I'm sure you will notice that they have Lambert at a shorter price than Alex Chamberlain to make the squad.

Is that right? Have any figures actually been published into the public domain? Or is he just referring to various numbers that have been quoted to the public by board members or other sources "close to the club" from time to time? I haven't been following as closely as I used to, but I haven't seen any published figures. It does seem to me, as a non-accountant, that his statements are confusing the situation, either deliberately or through ignorance. Even I know what "operating profits" and "operating losses" are, but I have never heard of "operating turnover" as a recognised accounting term. Did he make it up? Is it IADOPP? I don't think we would get any real useful information from this season's audited statements, if and when they ever file any, because of the overwhelming effect of the last parachute payments, and the short- and medium-term legacy debts. Next year's figures will be much more telling, if they get that far, when their income will only be gate money + commercial revenue. In my opinion that is what is scaring the sh*t out of the board, when they compare this year's outgoings with next year's income. I am, however, extremely confident that things are not as rosy financially as they would like us to believe. Sh*t and fan normally conspire to meet up just before or just after Christmas for struggling football clubs, when the season ticket money is long gone, and they have exhausted all other possible avenues to borrow some money, including the Bank of HMRC.

I had to pop home to sort out a problem there and happened to catch PMQ on Sky News. It's the first time I've seen Milliband in action. Jeez, Cameron is really really lucky.

Ah, so that would be the last club then Neil, the one that won a couple of titles and a couple of FA cups? Not the current club, that didn't?

Chris

I doubt that is right, because it wouldn't make sense, but if it is why don't you just open a chat window with your new chum behind you, and chat to him that way? On your version that is within the rules.

I assume you're not at work today?

Well that's a load of b*ll*cks.

Gaston played second half for Uruguay.