benjii

Wrong. It's not a red card if it's a legitimate tackle with a chance of playing the ball. Bundling someone over from behind should be a red. But it's academic anyway. Funny how Long was looking for the foul though.

Would have been nice to have seen one of those for their goal. And a replay of the free kick being taken.

What?!

Looks OK. Prob should have been a red

Penalty. Unless was offside

Ings hits bar twice!

I didn't see a decent replay of the goal at all on my coverage.

Great free kick position for JWP here

We're the better team but just have to watch the quick ball round the corner.

Lee Mason. Skate.

Goooaaaalllllll

Wouldn't have counted anyway.

Looked offside and moving ball but as Batman said, we should never have allowed that to happen.

The new rule makes perfect sense and is a good improvement on handball IMO. Strict liability for defenders would be a nonsense as it would be easy to manufacture penalties and it’s not always clear whether the defender has gained an advantage. One further refinement could be to introduce strict liability where it is a shot on target but not in any other situation. Strict liability for attackers where a goal is scored makes perfect sense as clearly an advantage has been gained that has led to a goal.

Not to mention his driver’s family and anyone else who was simply part of an escort party.

NDA, sorry.

I agree with these. We can keep ourselves compact and have plans to deal with their danger men without changing the shape that we have started to develop. I can't see us keeping a clean sheet if we go with a defensive mindset but I can see us scoring if we look to spring our own counter attacks.

I went. It was amazing. Loads of top Saints fans, the usual suspects from the club and a couple of VERY special guests. Some really exciting snippets were offered. Unfortunately, the club asked us not to tell anyone about it or post on Saintsweb.

The point is that the definition you came up with can be applied to most countries with an active military foreign policy so it is not very useful when one of those countries seeks to rely on it to justify their actions. Calling whole units within a government “terrorists” is simple-minded and intended to appeal to those people who struggle with complexity i.e Trump voters.

“unlawful intimidation”.

So do any number of government agencies. Trump threatened to destroy "cultural sites" which makes him a terrorist as well then. That being the case, it is hardly a label which legitimises the action. The reality is that this operation is unlikely to achieve any benefit, has weakened the US position in Iraq and hastened Iran's nuclear ambitions, one would imagine.

Good news if we've agreed 8m Euro for him though. Better than walking on a free whenever his contract runs out. Let's just hope he's not so ****e that they don't want him.

Are you saying Johnson hasn’t had dirt on him published? Michael Howard, IDS, William Hague, John Major, the list goes on.... they were all hounded by the media for one reason or another. The media will bash any politician that appears deserving of a bashing, regardless of party. It’s nonsense to suggest Corbyn was given a hard time because he was Labour leader. He was given a hard time for being utterly incompetent, and rightly so.

Wow, that’s crazy. Something similar happened to me. When I reached puberty I found some ectoplasm in my shorts one day.

It makes sense for him to take some time off to concentrate on his GCSEs.