benjii

I'm fairness, I thought he was offering some supportive words to Valery. One thing I will say for Austin is that he does seem to have more bottle than a lot of our guys.

Bear in mind, we might want to close some sections in the Championship.

Cosimo Sarli.

I don't want to slag players off but the main reason, in a tactical sense, for lack of penetration yesterday was Austin. He can't run channels and he can't hold the ball up. He's useful to have on the bench but really shouldn't be starting. One of the first things Gabbiadini did when he came on was to make a run down the right channel, force the Cardiff defence to turn and win us possession high up the pitch. Yesterday's 41221 system always had a sense of "safety first" about it, which was understandable considering the lack of time the new manager has had. I thought there were some interesting signs there though and I think we will be OK as an attacking force once he gets a better understanding of what the individuals can and can't do. His biggest challenge is to find a decent centre back pairing amongst the crud we've accumulated. That will determine whether we stay up or not.

Eh? Bednarek was pretty solid and didn't really make any mistakes. He also had to cover Valery getting beaten repeatedly in the first half. Basically, what Bexy said above.

Nah, it's about 40k. Only 40k.

46 isn't it?

https://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?60290-5-wins-in-last-38-league-matches/page3#.XAxnsJmnw0M

Think that's 5 in 46.

What about Long?

Farting a lot of speak.

All Spurs fans are insufferable ****s so don't worry about it.

Or if you Dec a man who's too drunk. Bit paternalistic there, bro.

I won't be pleased unless one of them dies.

Is he related to Paul?

What do you think this particular graphic shows? I think the one further down the report is more interesting / relevant.

Who's Phil Merson?

It will indeed! We've got enough in midfield and attack to stay up. We scored more goals than Burnley did last season and they finished 7th FFS. We just need to find a few clean sheets.

Anyone ever had one?

Yes, of course I've been that drunk. And sometimes I've acted like an idiot. But I didn't abrogate my moral agency as a result. Look, I'm not defending predatory behaviour and clearly there doesn't have to be violence (beyond the act itself) for there to be a sexual assault but I really think the general public is less tolerant of the notion that you somehow automatically lose all powers of consent if you're really, really, really drunk.

I am willing to accept another style of football, Ralph.

Mate, you are struggling a wee bit. That's OK nowadays, though. It's OK to not be OK, man.

Looking forward to Batman's transcript....

And a dash of Neil Warnock.

Well it's shades of grey. It shouldn't be rape just because a woman is "very drunk". So if the question was, "if a woman js very drunk, can she consent?" the answer is clearly yes. If she's so drunk she's comatose then that's a different matter. You can't escape your choices just because you're "very drunk". I think what I'm saying is that this survey sounds like some flabby-minded waste of time. Which is what you would expect from an organisation with the words "women" and "coalition" in its name.