benjii

Simply intolerable.

I've been to his house for dinner too. He played the xylophone. Lovely stuff.

Le Tiss v Blackburn is one of the beat goals EVER. By anyone. EVER.

I love Markus. I love Nicky. Who's the dude in the picture?

I swear I saw Morgan on the telly in the crowd at the Cardiff v WH match last night.

Looked like a boy amongst men against Milwall. I expect he's miles off the first team.

Thanks. So it's pretty simple stuff to use? You lost me at "media server"!

Agreed.

Now then, I understand it may be illegal to copy purchased dvds and so, personally, I would never do it. But, out of interest, if someone wanted to get a purchased DVD on to their iPad and they also had a pc would there be a simple and novice-friendly way of doing it and, if so, what is it? Just wondering if it's technically possible, that's all...

I know for a fact he's being replaced by Paul Hart.

I keep seeing this retarded statement, or variations of it.

You didn't go to their matches against us then?

Indeed. All this will do is make the Premiership even more of a closed shop and distort even more the value of parachute payments.

It strikes me that the main substantive concern here seems to be not the principle of inheritance but, in fact, the question of whether one should be permitted to own land at a particularly large scale. Is that, in fact, the main point of the thread? In other words, provided no one amasses too much land in the first place, there ought to be no issue with them passing that land on to whomsoever they choose (presumably with the proviso that the inheritee does not already own such amount of land that would take them over the prescribed limit)? Is that right? Or is really the principle itself of inheritance? Do away with that and you basically advocate arbitrary state appropriation of property (it takes enough ****ing money from people already FFS). So, what is this arbitrary limit to be? And all that needs to be done to get around it is to devolve legal ownership and use trustees etc... The corollary of what Pap really seems to be comtenplating is some sort of fundamental overhaul of the entire principle of legal ownership. Basically, it is uber-Marxist fluff, entirely incompatible with humanity and doomed to distortion, abuse and failure in all but the most simple of low-scale communities but entirely symptomatic of the sort of sixth-form totemistic moralising that would occur on, for example, a football forum. Pap, you should read some Rousseau (maybe you have). Great stuff, but pie-in-the-sky.

Inheritance tax is terrible and should be abolished. Completely unfair.

What you saw tonight was a manager with a game plan and a group of players (Terry excepted) committing to that game plan and willing to show bottle and nerve to do so. This is precisely why you will not see England win anything any time soon.

Lol.

**** me. I can't be bothered with anything more than that. You bemoan the lack of meritocracy in inheritance and then you advocate divying up the world equally. If you can't see how stupid that logic is then there really is no point carrying on.....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2132750/Wales-footballer-Ched-Evans-raped-teenager-drunk-consent-told-judge-thrown-away-successful-career-jailed-years.html My opinion is that "rape" is a totally inappropriate charge for this, unless the girl was actually unconscious at the time of the smashing. There seems to be no suggestion she went with them against her will, no suggestion any physical force was used and no suggestion she asked them to stop at any point. To categorise this sort of thing in the same bracket as committing a predatory violent sexual assault on someone who has indicated no willingness is absurd. Had she no interest in going on the lash that night and getting smashed by a lad she would not have found herself in the hotel. That doesn't seem to be in dispute. Rather than shifting the burden on to the lads to make some sort of judgment as to the mental state of the bird, the responsibility should rest squarely on the bird IMO to maintain a state of awareness where she is capable of exercising her discretion should she so wish. I don't see why the bird being hammered should shift the burden of discerning her thoughts onto the smasher; it should remain with the smashee and her thoughts are evidenced externally by her actions. If you have a propensity to sleep with people you don't want to when drunk, then don't get drunk. It may be that Evans snuck in whilst she was unconscious and slipped her the sausage. Clearly that's not on. That is rape. So maybe that's what happened. Either way, you can't trust a man who tweets that he thinks J-Lo is great.

Cheers for that! Nice one.

Brizzle have an easier couple of games than the Skates do. And I think the Skates have been very lucky in their last three results. They will go down. Chill and enjoy

Quality.

Doesn't sound like, "no more points penalties" to me.... ------------------------------- Ben, We thank you for contacting The Football League on this matter, however until all the circumstances surrounding the club’s exit from administration become clear, The League is unable to make any official comment at this time. Updates that we do give will be made available on www.football-league.co.uk and you should check there for any further updates. Thank you again for your email. Regards, Andrew Pomfret Customer Services Officer The Football League Limited Email - enquiries@football-league.co.uk www.football-league.co.uk The Football League Ltd. Registered Office - Edward VII Quay, Navigation Way, Preston PR2 2YF. Registered No: 80612. Tel: 0844 463 1888. Fax: 0844 826 5188. London Office - 30 Gloucester Place, London, W1U 8FL. Tel: 0844 826 3099 Follow us on Twitter: www.twitter.com/football_league This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you have received this message in error or there are any problems, please notify the sender immediately and delete the message from your computer and any copies. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is forbidden. Any views set out in this e-mail are the views of the individual sending it, and not the views of The Football League Limited unless otherwise stated. This e-mail should not be seen as forming a legally binding contract unless otherwise stated. Although we believe this e-mail and any attachment are virus-free it is your responsibility to ensure this on receipt. From: benjii Sent: 02 April 2012 23:00 To: FL Subject: RE: A fair playing field Dear Football League, I posed a question below and was wondering if you wouldn't mind answering please. To save you reading the previous correspondence I'll restate the question as simply as possible: If a club exits administration with a CVA and subsequently fails to make the payments due under the CVA, and its administrator states categorically that it will not be doing so, should it receive a points deduction? If the answer is not "yes" then will you agree that this is a puzzling and perverse state of affairs? If a club does not obtain a CVA when exiting administration it is given a stern additional penalty. If it obtains a CVA but subsequently fails to honour it, should not the same penalties apply? Thanks and kind regards Ben

The fact that I have never heard the name "Samantha Brick" before reminds that I am very lucky to have had a private education and to have a superb career. I have no idea who she is but I am confident that I ought to have no wish to. Good luck to those of you without such fortune. Believe in your capability to better yourselves and work very hard and you may too free yourselves from the shackles of popular under-culture (for it is my assumption that such is the malady we are dealing with).