Kingsland Codger

A deafening silence when it comes to giving it back to the people to whom it belongs. So which will it be, a reduction in the rate of tax or an increase in the threshold?

I have just heard a broadcast from the Vote Leave campaign on the wireless. This is available here ... http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07d33jx This broadcast includes the statement 'Vote Leave to stop British tax payers from bailing out countries like Greece' found at 1 min 06 seconds in. However, the conclusions adopted by the European Council at their meeting of 19 February 2016 state exactly the opposite. This document (link below) states in Annex 1, Section A, paragraph 3 (top of page 14) 3. Emergency and crisis measures designed to safeguard the financial stability of the euro area will not entail budgetary responsibility for Member States whose currency is not the euro, or, as the case may be, for those not participating in the banking union. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/european-council/2016/02/euco-conclusions_pdf/ Can anyone explain why Vote Leave would say something that appears to be, at best, misleading?

A question for anyone but primarily for those who want to leave ... The argument goes that leaving will mean we will no longer be governed by Europeans who were never elected and democracy will be returned to the British people (is this a fair summary) Given the above, in what way is the EU undemocratic - we all have a vote for MEPs in the European Parliament (EP) , the EP then elect the European Commission and the European Council are the Heads of State/Government and the President of the Commission. Whereas in the UK we have an imperfect first-past-the-post system for the Commons and we have a House of Lords, many of whom have not been elected, there are 92 hereditary peers and most of these cannot be women, there are 26 Bishops ... you get the drift. Does this mean Brexiteers want a wholesale reform of our political system - and if not, why not? When those who want to leave say it is because they want things to be more democratic, can they define this more clearly?

The University of Stirling is offering a free online course on the EU Referendum entitled "Remain or Leave". The aim of the course is "to cut through partisan rhetoric and the mass of competing, often contradictory information". http://www.stir.ac.uk/news/2016/05/stirling-launches-eu-referendum-online-course/ I'm tempted to sign up.

Thank you for your replies. I was concerned at the time as the 4 hour (plus) update/upgrade came with no warning and no offer of a convenient time for the update to take place. My laptop has been working fine for the last several days.

Quite. Ask 10 economists for a view and you will get 11 different answers. The idea of voting to leave in the hope/expectation that it will cause the whole EU project to implode may be a realistic one but will the upheaval this will cause be desireable? On balance I'd rather we continue to fight from within and to do so it would be handy to have allies, but these seem few and far between. Why are we so unpopular within the EU?

Thank you for posting the above link. Like most others on this forum I am fed-up with the deliberate misinformation/spin inflicted upon us voters by both sides. In an ideal world, we should all abstain until they stop treating us like idiots. At least the BBC Reality Check page you direct us to above offers the following conclusion ... "If you want to be influenced by economic modelling, the useful thing to take away is that the Treasury thinks leaving the EU would be bad for the economy, by an amount that would dwarf the savings from not having to contribute to the EU Budget". The economic argument, then, suggests I should vote to stay in. (But does one have confidence in the Treasury? ) Now my attention needs to be turned to the sovereignty argument - and I recall this was a major talking point back in 1975. I don't think there was an easy answer back then and there certainly isn't an easy answer now. Does one leave and then be at the mercy of whatever decisions the EU make - or do we stay and try (vainly) to change from within?

The update has now been completed - it took just over 4 hours and at times it looked as though the whole process had frozen. Should anyone experience similar, the trick is to be patient and let the process take its course. And now the upgrade has finished, my laptop is working at a noticeably slower pace.

Does anyone else have a problem with what now appears to be daily updates for Windows 10? I installed Windows 10 some time ago (maybe over a year~ish) but only recently have updates been happening daily and they take ages. Over an hour so far this morning and no sign of it ending. Is this just a common problem or could there be a problem with my laptop?

Not sure who the 'they' is to whom you refer, but Cruyff and Ajax conquered all before then in the early 70s. I would say winning three consecutive European Cups was quite an achievement.

A word of praise for Andre Marriner who policed the game very well. Quite a few of the challenges (by both sides) were borderline - nothing dirty, just competitive and timing had to be spot on. Another ref might have blown up more often and caused the play to be disrupted, which would have stymied our fast, hustle-bustle, style.

I am also puzzled by the way Brexiteers assume the funds that will no longer be sent to Brussels every week (£350m or £152m or something else) will then be available for politicians of whatever hue to spend on whatever project they fancy. Here's a novel idea; give it back to the people from whom it came. Will this be in the form of a cut in the tax rate or an increase in the threshold?

Brother Erwin?

Has anyone any ideas about the international rules on shipping? If a ship from, say, South Korea spots a dinghy in distress in mid-Channel is it duty bound to help? If so, does that mean those in the dinghy are the responsibility of South Korea? And if the SK ship ignores the distressed dinghy is it liable for any neglect? I say 'mid-Channel' but does the same question apply should the spotting happen in French or UK waters?

If it's 100% accuracy you're after then you must be all in favour of doing away with referees and linos. We have an imperfect system at present and I would like to see if improvements can be made. One use of video technology which wouldn't interfere with play is the use of retroactive checks for things the ref simply didn't see. Marcelo's antics in the Real v Wolfsburg match is one clear example.

I was asking a question of Whitey Grandad as his comment on the use of video technology was 'no, no and thrice no'. This seemed fairly emphatic. But is the difference between 'interpretation' and 'fact' as distinct as you suggest? Lee Mason believed he saw Sadio Mane foul Eric Pieters and showed a red card. On review the authorities decided the referee was wrong, and cancelled the red card. I have no idea what was 'fact' and what was 'interpretation' but I am certain the use of video technology in this case was completely correct.

Are you in favour of scrapping goal line technology?

I agree the Huth incident is more of one of interpretation. As The Professor says in post 490, the view the referee has of the Mane incident (much the same as one of the video cameras) shows the ball hitting the arm. However, the view from the side angle shows the defender deflecting the ball - look at the follow-through to remove any doubt. Hence the call for video technology.

Yet more evidence for the desperate need for a Television Match Official. Quite why football is so hopelessly behind the times continues to be a complete bewilderment. Refs cannot see everything and they need more help than they get from the (frankly useless) linesmen/referee's assistants. One day an incorrect decision will relegate a team and the financial implications of that won't bear thinking about.

Look at some of the videos from 11 months ago when he got his speedy hat-trick against Villa. Whilst not grumpy, he didn't look overly joyous.

The penalty claim ... I think back to the 8-0 rout of Sunderland last season and the 'penalty' that wasn't awarded to Sunderland when Steven Fletcher was upended by FF when we were 2-0 up. It looked like we got lucky back then and unlucky yesterday.

The Man of the Match was Vito Mannone by a country mile. He made three vital saves in the first-half and another couple on the second. Yes, it is frustrating we weren't smashing another eight goals past them but we were mostly thwarted by their goalkeeper.

I agree with much of Winnersaint says. By-and-large, life is pretty good in the UK in 2016. Whilst we are still recovering from the financial crises, there is economic growth (of a sort), inflation is low, unemployment is low and various other economic indicators, although not fantastic, are generally favourable. A year ago I was very much in favour of remaining in the EU. However over the last twelve months my enthusiasm has been diluted and I am open to persuasion BUT I am not hearing any reasoned arguments from the 'Leave' campaign as to why they are so keen to upset the generally good life we are currently enjoying. They offer plenty of heat but very little light. All I need are three good economic reasons for leaving. I am not hearing any and I suspect I shall vote to remain in but there is plenty of time still to go.

On the BBC 5 Live commentary, Steve Claridge was purring about how great we were.

For all the frustration of not taking our chances and dropping points, I thoroughly enjoy an exciting and hugely entertaining match.