shurlock

The Frenchman?

Drinkwater?

No Frenchman then?

And failing in his own inimitable way.

Read it again you tit. The statement holds independent of the two working together. Ralph came to the club “with knowledge of how we operate” (to paraphrase). That obviously and necessarily predated his arrival and is a reference to how the club has supposedly approached and conducted its transfers. Now f**k off and go back to playing your little computer game.

If only the last few years backed that lofty sentiment up.

I think PEH has got it in his locker.

Have fond memories of his goal up at OT (and the London Stadium), though he did make him bit of a cult favourite way out of proportion to his contribution.

I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s got ADHD or something.

If Wee Ross pulls it off, he will have gone up a few centimetres in my estimation.

One of the worst performances I can remember in quite a while.

Thing is we’ve signed two CBs in back to back summer windows; we just can’t afford the fees that CBs now command, not least as its now arguably the most inflated part of the market. If we’re not going to properly budget for the position, there really is no point gambling on a raw £15-20m CB and the abilities of our recruitment department.

Goa loves the passion. Keep it up.

We’re lucky we still have a club and all that.

At least we won’t get gloating and propaganda from Uncle Les this year about how we didn’t panic and stuck to the Southampton Way. Small mercies.

Weak productivity, a long in the tooth economic expansion, high debt levels, QE-inflated asset prices, unfavourable demographics and now trade tensions - its not hard to paint a bearish picture (if somewhat extreme) but this isn't simply a European problem, its a global one. Little John struggles with this.

Feel like a swivel but I've got roughly £7K in a gold ETF and I'm sure its a holding in other funds I'm invested in. But that reflects my bearishness about the global economy, not your little fixation with DB. My bet against sterling has been going great guns. Crap website btw and even that you've managed to cherrypick

I see the great light entertainers of the 80s taught you well – forever the forum crowd-pleaser and consensus-builder

I don't fault him for going but, lets be clear, its not the same situation as a player going from Saints to Bayern. He's moving to a different role and, on the surface, one with less responsibility and influence than he had a Saints where he was effectively Ralph's no.2.

I see Nolan didn't study English at university.

I'm scared to ask where you studied Then you would understand that median income (which underpins measures of relative poverty) is far, far less sensitive to outliers and skewed data (i.e. what happens to the rich). Cue the next fantastic, as-yet-to-exist strawman to dig yourself out of a hole: what happens if those on median incomes are also millionaires and rich. Jesus wept A quick to do list for you pal: Read up on the difference between median and mean Read up on how poverty and income measures are constructed (i.e. they include benefit income which is progressive, not just employment earnings) Read up on the rationale for relative poverty measures Read up on the divorce bill - £33bn really isn't a large sum of money all things considered. And no Britannia Unchained doesn't count. In the meantime, perhaps, you should be asking your uni for a refund.

Again this is moronic - you should have got a few more hours of sleep. I gather you understand the difference between median and mean income (N.B income incorporates more than just employment earnings) pal. Or may be not

I know what he's talking about - it doesn't make it any less of a ludicrous strawman. Never mind you and Nolan don't even know how relative and absolute poverty measures are constructed - the basic difference between wages and income

No I know exactly what you're talking and your strawman example does you no favours. Because a society's view about what is an acceptable standard of living evolves over time, use of relative poverty makes complete sense - it is not some lefty ruse to require there to be poverty.

??? Its possible to have no poverty on both relative and absolute measures of poverty. So no definitions don't require there to be poverty. FACT.