dronskisaint

I look forward to your comparative set Barbie?

Love it!!

Wasn't he on stage at the Lawrie/MLT/Mike Osman do at The Mayflower? I remember him scoring twice at Norwich when I took my lad and his mate to see us play around '95...think it ended 2-2. Good player, did reasonably well for us

Someone called Roes who sells Barbies

+1 Not even as if we have any more 'right' than some of our European neighbours! Apropos The Falklands, I have been doing a little research It appears that although the islands were claimed by several nations which planted flags there, they were not settled by Europeans until the late 18th Century when the French established a settlement, at what they called Port Louis, in 1764. As Many know, they named the islands Les Iles Malouines in honour of sailors and fishermen from the French Port of St Malo, from which the French ship had sailed, an inhabitant of that port being called un malouin (feminine une malouine.) The British had been the first to record the existence of the islands. A certain John Davis having sighted them in 1592. One John Strong was the first to land, in 1690. He named the islands after the Treasurer of the Navy, Viscount Falkland, and then sailed on. In short, they might have planted a flag there, but they did not settle there, and it is useful to note that the islands remained uninhabited until the French landed 74 years later. A year after the French established a foothold, the British, apparently unaware of the French presence, landed a force on what they called Saunders Island, and claimed all the islands for Britain. So with respect to all those claiming the moral high ground, when the British landed to settle, they were not alone. Not long afterwards, it appears, the French ceded the islands to Spain who kept them for 60 years. Spanish forces make repeated efforts to expel the British from Saunders Island, finally being able to do so in 1774. However archeological finds suggest that Amerindians from Tierra de Fuego might have been there long before the European ventures, a possibility which could be said to strengthen the Argentine case. This case rests on the fact that under the Spanish the islands were part of the Vice Royalty of the River Plate, the part of which was the future Argentina. So when the inhabitants of the vice royalty declared their independence from Spain, establishing this finally in 1816, they naturally considered the islands to have become part and parcel of Argentina. It is perhaps little known that Argentina took the Malvinas in 1820. Britain claimed the islands anew in 1832a claim based solely on their previous occupation of Saunders Island from which they were expelled 58 years before and evicted the Argentines. This distilled information was gleaned from: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ac51

They have beer in Bognor?!

Nevertheless Steve (and I grant that we'll never know) Without Crouch's stumping up for the month's expenses we never have got to the point at which ML and NC could enter the arena - if he did do as you say then to my mind he went a long way to putting things right...at his own expense. Not the right place for this discussion though, my apologies Are they dead yet?

:D

You are Corp Ho and I claim my tenner?!

One in the eye for P*mpey? It's an inventory count for a P*mpey fan, 1 tooth, 0 brain cells, 6 digits on each hand? Battle of Wastings?

Is it legally permissible to fund the administrator's through a separate company - assuming that there are funds to finance the administration process from within?

Delusion treatment still not working I observe...keep taking the drugs...most fans of other clubs detest you and cite TCWTB as the personification of that

Good answers :-)

Still functioning with the '.eu' suffix

:toppa:

It doesn't usually stop them?!

Living up here I get to see and hear a fair bit about Holt and I agree that he's done well to get 11 goals (and I don't like him one bit after his pansy histrionics in the last minute of the JP Trophy tie when Waigo scored) but Norwich get the ball to him as a big lump who scores. Ricky has far more skill, finesse and makes, links and creates far more than Holt is capable of doing and this makes him 'different class'..Sheringham is a good comparison.

Having viewed the 'all angles' coverage on Saints Player this afternoon it really does confirm my impression from Block 38 that Guly was involved in most of the good things that they showed us doing. The problem with having an agenda is that you tend to see whatever it is you want to see to the exclusion of what is evident to others without the said agenda.

Like old folks at a Christmas party...bless - that will impress HMRC!

As Sharp says...he might as well claim it because Mee won't want it! I couldn't see yesterday as I was the opposite end but Saints player indicates an own goal...but do I care? Not a bit

1) Laugh 2) Feel justice has been served 3) Party 4) Ring up the two skates who I've had sensible conversations with and wish them well for AFC Southsea 5) Get on with supporting Saints as I always have 6) Regain the chunk of my life that this thread has purloined...it's given me laughs galore, wide-eyed incredulity and a further education in admin law etc 7)...keep taking the p*ss

Of course you have the right to state your opinion, seek attention and dig yourself deeper in to a hole instead of putting down the shovel. Thank you for proving it still further

Well-researched and reasoned...we have a strong squad made stronger by Guly's presence.

No...you really are wrong - I'm surrounded by a group who constantly find fault with him, sometimes justifiably but today they were won over (I suspect short term). He adds something different to the team and when he puts in a shift and his touches come off he's (as today) great for thye team. I felt he looked more comfortable in today's role than he has for a few weeks.

But we're having fun on our site...er you? Granted most of it is at your expense...you've even paid for the privilege!! How big a c unt does that make you look?