Minty

[video=youtube_share;wRo5NWNzJu4]

It's his fault I got a face-to-face bollocking from WGS. True story.

Seconded.

Not stats per se, but I saw this graph a few weeks ago and for all the permutations of what might happen, I can't help but marvel at this. It's one thing to hear Nige talk about being top two all season, but seeing it like this is somewhat bizarre. How many teams have done this before? I know it's not over yet, but it's one hell of an achievement. http://guardian.touch-line.com/?CTID=11&CPID=82&TEID=236&pStr=League_Pos&t=3

Now updated.

Let's be honest, conceding that equaliser as we did got to all of us, even those like myself who tend to be less reactionary, so I have no doubt the players would've been a lot more gutted than perhaps they might normally be. A game only 48 hours later can be a good thing, but I think you're right, Nige felt the need to lift them and what better way that to actually remind them what they're capable of? There have been, and will continue to be, some over-exaggerations about our Nige, but I genuinely think he has the potential to go all the way to the top of the game, and hopefully he'll take us with him as far as we can reasonably expect.

Saints fan has an opinion. Others disagree with it. The End. Sorry Gemmel, think you're overreacting a bit to this one.

Then again, some would say the Liebherr estate, since Markus' death, have exactly the same interests. From a fans point of view, the two main aspects to any sale are: How much money does any new owner have to invest if required, and who is in charge (and are they competent)? Whilst the answer to the latter question remains Nicola Cortese, then I'm pretty sure he would ensure the answer to the first question is 'more than enough'. All SISU did was answer those two questions with 'not enough' and (arguably) 'the wrong people'. I'm no fan of hedge funds, but it all comes down to the money, and the person in charge of the club/money.

I think that what Panda means is that 'written off' usually implies they won't see their money again, which is clearly not the case and therefore probably not the most accurate description.

You can suggest it, but I don't think this game and Forecast playing has any bearing on that possibility.

I think SFC (and a lot of businesses) are quite short sighted when it comes to vegetarian options. Good quality non-meat options can appeal to everyone, not just vegetarians. Given the lack quality in the cheap, mass-produced meat products like some of those we've got at SFC, there are an increasing number of people who want to eat something tasty and nutritional, and it doesn't have to contain meat. In terms of quality vs cost, non-meat options are far better. Why?

I wouldn't criticise people who *routinely* leave early but I do wonder why they really need to and feel a bit sorry for them to be honest. Why do they need to 'beat the traffic' and get home 20 minutes earlier? And what are you going to do when you get home? Have a cuppa, eat dinner, watch 'talent' shows on telly? Do you really need that extra 20 minutes?! If i'm going to football I just build travel time into things. Even if it's just a quick one, why not go to the pub for a half after the game, mix with some fellow fans, enjoy the day, not just the game, and then leave after the majority of traffic has gone? Everyone is in too much of a rush these days. Just slow down and enjoy the day!

I asked the question for a reason...

Perhaps you could try explaining your reasoning in a clear, concise and intelligent manner dune, and then we can judge accordingly?

We're not gonna end up liking post-liquidation AFC Pompey's new non-league home pitch are we?

And will more than likely stay that way forever more...

Indeed, there is clearly more to it than is made out in the simplistic and misleading terms that ALL parties try to portray these issues. However 2 is undoubtedly true, the gap has been consistently widening under *every* government for decades.

I would've said similar about Lambert when he joined but he has improved his fitness markedly since joining us, and even more so under Adkins. He's not a Lee or De Ridder, but in relative terms, if we can get the same improvement out of Sharp that we got from Rickie, I think Sharp can become far more agile.

I actually find your posts fairly non-political, in comparison to many who find it difficult to look at political decisions in an objective light. There are for more candidates on here who try to 'score political points'. On reflection I actually don't think the budget is all that big a deal for individuals in the great scheme of things. I agree with Duckhunter that the sums of money being talked about are not huge, I think the concern I always have is that in general, we should share the burden as much as possible, so taking more from one group than another will always introduce comparisons, and when the two main groups affected are the higher rate tax payers and pensioners, then the ensuing headlines are inevitable. My biggest concern is the investment in oil and gas exploration from 'the greenest government ever'... yeah right. A real disappointment that sustainable job creation in renewable energy hasn't been encouraged and we continue our reliance on fossil fuels. That is far more short-sighted than anything else in the budget IMO.

Erm, no. I'll accept it's a matter of opinion, but if you did a poll and ask if fans felt his signing improved the squad or not, I'd wager most people would say yes. Plus, as mentioned above, he *has* been on the bench, at least, for most games since he joined, and bearing in mind players like Chaplow have been left out of the 16, clearly for tactical reasons by Adkins, it is clear that he will use players as he sees fit, and that it is no reflection on his worth. So, back to the OP's question - which seems to be being asked based on the OP's own perception that the player *should* be playing, which I believe is wrong. Players are signed to improve a squad. ALL players are signed for this reason. Many will be such an improvement on existing players (in the managers eyes) that the new players may well be put straight into the starting XI. Some need time to adjust, others have to earn their place, others are used tactically... but a signing doesn't automatically mean a starting place, and vice versa, if they do NOT play, it does not mean they were a waste of money or are NOT going to have a role to play in future.

This is the kind of question that people should be asked before they then give a soundbite on BBC news to say how hard life is and how they can't afford to eat or buy Johnny some new shoes, when in the background they've got Sky Sports showing on a 50 inch plasma...

Some facts to digest: According to the treasury's OWN figures, the 30% of households at the lowest end of the income scale are set to lose out the most. Figure B2 is the one you're looking for in the following document. And yes, it says the top decile will lose out most, BUT this DOESN'T include the reduction in the highest tax band, so is not representative of the overall picture. http://cdn.hm-treasury.gov.uk/budget2012_annexb.pdf So, rather than focusing on those at the upper end of the scale, what about these impacts on the lower end?

Please tell me that after 1185 pages, we're not going to see this thread reduced to a ****ing contest over attendance? That would be like the ultimate groundhog day.

The Budget 2012: (Courtesy of @laura_barnard on Twitter)

Oi, we'll have no such common sense on SaintsWeb thank you very much.