Minty

I guessed it would be something like that but ran out of interest shortly after posting...

I swear MLG is actually getting worse.

In that case - and whisper it quietly in case MLG finds out - I know Miles Jacobson, and he always gives me the stats on every single player in the game. So you can put me down for every league in the game. And then everyone knows that I am 110% helpful about 9.5/10 players.

Does watching leagues on Football Manager count? I'm sure it does...

This comment/blog might be worth keeping an eye on... entitled to his opinion of course, but really? Bottom?!

Depends in what context you mean the word 'joke'...

It's not quite the same. Being self-employed, taking on a contract, is like getting a temporary employment contract but for a fixed number of hours. You know the hours you are going to have to work and for what duration, to get the work done. Zero hours would be like you getting a contract with a client, who says: "I will have some work for you, I just don't know when it'll need doing or how much there will be... I just need you ready to do it when I say... sign here!" You wouldn't sign that contract.

I'm sure someone could do a similar analysis of other retail sectors too Wurzel... maybe clothes shops...

There are many reasons - most people cite 'convenience', but a well planned shop along a good High Street can take the same amount of time, and is far more enjoyable IMO, getting to know the people who know their products and add value to your shop, and also to the social fabric of our towns and villages. It also depends on the choice of local independent traders, which can vary greatly, for a host of reasons, but usually because of larger stores (and the customers who use them) putting them out of business. We have a lot of hypocrites in this country, people who say they want to support independent shops, but then just jump in the car to a supermarket. The same people are probably decrying the lack of jobs in the UK, whilst handily ignoring the fact that independent businesses create more jobs per £1 spent than the larger multiples. Basically, many people look after their own selfish needs first. Their perceived convenience and saving 2p on a few items will always be more important to them than the wider retail picture and the impact on the country, because they don't see the effects first hand and aren't able to see the links. Marketing plays a large part, but the big boys can afford to splash out a bit in the short term, to kill off smaller competition. And we haven't even got to quality yet... if people really cared about quality of the food they eat, they would spend more time looking at what they're actually feeding themselves and recognise that they don't have to spend more to eat well, it just needs a bit of planning and interest in what you're buying. But cost is king nowadays, and to the detriment of all else it seems - so many people claim that food is 'too expensive' to buy 'decent stuff' but then they waste half of what they buy, throwing out tonnes of uneaten food every year, and fill themselves with such low quality crap that only makes them want to eat more thanks to the mass of sugar/salt/MSG contained in processed food. And the marketing that the supermarkets use skews the situation too... independents are often deemed to be more expensive, which is not always the case... but where it is, it's usually for good reason. We eat 3 times a day or more. There is nothing else in life that affects our health and well being more than what we eat, yet it's one of the areas where so many people seem to want to spend as little as possible on all sorts of crap, whilst they don't bat an eye lid spending on football, beer, nights out, clothes and whatever else. That is entirely their choice, it is a free world after all, but if you want to treat your health and nutrition as a lower priority than your entertainment and how you look, then don't expect any sympathy from me when you complain about being ill or when you expect the NHS to sort out your Diabetes or obesity. Rant over! You may have noticed this is a sore subject with me!!

Everything varies from store to store, based on the local demographics (or rather, their interpretation of local demographics)... annoys the crap out of me when I want something specific but know it's only likely to be in certain stores in certain areas.

Over number 13 killed them off - Dawson taking 3 wickets and conceding just one run! Had probably won it before that anyway, although Stevens had hit a few. Currently 108/6 after 16, needing 78 off 24 balls.

Kent 66/2 off the first 10 in reply, 120 needed in 10 overs. Pretty simple maths, somewhat less simple to get them I reckon!

Got it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23488437

Agreed, hence wondering where the story came from... a bit of context is needed.

Finished with 185/6, Carberry 83* off 56 balls. Dawson came in with 7 balls remaining, faced 5 of them and got 6, 3, 4, 4, out! 17 off 5 balls!

Double yellows are rarely anything to do with pedestrianised areas, usually they're to stop cars from parking in areas where it would cause an obstruction to other traffic if they did so, and to keep a route clear. Got a link to the actual story?

He should be so lucky. I know we form our opinions on just a tiny portion of their life, and more often than not we judge 'famous' people quite harshly as a result, but I have never seen or heard anything about Holloway that even vaguely makes me think I'm a bit harsh on him when I think 'You come across as a complete ****t@rd'.

We all know it, but so many conveniently forget when they get behind a keyboard. Half of the comments made on here would never be made if the discussion was face-to-face.

Crikey, that was a bit harsh of him... does he not know you've worked at Chelsea?!

I'm glad/disappointed to read that! lol. You make some fair points about some immigrants, but I suspect lots of people sponging off the state would do so irrespective of many immigrants. There are of course many different individuals involved, with different motives so it's difficult to pinpoint it on any one reason - which is another reason why I cringe at some of the sweeping statements made by others, and some of the short-term 'fixes' proposed, when the situation is far from simple to fix. Many of your hypotheses are quite reasonable, but just a few in amongst a very big complicated mess of economic and social factors. I am also loathe to criticise those who come here in search of work and a genuine desire to improve their fortunes back home, whilst there are Brits who also seek to do the same in other countries as it suits them too. It may not be for exactly the same reasons, or the same timescales, but we should not be hypocrites. I also do actually agree that the Single Market has contributed to the situation - my main point was simply to highlight that the problem is far bigger than just 'they're over here, taking out jobs and our money' etc, which sadly seems to be the rallying call for many who lack the capacity to understand the issue in any greater depth. But I guess the same goes for so many political issues, so I shouldn't be surprised.

So would it be fair to summarise that: - Everyone, bar none, would love to see him have the same influence in the PL as he did in the Champ and L1, but... - Most people think he could be contributing more, especially on the evidence of the tail end of last season... - Some people are unsure whether he can do so in the Prem at all, although would gladly be proven wrong, and... - NO ONE is actually 'anti-Lallana'.

I think the real problem lies in our internal policies. Ask yourselves WHY so many people want to come to the UK? Our country is attractive to many immigrants because they can see how easy it is for many of our *own* citizens to sponge off the state. The two problems are intrinsically linked IMO. We need to make sure that those in the country, whether native or not, are making a valued contribution to our country and our society, and make it harder for people to freeload. If we do that, immigration will naturally reduce because we will be seen as less of a soft-touch, but those who do come will actually be contributing more. It also needs more recognition that people need a role, and a purpose, and to learn the skills that will help them provide for themselves. It never ceases to amaze me how our (excellent) charities are so good at recognising that, but our government does not. By giving money or food or water to people in need, charities only solve short term issues. Which is why they learnt long ago that our charity efforts needed to focus on giving those in need the means to make their own money, grow their own food or collect their own water, they are infinitely better off and happier in the process because they can provide for themselves. Rather than always talking in terms of financial benefits, lets give people the opportunity to learn skills, to contribute to our economy and earn for themselves... those who want to learn and improve will flourish, and in immigration terms, those who do not, will be put off from coming here in the first place. The Go home campaign is a short-term reaction to short-term anxieties, and IMO, indicative of long-term failures by various governments of all colours, to put in place robust systems to make sure everyone in this country plays a part in it's success.

Absolutely, but that's just the tip of the iceberg... Like many things, IMO, the best long term solutions require a bit of willingness, patience, effort, investment, to see the rewards, but as with so many issues in this country nowadays, a lot of people want to see a short term 'fix', and politicians rarely look beyond the next General Election and so policies end up being very short-termist, which helps no one. I'm with you - I'm broadly speaking quite left wing, but recognise that our country has problems and limits which need to be considered, and that immigration needs to be controlled more effectively. But a robust, inclusive immigration policy that sees immigrants integrated in the UK better, and making a valued contribution without simply draining resources, is essential for long term harmony... question is are MP's and the electorate to look at the long term picture, or are we now stuck in the short-term reactive bubble that most of our politics seems to be trapped in?

Oh. I thought you were being cryptic.

Predicting the future in some way then? Contingency planning? Financial planning?