Lighthouse

A bit ‘Japanese Juanmi’ if you ask me. Definitely a player in there but I’m not sure he’s suited to the tempo of this league.

That would explain why someone with a terminal illness would risk getting Covid, if they’ve only got a couple of months left anyway, but not the rest of his arguments. Without wanting to sound too blunt, we shouldn’t be making decisions about running the country based on that those very specific circumstances affecting a small minority of the population with nothing to lose in the long term.

This won’t quote properly but I just can’t make head nor tail of your position. The cognitive dissonance require to hold your views is just massive. You worry about other people and their jobs.... but don’t care about the disease because it apparently can’t kill you. You’ve said that you’re a senior citizen and have a very short time left... but rather than accept that you’re in a high risk group, again you insist it can’t kill you. You insist the government are trying to control you... by taking away trivial freedoms in beer queues, which are inconsequential to you anyway. You say your lifestyle protects you from Covid which can literally only mean you’re a hermit with no physical contact with the outside world.... but you’re upset about the government taking away your right to meet in large groups and travel to foreign countries. I’m sorry, I just don’t understand you.

Baseless paranoia. If you think Boris is sat in Downing St. w*nking himself senseless over the idea that people can go to concerts and sport events but NOT meet in the concourse for a beer, you have some strange ideas. Of all the very specific ways of controlling the population, that's the most abstract niche I've ever heard. A consequence of other countries behaviour and their own failings with regards to control and vaccination. Anywhere with a green or amber light we should be able to visit with very little by way of restriction. Look around the world. The countries who come out of this lightly, kept things open and lived a life of relative normality were the ones who locked down hard, early and nipped it in the bud. Australia and NZ have basically closed their borders for a year and have local lockdowns if cases numbers hit double figures. As a result they've been living relatively normal lives. Same with Taiwan, China, Singapore and a few others. Brazil and India.... cracked on as normal and the whole country's f**ked. 8 million made redundant in Brazil so far and it's not getting better any time soon. https://www.batimes.com.ar/news/latin-america/brazil-registers-record-144-million-unemployed.phtml A nice soundbite to put on Instagram but it doesn't mean much. You aren't being stopped from living. That's just selfish. They've made a huge difference to the tens of thousands of 60 and 70 year olds who now aren't dead and will live another 20 years. You might not care if you'd died from COVID in the last year but many millions of older people do. I'll refer you to my above answer. If I make it to 65, I'd quite like another 20 years, not days. If that means 3 months of gardening and watching Countdown whilst I wait for the storm to pass, so be it.

This is not extreme caution, extreme caution would be still being in January lockdown levels with no plan on the horizon to come out. That’s quite clearly not the case, we’re opening up gradually in accordance with our vaccination rate. We’re aren’t there yet. We’re making excellent progress but we’ve still done hardly any under 40s and they’re the ones who socialise most in the largest numbers and busiest locations. Their risk of hospitalisation may be low but if they are all spreading COVID, they’re putting the one-dosers at roughly 40% risk of infection. There is still risk. It’s dwindling every day we’re vaccinating people but it’s there and needs to be managed proportionately until it’s reached the point of being negligible.

So why are you declaring, "no more fun. Never!" At something you don't even want to do? In what possible way does this very specific scenario constitute being controlled? Who stands to gain anything whatsoever by preventing people from gathering in concourse areas for a short period of time? What will you not be able to do in six weeks time that's going to negatively effect your life so strongly? I don't know you, your age/health is none of my business and if you're as close to death as you're alluding to I genuinely sympathise. However, there an awful lot of people in their sixties and seventies who could die in a week with COVID or live another 20 years without it. Those are the people we've been trying to protect for the last year.

I agree with that, I want everything open too. All I’m advocating for is a modicum of patience and caution and not continuous negativity about what we haven’t got yet. I don’t get this inverted logic whenever good news is announced. The correct response to deaths plummeting into single figures is, "brilliant! As a country we’ve nailed it, we’re well on track to getting everything open." Instead people are somehow arguing that we’re doing it wrong and that the ever dwindling death count is proof that we should be doing everything quicker. It’s the same false logic as people who don’t vaccinate their kids against measles because when was the last time you heard of someone dying from measles. Or saying that road deaths are at their lowest rates ever so why the f**k are we still wearing seatbelts. The principle that because everything is going so well, we must be doing it wrong.

We’ve been safe since we beat Liverpool. Fulham are still 2 points behind where we were after that game on 4th January.

Jeez, the ‘taters are talking as if Fulham are already relegated. They clearly don’t read this forum.

Yes it is the principle. We’re now in a far better position than most of the rest of the world and people are still acting as if their lives are being ruined by some horrible act of oppression. Around the world health systems are collapsing, people are dying in the streets in their tens of thousands but we aren’t. Instead of being delighted by that, people are still outraged at shrinking list of things we can’t do. I’ve explained masks to you in very simple terms on numerous occasions. If you still don’t get it, I can’t help you. No but maybe you could stop for a second to acknowledge that maybe yours isn’t the life being ruined. That maybe only being able to drink in the pub before and after a match but not at half time is a burden you can shoulder for a few months and doesn’t constitute, "no more fun, never, ever!"? And look where they are now. Yes I know we’re mostly vaccinated and won’t end up with anything like that situation but would the tiniest bit of caution regarding mass gatherings at sporting and music venues really be a terrible idea, in the short term?

At a time when hundreds of thousands of Indians are sat in slums, desperately gasping for oxygen because the health system has collapsed and there’s literally no point in going to a hospital, you’re upset that you might (it’s a hypothetical news article remember) have to finish your pints at the pub before you go to a sports venue? In your view, not being permitted to queue for 15 minutes for a pint of lukewarm, overpriced p*ss at half time equates to never having any fun again for the rest of your life?

Wouldn't been a great week to launch the European Super League TBH.

That’s the definition of being out of control and a dangerous challenge.

Denial of a goal scoring opportunity there from McCarthy, catching that.

That’s only ever been the case for dangerous or violent conduct.

If VAR have decided that then you’re right, it’s absolute bull sh*t and clearly not the case. I was working on the assumption that it must have been for the studs on Vardy’s ankle being deemed a dangerous challenge, which I have seen given for tackles like that.

They review everything of this magnitude, whether it comes up in the TV broadcast or not. They’ve clearly looked at that, decided he went studs in on Vardy’s ankle and decided not to overturn it.

Yeah but we had a player sent off after 10 minutes then, that won’t happen again.

No, the player was offside.

I already gave up my racist ways after seeing the teams take the knee before the match last week. The first 42 times, I was completely oblivious as to what the message was supposed to be but wouldn’t you know it, that 43rd time did the trick. Anyway, the team....hmmmmm. 😐

You believe all of these slogans and gestures have lead us to the brink of a sudden outbreak of world harmony and tolerance?

Well, yes but none of that's feasible at all. Another Adams as backup is going to be £15m+ we don't have if we haven't sold Ings first. Even if we did have £15m spare, I'd spend it on a LB anyway.

No sign of that though is there. Walcott, Redmond and Minamino have 2 each all season and half the time they’ve been on the pitch with Ings anyway. Obafemi has had his own fitness issues and not scored at all, nor has N’Lundulu. What you’re advocating for and what people are basically saying they’ll miss is exactly what we’ve had this season and personally I can’t wait to see the back of it. Ings, Bertrand, Walcott, Vestergaard... I’m really not fussed if all of them leave, they’ve been nothing remotely special.

I’m not bitter when any player leaves us, nobody is irreplaceable. Especially 29 year olds with poor injury records, who’ve averaged 13 league goals a season over three years. The fact that Adams and Gabbi didn’t set the world alight is exactly the point, which you’re missing. 10 goals is 10 goals, whether they’re ‘world class’ goals or Adams’ ‘scuffed’ goals.

We’ve already had the ‘huge loss’ of going from 23 league goals last season to 10 this season. It really doesn’t take much to be an 8-10 goal striker in this league. We need to find another Gabbiadini or Adams, not a superhero. Heck, even Long managed 10 goals once upon a time.