Lighthouse

Falling for what? I’ve always believed Gao to be a useless owner without a pot to p*ss in. What I don’t get is why some people are surprised he isn’t spending money. Yes, we absolutely need a new RB, amongst a few other players. Do I expect an owner like Gao to bloat the wage further when he doesn’t need to? No. I’m telling you what bears do in the woods. You seem to interpret that as me loving bear sh*t.

We aren't desperate, we're pretty much safe. We could play Yoshida or Danso at RB for the rest of the season, they'd be a weakness and we'd ship a few goals down the right but still stay up. F**k it, we could probably play Gunn at RB for the remaining games and still scrape together 2 wins and 3 draws from somewhere.

IF that's true I think it's about the wages as much as the loan fees. The board will no doubt see it as not needing to bloat the wage bill even further when we aren't going down.

IF we had it, it would have to be for the absolute cast-iron, murdering psychopath convictions. People like the Lee Rigby killers or London Bridge attacker (had he lived). There is no way in a million years new evidence is going to come out that they were actually innocent. I hadn't heard about that case before but I'm sure there are plenty like it in the USA. I guess it just sucks to be a black man in Arkansas.

Really, that long?

The social make up of America varies from state to state, so there are too many variables in that assumption. Two of the top three lowest homicide rates in the world belong to Japan and Norway, so you could argue that commercial whaling is a good way to prevent murder. You would need to try it in the UK for a few years and see what effect it actually had on our murder rate. Personally I think the effect would be minimal but if it did prevent just 5 innocent people from dying each year, would that be worth it?

Presumably you have the full details of the crimes Fitzgerald committed and you’ve checked with his victims that they’re okay with this?

If it was Morocco then it would have been Marrakech, flying back into Bristol.

Reminds me of a Simpsons episode, "somebody ratted us out to the FBI. We’ve narrowed it down to either Johnny Tight Lips or Sammy the Squealer."

Might have helped if he’d come up with a better code name than ‘El Futbolista’.

He’s still around but I haven’t seen him for a few years. One of the first people I met from here, back at the old Fleming Park football. He changed it to Ludwig but eventually got banned. Essruu I apparently flew home from either Morocco or Spain about 10 years ago, never met him though.

Basically it just looks like two teams will go down in the 37-39 point bracket. The bar is higher than last year but 43 would be a fairly large anomaly. For that you’d usually need the bottom two in the Villa/Derby points area from a few years ago, giving 4-6 points to pretty much everyone.

Reading through their forum, some chap called Scousenberg put £50 on a draw at 90+3 mins.

Pancreatic cancer a couple of years ago, was in his late 40s I believe. Way too soon that.

Knew we’d win because I spent the whole evening too violently ill to care. If anyone is looking for a good ab work out, I’d recommend the norovirus.

I don’t know but given the current scoring rate, the cut off for 43 points is Burnley in 14th. You’d need 4 of the 5 teams below them to all have a massive upturn in form.

No way, too many teams hovering around the 1 point per game mark around the bottom. A few will improve but you’re talking about 6 crap teams getting around 19 points from their last 14 games.

Interestingly, we’re level on points with Spurs who are as long as 1000 with some companies.

.

Who?

Jeez, never saw that coming.

I need a lie down, I’ve come over all hot and bothered.

Has to be fairly strong to get rid of all the duck sh*t.

If you really can't see the difference between, "We will/have to do something," and "we will sign three defenders in January," then I can't help YOU. I don't need help, thank you very much. I've seen enough bullsh*t promises from politicians to know that article was an open ended promise from day one. I never believed we'd sign three defenders then, I don't believe it now and more fool anyone who did. I'm not some gullible mug who believes everything the club tells me, quite the opposite. I pretty much ignore what's in the press and on twitter. How frequently I attend games and therefore hand over my money depends on what we're doing on the pitch. If we sign nobody in January, then the club will live and die by their actions. If we start shipping 4 goals in every home game again, I'll stop going. Over and out.

So no actually promises of signing again then. I don't see how this is so hard to understand. It's politics 101, vague ambiguous statements which set readers off down a path and let them jog along to their own conclusions. Neither the club nor the Telegraph have explicitly said, "Saints will sign three defenders in January."