Saint86

They're a forum moderator. They live for stuff like this 😆

Sigh.

This is fair 😂

What's the away shirt?

Well not for Tottenham no... And its not like city don't have a plethora of attacking players - i'm sure they'll manage 😆

I see similar arguments made to justify the introduction of these passports a lot. Firstly, an international travel passport is not the same as a passport to go to your local football ground. Secondly, Covid has an average mortality rate of circa 0.02% and diminishes with age. Comparatively Plague and Yellow fever have infection mortality rates in the region of 50%-70% even with today's medicine 🤷‍♂️. There is no comparison to be made severity wise. Take Measles as another example, comparable mortality rate to covid and more infectious... but no vaccine passports 🤷‍♂️ Anyway, i stand by the moral standpoint that they shouldn't be introduced.

Are they meant to be discriminatory? I thought they were meant to be an effective way to control the virus at large venues and make them safe 🙄? Genuinely scary how quickly some people have adopted this mindset. The inarguably safe way for large venues to be open is through testing, and only through testing. I didn't state vaccines weren't worth having, i said i was against vaccine passports. Also the 88% effectiveness against hospitalisation is another figure that is worsening with time. Its an interesting one, how low will that figure get before people are no longer happy to go to a football stadium with tens of thousands of other fans who all think there is no risk of them transmitting covid and that they all have a safe level of protection? Say 60k fans with a 50% reduction in transmission rate and an 80% effectiveness against hospitalisation? Or, negative test results prior to entry?

Well I mean, it includes asymptomatic transmission 🤷‍♂️. Also, the previous figures were a 64% effectiveness at reducing transmission. Whilst those latest figures are a 39% at preventing infection. I don't care overly about the nuance of the comparative wording given something like 80% of covid cases are asymptomatic and its highly transmissible. My point is. Vaccine passports are flawed and are discriminatory. If you want to ensure safety at these events, then for me, the only safe and non discriminatory route is testing prior to entry.

Sorry Whitey, your're right to question that number. When i looked last week Israel was reporting 64% protection. Sadly its dropped to 39% on latest evidence. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/23/delta-variant-pfizer-covid-vaccine-39percent-effective-in-israel-prevents-severe-illness.html Looks like I inadvertently made my point incorrectly weighted towards the vaccine passport side!!! 🙃

I'd actually not seen that. So there has been parliamentary debate which invalidates one of my above points. Boris and co are just going to ride rough shod over the outcome no doubt still citing the same emergency powers that they're using to try to ban protests and silence journalists then? Not to mention ignoring businesses.

To me its irrelevant whether you support vaccines or not. The bigger issue is the very slippery slope of adopting any form of passport to society and a system that will become an effective digital ID card. Fundamental points here (as i see it) is that covid has a survivability rate of 99.98%, the most vulnerable have been double vaccinated, 90% have had at least 1 jab, and people are entirely ignoring natural immunity in these debates. Against that we see a very one sided push for these passports from certain sectors despite any reasonable scientific debate or even a political debate in this country. I don't see an winning argument for adopting such an autocratic system that infringes on liberal freedoms. It is fundamentally the segregation of elements of society that don't tow the line - and even if that isn't you personally, surely that is going to include family members, friends, colleagues etc. I am sure we all (or at least a lot of us) know someone in this bracket? What will be next for them? As a society are we going to ban them from all forms of public entertainment? From working? Leisure centres/activities? Already people are having their education opportunities jeopardized. Are we just going to slowly ostracise them and turn them into pariahs because they're fundamentally acting out of concern for their health and what they put in their bodies? Its also fairly irrelevant to the transmission of covid. In a 32k crowd thats 90% vaccinated with a vaccine that only has a circa 60% protection against asymptomatic transmission (and falling), who is going to care about the 3200 who may be unvaccinated (but for damn sure will get immunity the other way) vs the 17,000 who could pass it asymptomatically despite being vaccinated? The only way you deal with this issue is a robust system to show proof of a negative test, and its also a lot fairer and more in line with a free society. There is also an argument to say that the youngest and least at risk should be encouraged to get a broad spectrum natural immunity to covid whilst the vulnerable are most protected by the vaccines - but that is an entirely separate debate). You also have the glaring issue in football that children won't be vaccinated and are therefore in line to be excluded from football presumably? Along with those who can't receive the vaccines or those that have had bad reactions to the vaccines. These people will form a significant part of a football club's fanbase / future fanbase. Its a no to vaccine passports from me at anyrate.

We're not selling either of our keepers surely? Why the hell did we sell gun in a cut price deal if that was the case.

I think Villa face an ffp fine when they get relegated. But yeah, if they don't sell grealish it doesn't really add up for me.

Brentford's recruitment setup has been superb for years. To my mind, they are where they are due to player trading.

We hadn't fucked our wage budget up a wall back then Also, that was our upwards momentum curve - young squad, selling and improving, a great shop window for players and knocking on europe. Then we signed an absolute pile of awful for high fees, on big wages, with long contracts. And we've been fighting the decline ever since.

It will be fine as long as Romeu is fit 😘

I reckon we'll pull Ings' bluff to be honest. That or we get an offer we're happy with. He has no choice but to play well for a move / world cup, and if he doesn't sign and gets a bad injury he is done / without income for a while. Takes more balls than the club showed since Cortese was here though.

Well, it could have been another midfielder at said club, especially given the Manchester connection and age. But yes, it does appear pretty certain as to who it is. Especially given his club have released a statement as well. Got to give said player the benefit of the doubt at any rate. Innocent until proven otherwise.

He isn't being named in the UK press or even by his club in their player suspension note... So I'm not sure it's the kind of information saintsweb wants to be sharing/hosting.

Daily mail were saying his contract was up in June! Good to see him out and about, pretty terrible what's happened to him.

Fair enough, time will tell i guess. I really rate Tella as an attacking player and think he was one of our best outlets towards the end of last season. He also seems like a pretty level headed young player. I'll be happy enough provided we get to see what he can do with more and more game time. Always find him to be exciting to watch and dangerous for the opposition.

Our starting CAMs next year should be Armstrong and Tella. Then you have Redmond, Walcott, Djenpo, and maybe Mo (not seen enough of him) as back up. Also Perraud can play left wing extremely capably if needed. Strikers will be ings and/or Armstrong, Adams, and Obafemi. Its a decent enough team for a mid table finish and will again come down to injuries and squad depth - but at least this year the covid rules on recovery facilities etc should be relaxed! The reality is that we're very much in transition even now - we're still trying to balance the books and off load Les' long contract squad players, whilst building a new team and remaining stable. its by no means easy task given our financial state.

I'd give him a loan and a contract extension myself - but we don't see him every day. Ralph did play him consistently last year when he could have played Tella/Redmond up top or not loaned out Long (not saying much with that latter comparison). And hell, its not like we've got much choice eitherway! Personally think we'll keep Obafemi as well, he offers blistering pace and reckon Ralph likes him despite criticising his focus etc.

Don't think Lowe was all that bad tbh. Kept the club going with a small stadium in a very competitive league. Shit hit the fan when the loan was called in. But he gave us the academy and SMS, thought outside the box (ala woodward), and his tenureship saw some great players and managers over the years. I don't think we'd be the club we are today without him, and i doubt we'd have been taken over by ML/NC without the stadium and academy - but purely speculative. He didn't saddle us with several multimillion pound championship level squad players on long contracts or ruin the academy - so his legacy maybe looks better with time? Maybe if he'd called Woodward the Bald Box he'd have been more popular? But also, i was too young to really follow all the fallout at the time so fully prepared to get shot down for the above 😊... I do seem to recall it wasn't his fault we didn't resign hoddle at least?

Fancy it will be a loan deal for him? He's got potential but he needs regular games and a chance to learn and develop at senior level. He isn't going to get that here.