badgerx16

Coming from a self confessed moron........ ( Now, just in case I am actually on ignore, can somebody please quote this post ).

I'm not trying to be difficult, nor am I looking for an argument, but I thought that a 'no deal' Brexit automatically meant WTO rules, in which case we must apply tariffs equally across the board; we would not be able to set different levels for EU and non-EU trade due to MFN rules. ( Now, if you can post a sensible response explaining where I am mis-understanding things, and you can avoid your default position of always adding an insult, I would appreciate the opportuninty to better understand the situation ). EDIT; After re-reading the quoted text, I think I understand where my misunderstanding arose. However, being an IT security consultant with a degree in Microbiology, economics is not my specialist subject of choice.

The quote in GM's post states "If following our departure without a trade deal with the EU we were to decide to impose tariffs on imports from the EU, possibly causing UK prices to go up,.....", and goes on to say " We import large amounts from non-EU countries and these prices would not change,...... ". Is not the second part incorrect, as under WTO rules we would be obliged to impose exactly the same level of tariffs on non-EU imports ?

So why was he sitting there being totally trampled over, on the subject of tariffs ? Why didn't he follow the basic rule, "Better to be silent and thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt".

So 1 item that may turn out, in the future, to become reality outweighs that list of nearly 100 outright fabrications, most of which would have been on front pages, in large typeface ?

He hasn't got a f+++ing clue. That wasn't a car crash, it was a complete train derailment, over the side of a bridge across a 1000ft deep ravine.

Caster Semenya, pictured here with her wife,

BBC with more details about how the flight was arranged; https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47013474

Women compete equally at the top level in equestrian events. ( If this were on The Muppet Show I am sure that would prompt some sort of response referencing their having a lump of throbbing muscle gripped between their thighs ).

Copied from the "Squad 2018/19" thread, and edited to remove those we know have gone, or look likely to go, ( plus FF, who almost certainly isn't going to play ); 1. Alex McCarthy 2. 3. Maya Yoshida 4. Jannik Vestergaard 5. Jack Stephens 6. 7. Shane Long 8. Matt Targett 9. Danny Ings 10. 11. Mohamed Elyounoussi 12. Jan Bednarek 13. Angus Gunn 14. Oriol Romeu 15. Sam Gallagher 16. James Ward-Prowse 17. Stuart Armstrong 18. Mario Lemina 19. Marcus Barnes 20. 21. Ryan Bertrand 22. Nathan Redmond 23. Pierre Højbjerg 24. 25. Jack Rose 26. Ryan Seager 27. Jake Hesketh Is this group strong enough / good enough for the rest of the season if there are no incoming players ?

Watching that again, 2 things stand out; Liverpool demonstrating a quality usually attributed to Saints - conceding from your own corner, and Puel showing some real animated emotion.

Which then begs the question, is Valery that improvement ?

So whilst it is not Ralph's 'preferred' system, it is the one he has decided must be used without strengthening the DM position, which we don't look like doing before the summer. Consequently we have to use wing backs, and having Valery as #1 with Ramsey as cover weakens the squad, ( IMO ).

In the 10 games from Cardiff onwards we have played a back 4 in 4 of them, starting with the Cardiff game and including the 2 matches against Derby, and a back 5 in the other 6.

However, he also seems to have determined that our CBs aren't good enough to play a flat back 4.

I sure hope RH isn't receiving some 'guidance' on squad management from the Board.

I don't care how much 'negotiation' takes place, you stay well clear or it's the badger's teeth and claws for you.

Seeing as earlier in the thread he self identified as a 'moron', don't take it as an insult.

Sums the whole thing up perfectly.

Couldn't really accuse Jon Moss of any Liverpool bias after he sent off one of his former school pupils - James Milner.

Folland

"She had better tread carefully", does not say "she should surrender sovereignty". Why do you always look for arguments ?

Did I say that ? Teresa May is desperately casting around for a way to make her completely unpalatable mess of an ugly duckling, overwhelmingly rejected by Parliament, into a graceful swan. If she tries to achieve this by rewriting elements of the GFA, she will need to be very well advised, very clear as to what she is, or more importantly is not, saying, and certain that she isn't selling the progress made in NI down the river purely for her own ego and vanity.

Considering that a car bomb was set off in (London)Derry on Saturday, she had better tread carefully around that potential powder keg.

Would that be Top Billing, or would we settle for Second Billng ?