sadoldgit

Because hypo had always had far right sympathies and that is their modus operandi. You won’t find him slagging off those responsible for inciting right wing fuelled riots yet to him, “socialism is dangerous”. It wasnt that long ago that he was posting on here asking anyone if they thought Trump had done anything good during his single term as President. Trump now has blood on his hands but hypo would rather have a dig at those calling out his attempted coup than the man himself. It isn’t socialism that is dangerous, it is enablers like hypo who let people like Trump get away with his shit. We can through in GM for good measure. 5 people dead so far all because of one man’s vanity. You Trump supporters must be very proud of your man today.

You aren’t prepared to factor in the completely difference circumstances then?

4 dead now. Not sure if that still qualifies as a largely peaceful demonstration? Still, it’s ok, Trump has been banned from social media for a few hours. The deluded fool should be behind bars by now.

Yep, only one woman shot dead. As hypo said, nothing to worry about.

One the best midfielders I have seen play. He would not be out of place in today’s game. RIP

Couldn’t agree more. Go for it and play the strongest team available.

Any screenplay written by Richard Curtis.

And then there are people like Turkish 😙

When hundreds of people are dying because poor decisions on are made by people that we elect to look after us, then yes, political points need to be scored. People are accountable. If mistakes are made, those who make them are accountable. It doesn’t matter what the party is, who the PM is, they are accountable to the electorate. Yes, it is a hard job. But we expect the the person in power to put the best team together to do the best they can. We have the worse cabinet and the most ineffective PM I have had in my lifetime dealing with the biggest national threat since WW2. They are accountable for their decisions no matter what the circumstances.

I appreciate that there are two sides to every case Weston and look at them when forming an opinion as, I assume, most people do. People will also form different opinions. As you brought the Evans case up again, the prosecution clearly have a duty to look carefully at what the defence are saying when making there case, so by definition look at both sides of the story. I agreed with the prosecution’s definition of what happened that night so I made that case here. You will remember that Evans agreed that he performed a sex act on the victim, that he never met her before or after the incident and that he had no communication with her before during or after the sex act took place. The law is there to protect vulnerable people from those who would take advantage of them. The prosecution demonstrated that the women was intoxicated by drink/drugs, was barely able to walk, had no recollection of what happened that night and lost her handbag. The law says that if you are incapacitated by drink/drugs you are not in a position to consent to sex. Evans was found guilty of rape and served his sentence. His attempts at an appeal failed, one assumes because those looking at the appeals felt the conviction to be safe. Adam’s partners family subsequently put up a large reward for people to come forward and provide “new evidence”. Two men came forward and provided evidence for money. The prosecution argued that the “new evidence” had no bearing on what happened in the hotel room that night (it is accepted that a persons sexual history should have no bearing on any current case). The judge overruled the prosecution and allowed the evidence of the two men to stand. One assumes their evidence tipped the balance in Evans favour as he was acquitted in the second trial. The prosecution believed that Evans was guilty of rape because he had non consensual sex with this women. He says he believes it was consensual. Girls under 16 cannot consent to sex. People off their heads cannot consent to sex (and before we get into the argument about drunk married couples, these are two complete strangers who met briefly for this sex act). So then, the prosecution looked at both sides of the story and went ahead with the case because they believed that she was in no position to consent. I agreed with their position having looked at the evidence available (which includes the evidence presented by Ched Evans of course). Very experienced legal minds have pored over this case. You may not agree, but you can’t say that both sides of the story have not been considered by those who think that he was guilty. Hopefully we can bury this subject finally now? This one is for you Wes as I am about to use up my three posts. Are you going to start calling the virus the UK Variant now that is has mutated and you are fond of giving in a national label?

I sat through the Strictly final this year (to the absolute amazement of Mrs.SOG) and actually enjoyed it. I blame Bill Bailey.

I remember Mick Channon saying that Lawrie Mac used to buy good players and just let them play. Those days are long gone.

To be fair Wes, Farage does bear a striking resemblance to a frog. 🐸

Do give us an insight into who decided that every virus had to be prefixed by where they are assumed to have originated from. I ask because I had the flu about 6 years ago and would love to know where that strain came from.

The virus has a nationality? Wow! I think your words might have more resonance if you didn’t sound like Donald Trump.

According to the Express, dear old Nige is kicking off and calling it another EU treaty. I thought Ducky said that he was ok with it?

Are you suggesting that the victim was encouraging the abuse?

I would have been very unhappy if that had been given against us. The ball deflected up and hit his hand. They get given, but wrongly so in my opinion. He wasn’t looking to gain an advantage, it just hit his hand.

You seem more bothered by this than the behaviour against her? Why is that?

Like everyone else here I have no idea how a Labour government would have handled the pandemic so far, but given that they put social principles first I would imagine that the care homes fiasco would not have happened. I also don’t believe that contracts would have been passed out to mates and that the money would have been better spent on PPE etc. The point is moot however. We have what we have and to say that someone else could not have done better is letting this shower off the hook. I am tempted to say that Labour could not have done any worse.

Not at all, but calling them out for their behaviour and helping to identify them will help. If they are sitting amongst people who let them know their behaviour is unwelcome that is a start, right? We are talking about one game when the racism was questionable. Players have been talking about leaving the pitch for some time. This has been blighting football for over 50 years and if nothing more drastic is done it will still be an issue in 50 years time. Instead of a bunch of people who have never been racially abused in their lives deciding how to deal with it, perhaps the people on the end of the abuse should decide which action to take?

Perhaps if the only racist comments were just “ that black guy” it wouldn’t be so much of an issue? Perhaps people spending £100 to attend a match will help the stewards and the police sort out racists in crowds because they want to see the whole match?

What exactly does that have to do with how racism is treated within professional football? Did you notice that both teams left the field of play in a European match recently do to an alleged racist incident? Are you going to ask them if they attend football matches too? If it is going to stop it needs to be shown that it will not be tolerated. If you can come up with something better, go ahead.

I find it very strange that people who clearly want what they think is best for their country are called “traitors” by some individuals.

Do you think people standing around them won’t let them know about their behaviour if the match ends prematurely? Don’t you think that at some point, even drunken morons will realise that their behaviour isn’t being tolerated? It has to stop, do you agree? What do you suggest we do to stop it?