sadoldgit

Convictions for violence are convictions for violence and you conveniently ignore his convictions for violence at football matches. No one said he goes round beating up grannies. How many ordinary working class lads as you call them give themselves double barrelled names are start right wing groups such as the English Defence League? I dont like because of his beliefs and his actions - nothing to do with being any kind of "class." Just how far right do you have to be before you become a proper Islamaphobe or racist? I dont agree with you that Yaxley-Lennon echoes the thoughts of a majority of "ordinary European citizens" and it is quite obvious that you are in a minority according to the polls. It is odd how supporters of extreme views kid themselves that they are in the majority when groups like the BNP and the EDL are clearly fringe groups and are supported by the few remaining Neanderthals. Plenty of people have criticised the more unsavoury aspects of that religion without breaking the law or using violence. You and hypo both clearly support this bloke but try and pretend that you aren't as bad as he is by saying that you dont agree with a lot of what he has done. It doesnt work like that. As soon as you voice any kind of support for people like this you are saying it is ok. It is not ok. There is no acceptable face of racism or hatred of people who are different. I will give you a clue - ENGLISH Defence League.

Stephen Yaxley-Lennon has used several different names. Which one would you prefer I use?

He may be many thinks but Stephen Yaxley- Lennon is certainly not an “ordinary working class lad.” Nice of you to gloss over his convictions for violence. As for his imprisonment, he was warned that he would go to jail and put himself in that position again. His own fault, not a conspiracy against him. And I think any right thinking person would have a problem with any extremist threatening lives of others, it doesn’t make your “Tommy” some kind of messiah. By his own actions the bloke is quite clearly a racist bigot and is supported by racist bigots. Please let’s nit pretend that the EDL and the BNP are some kind of liberal do gooders. You only need to look at the knuckle draggers who pitched up at Downing Street in support of their “Tommy” to see where it is at.

Yes. Yes. There is a big difference between someone's perception of what could happen and what actually does happen. Do you have any hard evidence that no one was prosecuted through fear of being accused of racism? Yes I did watch the drama. I seem to recall that there were bigger concerns about the victims being credible witnesses than about the religion of the alleged perpetrators. My personal experience with the CPS is not at all irrelevant. I clearly have a lot more knowledge of the Criminal Justice System and how it works than you do. Given that you believe you have more knowledge about the (lack of) equality of pay with women than a lady on here because you work with a few women I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you know more about the CJS than I do. Where do I ever deny that there are or have been problems. There were clearly cock ups but there are huge differences to people not doing their jobs properly and systematic bling eye turning to criminal activities because of race. I can tell you 100% that if cases are brought before the CPS and they are not charged when they should be, the sh*t hits the fan big time. The same happens with the police. Records are kept and everyone with their name on these allegations is held accountable when the system fails - which it does occasionally as no system is perfect. Your avatar gives you away more so than your support on the Terrorist thread for other racists on here, far right mouthpiece Katie Hopkins, Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees-Mogg and your support here for the well know far right agitator Stephen Yaxley-Lennon. You know full well that Pepe Le Frog has been appropriated by the alt right. So then, just to spell it out for you - mistakes have been made in these cases but offenders are now behind bars and other alleged offenders are being prosecuted for similar crimes. I have yet to see anyone brought to book for the perversion of justice by refusing to prosecute a case for fear of upsetting anyone due to their race or religion. If you had any working knowledge of the CJS whatsoever you would know that it is much more serious to ignore alleged crimes than it is to upset someone over racial issues. Cases are dropped if it is either not in the public interest to prosecute or if it is believed that there is no probability of a successful prosecution. No rape case, be it by a footballer or by gangs of men, will be dropped because it is not in the public interest to prosecute. Cases will be dropped if it is felt that the evidence does not hold up in court. If you were paying attention to the BBC drama you will know that there were big problems with prosecution which was down to the victims themselves. Go back through any court records you like over the years and you will find plenty of successful prosecutions against offenders who happened to be Muslim (or any other religion you care to mention). Just ask yourself why your favourite football hooligan isnt carrying out his personal crusade against those in "our" church who have been carrying out similar offences against children for years. I'll help you out here Pepe, it is because they are not Muslims.

Strangely enough the jury in his trial came to the same conclusion, as did many people commenting about the case on here. His efforts to go to appeal fell on deaf ears for various reasons and he served his sentence for rape. Granted he was finally acquitted of the charge of rape, although many people still found his behaviour that night to be reprehensible - unlike people like you, who seem to think that it is a normal night out to have sex with women you have never met before you walked into their room and so drunk they can barely stand up and have no recollection of what happen to them the next day. No doubt you (and your mate hypo) will also be astonished to hear that murder, gbh, rape, serious sexual assault - in fact any crimes committed in this country, are not somehow worse if committed by Muslims or immigrants. I know, it is staggering isnt it? A black guy threatening a white guy with a knife is no different to a white guy threatening a black guy with a knife. Jeez. Another fact that will no doubt freak you and hypo out - during the 8 years I worked for the CPS in the SE Area, not once was a case dropped if it met the criteria for going to trial for fear that it might upset someone somewhere because it involved Muslims or immigrants. Bizarre eh? People committing crimes, being charged and going to court no matter what religion, skin colour, sexual orientation, creed etc. etc. In fact, in the many many meetings I sat in, not once was any of these factors mentioned as being of any relevance. People were charged and tried according to the crimes they were alleged to have committed. All this and without Tommy's help too.

Same for me. I started in 65/66 too and the season we came runners up to Liverpool was the best by a long way. Happy days!

Along with the countless number of sexual abuse cases carried out by members of the Christian clergy or millions of sexual assaults committed by humans against other humans over the centuries I’m sure you would agree. Unless you just have an issue against Muslims of course.

You really aren’t the full ticket are you?

Nail on head. Sadly though his supporters try to make him out as a hero standing up for free speech. He was warned if he did this again he would be jailed. Not exactly rocket science. As for his views, I expect that Hitler said the occasional thing that was worthy of serious attention too. Farage can occasionally sound plausible but it doesnt change their fundamental beliefs and for those these people are rightly castigated. The people who stand up for Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon, Andrew McMaster, Paul Harris or whatever name he goes by now are the ones that share his opinions. Try and sugar coat it all you like hypo but you are cut from the same cloth. Your comments such as "thank God my wife isnt a Muslim" and "socialism is dangerous" together with your defence of Katie Hopkins are there as testament to your beliefs. By the way hypo, I am sure that you know that Yaxley-Lennon took the name "Tommy Robinson" from a football thug when he set up the English Defence League, an organisation from which that I am sure you will find a number of things to sympathise with. Carry on supporting alt right thugs and slagging off liberal newspapers hypo, you are doing a fine job of showing yourself in your true colours.

I like his new single (do they call them that these days?) and I bought a couple of Oasis albums in the 90s. His voice sounded rubbish though, no matter how old you are.

Was he "snubbed" though? Others players were preferred to him this time round and to be fair he hasn't had the best season clubwise. It also isnt as if he needs to be playing for a "bigger" club to get into the England squad as he managed it with little old Southampton. I dont think he will be off because he lost his England place. If he does go it will be to a bigger club and for more money.

What a surprise. No condemnation from you about a far right agitator who was rightly arrested for breaking the law. The reason he will not be accepted by "a mainstream audience" is because of his beliefs, not for the way he chooses his language. It doesnt matter which way he chooses to use his words. a far right bigot is a far right bigot. Nice to see you trying to paint him as misunderstood though.

100% this. Teams win together and lose together. To not go and support the poor sod was appalling.

How on Earth is Gareth Bsle a bench warmer? He needs to go to a club who will play him - not Spurs again please!

How **** is Liam Gallagher?

Never in the field of incontinence have so many beds been wet by so many for so few reasons.

So how has Les "pulled a blinder" if there is still a sticking point? The other ITKs seem to be saying it is a done deal and not to worry. Help me out here please Ekon as I am not sure which ITKer to believe. We have also been told that Hughes is either a) already on holiday or b) going on holiday today. Assuming that he is not leaving one holiday to go on another, which is it? Such quandaries.

It is isnt it? If you chose your colours properly there is no need for a third kit - but then it is just another way of getting more money out of the fans,

Or maybe some people just have the patience of a two year old?

Surely every football manager on the planet knows that if he joins SFC he will not have a shed load of money to spend on transfers. Mark Hughes will know that better than most given the time he has spent in the Premiership. If the rumours are true then more fool him if he thinks they are suddenly going to give him a huge wedge to play with. We are not the only club who have to sell to buy. Even the "mighty" Spurs have to balance their books. If this is the sticking point then it would seem very odd that Hughes is prepared to gamble away a job he supposedly wants on a point that he isnt going to win. It is more likely that there is no rush as everything is going to plan and the club are relaxed about when the official announcement is made. Or not.........

Yes it was and he turned out to be a good manager for us. Just as McMenemy was a Saints legend and it all went tits up for him at Sunderland. There are no guarantees in football and I am sure we recruited Puel and Pellegrino thinking we had found good fits. Everton would have thought the same when they recruited Koeman. Manchester United when they recruited Moyes. As they say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating and we can speculate all we want about Hughes but we wont know what he will do for us until next season. Whatever that is, we all want more than just staying up dont we? As for Hughes doing the nigh on impossible. No it wasnt. It was possible, especially given the worse form of Stoke and Swansea and that WBA were pretty much gone. I agree that sometimes managers and teams just click, but I wouldnt say that the results showed a massive upturn. He came in and did what he needed to do. Perhaps he can take things further, but I wouldn't say it was a marriage made in heaven just yet.

My dear Minsk, I think you have missed my point. I am not saying we shouldn't employ Hughes, I am saying that we should employ the person who is deemed best for the job by the Board given that they keep tabs on all potential new managers (apparently). If that is Mark Hughes, sobeit. You are right in saying that Hughes might have kept Stoke up if he had stayed. The same argument means that Pellegrino might have kept us up too if he had stayed. As you say, we will never know. What we do know is that the Stoke Board didn't think that Hughes would keep them up so sacked him just as our Board finally lost faith with Pellegrino and sacked him too. In hindsight the Stoke Board are saying they should have sacked Hughes earlier and our Chairman has hinted that Pellegrino could well have been sacked earlier too. Its hard to disagree. Yes it is entirely possible that Hughes could get us into Europe, but if you look at his record in recent years would you say you would put your mortgage on it? Of course the squad makes a difference, but as we have seen so many times, managers dont always get the best out of good squads. Manchester United, Chelsea and Arsenal all being examples of squads in recent years who have not performed up to the expected standard. As for offering up a better alternative, it is not my job to put forward names for the Board to consider is it? They tell us that they are constantly monitoring managers and players so you would imagine that, at all times, they have a "hitlist." The Times recently intimated that David Wagner was of interest and maybe he was the name that Les Reed through into the mix (if he actually did) who knows? The point is that when you recruit you should always give yourself options, not just give the job to someone because they have stepped in and helped out for a few games. As someone else said, no one is saying there aren't better managers than Hughes out there who might be interested in coming here. If that is the case, why not al least talk to them? No it wasnt Sparky's fault that players missed chances. Just as it wasnt Puel's fault or Pellegrino's fault either! Apparently we came quite high in chances made last season and low in chances taken. A few more chances taken and who knows, Pellegrino might still be here! You cant possibly remember me "bleating" about not scoring in the last few games the season before last because I dont "bleat" about things like that. For the record, rightly or wrongly, I would have given Puel another season, or at least up to New Year 2018, to see if he could make a difference. You say we could end up appointing another Pellegrino. We could also end up appointing another Pochettino or Koeman. Not sure why you think I would want Moyes or Fat Sam when I am hardly breaking open the champers at the prospect of Mark Hughes taking over for three years. Perhaps I am doing Hughes a disservice, but he does seem to have become a part of the Premiership managerial merry go round as Moyes and Fat Sam are. You say you have heard that some players saying how enjoyable it is playing under Hughes. Every time a new manager comes in one or two players always same the same thing in the first few weeks. Yes, I seem to remember it happened under Puel and Pellegrino too! Hughes was a top class, very experienced player. He is also a very experienced manager who actually hasn't achieved that much in terms of success as a manager. Perhaps he will do so with us? I do hope so.

A number of managers dont manage the basics every season. Hughes wasnt exactly mastering them at Stoke and that is why they sacked him. I expect they didnt expect him to get them up to 10th last season. I didnt say that Hughes wouldnt get us into Europe, but he doesnt have a record of getting clubs like us into Europe, only keeping them up. I think we have a better squad than Stoke. I am not sure what your point is. We are talking about the manager. Are you saying he will do better here because he has a better squad? I dont think it works that way. Who else could guarantee better results? You cant guarantee better results no matter who you bring in. It will always be a gamble, although some more so than others. Sparky only won 2 out of 8, albeit in difficult circumstances, so if he stays, lets hope his record improves eh? As for who else - it is not my job to put forward other prospective managers (thank goodness) and we are told that the club are constantly monitoring prospective managers and players, so you would imagine they would have a few other names on a list. If you were to press me I would hope that Slavisa Jokanovic's name would be on that list. I would imagine that there are plenty more up and coming managers that we could interview rather than just go with a steady journeyman manager with a patchy record. As has been said many times before, if Hughes had been suggested as Puel's successor this time last year this place would have gone into meltdown and the Board accused of having no ambition. Has beating Swansea and Bournemouth really changed things so much that now Hughes is the only one who can take us forward?

Unless we bring in two more strikers, but I guess they haven't thought that far ahead.

These were the basics that you would expect any manager worth his salt to do when coming into a struggling club though Dellman. Hughes has proved he can get teams to survive in the Premiership (although he may have not done so with Stoke if he had stayed there) but we want to do more than survive dont we? Whatever happened to trying to get back into Europe? Do the Board really believe that Hughes is the man to take us there, or have they bottled it and are looking of 3 years of finishing 10th? If it is true that Reed is the only member of the Board saying that we should explore our options then he is the only one employing any common sense in this matter. That is not to say that we shouldn't employ Hughes, but it should be on the basis that he is the best man for the job, not the only man for the job.