sadoldgit

I am not suggesting that he should get an easy ride, far from it. But it has been apparent that a lot of the flak from the media has not been justified.

Not seen this before. Priceless!

I don't know how much it costs to run a Premiership football club but would assume that it isn't a cheap gig.

I am still amazed that we have spent £12m on a player who mostly sits on the bench.

And once upon a time you couldnt go shopping on a Sunday in this country because the Man in the Sky decreed that we should all rest. When I worked for the Government up to a short while ago some buildings provided special prayer rooms for those who wanted to go off and do their thing at certain times. Does it really matter though? Just because we don't believe does it mean that we cant or shouldn't accommodate those who do? We are more of a multi faith country than a Christian country nowdays aren't we? Is it such a big deal to move exams times around?

The Echo today is saying that Gaston is on around £60k (and has cost us so far £8k per minute!!!)

I don't believe this. I am sure they would have kept players like Morgan as long as they could have.

If the £6m replacement turned out to be as good as say, Vardy, I am sure we would all be cheering!

I seem to remember that Morgan was offered £60k pw to stay. I wouldn't have thought that the top wage was too far away from that?

Nice to see a positive media story about Corbyn! I do have a lot of sympathy for the bloke. Not only does he have to deal with a media that cant wait to exploit his latest faux pas, real or imaginary, but even the BBC, who are supposed Lefty Luvvies or whatever the phrase is now, have given him a hard time. It cant be easy having to accommodate all of the disgruntled Blairites either, who probably thought they could continue to make a career out of being a watered down Tory. What I find really interesting is the support he has at ground root level. An old school friend and I have just reunited through the powers of FB. I haven't seen or spoken to him since 1964 and had no idea of his politics before (and at 10 why should either of us ever spoken of politics?) but since Corbyn has become leader of Labour he has been like a dog with two d*cks. Corbyn, for all of his supposed faults and naivety, seems to have lit a flame under rank and file old school Labour supporters and Cameron will be a fool to underestimate what this could do to the Tory Party in future polls.

Thank you for this post asnats. I know that Guan has no regard for anything I say but maybe he will take note of someone who has been here a long time but rarely posts.

Yes I get that Batman, it is just that I don't get in this day and age how anyone would think they could keep it under wraps.

I didn't say anyone said they were. Whose mouth am I supposed to be putting words into? It is just a figure of speech, but then you know that don't you?

I don't know who they think they would be hoping to appease as to not to be seen in a bad light? With the internet you cant keep anything quite for very long. The women of Cologne have certainly made their voices heard. Surely Merkel doesn't think that she can sweep this under the carpet?

I did, and I have been reading the reports on the BBC news app. The app today says that three suspects have been identified but no arrests made. It also says that the interior minister is saying that anti immigrant groups were trying to use the attacks to stir up hatred against refugees. He goes on to say "What happens on the right wing platforms and in chat rooms is at least as awful as the acts of those assaulting the women. This is poisoning the climate of our society." Not my words but those of a German official. Is he being an apologist? What happened was clearly appalling but why dont we wait until we know the full details before we start pointing the finger? It may well have been refugees and asylum seekers, does that mean that all refugees and asylum seekers are all rapists and robbers?

I am not trying to play it down and I think it is outrageous too, but I don't believe there has been a media cover up at all because I have been reading about for a few days now. I did read that Merkel was trying to keep a lid on the idea that it was "North Africans and Arabs" until they knew exactly what the position was. Given that many people are saying that the attacks were carried out by 1000 people and others are saying that around 30 people carried out the attacks, it does seem like there is still some confusion about exactly what went on. As I said earlier, the BBC on the main news last night were also suggesting that the sexual attacks we part of a cover for a mass robbery. I dont think there is any faux outrage at all. I think that people are genuinely appalled.

This is especially for Guan - Given the time and effort you put into your earlier post Guan I thought it only fair to try and respond properly. I was struggling with your post last night and am not doing much better after a nights sleep but as I seem to have bothered you so much I will at least try and give you my take on things as we clearly differ. First off I am struggling with your response because I was sharing posts with Batman who didn't seem the least bit bothered. I am sure he would have said more if it had been a big issue for him so I found it odd that you should suddenly appear all guns blazing! In light of the ongoing terrorist activities there are clearly concerns about the ease at which terrorists can operate on the ground. This is fertile ground for those who have issues with, for simplicity, "Johnny Foreigner" and immigration. A current candidate for the position of the most powerful job on the planet, Mr Donald Trump, announced that he would like to deal with the current situation by closing the US borders to Muslims *****il they could figure out what was going on, I think was the timeframe). Clearly there are some people who would like to do the same with our borders to a similar degree (not necessarily just to Muslims). I was having an exchange of views with Batman and as his stance is, I think it is fair to say, right of centre and I was curious as to his position on Trump's statement. I asked him (twice in total I think) if he agreed with closing the borders to Muslims and on both occasions he declined to answer. As you will know having been a member of this board for as long as I have, Batman is usually prompt in replying so I did wonder why he chose not to. Still, there is no law that says that you have to respond on here. Later on I mentioned it again and he accused me of hounding him, which I thought was a bit of an over reaction but there you go. So then we get to the statement "But as long as the luvvies keep demanding that we open our borders to the whole world." Hmmmm. Firstly who are these luvvies? I don't recall anyone on here demanding totally open borders. Is he referring to anyone left of centre? Again, I dont recall mass marches in London demanding that we open our borders to "the whole world" by a procession of "luvvies." I expect there are people who do feel that there should be no borders at all but I really am not aware of any mass movement demanding it. So then I decided to challenge Batman on his statement. There are clearly a number of ways to go about this. On an internet forum were blocks of writing are not easy to digest and brevity seems to be the order of the day (mostly you need something short and to the point. Batman's assertion was at one polar end of the argument - he is clearly against opening our borders to the world. Would you agree? So then one way of challenging that point in a very brief manner is to go to the opposite position - which is closed borders (he hadn't given any alternatives). So then, you say you dont agree with open borders, so are you are saying that we would be better off with closed borders? Obviously he isn't saying that because he is not saying anything other than about open borders, but by throwing the other extreme back it does give him the opportunity to come back and clarify his position, which he did. And he didn't kick off about it. What I didn't say to Batman at the time is that I do agree with him that we should have tighter border controls and that immigration should be limited by any country's ability to absorb the numbers required but that is for another post. This is not the Oxford Debating Society. It is a bunch of blokes exchanging opinions, often very badly, on a football chat forum. If you expect a higher standard Guan then I can only think that you dont read many threads! Finally on the subject of the photos you published here from the Paris massacre, I would just ask you how you would have felt if you had lost a son, daughter, wife, mother, father, friend in that attack and had logged on a few days later to chat about football and stuff and had seen a picture of them lying dead on a concert hall floor?

Some reports are saying that it was 30 and not 1000 who were involved in the assaults. Still not acceptable but there is a big discrepancy in the figures. I saw a BBC report on this two days ago and last night it was on the BBC news where it is being speculated that the gang were using the sexual assaults as cover for robbery. I saw one report that said of the 8 arrested all were asylum seekers but also another report that said that had not been confirmed officially. Whatever is going on it is clearly disturbing as the police are saying that they cannot guarantee security for women there.

Yes you are right. You were right not be bother reading either. Sorry, I know it must be boring.

Guan gets just three posts a day. I don't have a limit. The time on his hands comment was regarding that long post that he presented earlier.

I might be wrong here but as a post (or two) from Hypochondriac often appear(s) after I have posted I am assuming they are aimed at me. The text don't appear so I don't know for sure. I am sure they are just as boring to everyone else as they were to me before I put Hypo on ignore so therefore, from this point on, I am banning Hypochondriac from reading or replying to any of my posts. I have not taken this measure lightly and I am sure that it will be welcomed by all right thinking posters.

Okay, I have tried to read it but I am really sorry, I still don't know what the hell you are going on about other than you seem to be doing the very things that you accuse me of. Batman and I had been having a previous exchange of posts well before Christmas which if you had followed you might understand the context in which my remarks make sense to me, even if they don't to you. I really think that you take this all way to seriously. To me it is just a bunch of blokes chuntering away on an internet forum while they wait for something more interesting to do. I really do not think we are changing the world, judging by your attempt to justify posting pictures of the deceased from the Paris massacre perhaps you do? By the way, I believe that the majority of those pictures you mention if not all appeared well after the event and in publications that you would expect to find serious subjects dealt with. Not one of them appeared on an internet football forum. You clearly feel what you did was ok. I doubt that the friends and loved ones of the deceased would be happy to know that these pictures were published on a football forum before they were even buried but that is just my assumption. One more thing Guan, you have been very busy forensically pulling my exchange with Batman apart so can I ask you what you make of this quote please? "But as long as the luvvies keep demanding that we open our borders to the whole world" I am not sure who the "luvvies" are but putting that aside for one minute, isn't Batman just as guilty as breaking your "binary choice" thing with his assertion that this group of people (luvvies) want our borders open to the whole world?

Bloody hell Guan, you really do have a lot of time on your hands don't you! I will look at this when I have more time but have a feeling it will boring the cr*p out of everyone else if I reply at length. By the way, I didn't derail this thread. I responded to a mail from another poster.

Me too, as long as he is ok with that too. Don't want another unsettled player playing up!

This is puzzling me. He couldn't get in the team because of his growth spurt? Were they afraid he would burst out of his kit on the pitch?