Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/12/18 in all areas

  1. Assisted tonight for CSKA's 3rd goal against Real Madrid. Surprised by how fast some people are ready to write him off already. He's young, proving himself an important player for a decent team that is having a nice championship run. Folks cry out for Besic, Dowell, etc. to get a chance but are quick to write off Vlasic just because he's playing in Russia I presume. Yes, it's a weaker league, but Moscow are no slouches by any means. His play time here isn't even enough of a sample size to truly say he won't make it. I'm not saying he will, just surprised at the negativity. He at least deserves a chance.
  2. David Schneider @davidschneider Next Tory leader, latest odds: The one who lied on a bus 6-1 The one who lied about impact assessments 8-1 The one who lied to Parliament and resigned 10-1 The one who lied and didn’t resign 15-1 The one who destroyed the NHS 20-1 The one who didn’t know we were an island 8-1
  3. Pretty much everything said in that video has been debunked in this thread multiple times.
  4. Not sure what to make of that really. I understand why he'd want to leave -- he's playing well and the fans love him over there, and that's something he didn't have here exactly. I'd really like to see him come back full of confidence though. I think Silva would get the best out of him if he's really improved as much as it seems. I'm sure being under Koeman and Sam has tainted his view of us as a club, and I can't really blame him.
  5. Wilson all day. No benefit in selling Walcott.
  6. Can't find a thread on him but this seventeen year old lad we got from City last year is banging them in for the under 18's, 18 in ten games so far! A goal every 48 mins. Ably supported by Kieran Phillips (12 in 11) and the team not too shabby either by the look of it.
  7. Pickford Coleman Keane Zouma Digne Gana Gomes Walcott Siggy Richarlison DCL Walcott provides more cover than Lookman so it makes sense to have him there. Richarlison provides more cover than Bernard so same reasons there too. We need the engine that is Gana is this match, putting in Davies in this game in place of Gana would be suicide and we lack any other options, however I'm not a fan of Ganas recent form. Keane and Zouma are our best central pairing and would be best suited against Aguero should he play. I don't expect to see DCL upfront but I'd like to see him there. With any luck we can get a point.
  8. PS: I tried putting just the apostrophe after isn't (and left off the "t"), and it didn't give me the double tts. Strange.
  9. Is Callum Wilson really that much of an upgrade? I certainly dont think he is a bad player, Im just not sure he is a level above what we have.
  10. Thing is Rubes there needs to be a vote or referendum on whether we like the deal because it isn’t what Brexiteers voted for or remainers, so I can’t comprehend how you are prepared to except just to get it over and done with, if your so interested in just getting it over and done with the easiest thing would be to revoke article 50 and stay in. What you fail to see in your version of democracy is that if you voted for leave or remain because of certain promises that were made and then to find out later you had been lied to you shouldn’t you have the choice to reflect and change your opinion, if not that’s not democracy Rubes. So now that both sides of the argument are more informed as to what stay or leave will look like without all the lies and propaganda on both sides, there should be another vote in the interest of democracy which is. 1) except the deal negotiated ( and not leave it for the MPs to decide whether to except it or not because they will just make it party politics) 2) Leave with no deal 3) Remain For me that would be democracy working for the good of democracy
  11. MikeO


    7. 5=Lines in a Limerick 8. 5=Rings on the Olympic Flag 9. 7=Hills of Rome 10. 7=Colours of the Rainbow (coins works as well I think as long as you don't include specially minted ones like £5, don't know if they're legal tender)
  12. From The Times... If MPs can’t decide Brexit, ask the people Rachel Sylvester Parliament has proved again that it cannot agree a plan, so a second referendum offers the only way out of the impasse As if preparing for a major military operation, ministers have been counting down the days to the “meaningful vote” with the code used by army planners: D-3, D-2, D-1. This was supposed to be D-Day for Theresa May’s Brexit deal but yesterday, facing certain defeat in the House of Commons, she delayed the battle. It was a sign of extraordinary weakness, and a personal humiliation for the prime minister. It might help her buy some more time, but she has admitted that she cannot command the support of MPs on the most important policy implemented by any government for a generation. There is virtually no chance that the EU will agree to make substantial changes to the withdrawal agreement, so she will probably soon be annihilated in any case. The Tory leader is like a child playing hide and seek who thinks that by covering her eyes she cannot be seen. She has managed to lose her authority in the Conservative Party as well as in parliament. “She’s toast,” says one Tory MP. More importantly, however, the political process is deadlocked. The constitutional crisis that has been predicted for so long at Westminster is finally upon us. There is, it seems, an unbridgeable divide between the prime minister and her party, between parliament and the executive, between Brexiteers and Remainers, between pragmatists and ideologues. Underlying all these tensions is the conflict between our representative democracy, in which MPs are elected to legislate in the national interest, and the direct democracy of the Brexit referendum. This is less a difference of opinion than a category clash — like playing chess on a football pitch, and expecting the pieces to observe the offside rule. The Brexit vote was a populist cry to “take back control”, painted in primary colours, but it must be delivered through a technocratic withdrawal agreement that was always going to be fifty shades of grey. Instead of a slogan on the side of a bus promising £350 million a week for the NHS, there are 585 pages of densely written text drawn up by the kind of “experts” who were denounced by the Brexiteers. More seriously, there is an innate incongruity between parliament and plebiscite. Historically and constitutionally, MPs are the representatives, not the delegates, of their constituents. They are supposed to exercise their own judgment on behalf of the people who send them to Westminster. It is a concept best described by the Tory philosopher Edmund Burke, who told the voters of Bristol in 1774: “Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving, you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.” That principle was fatally undermined by the decision to throw the vexed question of Britain’s relationship with the EU to the voters in a referendum. Although legally, the result of the 2016 vote was only advisory, politicians felt morally bound by it. Many MPs are torn between their duty to do what they believe is right for the country and the political imperative to follow the “will of the people”. As one minister puts it: “The referendum has not added to democracy; it’s introduced a new conflict of legitimacy.” If this is the real cause of the current political deadlock, then the logical way out is another popular vote. It is surely wrong to insist that public opinion is set in stone when the prime minister seems to change her mind on an hourly basis about what to do. Tobias Ellwood, the defence minister, tweeted last week that the mandate of the 2016 referendum “will begin to date” and “will eventually no longer represent a reflection of current intent”. Indeed Mrs May herself decided that the mandate of the 2015 general election no longer applied after 25 months and required another election. By contrast, it is now nearly 30 months since the EU referendum. The Brexiteers denounce the so-called People’s Vote as a betrayal but can it really be a betrayal of the “will of the people” to ask the people to confirm their will? Nobody is suggesting that the 2016 result should be overturned, just that people should be asked whether they still want to leave now that it is clear what it means. Far from being an affront to democracy, it’s an assertion of democracy. There was always an internal tension among Brexiteers about the meaning of “take back control” if Britain escaped the clutches of the EU. By appealing simultaneously to the ideological Eurosceptics, who were interested in sovereignty, and the white working-class voters, who cared more about immigration, the Leave campaign won the referendum but now the inherent contradictions are becoming clear. It was extraordinary to see the Brexiteers denouncing last week’s Commons vote that gave MPs a say over what happens if Mrs May’s deal is rejected. Stewart Jackson, the former aide to David Davis, condemned this assertion of parliamentary sovereignty as a “long planned coup by the establishment, well represented in parliament to cheat the voters out of the Brexit they voted for”. With judges denounced as the “enemies of the people” and Tory pro-Europeans condemned as “mutineers” the hardline Brexiteers apparently only want to give control back to people who will do what they say. It is deeply irresponsible to warn of civil unrest if the people are asked for their opinion on such a critical issue. The danger is that this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, with passions inflamed by the cries of betrayal. In Whitehall everyone is “going round and round getting dizzy with all the permutations” as one minister puts it but the idea of another referendum is gaining momentum at the highest level. David Lidington, the prime minister’s de facto deputy, has been talking to MPs who support a People’s Vote about how it could work. “He’s in listening mode,” says one, “but he is totally opposed to the Norway model as a way forward. When he was Europe minister he saw how trapped the Norwegians were in their relationship with the EU.” Amber Rudd, the work and pensions secretary, also says she “can’t understand the hysteria” around the idea of another referendum, pointing out that, while she would campaign to Remain, people would have every right to vote to Leave. Several ministers are said to be ready to quit and support another popular vote if Mrs May’s deal is rejected by MPs — indeed, one has already written a resignation letter. Despite Jeremy Corbyn’s reservations, Labour is edging slowly but surely towards the idea. There is a growing sense of inevitability about it. The political system is in meltdown, parliament is gridlocked and the prime minister has lost control of events. The government is doing nothing but Brexit and now it cannot even do that. Another referendum is the only way out of this mess.
  13. It seems Marco has the same ability as Martinez to inspire players but without blowing smoke up their asses.
  14. I’m amazed anyone wants to take the job! If May got a poisoned chalice taking over from Cameron, what the hell is this going to be?!
  15. MikeO


    No pressure than. 2=Only Even Prime Number ...for starters. I'll have a proper look later. Take issue with Rubes on 5. 4 = A in a P of C apples in a pint of cider though. http://www.kgbanswers.co.uk/how-many-apples-does-it-take-to-make-a-pint-of-cider/18120021 4 Aces in a Pack of Cards I'd have thought.
  16. Bill


    Well done Rubes, see if Mike can finish the rest. 12 aisle's at the local Sainsburys. 😁😁 That's a brilliant answer Pete, its not right (but I'm sure you knew that).😊
  17. https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ademola-lookman-opens-up-rb-15536895
  18. Why not just make the process to enter more personal and, therefore easier, and massively reduce the need for illegal immigration?
  19. mind you it may just be the prunes
  20. sage rubes we shall call ye. some sort of druids in your bloodline i'm sure of it
  21. It’s debatable that Davies is a better passer imo. I, for one, have been so happy not to see him fail to pass to a teammate 2 fucking yards away. And playing him means we lose athleticism in the midfield. You’ll still get energy but it’ll be slow as shit energy as he literally can only get close to shadows, and not the physical player. Gana might not be a player to take us into the top 4 but neither is Tom Davies. The sooner we bring in, or bring through, better players the better.
  22. I have a very odd feeling about the fa cup this year
  23. If you mean it’s wrong to be positive and have belief in your ability then your right. If you mean that being the top scorer in a team and one of the top scorers in the league is strolling around doing fuck all then your right. If you mean it’s wrong to want play at the highest level in your career, and he hasn’t been the first to leave us for that reason and he won’t be the last then your right.
  24. I dont think its that Silva doesnt have faith in Davies (given that he made him captain and promoted him ahead of Schneiderlin) but more that he sees Davies as 'competition' for Gomes rather than Gana. McCarthy has always been a box to box player. He isnt a fancy passer (not that it is a requisite for a box to box player) but he is an intelligent player who makes more good decisions than bad, such as when to pass, who to pass to, and with good weight. He is a no frills all round, aggressive player that goes about his business largely unnoticed until he isnt there. Gana gave a few good examples yesterday where he found his man with the pass but it was a slow pass, it was bouncing at the player, the other guy was under pressure but he played it anyway. You dont get that shit with McCarthy, or at least you didnt. He just gives you more control on the game whether that be in defensive or offensive situations. Edit: type James Mccarthy Wigan into Google and the top search is a review of 2014 (with us). Its a crap video, but it shows you what I mean bout him driving forward, playing (most) passes into people at the right time, taking people on, creating better angles for passes. His starting position is also quite often a lot further forward than you would ever see from Gana. He used to be an Irish Gomes 😂
  25. Your right Aidan it was just more a rant about how we could do with him now, because of what he can do regardless of what people think of him as a person, we payed him to score goals and he earned his money.
  26. I agree with that John but don’t you think when we had Lukaku it worked, whether you like him as a person or not or think he’s fat and lazy lacks a good touch, he did what good strikers do he stuck the ball in the back of the net on regular basis, with less opportunities and possession being created as now. I’d buy him 20 Big Macs a week if he come back and put the ball in the net like he did before for us.
  • Create New...