Search results

I have this thought that we get both, Doyle becoming our starting LB but cover for LCB behind Kitching. Can never have too many left backs!!

Equally, due to their playing style I don’t think we got to see his capability on the ball.

One of my issues with this style of play. You basically make 5 stand up front which results in little to no space to play. Playing quicker will bring more depth to the play and get them more involved.

Luke Plange. He is shite.

Little to no merit in “strengthening the balance sheet” given the circumstances. The funds were lent interest-free so there is no interest deduction on the P&L to account for (thereby meaning no impact on PSR) and we’re nowhere near flying close enough to the sun for any debt management plan...

Because there is literally no logic applied to zero immigration and increasing the personal tax allowance. Well, there is…looting.

I can think of 3: Michael, Callum and Colin. Any more?

Fairly sure it’s Nagasaki

15 points minimum.

Sorry. https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6893b0178b708191b881c1f3624a14cb Edit: oh shit, even ChatGPT suggests more immigrants.

Hughes signs to play RCB, Doyle comes in as (another) LB. We win every game without conceding.

Based on what exactly?

So it seems Hughes can play both sides. Genuinely wouldn’t shock me if he’s earmarked to play alongside Kitching.

This is the situation we’re in. To upgrade on any of our starting players is going to cost more than we’re used to spending on a single player.

Will come full circle when we sign Kelvin Wilson on deadline day.

Not for me, Clive.

I’m currently seeking a Volvo XC40. Not found the right one for me yet.

Promised myself I wouldn’t watch this, but reneged on it already. Brady comes across as a proper c**t.

I can’t believe you’re trying to defend it to be honest. Well, actually, I can…