Search results

Can we please stop with the faux caring about people risking their lives crossing the channel. half the people saying that are also in favour of sinking the boats those people are on so it seems their welfare isn't actually that high on their agenda.

Not a comparable product. Last few years we've been one of the best teams in the division looking at promotion. People want to watch us. Demand is higher so clubs can set prices higher due to that. Same reason why the price of a BMW is higher than a Hyundai - on the face of it both do the same...

The club are a business in a luxury industry. It's literally their job to charge as much as people are willing to pay. If they don't then very soon there'd be no club. And the club is still making a loss. If we're going down the road of ethics, is it morally right that a business doesn't charge...

If they sell double the amount of beer or more because people are drinking in the stadium instead of elsewhere, or even drinking an extra one or two, then they make more money. And as has been said it could be a short term loss leader to encourage a change in habits so people make drinking at...

Yep. I looked at the prices of the A+ games and immediately decided not to attend any of them. But seeing as the attendances for those games were still high it shows the demand was there to allow for people like me that wouldn't pay it.

Only way that could be more Liverpool is if the other team got back to the changing room to find he'd nicked all their boots and put their kit bags up on bricks.

More of a treat, or a dessert at a push.

I didn't say I had a better idea. Maybe lump them in with other less attractive fixtures so if you buy for the really high demand game you have to buy one for a low demand? Of course there are problems with that in people needing to be available for two dates etc.

As I've said before, stop the clock and arseing about getting the ball back into play becomes less of an issue. I was wondering if you could make it so that the player nearest the ball has to take throw-ins and they get a yellow if they try and walk/run away. Of course without further rules it...

I think we'll lose sooner rather than later (I think it'll be the Shef U game personally) but we'd have to be extremely poor and the other team exceptional for us to get tonked. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that our clinical finishing thus far deserts us in a game, or that Rushworth...

International law would still apply though and due to the proximity to France there are no international waters to 'push' these boats back into. So France could just as easily record us forcing boats into their waters in contravention of international law, or just turn them straight back round...

But we've seen two many times in the past where we've rushed players back in (often through necessity) and it's eventually led to them having severe long term injury problems. When we've got a team doing well and have the luxury of not having to do that, then why would you? Give him the chance...

So your fix-all is to get rid of the ECHR when all the main parts of it are in English law anyway? So getting rid of the ECHR won't make the blindest bit of difference as the laws will still be there. That's my point. It's the fact that it's got 'European' in the title that makes it this...

Because there are more threats to them (many more likely to affect them day to day) than violent criminals that human rights legislation protects them from. And rewriting/amending the ECHR and putting into UK legislation isn't the same thing as getting rid off it. The hardliners talking of...

And IF that's the case it suggests the mainstream of people don't understand that the ECHR also protects them and they'd lose a lot of legal protections if we got rid of it.

So you do read what's written, you just choose to ignore facts.

If the team is playing well and winning then ease him back in with sub appearances. Assuming we get no further injuries and everybody carries on playing to the standard they are, as it stands Rudoni would replace EMC.

If we want to retain any hope of getting him permanently (or possibly even not being recalled in Jan) we need this to be bullshit

I was wondering whether Woolf might be a good one to play against Moore, but Kitching and/or Thomas should be capable of larging coping with threat he poses.