Search results

It's not quite a 10, but not really an 8 either. Does that make him a false 9?

I took you up on your suggestion and first didn't get anything at all. Second time was much better, but wouldn't really be arsed to do it again. I guess you win some, lose some. It's all the same to me.

My thoughts exactly. Wondered if having the in for training to get systems etc sorted rather than having time off for internationals may have been a big help.

When you say half of the pitch do you mean attacking and defensive halves of the pitch or left and right halves?

Cos he'd get a 3 game ban?

What happens in your bedroom should stay in your bedroom.

He did a few things infuriatingly wrong but 1 for Wright. C'mon!

I'd agree but -1 for you for your unnecessary brag about your financial status at the end ;)

Much better. We looked dangerous at times and the move to this new formation and tactics seems to suit us a lot more. Playing with more urgency. Fair play to MR for having a rethink and changing it. Seems to have a knack of getting there eventually. Wright both caused problems and had some...

He's had a decent enough game but that's going well over the top.

Just me that doesn't get this analogy?

I'd definitely give Simms some time in place of Godden as things are. Probably let O'Hare have some more minutes as well.

Get In! Super Sakamoto!

But that proves my point that we need to get the public sector involved in housebuilding again. While there is truth in problems with planning laws and restrictions and land availability, it doesn't explain it all. The LA's went out of the game completely in order to give the private companies...

Not really, because it still shows he has no idea how to use a hammer. If he did he'd have just ignored her and used it correctly. Hope next time he's asked to apply some striped paint and if he knows how to use a long weight.

Yeah, hence why I suggest doing it more in the same colour as it probably wouldn't look so bad. Our badge must be an absolute bitch to do though.

But they haven't. They've always produced far less than required (and are able to). The changes in planning law just gave them another excuse to control the supply even more, should it suit them. Which it does. If they're producing less houses, how come their profits are going up? I guess it's...

Of course they're building at a consistent rate. A rate that is consistent with them having houses to put on the market and sell but not so many that it'd bring the prices down. They will supply less than the demand - it's in their interests to do so. Wasn't it the owner of Persimmon who...

They make big profits because they don't build enough to meet the demand. Increase supply - price goes down.