Search results

He has 5 promotions under his belt. Nothing though since 2009.

Thought that first series was brilliant and a couple of episodes were nothing short of mind blowing. This series is a back story isn't it? Keith Carradine's story (the dad of the female cop, Molly), who ran the cafe.

Homeland started off a bit slow, but I think that is a good sign. The last series started off as if it was going to be a damb squib, but it was just setting the scene for what turned out to be excellent TV. Lovely. Three of my favourite programmes all starting around the same time.

Nope. Saving it for tonight. Fargo starts again next week too. Good times. :guitar2:

Yes, exactly. City can always have another go again at getting promoted the following season. The World Cup only comes round once every 4 years. Well said that man. Has to be England every time doesn't it.

Best I have ever seen has been Derren Brown. If you called him a magician though I think he would be deeply offended.

I'm not being funny, but if I was earning thousands of pounds every week and I knew the budget was tight, I'd be paying for my hotel room myself. £70-£80 for one night occasionally out of my multiple thousands per week? Hardly going to make a dent now is it! Unfortunately this is not the...

Well that's it. Strikers like Armstrong aren't ten a penny. We were very lucky to get Armstrong and have it pay off for us. Tudgay and Fortune will always chip in here and there, but they just aren't going to be banging them in left, right and centre every week unfortunately.

But this isn't about what we have now BlueElephant, it's the fact that we only have the one and if he gets injured, then what? I'm not saying have 2 goal scorers both in the team at the same time necessarily. I'm saying having reliance on just one causes a probem if that one is missing.

There's a fair few on here.

Anyway, I know you never, ever back down in an argument (as can be witnessed in the incessant Italia/Tony battles). I have better things to do than just argue the toss with you, when I know my stance is the reasoned one. Just to make it clear one very last time, unless anyone missed the...

I don't need to answer it. It is so obviously very, very wrong. Bleedin obvious. There's no jury? Really? Wow! I had no idea at all about that at all. Not even an inkling. As it was Crown Court I thought there would be a jury and cameras and everything! How remiss of me. :facepalm: Can I ask...

Yes. And therefore we need to know what this new evidence is. If it is as clear cut as you say, Tony, then why did the appeals board grant the appeal? If he gets off on a technicality then that is an outrage, but let's wait and see what the basis of this appeal is. Just because some stuff has...

I do not think this is like some episode of Crown Court. What a ridiculous statement to make. Sorry but that is a total nonsense. My stance has always been that he is guilty, because he has been proven guilty in a court of law. If however, he can prove his innocence, all I am saying is, let's...

Hang on a mo there chap. We don't even know what this new evidence is yet. :D The bit I am interested in is that of the appeals panel, who have quite clearly said there is new evidence that aids the defences case. That has to be something of significance. They don't just grant right to appeals...

I can only manage one or two at a time, Torch. Very hard to chew and digest.

It is the devil operating at his very darkest.

Errm, stop being naughty, Grendel. ;) In this case, if it is proved the conviction is unsafe, then obviously, prison, loss of earnings, loss of credibility, tarnishing of name etc. etc. etc.

Well that is entirely true too. That's why these cases have to make sure that all evidence is obtained and every single witness interviewed and statemented.

He does have a tendency to dive in at times. Sent from my Hudl 2 using Tapatalk