Search results

Why not? It’s the same system we used during the run that’s taken us into the playoffs.

Surely that’s pretty bizarre incompetence from the prison guards to let someone so clearly deranged have access to boiling water?

Watch it again - it wasn’t a pacy cross by any definition. If our tactic is going to be endless floated crosses and throws into the box then I’d consider playing one of our tall strikers up front

He was the man on the end of most of our good chances tonight. I thought he had a disappointing game by his standards but he is usually much more effective than you’re suggesting. Need him to get his shit together on Tuesday.

Wilson 6 Ideally he does better for their first goal MVE 5 As good (and as bad) as he was elsewhere in this game, that may be a career-defining mistake Thomas 6 Kitching 6 Dasilva 6 Grimes 7 MOTM Sheaf 5 Rudoni 7 Sakamoto 7 Big call in terms of making him effective on Tuesday BTA 6 I...

Sheffield Utd are clearly the superior side so I’m hoping (and weirdly expecting) that they’ll balls it up.

You seem to have gone off the deep end lately. This is a thread about a WW2 anniversary.

It’s an interesting discussion, I don’t have a dog in the fight per se. Sorry?

Nice attempt at the hit and run, in that case then. Good to see you back. If you think that me disagreeing with you on this one specific issue amounts to a “continually downplaying the impact on females” to the point where you think I don’t prioritise the issue at all, what can I say? I...

So you are calling me a misogynist then?

Give me a break. You said that sharing your view on this was a prerequisite for believing in equal opportunities for women. As I’ve said multiple times, it’s your prerogative to be as angry as you like about this, but at least own it when you try to suggest it’s your way or the highway.

Has the ‘other way’ been proved to be an issue in women’s football? I assume there are thousands of examples?

That’s not strictly true is it? My argument was that a ruling that involves the playing status of <30 players isn’t quite the seismic and existential moment for women’s football that you and others claim it is. You clearly disagree, to the extent you bumped this thread after several weeks to...

I believe that if you’re going to dismiss one set of data when making your argument, then you should be able to say why that’s the case and offer alternative data that you believe to be more accurate. You’ve done neither. Your argument that thousands of women were impacted by the hypothetical...

“Who knows how many” is indeed the very question I’m hoping you can answer for me. But if you refuse to even consider the FA’s own data to be reliable and will only speak in grand hypotheticals, then I’m afraid it’s difficult to share your level of outrage. Clearly you think that makes me some...

Well again, I’m not sure you can confidently claim that “thousands of female players” were affected, while still maintaining that you have no idea how many transgender women were actually allowed to play. Considering the FA had recently insisted that those trans players manage their hormone...

The FA allowed transgender women - around 20 of them, it said - to play women’s football. You’re referring to them as males here but the distinction is significant in this context - now the law has clarified that transgender women should no longer have access to single-sex spaces, the FA is no...

You haven’t given any good reason why we shouldn’t believe the FA’s numbers. Indeed, you’ve gone on to propose a verification system that was near-identical to what the FA was already doing. The suggestion that I don’t believe in equal opportunities for women just because I don’t agree with you...

Charming

Considering you openly admit to having no clue how many people were even affected by this policy, and considering that your proposed solutions are near-identical to the long-standing FA policy, I find this level of anger and mistrust to be quite surprising.