OutByEaster?

That BBC reality check column has been one of the most right wing things the BBC has ever done - it's an awful series of "How to think properly" pieces dressed up as debunking exercises. Since Cameron threatened them with extinction, they've lurched to an almost Daily Mail position on a lot of things. I do like the idea that you consider them Bolshevik, you'll be unsurprised that I consider them Pravda.

In fairness to her, it doesn't matter if only five people voted - everyone had the opportunity - if three of those five voted yes, then that's the will of the British people. I'm still not quite sure on how this became a referendum - who decides what's referendumable (that's a word) and what's not - who says lets ask the people on this one and not on, say, Trident or TTiP or whatever other issues there are that might spark the public interest? It seems strange to pick a subject that's complex - and that we're learning is more and more complex by the day - and ask the public to decide on it after five months of ridiculously poor campaigning, but then avoid some of the simpler things that the public might be much more familiar with. If Parliamentary democracy works, then why throw a referendum in?

I think you have your chicken and egg in the wrong order here - NATO (the US in blue helmets in this case) has been moving progressively East over a number of years and building troop presences in Eastern Europe since Gorbachev agreed to give up East Germany. The Russians will claim, with some justification that they have been forced into defending their borders. Well, that depends - if you factor in that the situation in the Ukraine was largely a standard CIA engineered coup to remove a democratically elected leader and replace him with a more pliant right wing government in order to move economic control of the country West, then I think it goes some way toward justifying the subsequent and ongoing Russian invasion of the country - the Russian's will claim, with some justification that they were supporting a destabilised neighbour in order to defend their borders and attempt to bring some order to the region. You're right, it's not by any measure okay. Changing and incorporating other countries by force is a dangerous and unacceptable act. Changing them by subversion, economic pressure, politics, orchestrated disruption and control of resources is I suppose more acceptable I guess. I think it's fair to place responsibility for a number of the global political problems currently happening at the door of the nation that is pushing an agenda of global control. The project for an American century, for permanent global hegemony, for the removal of any threat to American trade dominance - this isn't a myth, it's not a conspiracy, it's accepted US policy. That comes with natural tensions in regions that are seeking any other sort of approach. Is it not fair to say that the problems with our changing world are to some extent the problems of the nation that is changing that world? There's an awful lot of finger pointing at nations showing their dangerous psychotic aggression from inside their own borders whilst plucky brave us try to defend the freedom of people in Baltimore and Milton Keynes with massive military bases thousands of miles from the homes were keeping safe and free. Now that doesn't mean that Putin isn't a semi-psychotic potentially dangerous madman, it doesn't mean that Assad isn't a brutal backward leader, but it does mean that the way in which those things are presented to us is almost entirely dependent on how the aims of those semi-psychotic brutal leaders fit in with the aims of the free world/free market.

I think he's okay. Passable. Unspectacular. We'll need to use him at times in the immediate future and I think he's capable of doing a job. I don't think he's the future.

Folks, I think the threads are easier to read when we talk about our opinions on Ashley Westwood - not about our opinions on the opinions, real or imagined, of other posters opinions of Ashely Westwood. Simply - can we stop talking about each other please and let this thread be about Ashley Westwood.

Might have been easier to just post this.

The US, Nato and various US friendly nations currently have the largest gathering of troops in Eastern Europe since the end of world war two. That's at Russia's front door, it's very much a big f-u to Putin. Imagine the fuss if Russia were to put two blokes on an island off the coast of the US? Meanwhile, the largest naval fleet ever assembled patrols the seas south of China and the US continues to put massive bases around the entirely of China's South Coast. We're complaining that the building of islands in the South China Sea represents a dangerous escalation whilst claiming the right to sail in any and every water we like, and calling a fighter flying past a US aircraft carrier thirty miles off the coast of China a dangerous and wild provocation whilst ignoring the idea that there might be something provocative about having a US carrier thirty miles off the coast of China. It's unlikely there will be a war, but we're currently surrounding those that might argue against American hegemony. Not just militarily either, they are being surrounded economically in terms of the rush to trade deals protecting US interests; CETA, TTiP and the TPP are all aimed at shutting out those that aren't playing by US rules, and they're being surrounded by a wall of media and PR dressing them as the instigators and aggresors. In light of that, we're playing a dangerous game and one in which if we leave countries with no option then war becomes much more likely - that is if we can avoid those that quite fancy the prospect in US government managing to get their way. Worryingly, much of the groundwork for public support of that seems to be being laid already.

If it was by Anthony Joshua, I had the same dream.

I think there are areas we match up quite well. Baker will do okay with Donaldson, Ayew might have a field day getting Robinson tied up in knots and yellow cards. There's some good stuff. As ever, where we're strong, we're as strong as anyone in the league, but where we're weak, we're worryingly weak.

The problem is, you're now identifiable even without colours - you're people coming out of the ground an hour after everyone else. I'm not sure it's the right decision. Horrible ground, horrible people, horrible place to have to go, good luck to those of you that will be there.

On the pitch I haven't seen any childish behaviour, off the pitch he had a party in a hotel that was noisy on his 21st birthday. I think it's massively overplayed.

It's easier for the banks to change the country than to change country.

I still can't believe he got a three game ban for something which for me barely merited a yellow card. I'm not even sure that the description "kicked out" is suitable. I'm disappointed the club didn't appeal that one.

Banks and bankers will go wherever they're regulated least and can enjoy a decent standard of life. I think the headlines this week were a shot across the bows of the government to not consider any sort of hard Brexit that might result in increased costs or regulation. I agree with AWOL, I think it's very unlikely they'd actually go, but they'll want to ensure that they're the first thing on the PM's mind during negotiations.

Jose staying classy and calling Conte a son of a whore at the final whistle. So - United are now Liverpool and Liverpool are becoming United?

Indeed. I also think that Bruce will strengthen the midfield in January. If he does, that will enable us to play in different ways, I think that'll benefit McCormack immensely, and he could well have an excellent second half to the season.

You say that, but actually the shape we started the game with didn't work - with two men up front and Ayew with a free role - once we brought on a wide midfielder in Adomah, we looked a lot more balanced - I think two from Adomah/Grealish and Ayew will be starting in wide positions and he'll get games. If anything, I think yesterday showed how difficult it might be for Gestede and McCormack to start more.

I think that's the banks reminding May who's in charge and establishing how Brexit will be negotiated.

Some fans for more years than others it would appear.

That's a bit harsh.

Personally I'd play Adomah instead of Gestede. I can't see how we can fit McCormack into the starting line up without some pretty significant changes.

A big strong centre half who's quite happy with putting his head into places it'll get scars. I suspect the manager might like him.

It's difficult for him at the moment - he's a player that plays the traditional forward role very well, linking midfield to another striker, playing one two's, little runs and through balls, and he can finish - but we're not that side at the moment, the forward roles in the team currently are about physicality - about chasing and making things happen, dribbling, strength, pace - he's not so good at those things, so I think he's rightly on the bench. I think he'll stay there until our midfield improves, but I think there's a role to play for him off the bench until that happens.

We've got a good 'un here. He's quick, he's mobile, he's sharp, he's strong and he can finish. He'll score a lot of goals.

He had a really good chance to add a second for us which I'd like to see again and he lost the ball a few times, but I thought he was the outstanding player on the field today. He was our second best forward - Kodjia looked dangerous throughout - but he was our best midfielder, there were countless times where it was Ayew coming back to win the ball, tackle men, cover for fullbacks, cover for midfielders and then when we had the ball he was always free, always moving, always willing to take the pass, give us the energy we needed - he was the heartbeat of the side today. I'm not sure if it says more about our midfield or about him, but what we seem to have here is a box-to-box striker - and if that sounds like a confusing thing, well it is - he's unorthodox, he got errors in him, he can make poor decisions - but he's also brilliant and the hardest working player in the side. Long may it continue.