drat01

There are plenty of managers who could and would do a better job than the bumbling idiot that is lambert .

Again proving he is totally clueless in all things football except pulling the wool over some fans eyes .

From the few people desperately holding on to some forlorn hope that Lambert will come good, despite the evidence of his failing time after time, we are seeing some very weak excuses when people show up reasons why they feel he is poor. Now we all know that Lerner is a lot to blame so lets not use that excuse, but please show where Lambert is actually improving any of the football at the club. I had the misfortune to watch the match on TV in Spain on Saturday with other neutral football fans and they were amazed how poor we were. "No fight" "No idea" "nothing football" were a few of the often used comments, "have you not got any reserves who are better?" another. But Lambert has killed off any sort of alternatives by the looks of it, from quite a good reserve / youth setup we now seem to have one built in the style of one of the poorest managers ever to be inflicted on the club. But hey ho I am sure he and the few supporters that he still has within the fan base will no doubt trot out the same old excuses (plus a few new ones just to keep things interesting).

A absolutely terrible manager who's footballing style is killing the club - just go walk out the door .....

that's not what you said though is it? And I have not said it applies to all so I don't really understand your point edit : Chris has explained all perfectly

where did anyone say that? I am intrigued because my browser is missing a post where this was stated.

I'd say that's a fair assumption to make. I travel regularly to London, and it seems that every single shop, bar and restaurant is staffed almost exclusively by Eastern Europeans. That doesn't seem to be the case so much in places like Manchester and Birmingham. every shop? Bar? And restaurant ? Hmmmmm me thinks you are somewhat over doing that .... I travel to London most weeks now and I don't see that. What I do see is people serving me typical with good service and trying to help. Where they come from means nowt to me as long as they are being paid fair wages and paying fair taxes (not avoiding them :-) )

I don't think that's entirely fair. While it certainly is true for some people it's not like there were no concerns about immigration prior to the global financial crisis, it's just become more of a mainstream issue now and you're not automatically branded a racist or a bigot if you bring it up (well, most of the time).people are often branded that way because they are

Where is he wrong then Mart? or was that covered previously also.

and it was written by a Tory !

The economic lies of the Tory party are firmly shown up here (apologies for the length of the article but a fascinating read) http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ramesh-patel/growth-cameron-austerity_b_2007552.html

AWOL I ain't had many things to smile about recently but boy you have made me with that - thx :-)

it is comical, cause how did they win as such. At least with a uk election the winners are the majority party - well usually. In the euro elections you vote for a number of meps that are then part of a larger body. So yes it is comical.Right. UKIP got more votes than any other party in the country and the most MEP's across the nations of the UK. That's what a national election is, not the election for the national parliament, but nevertheless a national election. That's why all the politicians, the newspapers, the broadcasters and any remotely interested voters said, "oh look UKIP just won a national election". You do see that, right? i appreciate you are trying to prove some point but basically you are wrong. The european election were (hint clue in the title) not national elections. But i know that you probably know that and just want to continue a quite silly little argument imo so shall we get back to discussing ukip and how it helps with any real examination of what ukip and their supporters really are standing for.

it is comical, cause how did they win as such. At least with a uk election the winners are the majority party - well usually. In the euro elections you vote for a number of meps that are then part of a larger body. So yes it is comical.

absolutely but that has nothing whatsoever to the point that you were making. To claim ukip won an election when clearly they did not win anything is wrong :-)

They're even more straight faced. I'll have to work on my delivery. are you a postman?

You don't "win" the European election though do you? - a head of state for Europe is not voted for as a result of it

Hearing that our kid had beer and fish and chips this weekend - :-)

Is that Putin in the background? I read a book years ago, where a sample population would vote, then a really clever AI computer would extrapolate the findings for the whole population to create the government. Over time, the computer selected less and less people in the sample, until it could extrapolate the world government from a single person. Everybodys name went into the ballot, and the person selected by the computer would have the responsibility of choosing the world government. i think its a good idea :-) As long as that person isn't Drat or Jon! You have to live in the country also

Fixed for you

It's a difficult thing but I really struggle with the what society finds okay line (I'm not saying that you're taking it, Ian - it's just that you brought it up). I understand that people change over time and individuals' attitudes and opinions change over time but I don't think that makes one thing wrong at one point in time and okay at some other (or funny once but no longer so). Oh i know what you mean, the point was trying to highlight what was accepted then compared to now and the fact that society has a different view on acceptability as it progresses - hopefully that makes sense :-)

I suppose the thing is everyone is different, and that stems from what you find funny through to how you react with life situations. Just because say you are OK with a joke about subject A does not mean that someone else would be. It's a judgement call both on those who make the comment and those that hear / read it. Life circumstances change as does society. I am of an age where I can easily remember a mainstream comedy series on TV that used the N word and it got raucous laughter for example (see Youtube clips of "love thy neighbour") would that be OK now? What about homophobic "jokes" that were very much part of mainstream culture at one time? When I was younger I saw Bernard Manning in his so called prime, I probably laughed at some of the jokes then, looking back they were cruel, horrible comments, but some can argue they are just jokes, and I don't have a problem with that at all, as said we are all different. But it's no biggy in the whole scheme of things so hey ho and all that Note: anyone who says Lee evans is funny can go and get treatment though ........... :-)

If you don't like shopping are you mall-content?

There is certainly a potential leader there on the face of it.

ahhh sorry Sir - I suppose I am bit sensitive re the C thing at the moment - apologies for any inference etc and have a (virtual) pint on me - or a real one if ever around VP