avfc89

Exactly, but football has evolved a lot and it's important to spend money to compete nowadays. It's a business now and should be treated as such.

It's nothing to do with losing one game. We may be "unbeaten in 2010", but that's **** all use when you draw games against shite like Stoke, Wolves and Sunderland. But that's not how the season is decided is it. You can't just pick out individual games like that. Spurs lost at home to Stoke and Wolves, I suppose they're wank then? Of course not, but you can review and judge MON's persistent bottling when it comes to crunch time.

I think people are beginning to see his flaws; tactically naive and his team don't possess any composure with the ball.

Thi is part of the problem, in my opinion. To expect a trophy or top 4 at any point is pushing it. That should be the aim, sure, but to expect it? Just silly, in my opinion. Football doesn't revolve around Villa, there's another 4 sides competing with us for that 4th place and then plenty of good sides competing for trophies. To expect improvement year on year is ridiculous. What's the point in supporting the club? and buying a season ticket? I think you answered your 2nd question with your 1st question. I buy my season ticket to support the club. I'm not going to throw a hissy fit just because we don't improve every year, it's a bit silly to expect that. What do you expect from the club?

Thi is part of the problem, in my opinion. To expect a trophy or top 4 at any point is pushing it. That should be the aim, sure, but to expect it? Just silly, in my opinion. Football doesn't revolve around Villa, there's another 4 sides competing with us for that 4th place and then plenty of good sides competing for trophies. To expect improvement year on year is ridiculous. What's the point in supporting the club? and buying a season ticket?

Time for a change I'm afraid, getting stale and the excuses are starting to come again.

England.

Would Tottenham have sold him to us? No problem for them selling to Sunderland who aren't a threat to them but I'd like to think they wouldn't have been pigshit thick as to sell to us. Would Spurs keep a unhappy player at the club?

MON won't progress us any further IMO

Agreed. MON doesn't believe in his players and making his excuses already.

Poor result, not good enough.

The parties, in word/history at least to me are a bit like this Conservative - central controlling, look after people with money, help people who "help themselves" (in both senses of the words). Believe in the free market and big business as the engine of the economy. Anti European Union/EC. Labour - central controlling, look after people struggling for money, help people who "are unable to help themselves". Believe in the free market, only to the point that the ordinary people who work in the economy need to be protected from being exploited. Lib Dems - not centralist - devolve more power to local areas, help people in the same way as labour, historically "Green" and pro Europe. Want voting change to PR. In reality Bicks and Chindie have it summed up rightly for me, in terms of what they've actually done, or would do. There's not really that much difference in a lot of what they would do, or say they would do, on most things. I think that a lot of people vote on almost single issue stuff in a negative way - eg. Iraq, Ashcroft, "immigration", whatever. If you see a party that will do something for you or people like you, or soemthing you believe in strongly, then look at what the others would do for you and what they say about things you care about and make a decision. What about BNP?

Nicky Butt is a Man City fan with a tattoo of their crest.

I just finished 1984 and Forrest Gump.

I thought you were about 46.

Woah Tony, it's all going over my head, I'm only a simple northern lad who works in t'mill

Pretty much, I think BNP will get a few northern seats.

I will see you next year I hope.

You expect more of the leader of the opposition than you do of leader of HM govt?Yes, don't you?I'd expect them to be equally capable of leading their parties, and with 13 years of govt experience you would expect the incumbent to be actually stronger at the despatch box. So how do you use something which both are obviously equally guilty of as a measure to choose one over the other? I would, as you said, side with the current Government with 13 years experience if there aren't any other creditable alternatives from the opposition. Looking at their policies, the Tories would be a disaster if they got into power this May.What tory policies are different to nulabour policies?The Economy is the big deal this election, Tories want to hold a emergency meeting - reducing the deficit - within 50 days of them taking office, that's too risky and shouldn't they be planning before hand? You're right they're both very similar but who would you trust Gringo in this time of need?

Or if you listened to PMQs you might say: Gordon Brown has no policies, he justs berates David Cameron. It is tiresome. I expect more from David Cameron to be honest. Leader of the opposition; he can see Labour's failings and problems in front of him, why not take advantage of that? Unless his policies aren't beneficial to the common people of Britain, which I suspect they aren't. I am sorry I just don't believe in Cameron or the Tories. No-one wants to release any policies because they will be pilloried by the press. And if you're the Tories, you don't want to have to tell people WHERE these cuts that they've been on about are going to be, because people won't like it if it affects them. It's one thing to make big promises, but to explain how you are going to enact them is another. And if they might be lose votes in key seats, it makes more sense to keep schtum. This, sadly, is just the nature of electoral politics. Exactly, that's why I'm not voting for them.

You expect more of the leader of the opposition than you do of leader of HM govt?Yes, don't you?I'd expect them to be equally capable of leading their parties, and with 13 years of govt experience you would expect the incumbent to be actually stronger at the despatch box. So how do you use something which both are obviously equally guilty of as a measure to choose one over the other? I would, as you said, side with the current Government with 13 years experience if there aren't any other creditable alternatives from the opposition. Looking at their policies, the Tories would be a disaster if they got into power this May.

You expect more of the leader of the opposition than you do of leader of HM govt?Yes, don't you?

Or if you listened to PMQs you might say: Gordon Brown has no policies, he justs berates David Cameron. It is tiresome. I expect more from David Cameron to be honest. Leader of the opposition; he can see Labour's failings and problems in front of him, why not take advantage of that? Unless his policies aren't beneficial to the common people of Britain, which I suspect they aren't. I am sorry I just don't believe in Cameron or the Tories.

David Cameron has no policies, he justs berates Gordon Brown. It is tiresome.

This reminds me of the Sheff United defeat a few years back under DOL. Out battled and out played