djdabush

Think the thing that annoys me most about him is that in every game he seems to try some kind of clever flick which gifts the opposition the ball in a really dangerous area. Really wanted Davis to come on because he's good at being strong and retaining the ball, Barkley offers the exact opposite. Dreadful.

Looked like a man who hadn't played football for 15 months in all honesty. He was never the most mobile but he was miles off the pace of the game.

There's no way Smith drops Watkins so only way we will see him play is if he put Watkins on the wing. I actually think Watkins playing on the left and Grealish as a 10 is an option and might help with actually getting players on the ball in and around the box. 

He made a mistake for their goal but he had a very good game other that. I like Hause but against team who don't pose a massive threat I'd prefer Mings over him.

We always talk about what a bargain McGinn was but House can't be too far behind. It's also really nice to have a defender who wins nearly every aerial challenge he makes too.

test

The problem we have is that he is going to be inconsistent at this stage of his career and when our only alternative is a young, injury prone non-scoring striker then we don't have the ability to change it up when it isn't happening for him. For all the good business we did in the summer, I still can't believe we went with Watkins and Davis until January.

45 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

That seems like textbook discrimination. If she wanted to contest it, she should document every conversation she has, and get as much of it in writing as possible.

That there was no mention of this at all until she disclosed the pregnancy puts them in a very difficult position. She's not exempt from being made redundant but it can't be used as a factor when choosing who to make redundant.

Having said that, an employer wanting to game the system and get rid of a specific person is going to be able to. I'd be considering what kind of voluntary redundancy packages they'd be willing to offer above and beyond statutory redundancy, and how it compares to maternity pay

I've have a bit of knowledge of employment law through my work, however I work for a multinational company who's lawyers essentially said 'avoid making pregnant women unemployed at all costs' and the feeling I got from that is that anything like this is an employment tribunal waiting to happen.

I can't see them offering much other than the statutory redundancy as I'm almost certain they are doing this to avoid SMP so they will be looking to ensure the redundancy is less than that

Anyone here have much knowledge of employment law? My wife told her boss today that she's pregnant and she basically got told that they were thinking of making her redundant anyway as they going to close down part of the business (my wife does not exclusively work in that part). It all seems very dodgy but my worry is that they will get away with it as they only have 2 employees and whilst my wife is part time, the other employee works full time so they could argue that she is being selected because she can't cover the hours.

50 minutes ago, Xela said:

Kids innit... more interesting in staring into their phones all the time 

Gone of the days you could have a girl back in your room and no-one finding out about it! 

To be fair, I bet when he's got her back in his hotel room he's used some absolutely filthy Snapchat filters on her.

1 hour ago, ferguson1 said:

 

Who’s the guy in the first pick that can walk on the top of trees?  Looks full of himself.

I don't know but that's some very disappointing circling skills there. I mean how am I supposed to know who Chukwuemeka is when there are 2 people in the circle? Very poor effort.

30 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Wonder who it is, need to research which ones are in their fifties but gonna be a lot 

 

Some outlets are saying former MP, others are saying current and prominent 

He’s a current MP and former minister.

Only me who thinks that looks like a really obvious photoshop then?

33 minutes ago, VillaJ100 said:

I think Bournemouth need to win by 2 goals? 

No, if Bournemouth win and we lose they will go ahead of us on goal difference no matter what the score is.

15 hours ago, PieFacE said:

If we did sell him, I suspect we would be asking for big money unless City decide to buy him back.

Problem is if there is a club that wants to buy him for big money then all city will do is activate the clause and then sell him on themselves. Realistically the maximum we will get is whatever the release clause is for him.

Still only effective when we are the team who are dominating and in this league that's pretty much never the case. Either bring Grealish central or play Nakamba but at the moment he's just a set piece specialist.

The Sky Q touchpad remote. The normal one broke so having to use this abomination now. I'd say I accidentally fast forward or rewind every 10 minutes or so. Horrendous.

Worth pointing out that they haven't decided that the season is null and void, just that they won't be playing again. Every chance it will go down to average point per game or the table will stand as it is.

44 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Yep that’s the road outside my flat. Not quite the nose to tail it usually is on a Friday evening but it’s a constant stream of traffic 

So you have the same birthday as me and you live on the same road as I grew up on. Weird.

As for the Rona, it's the same in Manchester, roads during the day are pretty much the same as they were before the lockdown. 

11 minutes ago, Mjvilla said:

I think the numbers are clearly well underrwporfedy too.

I couldn't even tell you how I did that. I could edit it but I think I'll leave it be.

Although the numbers are clearly well underrwporfedy, It's also probably worth pointing out most of those people who have been feeling up unwell probably have another illness. If you look at the figures of people who they've tested the vast majority haven't had it. 

19 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

So option 1, the Chancellor’s announcement after 5:00pm tonight might really help out a lot there.

Option 2, the supermarkets etc really are taking on lots of extra staff.

 

very best of luck.

We are but nearly all the jobs are temporary and we are being inundated with applications. In my store we took on 6 temporary workers and in the first instance they were offered to friends and family of staff. We filled them within a few minutes.

Does anyone know what the situation is if you find temporary employment elsewhere? My wife is going to help out for a few weeks at my workplace but obviously makes no sense to lose the protection of receiving 80% of her wages from her full time job when this is just for a few weeks.

Realistically we might not see Jack in a Villa shirt again. A poor performance in a dismal game against Leicester was not how I envisaged it ending.