• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


blandy last won the day on September 8

blandy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

10,113 Excellent

About blandy

  • Rank
    Player Manager

Contact Methods

  • Twitter

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Interests
    Fettling, Cricket, Ale, Music.

Recent Profile Visitors

5,642 profile views
  1. Thanks . That was exactly my point. The single market wouldn't work if we did individual deals.
  2. Yes, this is true. FI Italy (hypothetically) could do something that would give them a leg up and knock back the others, they'd not be able to. But equally, if the next week Germany wanted to do a deal which would knock back Italy, then they'd not be able to - so no one can individually gain at the expense of everyone else - they all get protected, and on top of that, by persuading others they all get, ultimately a stronger hand. It's like now with the brexit thing - Ireland desperately wants no border with the UK. All the other EU nations are firmly supporting them, even though it doesn't really benefit, say Hungary, if there's a border or not. Stronger together.
  3. Yeah, TTIP was an abomination and (due to people power) got canned by the EU. It was a close run thing, but "we" (people) won. Which is not the case with the UK and say Fracking, or trade deals we might have done or do in the future. TTIP was a massive reason for me to see the flaws with the EU, the secrecy, the lobbyists, the sneaky dealings...and it got stopped. All those problems are even more apparent in the UK.
  4. blandy

    Steve Bruce

    I think the opposite. And in a twisted way, it's part of the problem. Albert, Jack, Elmo Connor, even to a degree Jimmy Danger all make a real effort to retrieve the ball, to fight for it, track players, cover full-backs etc. And they're told to by Bruce. Which is all commendable.... ...but, in selecting (say) a wide player(s) who put in a defensive shift, rather than perhaps more skilled attacking wide players, we lose something going forward. Partly he does it because (IMO) Taylor's poor and Axel's learning the game. But in reducing attacking options to improve defensive cover, he weakens our forward play.
  5. This implication that we're obliged to follow rules, as a member of a (in this case) Union being potentially a bad thing, or a loss of sovereignty, is possibly valid, to a degree. It's also true that in the world of aviation, for example, as it was just mentioned, we have to follow the rules of the ICAO. As a member of NATO we have to follow rules on how much we spend on defence and on various other matters. We have to follow the Geneva convention. We have to follow WTO rules.... In essence, any modern nation benefits from membership of various legal and collective groups for trade, for co-operation, for defence, for employment, for import and export and... It may be that a nation might not always, wholeheartedly want to adopt the "club" rules, and then either their complaints get adapted to, or they put up with it for the wider benefit they gain. It's not some kind of horror show, it's not anything to fear or rail against. It's beneficial, and the theoretical loss of some mythical "sovereignty" because the EU or NATO or ICAO requires plugs to be fused, or mobile phones to work abroad at reasonable fees... These Brexit campaign people sowed an "idea" that we are all being shafted, and it's bollex. Get to an yspecifics and all they can do is bluster generalities. An argument built on falsehoods and sand. (And I don't much like the EU).
  6. The EU is stopping it, through the single market which the UK played a big part in setting up. Whether you or I like that or not is one thing, but from before the vote the UK knew we could not do individual deals like the one you mention, though David Davis lied about it and falsely said we could. "We" decided to jump anyway. We could stay in the single market and have the trade and commerce benefits, still, and be like Norway (which is not in the EU) if the tories wanted, but they've taken it upon thermselves to decide not to do that, because ...idiocy/racism/whatever... Italy has decided to be and stay in the EU and benefit from the enhanced trading opportunities a collective trade negotiating position entails. If they wanted to do individual deals of the type you mention, then they could leave, too. But they don't want to, because they'd be worse off, and it wouldn't be "beneficial" for them as a member state. No one, not even the Brexit campaigners are claiming, now, that trade wise the UK will be better off leaving, as was pointed out on the previous page..
  7. blandy

    Things You Don't "Get"

  8. I think I'm missing your point. The EU cannot stop Britain trading with anyone. What the members of the EU (including the UK) decided was that we'd all take away all the trade tariffs, customs charges, different rule sets and standards we all used to have, and have a zero tariff, common set of standards, free market between us all. It's been a massive success. Because we are all one big market, the EU countries, including the UK sensibly agreed that we, together would negotiate any deals with other nations or groups of nations - as a big powerful block of countries we have more clout and can get better terms for us all. The counter side to that is that no single country can negotiate a special deal between itself and any non-EU country. But we can trade with anyone else under standard WTO terms (which are not as good as EU terms). From a trade perspective (whatever the other arguments about the EU) we're miles better off inside than outside. Humungously so.
  9. The UK can trade with whoever we like. And we do. Anyone and everyone in the world. We're not restricted from trading with anyone, by the EU or anyone else. There's a total misconception in your question. Trade deals are on top of what we can already do. We buy and sell stuff with Japan, and have done for ages. But recently the EU ( with the UK in it) did a deal where special (better) terms exist between the EU and Japan, so we both benefit. We trade with the USA, obviously. The EU doesn't stop us buying Jeeps Levis, Apple phones, Jack Daniels or selling them Jaguars, Whisky and crap TV presenters.
  10. blandy

    Jack Grealish

    The closest in style (but currently a much a better player) is Eden Hazard, I think. Also, Chelsea have struggled to work out to how to fit him in their side over the years - where best to play him.
  11. blandy

    The Apple Thread

    This is because when the OS is updated, the phone has to re-index everything, which takes up a fair chunk of processing. It'll stop being so power hungry when that's happened.
  12. blandy

    Steve Bruce

    Not for a moment does this apply to Steve Bruce, and hopefully it never will, but before the kick off yesterday there was a minutes silence for international awareness of suicide day ,or the right name of that if I’ve got it wrong. But, yeah, don’t get unwell because of your job. Be well, don’t be a victim of something you can’t control.
  13. blandy

    Steve Bruce

    Yep, spot on. When I said it didn't feel to me like he'd lost the away fans but it is getting close that's exactly it. Plenty of (very valid) comments and complaints and heated arguments that all the problems we outline were staring us in the face, some booing at half time, but not like it got to with O'Leary, Houllier, Lambert etc., where the whole away end would be chanting for the manager to get sacked. But it's not far off if this carries on. My personal view, is like I said maybe a week ago, about what happened with him at Sunderland, where I was concerned for his health, if he's looking ill again, then that's more writing on the wall. He's a good bloke, but he is not able to manage a big club successfully. Because the expectations of owners and large support is to actually achieve objectives (promotion, progress, whatever is appropriate) and he does not have the mentality or wherewithal to build sides that grow and can do that he will always struggle in that type of role. He's very good, or has been in the past at getting clubs where there's lower expectation to get the utmost out of themselves, but given money and therefore better players, they need more than just being told to try hard and counter attack - they need coaching in a way that lets them fulfil their talent, that plays on the front foot. "Give it to Jack and hope he does something" is not enough. It's a waste.
  14. blandy

    Steve Bruce

    A minority of fans were doing that. My sense from block S02 was that there were plenty who shared the criticisms made - we can all see the failings - but that the majority of the away fans at the game had not reached the point where you could claim “he’s lost the away fans”. It’s getting close, though. There’s a lot of lingering respect for him as a person and a lot of fans hope for that reason, perhaps that he turns it round. please note this post is a comment on what I saw, not what I think.
  15. blandy

    Steve Bruce

    I dunno, KHV. I'm not a Bruce fan, but it seems unlikely for the reason that the owners don't seem the sort to act in haste. Having decided at the start of the season that he should be manager, they're (IMO) unlikely to sack him if we lose a second league game of the season. To be honest, whatever problems we have regarding an unbalanced squad etc. are there, now, until at least January. Changing the manager won't solve that. It might "punish" him, but wouldn't leave the club any better off in terms of fixing those problems. The likes of us fans can talk about lack of entertainment or lack of faith in the manager, or what we think are daft team selections, but for owners sacking someone after what, 6 or 7 league games would seem to be very knee jerk having decided a month or two ago that he was the right man.