blandy

Of all the birds, they are probably the dumbest, most unaware there are. When I worked in the outback they were everywhere, being their unhurried selves. On a bike, or walking, they'd make their way away from you, but eff me, with cars, they just, well, seem to have a death wish. They'd quite blissfully step out into the road in front of a car. I managed to avoid hitting any, but a lot get hit. There seemed to be loads of them, nevertheless - sometimes in groups of thirty or so, other times just a parent and a train of little humbug Emus tailing behind. I like Emus.

When this happens, it HAS worked. Some browsers seem to struggle with immediately displaying the tweet, but it’s likely to have succeeded.

Some posts removed. Sorry if your funny gif/retort was one of them. Thanks for settling down, Villans. Next time maybe could you pay heed to the site's guidelines and "agree to disagree" cheers all

It's just a sign that you need to grab The Bull by the Horns and not try to Red Lion incomplete data. Cheers!

16 years ago. Strewth.

Want pu cat

CB scored in his first game, didn't he? Came on as a sub against the Albion, missed an absolute sitter from about 4 yards, then scored a much harder chance 5 minutes later - all down the far end (North stand). He looked raw but dangerous. Wesley looks sort of meek and harmless.

I haven't even watched them once - I just went to the game and saw the Spurs game on the telly. Yes he sometimes showed good touch, control, movement even. Just not remotely looking dangerous, maybe one shot in 2 games and not troubling defenders near the box. I've got my fingers crossed for him and hope he settles in and is a success. Like I said above, just cus he looks duff after 2 games, means now't. We have to give him (and everyone) some time to find his feet.

I must confess he's not impressed me at all and right now he looks a dud signing....after 2 games. But thinking back,for example to JPA and Savo - it took both of them ages to settle in and start scoring, so people like me jumping to barely formed, inexpert judgements after 2 games ought to think on a bit and have a bit more faith. That's me had a word with myself.

Well, yes, (though I'm not sure that "requested" is quite right - more suggested/proposed as a workround) but that's neither here nor there. The problem is the "us" you're talking about isn't the throbby and opportunist "us" that's now running the UK. The throbbers are quite happy to claim that any moment now technology will come along, (meaning the backstop "insurance policy" will not be ever required) yet also absolutely furious that the backstop exists. Mentalists. And after all that it's only needed because of one of May's self decided red lines and a unicorn about trade deals.

The throbbers, plus the opportunists have been saying for ages "Get rid of the backstop" - they've been saying "we want a deal, but the backstop has to go, because it'll be used to trap us in the customs union forever". That's what they want the EU to do - remove the backstop. That's it. As I've written before (probably too many times), I think all the no deal stuff is just a "we have to make the EU believe we mean it, so they make some concession on the backstop" . The plan, I think, is to get some words from the EU, get the amended or caveated deal through parliament, leave on 31 Oct. That's it. It's absolutely not really "no deal". It's not remotely cunning, or clever and has a risk of blowing up in their faces, either because the EU call their bluff, or because sufficient MPs fall for the ruse and block it one way or another. The threat of an election which no tory MPs want, which at least half of Labour MPs don't want is another lever to use, by Johnson, to pressure MPs to vote through an amended deal. Pressure the EU, pressure the MPs, get a deal through that has some weasel out on the backstop. Yeah, it's transparent and it's bobbins, but there we are.

Hare Metal. I don't mind a bit of heavy stuff every now and again, at all, but that one Dave posted was shite

It's very cross about something.So very now. 2/10 WNB (would not buy)

Site Guidelines Could posters use pm's please if you wish to debate each others motives, intent and statistical analysis techniques or interpretations.

Pretty much how I saw it, John. I'd maybe give Wesley a 4, and Taylor a 7, but it's marginal, really. Wesley in the first couple of games looks to be struggling to adapt - he's like a fish out of water and current form looks like a dud signing, but time will tell. Overall, we were kind of fine apart from 2 or 3 mistakes and a lack of a goal threat up front. I quite enjoyed the game.

Back in Jan Feb March, I was certain, and said so, that the notion of No Deal at the end of March (and then again June) was a nil percent chance. This time round, maybe 15-20% chance, purely by **** up, really. There's still the same actual facts - the EU doesn't want it, the UK doesn't want it, neither the EU nor the UK are remotely prepared for it, the consequences are dire for both. But By sheer incompetence it's possible that the Tory bluff (as I think that's all this is) will be called, or that one of the EU nations (France) will, for their domestic short term reasons block any further extension.

It most likely needs to be a Tory. Biggest party, as many of them hate Johnson as labour MPs do Corbyn. A non-throbby Tory, obviously.

I suppose it all depends on where we stand. There is no "protocol" for this (potential) situation.It's a new thing, but I read that if Johnson's Govt loses a VONC, there's 14 days for HIM to recommend to her Queenship a new bod to lead a new Govt that does have the confidence of Parliament. Johnson gets to choose. It seems therefore, that assuming he adheres to the truth, basically it could be anyone demonstrating they have the numbers. So while Corbyn supporters or sympathetic others might well feel their man deserves a go, by dint of him being LoTO, there's nothing laid down that dictates it has to be him, and if he can't command the numbers, then clearly if there's another who could, then that person would be the better choice. Corbyn struggles,as we've seen to command a good level of support either in his party, or nationally in polls, where he is essentially felt to be effing useless as a leader. Those sympathetic to him citing his loveliness, or whatever, fine. But it doesn't wash with most people. His stance on Brexit is another example as to why - remainers, leavers, "just get on with it-ers" - all view him poorly. And this is parliament and nationally. It's a muddle - some are (as the article said, above, somewhere) Meatloaf because anything but Corbyn to stop hard Brexit, Corbyn is anything but "me not having a go at being PM to...er...do a Labour fantasy Brexit". They're all still stuck in party blinkers mode, bar a few.

This. Spot on. Absolutely.

I'm OK with that. Many other things we do agree on. With politics, I sometimes think of something Scott Adams once said which is "If you belong to an organized political group, don’t expect people to take your opinions seriously. No one cares when a sheep burps." Which is harsh, but there's quite often more than an element of truth in it.

is it ****! - "A referendum on the terms of leaving including an option to remain" - so is that a 3 option, 2 option, remain v hard leave or remain v May's deal or Remain v some imaginary future labour deal. Clear as ****!

OK, here's another way of putting it, I've just seen by Paul "Corbyn's Ace" Mason

Remainers want to remain, not leave via a Unicorn Labour soft Brexit deal. Labour can't even decide what the referendum would ask, or what their policy would be on the options.

It's just my perception, but no, absolutely not. They're not. It's like this (in my view, with some back up from known facts) The tories want and alsways have wanted Brexit (since the Ref). May tried to get a deal through parliament, her deal failed 3 times because of her red lines and because, specifically the throbbers hate the backstop. The throbbers said "the backstop has to go" they don't much care about the rest of the deal, it's hard enough for them. Boris Johnson voted for the May deal at the last vote. The throbbers have always claimed that they want a deal, but that the EU has to believe we are prepared to walk away, that "no deal" has to be kept on the table as a negotiating strategy. That the EU has to believe we mean it. Johnson's strategy since he came in has been to do exactly what the thobbers have been saying needed to be done - make the EU believe we mean we're OK with no deal. By definition, this means others also have to believe we are OK with no deal. That's all all this is. It's an enactment of the throbber negotiating tactic. They hope the EU will crack a bit, offer them something, then they'll put it to parliament, and they hope that the "threat" of no deal, plus the tweak from the EU will get basically May's deal (with the tweak) through parliament by 31 October. That's been (in my eyes) transparent since Johnson took over. He/they don't actually mean or want no deal. It's their act, their game. They're spending moey and time and effort to try to scare enough EU people. That's all this is. Playing throbby games. It actually aids them, to an extent when opposition or media raise how terrible it all is and how the tories are going to no deal Brexit - it helps with the perception it's "real". But their desire, the real one, is for a revised deal. The "commitment" to no deal is entirely fake (apart from a tiny handful of full on nutters). The two big risks they have, are that either they scare enough moderate Tory MPs into siding with the opposition parties and they hoof out Johnson as a consequence, or that the EU calls their bluff, and caught between a lie and a hard place, they have to follow their own lie (though I believe that actaully would be stopped, one way or another) . Either way they're utterly goosed, ultimately.

They're not, though, being offered a dream scenario. It's perhaps a dream scenario for Corbyn "make me PM". On planet earth, for a plan to work it has to be one that is able to add up. There is no way that enough Tories will go for "Corbyn as PM" for it to be feasible as a genuine possibility. It would be like Labour saying "yeah, sure, Let's have Prit Patel or Jacob Mogg as temporary PM" - these characters are so divisive as to be unfeasible as potential PM . So the "proposal" is far from a dream scenario, it's (again) Labour playing games "here's a Unicorn" "Oh, you turned the Unicorn down - look everyone at the nasty other lot, vote for me" If anyone wants to stop Brexit/No deal Brexit, then picking someone in favour of that thing is about the dumbest move they could do.