blandy

Only 'cus we melted their ice caps with our fridges and cars. Can't blame the bears for that. Anyway, it's Grizzlies and Brown bears that do that, isn't it, not Polar Bears?

Warwickshire County Cricket Club. The Mighty Bears!

I wish you would and soon, it can be a lifeline for overseas fans able to get cable and satellite. Thanks for the other confirmations too ,) I went to Spurs, and noticed that they seem to have a TV station - they certainly showed stuff on their big screens which was professionally presented, "appeared" to be Live TV and was a distance ahead of the Villa pre-match and half time "media". I think what I'm saying i that there are clubs, clearly, who might be able to help or advise on what they do, and Villa could take what suits us from that.

And the "premium content" doesn't work ( the videos etc) on a Apple Mac computer due to using microsoft only windows DRM. Minor issue "audience" wise, as only about 5% of people use Macs, but....

To expand on Gringo's answer, it was once renowned for typographical errors (spelling mistakes, basically) Private Eye, therefore called it the Grauniad, and it's stuck. Like Mike I'm quite surprised by how many Guardian readers and Independent readers we have. Much greater percentage than the national average. Is it Villa specific, or Football specific, I wonder?

I think this might be down to what Wurzel's point gets at. With people looking at other ways to get their news/opinion, papers have adjusted in different ways. Some have become arms of the murdoch world media/Government empire, that promote a particular interest or viewpoint, some have shrivelled and died and some have become simply a means to make (or lose) money and have gone not for news, but for percieved interests of a sector. The ones that people admire are the ones that either stand by a set of principles, or an ethos, or ones that have adapted to the interweb (The Grauniad being perhaps the best example). I can't stand the Daily stormtrooper, but it has a set vision of what it thinks, what it's target market is, and it goes for that, and seems to do well as a result. Never straying from it's agenda. I prefer papers that don't have the same owner imposed discipline. Whether right left or centre. It's nice to have the choice, though.

They (proper papers, not comics) are a very good way of being informed, IMO. They're portable, contain news and analysis, opinon, images, cover a wide range of subjects, both national and international. Some of, if not most of, the best journalists writ for national papers. They often challenge the orthodoxy of whoever is in power in way that TV and radio doesn't, and they are better edited than lot of the internet. And the Guardian has a typeface hand crafted by a Villan of some repute. Papers are great.

Independent for me. Guardian sometimes.

I don't like him because of his "humour" - basically 1970s Bernard Manning Style racist stuff forms a part of it. Apart from not thinking much of his style, I just don't think he's of the right calibre for the club. Now Ellis has gone, there's just no need for him (if there was a need for him, as Denis says, which I doubt). And that's being very kind to him.

I don't like to speak ill of people, generally, but I'm pleased with this.

Me, I'd feck off from the trenches on the first hint of a "maybe". I mean who wants to live (or die) in a trench? Silk sheets, a fleixible, lithesome lass, champagne (or a pint of ale, come to think of it)...nuther matter, but trenches- nah!. I'm being daft, I know, but the point is that footy is about fun, pleasure, escapism, not trenches and death. 'tis all maybes, Malc. No-one can see into the future. just enjoy the ride, so to speak.

There's been a lot of postings about the squad's weaknesses, about speculation as to who we might bring in. On the weaknesses it seems that a lot of folk think we need a right back, a left back, a right winger, a centre forward, a centre half, and maybe still a creative midfielder To get all of that lot in, to find people available and of the necessary standard is no mean feat. In fact it's all but impossible, given that not every signing will come off, even if we get them in. I accept completely Malc's point that while we have seen that the New Owner's words have been matched by deeds off the pitch, there has not yet been a chance for them to do the same with playing staff. I'd be massively shocked if they didn't completely and fully back MO'N in January. Perhaps there's an aspect in the statements of Roeder and Curbishley and others which should also be considered. Maybe they are talking up unrealistic expectations? They're at 2 clubs that are not performing as they would like. Perhaps come January all their words will come to nothing? Will Newcastle in a takeover situation really be spending big? Will West Ham, in a relegation position be able to get the players they want to go there? Maybe it's managers trying to pressure their boards to back them? Maybe MO'N doesn't need to do that? I don't know. Probably best to wait and see what happens and then form a view at the end of Jan as to how it's gone..

I hope that the video screens are able to put up some clips of Ron smiling when we won the league (still the most famous smile in Villa history), maybe some of the moments that we remember him and his superb side for. Maybe not so much for Ron, but for some of the people who weren't around at the time, and for people like me especially who was around at the time and would absolutely love to see it all put together again. thanks

What a good read. Giddy was a "bit of a character" and a ruddy good player. Thanks to UWS, too.

WMS

It's going OT, but no, not that beasley. I was in the royal air force - clearly the most intelligent of the services - in the Army, the Men go to war and the officers stay behind. In the Navy they all go to war in a boat, but in the RAF the officers go to war and the Men stay back at base * Anyway, it's because, er, I guess there has to be a line somewhere, and I just see pensioner ex-servicemen and women and people who are currently serving on the other side of that line to people like myself, who are neither of those. Where do you draw the line - firemen, policemen nurses, doctors, ambulance drivers, councillors, politicians (Gah!) etc. - I know they're not military, but they still serve us lot one way or another. * I know it's not strictly true, but for comedic effect...

I'm about to write something very stupid....here goes.... I did a stint in the armed forces. Nothing of note, no one shot at me, I never shot at anyone. I just mended aircraft for 9 years and had equal measures of "wahey", "God I'm bored" "why is that [censored] shouting at me" and "strewth I'm knackered". [start stupidity] I don't want a discount for it. It'd feel wrong.[end stupidity]. It was a bit more than a job, a lot more, but the reward was there at the time, and still is to an extent. You learn a lot about life and learn a lot about what the right and wrong ways to treat people (there are/were equal measures of both, IMO, to see) I'm not saying the idea is wrong, just that, well, culturally for me at least, I think there's a difference betwen the US attitude to serving and retired members of the forces and the UK one. Maybe the US attitude is better. It perhaps is. Or maybe it's just me. serving personnel - yeah - go for it. Pensioned ex-forces - likewise, but folk like me. Not so sure at all.

I've fettled mine. Some new fangled format thingy. Not changed the content, though. For I am idle. But if you've got a RSS then it does this (only works with RSS capable internet readery things)

I'm 110% chuffed at that. It brings a lump to the throat and a tear to the eye just thinking about it. It's really something that he has accepted, too. Really well done.

In terms of individual games, plucked from a period, then BFR, but in terms of overall I'd say Both Ron Saunders (not listed) and Brian Little more consistently did so.

It might not (alright, definitely isn't) my place to say this, but what the hell... Stuff like the question (which is a good one), in time, if not now, ought really to be something that should be addressed perhaps to someone at the club who is actually directly responsible for (in this case) turnstile admission. It's tremendous that General K posts and more importantly reads, the interweb, but my view is that it ought not to be just down to him to do that, as welcome as it is. Ideally perhaps people in other roles within the club ought to do similar (maybe they do), or alternatively (and better) there should be a way of contacting people regarding turnstile issues, Holte suite issues, kit issues, shop issues etc...etc... directly. Perhaps any new facility set up under the new initiative should list clear points of contact regarding ticketing and all the other main subjects. The openness and communication from the new team has been exemplary so far, but there's a better way which I'm confident they are looking at formalising, without removing the level of accessibility and personal touch which is just great.

agreed It wasn't 'Gate asking to leave that was the problem, the problem was what caused him (and many others) to want to leave.

Well said John. I don't get why GS gets so much abuse. It's wrong headed and shameful in my opinion. And yes, we are lacking a bit of a finisher. I though JPA had a good game, but we haven't got a combination up front. Gabby's doing brilliantly, Sutton and JPA do well, but there's no lethal pairing.

Agreed on all points, Ali.

I know mine. If you are in the Armed forces it's recorded on your ID card, and though I left a good while ago it's not that hard to remember.