Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×

kick it off

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by kick it off

  1. 6 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

    And the Skins v Giants for the wooden spoon in the worst division in the NFC.

    Praying that we lose this. This is exactly the kind of ****ty pointless game we win and costs us huge in the draft stakes. Imperative we lose this one due to draft implications.

  2. So Boris' first act as elected PM is to remove the protections on workers rights from the EU withdrawal bill.

    I'm sure the working class voters who turned their backs on Labour to put Boris in power are delighted that Boris is using their votes to strip them of their rights and future protections.

    It was all so difficult to predict as well, I mean who on Earth saw that coming... 😐

    Like I said, the turkeys voted for Christmas again 🦃

  3. 1 minute ago, PurpleCanary said:

    It seems as if it might be Long-Bailey with Rayner as deputy. If so, and it is more of a collegiate leadership, that might ease your fears? My guess would be that even if Long-Bailey is the choice of the Corbynistas that doesn’t necessarily mean she will keep to their script.

    Nah, I just don't see her offering a credible opposition. I'd rather take the shot in the dark with Jess Phillips than take RLB and Rayner as a duo. I like Rayner, but can't understand why she'd sideline herself and play sidekick to Long-Bailey when she's clearly a stronger candidate.

    If it's RLB-Rayner ticket, then it's likely to garner a lot of internal support within Labour but I would much rather see anyone else get the top job. Nandy might give them a run for their money but if Rayner positions herself with RLB (which is not a given, as Burgon was eyeing up that spot) then Nandy would need a strong second in command.

    Nandy and Phillips could work - Northern seat and Midlands seat - and think their styles would complement each other very well. Think Phillips' biggest knock in this run would be lack of front bench experience and only 4 years in the Commons. Running behind Nandy with a view to a natural succession might be a sensible path for her if she harbours ambitions for leader.

  4. 4 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:


    In looking deeper at the others - Starmer was pushing for the referendum position and has a north london seat so not likely to take the top job but instrumental part of the new leader's team.

    Lots of political will to have a woman as next leader which probably rules Lewis and Jarvis out (wrongly) before it's begun.

    Rayner or Nandy are both credible and have some charisma. Northern background. Northern seats and not tainted by the last election.

  5. 4 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

    I have no idea about any of them, KIO, but why so opposed to Long Bailey? Because she is seemingly a Corbynista or is it a lack of talent? 

    It is not clear to me whether Corbynism will survive. Some plainly want to keep it going. Others not. But in any event she doesn’t have the unelectable baggage - some genuine, some much less so, and some just a rightwing tabloid fantasy - that Corbyn had. And some aspects of the Labour manifesto, whether Corbynism or not, are worth keeping.

    Look at who is supporting her - McDonnell, Burgon etc. She is the Corbyn 2.0 candidate and if we've learnt anything the electorate does not want Corbynism. I agree Corbyn was toxic, but the problems run deeper than just him. The party needs a fresh direction and someone with a bit of personality. Long-Bailey to me just seems devoid of personality and a continuation of the failed direction of Labour.

  6. 3 hours ago, Herman said:

    Isn't it "the pot calling the kettle black"?🤣

    Just when you think he couldn't prove to be much dimmer, he impresses yet again.

    No wonder Pearl dumped him... although she did have her Instagram career to think of too, I guess.

    • Haha 1

  7. Dan Jarvis would be a very sensible choice to bridge the divide - Northern seat, mayor of Sheffield, Nottingham born, former military man and very competent and coherent. Credible and electable. Very understated manner but I think that would sit well with the Northern voters who don't like all the circus antics of parliament.

    Clive Lewis, Rayner, Lisa Nandy or Keir Starmer would also be solid choices.

    Jess Phillips would be a shot in the dark. She's more of a loose cannon - might work, equally might just explode in their face. I like her but not sure how she comes across to the electorate en masse.

    Long-Bailey would be an horrific choice. Absolutely the worst choice they could make.

    It'll be Long-Bailey then no doubt

    • Haha 1

  8. Hoping for an eagles win tonight. Urban Meyer in Dan Snyder’s box tonight... probably nothing but ****  if we can lure Meyer into the pro league that would be a HUGE deal. I’d be really happy with him as the next coach. 

    Newsflash - Terry Mclaurin is REALLYYYYYY ****ing good. He’s going to be an all pro sooner rather than later.

  9. 4 hours ago, CDMullins said:

    Not a massive fan of Roger's personality but no doubt hes doing a cracking job and good to see hes committed to you.

    I'm also not a big fan of Rogers but have to say he was the epitome of class when asked about Iheanacho's gamesmanship. Said essentially that he was in the wrong and he had no idea what on earth he thought he was doing. 

  10. 32 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

    So the love in carries on into the match where we applaud Maddison when he comes over to take a corner....like the one they scored from...doh!   We are supposed to be partisan...you know.....like supporting Norwich, not the opposition?  I still like the guy, loved him at Norwich, but he celebrates their goal, hacks down Tettey a couple of minutes after he had been caught totally accidentally by his trailing hand, so he wasn't being "nice" during the match.  Don't understand it. In my book once the match starts, it's them against us, no exceptions.  If he had scored a great goal, then yes, maybe acknowledge that........I dunno, maybe I'm old fashioned, but it used to be that you cheered your team on and gave the opposition as much stick as possible.


    I disagree. Maddison is a player whose like I have never seen in a city shirt in terms of quality with the exception maybe of huckerby. I’m 32. Maddison have everything for us that season and singlehandedly put us mid table. Without him, we may very well have gone down. He was and still is utterly brilliant with sophies family as demonstrated by having her sister be a mascot last week. Madders never once demanded we sell him etc, he conducted himself with utter class with regards to our football club and deserves the same back. I’ll never forget the 2-0 win at Elland Road and when Johnny Howson scored, the Leeds fans to a man, stood up and applauded. One of the classiest moments I’ve seen in football. Maddison is a special footballer and we were privileged to see him play for us. I have no problem with him having a positive relationship with our fan base after he has moved on to better things. You sound like a jealous ex-girlfriend of his lakey

    • Like 4

  11. 23 minutes ago, Van wink said:

    Pleased to hear that, there are lots of good comparators, Todd is taking perhaps a little longer to develop physically, Maddison was lucky that he had the chance to have a season out on loan where he wasn’t  being  scrutinised at a high level.  Todd however is constantly in the spotlight. That may of course be helpful but the negative stuff that we hear sometimes certainly won’t be.

    Don’t disagree with the crux of your point, but just to keep it factual, Todd did have half a season on loan in the Dutch championship. I’ve no idea of the standard and probably lower than SPL but he did have a loan opportunity 

    • Like 1

  12. 5 minutes ago, Banjoman said:

    Errrr...? This means the same thing. 

    Apparently it does. I always thought that fractures were less serious and more like  surface cracks, whereas a break was all the way through... google says I'm wrong and they mean the same thing... 😳

  13. Cheers Chris - Have a soft spot for Leicester after the title winning campaign - was ****ing fantastic to see the big boys get the tables turned and you fully deserved it.... and of course you have our James now, possibly the best player I've ever seen in a city shirt. Good luck for rest of season - looks a bit of a long shot for the title, but good to see you giving the big boys a run for their money again

  14. 1 minute ago, ron obvious said:

    Reassuring to know it's all MY fault.

    On the other hand, perhaps it's YOUR fault for characterising all leavers as thick, racist, xenophobic, Little Englanders. Call me a cvnt & I'm unlikely to warm to you.

    And if the only way you can hold a club together is by threatening its members with dire consequences if they leave, then it's not a club I want to be part of.

    You seem to fundamentally misunderstand the reason for trade. Nobody would ever do a trade deal unless there were some advantage to both sides - otherwise why bother? We may well lose some markets after leaving the EU, that's up to the EU, but to deliberately rig such a deal so as to impoverish the UK in order to hold itself together is not I think a good idea, any more than it would for any other empire.

    YOU voted for it, I didn't, certainly not my fault! Maybe, people wouldn't speak about Leavers in that way, if they were capable of offering any real argument for leaving other than the imaginary abstract concept of "sovereignty" - when you've had 3 and a half years, yet still cannot construct a coherent argument to support your position, then it's a little difficult to engage with on any other level.

    They didn't threaten us to stay in. Nobody once said that. We were warned that the natural consequence of leaving would be a massive economic hit - maybe, because the benefits of that club were pretty bloody beneficial.

    You were arguing they were going to the rig the deal a minute ago - your new position is correct, they aren't going to rig the deal, because they don't need to. They have every card in the deck. They will do a deal with us because we bring something to the table, but ultimately it will be massively favourable to them because they don't need us, and we are scrounging around for the scraps as our choice is take what we're offered or starve. You seem to think that we are trading on an equal footing so the deal with be equally equitable but that's simply not the case.

  15. 9 minutes ago, ron obvious said:


    And if Scotland leaves the UK it's leaving the UK club. And I believe they do quite a lot of trade with us. Plus receive a lot of money via the Barnett formula. So perhaps we should ensure the Scots would be worse off in the way the EU must ensure we'd be worse off

    But again you're missing the point. The EU want to stay together as a club, if Scotland leaves our little club, does anyone really care if Wales and NI do too? The SNP already accepted they'd take an economic hit from independence - they admitted that before the last referendum.

    Plus the fact, I doubt we'd be desperate to do the Scots any favours if they did go for independence (which is utterly inevitable now), in the same way the EU won't do us any. You're equating some little Englander entitlement to the EU being outrageously behaved. The EU doesn't owe us a living, and will act in the interests of their members - if that results in us getting a terrible deal that makes us far worse economically, then thats YOUR fault. You were warned. I have said from day one the EU holds all the cards. Once out of the club - the EU will act in their own self-interest, as should be obvious to anyone with a brain.

    Their self-interest is aligned around getting the best possible trade deal for their member states, and they will look for common ground with the UK but ultimately, any deal that is not materially worse for the UK than being in the club is not worth doing, they'd be signing their own death warrant and breaking up the union.

    If Scotland leave, then I have no doubt Westminster will be acting in their own self interest too. I suspect that will align a little more closely around mutual interests due to the nature of shared currency etc, but ultimately, they won't be looked at from the same perspective as there will be little desire to keep the other states within our UK union.

    • Like 1

  16. 1 minute ago, ron obvious said:

    OK. So it's acceptable to make people economically worse off to ensure they don't elect governments you don't like, even if that government is democratically elected.

    What are you even talking about? We chose to leave the EU. If you leave a club, you lose the benefits of the club. That's not the EU making us worse off, it's the people who voted for Brexit leaving us worse off. If you extend the advantages of the club to people who don't belong to the club, then the club itself becomes pointless. It's not difficult to grasp....

    • Like 1