Jump to content

horsefly

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    10,343

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

Posts posted by horsefly

  1. Posted · Edited by horsefly
    spelling

    So, in his steroid fuelled video rant Trump speculated, "Maybe I'm immune". No Donald you're not immune, you're f*cking CONTAGIOUS you sh*t-for-brains piece of garbage. Your value to humanity is less than the screwed up fat stained burger cartons that no doubt swamp your bedroom floor. Only a king cnut like you would think it acceptable to spread the virus among others in pursuit of your grubby political aims. 

    • Like 1

  3. Posted

    2 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

    Boris has a BIG mandate by having a big majority, the general pubic gave him that, to leave the EU

    He does not have a mandate to ignore the democratic processes of parliament. He was not elected to behave like a dictator. Now have a go at answering the points I made.

  4. Posted · Edited by horsefly
    missing text

    14 hours ago, SHRIMPER said:

    He should be locked up for this statement alone.

     

     
    kUuht00m_normal.jpg
     
     
    Donald J. Trump
     
    @realDonaldTrump
    · 8m
    I will be leaving the great Walter Reed Medical Center today at 6:30 P.M. Feeling really good! Don’t be afraid of Covid. Don’t let it dominate your life. We have developed, under the Trump Administration, some really great drugs & knowledge. I feel better than I did 20 years ago!

    Nothing to fear here then. The man is truly a monster

  5. Posted

    1 hour ago, SwindonCanary said:

    Barnier has been ordered to see Merkel, I wonder if he will he be going to see the other member countries leaders to hear their concerns. So much for EU unity. How very democratic.

    So do tell us which EU country leader is complaining that he/she can't get her voice heard. I think you had better look closer to home if you want to find a regime that ignores the concerns of its publicly elected members. Tory rebels are proliferating at the moment because they are sick of the Johnson/Cummings axis riding roughshod over the democratic processes of parliament. And a number of those rebels happen to be your Brexsh*te heroes. 

    • Like 1

  7. Posted · Edited by horsefly
    missing text

    DUNCES.jpg

    THE TRADITIONAL DUNCE CAP IS NOW ONLY FOR USE BY KKK MEMBERS WHO ARE WARNED TO SEEK HELP FROM THEIR MOMMY WHEN CUTTING EYE-HOLES AS THIS TASK WILL OVEREACH THEIR INTELLECTUAL CAPACITY

  8. Posted

    42 minutes ago, KiwiScot said:

    Does it compare regulations to being a business owner in general?

    To a limited extent. For example they note that someone who demonstrates they have enough "money in the bank" can take over a club without any commitment to using that money to keep it afloat. The guy who took over Bury (and quickly closed it down) is a case in point. It was truly shocking to hear him say that he had never been to Bury, was not a fan of Bury (in fact hadn't even known that Bury had a football team), and didn't care a damn about closing them down. 

    I truly believe that every City fan should  listen to this show before they comment on our own present owners.   

  11. Posted

    1 minute ago, SwindonCanary said:

    That's it, turn a blind eye to the truth, it may sway you.

    wtf are you talking about you dumb fool. What I have just quoted are the current US food regulations. You're the one turning a blind eye. Do try to use whatever constitutes the matter sloshing around in your cranium.

    • Haha 1

  12. Posted · Edited by horsefly
    added link

    2 hours ago, SwindonCanary said:

    And all SHRIMPER has to fall back on is swearing and silly photos !

    Can you stop throwing insults and start giving me a reason to go back to the EU =ANSWER NO !

    Or even comment on the food standards that I put the link to. 

    I guess you didn't listen very carefully to the food standards issues raised in the the video either. Even this twerp has admits that the lowering of standards here was a UK inspired initiative. And here's what we will be open to in a post-Brexsh*t deal with the USA:

    "Insect-filled chocolates, rat hair-infested noodles, and orange juice containing maggots are just some of the “horrors” UK consumers could be forced to accept if post-Brexit Britain signs a wide-ranging trade deal with the USA.

    In the US, producers adhere to a “Defects Levels Handbook,” which sets out the maximum number of foreign bodies like maggots, insect fragments and mould that can be in food products before they are put on the market.

    For example, US producers are allowed to include up to 30 insect fragments in a 100g jar of peanut butter; as well as 11 rodent hairs in a 25g container of paprika; or 3mg of mammalian excreta (typically rat or mouse excrement) per each pound of ginger.

     

     

    • Haha 1

  13. Posted

    20 minutes ago, How I Wrote Elastic Man said:

    Douglas Ross has put his flag up and highlighted that the UK doesn't have the capacity to land all the fish in its waters 

    If that's correct, maybe we should look to find someone to give us a hand for a few years, until we are up to speed 

    And then when we've found that help in landing the fish, perhaps those same people can help us to find a market in which to sell it, since the UK currently exports 75% of its catch:

    (https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-4043758/EU-trade-key-success-UK-fish-industry-75-home-caught-fish-exported-majority-fish-eaten-Britons-imported.html)

  14. Posted

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000mzph

     

    Radio 4s investigative show "File on Four" did a really excellent investigation into EFL team ownership this evening titled, "Fit For Football".  If you have any interest at all in the regulations and practices that determine team ownership and finance this is essential listening. You can find it at the link above. There are some truly shocking (and indeed, heart-breaking) revelations uncovered. 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 2

  15. Posted

    47 minutes ago, Aggy said:

    What are the policy differences between those countries and here? Are there different restrictions in Germany/ Italy?

    Italy seems to have about the same level of restrictions as we do - looser really. As far as I can tell online, masks seem to be mandatory in virtually the same circumstances as here. I can’t see any equivalent of the rule of six. Sounds like nightclubs are banned to stop dancing, but no “curfew” for bars, pubs, restaurants (as long as they have adequate social distance measures in place). 

    Is Germany doing anything different?

    I think one of the key differences is that Germany had a well functioning track and trace system from the beginning. Sadly our government twiddled its thumbs while watching Rome (and Madrid) burn. I highly recommend the Sky News Hotspots documentary on the global pandemic as it provides a detailed account of the many mistakes made in responding to the crisis through a collation of contemporaneous news reports. One interview with an Italian mayor in particular stands out for me. He actually sent a warning to the UK government that it would be hit worse than Italy because it was doing nothing to prepare adequately for the coming catastrophe (at that time we had a handful of cases). He had even flown his two children home from UK universities because he was convinced that the UK was on course for a much worse outcome than his own country (which had a huge number of cases at the time).

  16. Posted

    Just let this sink in for a moment. The president of the USA has not only presided over the worst mortality record of any world leader in responding to Covid-19, but has also turned that country's HQ into an epicentre for (super) spreading the virus. The utter irresponsibility of this is staggering. The White House should have been the strongest bastion against Corvid-19, protecting those individuals essential to running the most influential country in the world. Instead, Trump and his sycophants have flouted all the scientific advice, and engaged in practices with a very obvious (and oft predicted) outcome, throwing the US political system into chaos. It was not some unfortunate accident that brought Covid-19 into the White House, but naked arrogant stupidity. In a morally ordered universe these facts alone should be enough to impeach the president and rid America of this 4 year pestilence.

    • Like 2

  18. Posted

    4 minutes ago, Herman said:

    They just can't stop telling porkies.

    It is quite a remarkable feature of Trump's reign that he has been able to corrupt so many professionals into serving the needs of political expediency over their commitment to the principles of their vocation.  I have taught medical professionals in this area and was quite astonished and embarrassed by the scene played out in front of the hospital. They came across as spin doctors rather than medical doctors, and I'm sure their fellow professionals will appalled at that performance. 

    • Like 3

  19. Posted

    I think Ben Gibson said the most intelligent thing I've read about yesterday's game so far:

    “You can’t take away the result but if you look at the performance, one moment of quality - maybe the penalty goes in - and we’re stood here getting all kinds of superlatives. So it’s very easy to overreact in football, to be too high when we pop a team off the park and win 2-0, and I’d say the same on the other foot, we don’t get too low because we’ve lost. We dominated from start to finish, one moment of quality from Wayne Rooney and we didn’t quite muster that up ourselves."

    Surely any objective assessment of the Bournemouth and Derby games can not support the view that the team lacks confidence as they have dominated both of them. The high quality of passing and movement is still very evident (e.g. the movement that lead to the penalty), and there is certainly no lack of effort (the stats just don't support an alternative view). However, I do agree with some of the posters that Farke does need to think about starting Hugill up front. The consistent high quality of crossing into the box from Quintilla is not something we have had before under Farke's reign, and it just cries out for a more traditional centre-forward good with his head. I would also love to see Pukki given the number 10 spot behind Hugill as I can envision Hugill's physical presence creating the space that is currently being denied to him. Indeed I think both players would benefit from the others presence.

    Now is not the time to polish the pitchforks; the evidence from our actual performances does not support the view that this is a team in disarray. And I think this is all that LDC is pointing to in his comparison with 2 seasons ago, as just like then there were premature ejaculations calling for Farke's removal. Of course, nothing guarantees that we will follow a similar trajectory to that season, but surely the memory of that time would suggest that at this stage what is called for is a calm and considered analysis of why we haven't been able to turn 2 good performances into victories.

     

    • Like 2

  20. Posted

    59 minutes ago, Highland Canary said:

    Until we have new investment in the club we will continue to oscillate between financial crisis on the one hand or mediocrity on the other. Sadly.

    I have two points to make in response:

    1. I think you rather miss the point that the self-funding model has been developed precisely to prevent us ever falling into financial crisis in the way we have done in the past. Does that mean we must remain forever mediocre? I defy anyone to describe our recent championship winning season as mediocre. It also enabled us to turn players who cost a pittance into desired assets worth multi-millions.

    2. Just who are these super-rich investors that you think are out there waiting for a chance to pour huge amounts of money into Norwich City FC? No one ever seems to come up with a name or even a hint as to who these individuals might be. With very few exceptions such investors never turn out to be benign patriarchs whose only interest is the good of the club. On the contrary, too many fans attest to the destructive, asset-stripping effect that these individuals visit upon their clubs (think Bolton, Charlton, Portsmouth et al).  There is not a chance in hell that there is an individual out there willing to turn us into the next Man City. But we have a very good chance under the current model of sustaining a team long into the future that will produce some damn good footballers, playing some damn good football. 

  21. Posted · Edited by horsefly
    missing text

    2 minutes ago, paul moy said:

    I see trolls are out.  Have a good day and enjoy the match.

    How is that trolling? just trying to help you out with your semantic shortcomings. If you want I could also point out the grammatical incongruities explicit in the totally unrelated subclauses of your second sentence.

  22. Posted

    2 minutes ago, paul moy said:

    Not missing the point at all.  I'm aware of the pitfalls but if there are wealthy owners there is far more chance of a club surviving than in the opposing scenario. There may well be clubs allowed to go bust who have disinterested owners but we should not be expecting the taxpayer to bail out these supposedly wealthy people.

    Ok! I'll let others compare our posts and decide who's on the ball here. But just for your information, the word you are looking for is "uninterested" not "disinterested", they have very different meanings.

    • Haha 1

  23. Posted

    42 minutes ago, paul moy said:

    Seems that worries of Championship clubs going bust are somewhat way off the mark looking at the owners' wealth.  Is there a similar table for the lower divisions I wonder ?

    I'm afraid you completely miss the point. The point is that the wealth of club owners bears NO relation to the amount of money they are prepared to invest in the club. Just ask our "friends" down south. The overwhelming majority of these owners are not natural fans of the clubs they own (unlike our owners). They regard their ownership of their club as no different from their ownership of any other business (unlike our owners). Their commitment to their club extends as far as that club presents a source of real or potential profit (unlike our owners). When a club struggles financially these owners are often quick to strip a club of it's financial assets (unlike our owners). 

    There is every reason to believe that the majority of Championship clubs (and in all leagues) are going to find themselves in serious financial difficulty post Covid-19. There are very few reasons to believe that their owners will be willing or able to bail them out. These owners too will be massively hit by the effects of Covid-19, and I suspect it won't take long for them to scrutinise the loss making parts of their business empires and seek to strip them of any realisable assets. When owners are not genuine fans the bottom line principles of free market capitalism tend to provide the impetus for their actions. We have been incredibly lucky to have owners who are also genuine (fanatical) fans. They have bailed the club out on numerous occasions and have never been motivated by the bottom line principles of business. But to rely on such largess into the future would be utterly reckless, which is why the self-funding model represents by far the best prospect for the survival and flourishing of the club we all love.

  25. Posted

    If anything could be cited as support for the self-funding model of Norwich City then this table is surely it. It demonstrates that having massively wealthy owners does not typically translate into significant monetary input into a club's finances. Not only is FFP increasingly preventing this, but the economic consequences of Covid-19 is likely to ravage the wealth of many of these individuals, thereby making their ownership of these clubs a genuine financial burden. How many of these clubs offer an opportunity for their owners to recoup their losses? Don't expect to see these owners investing in squad acquisitions, do expect to see them selling off their club's realizable assets (stadiums, training grounds etc). It is no coincidence that City tops the league in (quality) player acquisitions. We can do this because of the financial security offered by the self-funding model. 

    The reality is that the influx of "super-wealthy" owners has only benefitted a handful of top premier league teams, and has contributed massively to the financial sh*t-storm that has been raging in league football for many years. Post Covid-19 that sh*t-storm is about to be raised by several categories, and the consequences will be dire for many clubs (RIP Macclesfield et al). So I for one have no desire to see some super-rich individual eye-up our real estate. I for one am genuinely grateful for the stewardship provided by Delia and Michael that has seen us achieve success well beyond what might be expected if we are to take the Championship Wealth Table seriously.

    No doubt some here will brand me a "happy-clapper", so be it. But one thing I can safely predict is that because of our self-funding model I will be happily clapping once again at Carrow Road at some point in the future when this hideous pandemic subsides. And it will still be a Carrow Road that we own, sporting a team of exciting, high quality players that we can genuinely afford. 

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...