keelansgrandad

I am firmly in the camp of England football is just the holiday from club football. Too much importance is placed on it. We have so many different tournaments that it doesn't take anybody long to reach 50 caps. In fact, its almost just a marketing tool. I watch England games hoping we will see some real entertaining stuff but it is few and far between. The same old mantra comes out. Well, we qualified and that is the main aim. Get to the tournament is paramount. Then in the tournament its you don't want to lose your first game as the pressure mounts. Getting out of the group is the most important. Then we hear there aren't that many good players and we do well to get where we are. Yet we have Kane, Bellingham, Foden, Saka, Rice, Maddison, Stones, Walker, Sterling, Rashford who on form are as good as any.

My old school, the CNS, can have my Dyson vacuum cleaner that is just sitting in the shed because the Shark is a much better and much cheaper machine.

But to me, a lot of the current problem with offside and VAR could be lessened if the old offside rule was reintroduced. Kane was for about 140 years of football. But tinkering and the desire for scores like basketball, the rule makers have complicated it by allowing it to be subjective. So not passive, not level. If there are not two players between you and the goal, then you are off.

The Arsenal Women's coach has said that some players are struggling in the WSL on as little as £20K. I find this puzzling as the minimum wage for a 23 year old is £21K. So if the wages are low then that is down to the clubs. Its not a matter for the Equal Pay Commission.

Obstruction isn't a penalty Dion.

Southgate churns out the same old style and tactic no matter who it is. Yes, playpossession against the top teams who can hurt you but this is Malta, we will qualify top and go in pot one. Go out and entertain for once. Foden and TAA are trying to but Henderson, Rashford are just woeful. Dion has it spot on. Speed it up. Has Kane had a chance yet?

I don't think this was anything other than a conscience vote and I believe Starmer probably wanted to vote for it but is politicing instead.

I think England fans generally turn up even if it is Malta and I don't believe they would have been disappointed to watch those on the bench all playing. I know an international manager is unlikely to change the whole XI like a club manager in the cup but what is Henderson doing in that lineup? Apart from CBs, I think this current bunch of young England players could be our best ever.

£8.5Bn over 11 years to get rid of as many potholes as they can. Well that is my road done for 11 years. I must send them a note of thanks.

Perhaps the next emergency act will be that any percentage of those eligible to vote who do not will be considered voting for the incumbent.

I don't quite understand the purpose of FFP. Is it to punish a club and then hopefully deter others? Is it to bring down the cost of football?

Nothing will change. He will not attack the real problems. And no politician can in this nation. While people think they are so benevolent because they give to Children in Need, the overwhelming tenet is I'm alright Jack.

Looking at their 25 players, I can't see any coming to us. Maybe Nelson who is well into his twenties now and not really part of future it would seem. Partey would be a good shout though as a CDM.

Apparently it could happen with deflation.

No. They are exactly the people who can do something about it.

I don't think he will ever be leader. SKS will have it until the people find him out like they did Blair. On the left, Andy McDonald had the whip taken away by SKS for his speech at a pro Palestinian rally. And he was the only threat to SKS from the Socialist Campaign Group. I don't really know how well thought of Norwich's own Clive Lewis is. Of course he criticised the Party and the anti semitic inquiry that Corbyn probably did little to promote. Bit of a paradox. That is why I find Labour so strange right now. It has always tried to be a Party of consensus but SKS is far more ruthless than Wilson or Blair. I can see him being PM for 10 years. He will become PM on the back of natural growth of the economy, and even more borrowing and the people of Britain will eat out of his hand for a while.

Unlike the current Tories of course.

I know the left will never have power. The UK is predominantly Centre to Centre Right. While I realise compromise is important, I don't see that Socialism should have to change to be popular. Just the same as people see the LibDems as a local party and the Greens as looney middle class academic housewives, Socialism is seen as an extreme. Just shows why there is still a need for it as an alternative.

Sir Conservative Starmer threatened the sack and accepted resignations instead. With surprise reshuffles perhaps he can persuade some similar thinkers to himself, like Tories in marginal seats to join him. He cannot make a decision about policies for a future Labour Government but can threaten his own MPs whose conscience got the better of them. Any of Walpole's relatives still around in Norfolk who he can persuade?

The UK has one of the top 7 economies in the world. We should be continuing to grow. We no longer manufacture as much as we used to so have to rely on other things to maintain our status. Invisible earnings. These earnings are considerable and if it was manufacturing, the benefits to all would noticed. However the way that wealth is accrued in the UK means that those nearer the bottom of the iceberg feel the benefits last. Of course, when the money boys panic, they are reluctant to give up their own status and use ways to make sure that those hoping to move up from the bottom of the icegerg remain firmly where they are. The tought that we have food banks in our nation sends a shiver down my spine.

Since the advent of the Supreme Court, the ability of Parliament to overrule the courts is now only a theory. In theory, Parliament is Sovereign, but has abrogated that in instances such as the Human Rights Act.

That wasn't what I was saying. I am curious to know what prevents the boat people from staying other than the obvious reason that we cannot just open our coastline to anyone to sneak in. When they are processed, is there just a simple process other than the refugee status that some may well have? Is there further investigation into the backgrounds of these people to see if they not only meet the safety criteria but could be useful in employment areas that are willfully short? Apart from the language problem, can these people be taught to be waiters or waitresses for example where we have real shortages. Surely paying taxes and NI and spending their money here is preferable to us spending money on them in Rwanda.

Clearly there have been periods in our recent history when welcomed immigrants for their skills only. After WWII, we also encouraged unskilled to come and help with restoration of the UK. So its obvious we will always need immigration. I guess that many see that as meaning we should only invite people to come as and when we need them. That many saw Brexit as the answer were sadly uninformed. In the last twelve months a number of immigrants have arrived from Africa in our area. Chatting to them, it seems they were invited to come and work in the NHS. Surely even the most hard hearted must realise that this is a good thing for our nation. So when people see images of people in small boats trying to land in Kent, do they really know what happens to them afterwards. All they are told is that 600 arrived last week etc. But what do they really know? How many of the boat people have skills that we need? How many might be wiiling to work in industries that are desperate for workers? We don't seem to ever find out. All we hear is numbers. And was this a problem before 2016?

He has had a comfy ride for too long. Its about time he told us what he actually would do about anything.