Dazzler

Aye probably, I guess I just looked at it solely based on what was in the quoted text but your way makes more sense.

Would man city not be more concerned with loaning players out rather than in though? Doesn't make much sense to me this, and we're obviously not going down the route of loaning in players otherwise we would have definitely done it in Jan.

Remember when the man, the myth the legend went on MTV cribs and spent far too long explaining his love of hats?

He would have been had it not been for Colwill slicing his leg open in the LC. That said, he's not used him nearly enough since his leg healed.

Jackie Milburn's statue

No mention of Anderson there. Sneaky bench appearance perhaps? I heard yesterday that Dubravka was a doubt from person who knows a person who knows a person etc...No idea how true that is, but guessing untrue especially given Hope would have loved to tell us we had another goalie out.

Biden is and was always a complete piece of shit, made a shit load of racist remarks down the years and is quite frankly as creepy as Trump IMO. The best thing that could happen to the states is the pair of them snuff it before the election. Neither are physically fit to lead let alone the thousands of other reasons to do with their respective characters.

Na, it works in the US because they have the bible belt which takes up over a third of the country. A bunch of hillbilly bible thumpers are always going to go with things that suit their fundamentalist view points and politicians know this and find it easy to manipulate. I think we are more likely to fall for a bit of charisma initially, but we tend to quickly see through the bullshit when the country starts to deteriorate and can't be manipulated using religious propaganda and shit like that. If we were like the US then Rees-Mogg would have been tory leader (and *shudder* PM) by now because he represents everything those fucking dopes in the states love.

Typical BBC tbf, for the most part they must spend most of their day picking spelks out of their arse cheeks. That said, I honestly don't know how anyone can claim Starmer has any level of guilt with the Esther Ghey thing the other day. Anyone with a shred of decency would have called it out at the time, whether or not they felt the jibe was transphobic or not, purely because she was present. The press should be saying good on the bloke for doing what was morally right in the moment.

Sinbins on the way next season by the look of things. Trialled in the FA cup - the refs can send off players for 10 minutes for dissent and cynical fouls. What could possibly go wrong there?

I think he means back to the Protectorate. Sack off the monarchy, lob off Charlie's sausage fingers and scatter them throughout the Commonwealth.

He should save that open approach until he's in power tbf. Plenty of fucking idiots will swing to the tories upon hearing that, despite the caveats being extremely positive. He at least needs to do a positive sandwich. "We'll pick your bins up once a week. Yes that's right both of them." "You'll need to pay more NI." "You'll be able to see a doctor before your chest infection kills you."

They could but as you say, the risk outweighs the reward IMO. They may as well stay just left of centre for now and win by a landslide and then we can see where they go from there.

Aye, when suddenly they cotton on they are £150 a year worse off in NI most likely - This will be despite the NHS running as efficiently as it has in decades and other such benefits that outweigh it. TBH I'd fucking pay the extra NI just to get both my fucking bins emptied every week like it used to be before these twats took power.

Radio 2 has had a few people on today who seemed to fit this description. Plenty on there that are framing it as it's a joke that Starmer doesn't know what defines a woman - not a remark on gender identity itself (therefore it's ok). None of these people can comprehend that making even a flippant remark like that in front of a mother who's just lost her trans daughter in the most horrific way imaginable is at the very least insanely insensitive and is still something he should hold his hands up and apologise for. They also think Starmer was wrong for pointing out how insensitive a comment it was. Whether you deem it transphobic or not is somewhat irrelevant IMO. It was a fucking horrible 'joke' to make in the circumstances and Starmer was morally in the right to highlight it. Some fucking right whoppers saying Starmer should apologise and not Sunak which is a fucking horrendous take.

Na, not really. But they are so fucked now they are throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks (they eat what falls)

Completely agree with this. His approach is dull, and he's been pretty non-committal on most issues so far, but all he has to do is be professional and show an ounce of competence (which I think is exactly what he's done/is doing) and he walks the election without breaking a sweat. As others have mentioned, at his core I think Starmer is a decent bloke, but even if he isn't that decent so long as he's a competent one he'll be a fucking vast improvement on what we have at the minute.

Thank fuck, the last thing we need is Barnes to come back only to break down again because Gordon is knackered longer term.

I completely agree, but the tories pushed the referendum and caused everything that has subsequently happened. We've had nothing but chaos since 2016 at least - and seems to only get worse with each passing day/month/year. All I was pointing out (or attempting to) was a labour government flip flopping on some policies (or as it's normally known - changing plans or adapting to changing factors in the external landscape) would be no more chaotic than the chaos caused by the last several tory governments. In fact, it would likely be significantly less chaotic as it shows they are willing to adapt as things change, rather than doubling down on the bullshit that has been proven doesn't work.

What sort of chaos would we have to endure? Probably, no worse than the last decade+ of chaos we've endured under the conservatives probably, Jeremy. The idea of better the devil you know here is fucking nuts, in fact "doing the same things and hoping for different results" is the tory go to, and is quite literally the definition of insanity.

Of that 52% how many were dead and/or changed their minds by the time of the 'get brexit done' election? I reckon enough to swing it had it not been Corbyn leading labour at that time. Starmer would have been a more palatable front man for those swing voters by being more centre left in his policies etc and would have beaten the tories - at least in my opinion. I think all it would have taken was someone with a bit of professionalism and competence with an actual plan, who's face fit with the press to outdo all the bluster from the other side. If Corbyn was still leading labour now we'd likely be heading for another 4 years of tory leadership, even after all the complete fuck ups since the last election.