Happy Face

I never wanted Hughton to quit and he was working under the same constraints. Hughton fostered a togetherness in the squad despite those at the top. Pardoo has more devotion to his paymasters than to his players, which is unforgivable. I'd rather he spoke in support of the players that served him and the club well following relegation/promotion, then he'd gain my respect. He prefers to criticise their contract demands. Shameful.

I hope he drops the lid of his yoghurt on the kitchen floor sloppy side down.

Think there'll be a lot more interest in Barton as the end of the window approaches...he'll be second choice for lots of clubs who don't want his volatility, but as their targets go elsewhere, they'll want to jump on whatever quality is available. I just texted a Liverpool fan: they could have had (could still have, let's wait and see) Barton and Enrique for £6mill in transfer fees instead of Henderson for £20 mill was it? Madness. £14 mill left over to get a decent centre half, now Carragher is OAP age and their other centre halfs are shite/crocks. I think the valuation Liverpool have put on certain players is ridiculous...but unlike us, they have a good record of spending what they've made on sales. In 09/10 they used the Alonso money (and a few others, Benayoun etc.) to bring in Aquilani and Johnson. Made a small profit. In 10/11 the Torres and Mascherano money paid for Carroll, Suarez and Meireles. It's not been spending that they can't afford in recent years. Who knows if this window will be the one they stretch too far. They've spent £45m on Downing, Adam and Henderson so far this window, so Enrique makes it £50m that's not been funded as yet. Think there'll be departures now they have bodies in...which is the way to do it.

Why give a toss what excuses ANYONE at the club has for anything any more?

Think there'll be a lot more interest in Barton as the end of the window approaches...he'll be second choice for lots of clubs who don't want his volatility, but as their targets go elsewhere, they'll want to jump on whatever quality is available.

So before the season even ended it was clear we needed better than we have at... 1 FW 1 RB 1 CB We since sold... 1 CB (Campbell) 1 FW (Kuqi) 1 CM (Nolan) 1 RW (Routledge) 1 LB (Enrique) So we need to sign 2 FW (Ba and...) 2 CB (...) 1 RB (...) 1 LB (...) 1 CM (Cabaye) 1 RW (Obertan) Assume we must be touting Gutierrez about, or Marveaux wouldn't fill any gap we have at the moment.....or (more realistically) we just sign whatever becomes available on the cheap rather than having a vision of a squad with 2 players for every position.

http://digital-stats.blogspot.com/2011/08/...er-british.html I was as guilty as the next man for scoffing at twitter (Twatter etc.) when it was starting up, but it's bloody good when shit like this is going down. I hardly watched any of it on the news channels where the same pieces of video are recycled interminably for 24 hours a day.

I love the look on her face. I think she'll sound more like a 'big Mamma' type, "Outta my way, sister, Aint no Mo'fucka getting my Nik Naks, you bet your sweet ass they aint, mm hmmm!" Like to imagine her sounding like Snoop off The Wire meself. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14474299

Some top brass fella from the Met was on the news last night saying how anyone who mentions a water cannon or rubber bullets is an idiot who doesn't know what they're talking about. They're tools used on large stationary crowds in order to create space, not small highly mobile groups....... http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/10/d...on-police-riots Pandering arseholes.

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/9187...juring_officer/ Sounds like the work of lazy blacks.

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/9187...juring_officer/

Most of those can be got new for 99p - £2.99...but the Beatles never drop their prices. Live at the BBC is £14.69 at the cheapest and £24 at HMV.... http://www.find-cd.co.uk/cds/B000007MVD-Th...-At-The-BBC.htm Would never have lumped that in there with everything else.

I'd agree...but I've been at work since 7.30am and done nowt but post in this thread. The hard work never stops when you're an upstanding and contributing member of society.

You can only laugh watching these people on the TV asking folk to make sure their kids and family are home at night...the people they're talking to are meth-heads who sold their telly so they could score and are busy blowing some randomer for the next hit.

The vast majority of us moral, (relatively) poor & hardworking react (rightly) with outrage when we see people like ourselves behaving in a criminal manner that's beneath us....hence 60 pages in a few days But we see the police, politicians, press and corporations as another strata, we can hardly even relate to them and take it in our stride that these people will use criminality to take what they can get....it's expected....there's almost an iota of begrudging respect for playing 'the system' and climbing the ladder....hence banking threads that are lucky to top 3 pages.

Thats what Ashley/Llambuias like to tell themselves about those in L7 corner.

But you need to consider the average age of a looter. There's gonna be a lot more white 60 year olds in the leafy prosperous areas than there are black grandparents in Peckham. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/156...minorities.html So? So if 7% of pupils in an area are white, and over 3 times as many are black....a random sample will have a vast majority being black. That's only Brent where it's so diverse....but White pupils are in the minority across inner and outer London. There wasn't even a riot in Brent, and it has one of the biggest shopping centres in London. Score more own goals than Frank Sinclair yee like. I'm not talking about the riots yet, just generic London demographics that show White people are indeed in the majority by a factor of 7:1. No argument with you there. But in state schools in London white people are in a minority to the tune of 2:5 ....and white students in some areas are outnumbered by black students to the tune of 1:3. That's before introducing the factor of poverty....which is twice as high amongst the black african population as it is amongst the white.

But you need to consider the average age of a looter. There's gonna be a lot more white 60 year olds in the leafy prosperous areas than there are black grandparents in Peckham. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/156...minorities.html So? So if 7% of pupils in an area are white, and over 3 times as many are black....a random sample will have a vast majority being black. That's only Brent where it's so diverse....but White pupils are in the minority across inner and outer London.

But you need to consider the average age of a looter. There's gonna be a lot more white 60 year olds in the leafy prosperous areas than there are black grandparents in Peckham. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/156...minorities.html

No debate? It was a symbolic downgrading from a discredited rating agency. If not then how come the interest rates the US pays on it's debt fell immediately after S&P's latest joke? The real problem is we (the UK and US) are facing a protracted period of stagnation or a double dip recession. Without growth, we can't reduce the deficit. Something you tory mopheads can't get your heads around it seems. Phil needs to read more Krugman. He's gone so far as to suggest the downgrade was a political favour by someone or other....given their sums were out by $2trillion.

You clearly missed my post earlier... http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/in...ncome-and-work/ Black AND ethnic minority backgrounds. So more than half of the others are more than likely not to be black. So you're looking an even smaller figure. How does that equate to 3 times as many white? Don't lie to the forum Stevie. It's you who's lying figures man. You couldn't even answer why you told lies yesterday and still can't. Obviously your pish above is saying about half of all people living in poverty are black or some ethnic minority. So that's 50%, AT LEAST half of them will be Asian or not black, meaning less than 25% of people under the poverty line in London are black, while AT LEAST 50% are white. I don't think your sums work out there (more than half, wher you say half etc)...but I'd be interested in working it out if you are too.... First of all clarity on the Black/white demographic... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_London By the census of '01 or the estimate of '07 London is roughly 70% White and 11% black

You clearly missed my post earlier... http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/in...ncome-and-work/ Black AND ethnic minority backgrounds. So more than half of the others are more than likely not to be black. So you're looking an even smaller figure. How does that equate to 3 times as many white? Don't lie to the forum Stevie.

Is she black? When writing that post I actually deleted the last line...which would have been...she's not black.

You clearly missed my post earlier... http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/in...ncome-and-work/

More of a gift than cutting benefits which were already at a ridiculously low position though. ...on top of getting the poor to chip in towards the wealthy folks income tax cuts by doubling VAT since it's introduction. Scroungers.