Kitman

In what way?

Nothing to lose versus a point is a good result mentality - criminal stupidity. Houghton is beginning to come across as a bit thick. I imagine he's a lot like Mike Bassett's No 2 in his approach, and agrees with everyone about everything. "Shola Ameobi? Terrible player, terrible positioning, no good for us at all" Interviewer: "Hasn't Mike Ashley just signed him on a new 5 year deal?" "Aye, great player, great positioning. Future of the club to be honest."

Pretty much. I doubt anyone would talk about Spurs otherwise, or any more than other Prem clubs as it were.

Lovely, looking forward to it. Gary Glitter will also perform a summertime children's special at SJP, with Michael Jackson as his special guest.

True, but when Ashley was sounding him out about the job up here there wasnt a lot of us who had a good word to say about him....... If only we could wind the clock back then. I'd have hated Redknapp at the time because I don't think he'd be a long term appointment, he's something of a chequebook manager in my eyes and a bullshitter, and would be on his toes the moment he got a better offer from a Southern team. He's also extravagantly ugly, looking like a wax caricature that's been melting by the fire. Now I'd have him at the club in a flash. At least he has a clue what he's doing.

We haven't had the happiest record with Spanish players, I wonder if a Spanish manager would be any different? It's a bit like the plonk you get on holiday, it tastes pretty good sitting in the sunshine by the Med but take some home and it's bloody terrible.

If he's trying to get a transfer back to Spain, this is a stroke of genius. Joe Kinnear strikes me as an understanding kind of bloke.....

Spurs get to safety because they appointed a proven Prem class manager and gave him some money to spend. Who'd have thought it, eh? They know a thing or two, those Spurs directors!

Incredibly they seem to think Kinnear is a proper manager. Therefore any new appointment would presumably be a stop gap. Seems to me Venables would be better than nothing, I still think it's more about there being 3 worse teams than us; I have no expectation we could put a run together, so we're relying on the likes of Stoke, Boro andWBA being unable to do it either. Not sure what anybody could do coming in with 9 games remaining tbh.

Deary me. How transparent.

The team was pretty awful throughout Allardyce's tenure. Whether that would have been a permanent state of affairs is up for conjecture but there's no doubt in my mind he deserved the sack. That he looks a good option in comparison to the current crew is more a comment on them than a compliment to Allardyce imo.

Well, you reap what you sow. It shouldn't surprise anyone if people stay away next season. No doubt there'll be fans who'll turn up regardless and good on them, but if I was an impoverished season ticket holder I'd be thinking long and hard about just to pick and choose matches. It's been bad enough watching highlights from the armchair tbh, and to be fair not just under Ashley's tenure either.

So... three, then. Barnes has been a failure as a manager, hasn't he? And he's a marginally better manager than a pundit too.

Dear me. I had this nailed on as a Fulham win. Nothing short of 3 points against Hull will do. We're supposed to have quality players; it's time for them to deliver.

Whatever. What a pointless thread.

where was the "Have you seen uglier football" question?

His best solo was on 'Southern Man' but he was never much for lead guitar. It's plainly his solo. If it was anyone else, they'd have turned his amp off after two minutes of butchering the song.

I think that message actually did more harm than good. It came about mainly after the Leah Betts tragedy and once people twigged how low the risk was of that actually happening the use of ecstasy went up if anything. I think speed and coke are more likely to kill you, along with drink - i.e. in a one-off 'overdose'. I seem to remember reading something to that effect at the time. A much more important issue should have been the long-term effects of prolonged use of MDMA. Unfortunately the tabloids weren't so keen on that story. Interesting point. When you're young you think you're bullet proof. I knew people in the nineties who would take a handful of E's every weekend due to the tolerance they'd built up. God knows what effect that's had on them by now. Not like spliff, which only affects your short term, errr, your erm, errr..... no, it's gone.

Regarding Neil Young, I'm reminded of the guitar solo on a version of "You Are Like A Hurricane", which I've heard a couple of times recently on the radio. It has to be the worst solo I've ever heard, not only because it's terrible, tuneless and interminable but because it ruins what would otherwise be a classic song. Not sure if this is just a live version, or the studio version, but it's bloody awful. And I like his stuff generally though, especially After the Goldrush.

Drink! for you know not whence you came nor why: drink! for you know not why you go, nor where. Drink! for you live to get minging on a Satdee, innit.

I think you have a simplistic view of this issue. People who want to get into drugs do so with very little difficulty these days. Prohibition has failed in that respect. Also nobody as far as I can tell in this thread is advocating free drugs for all; the idea is that by taking the lucrative trade off the dealers, and by attempting to regulate the consumption and quality, you might benefit both addicts and society as a whole and achieve a measure of control where none currently exists. Furthermore, you seem to have absolute contempt for your fellow man in general, and assume that at the first opportunity people will be out on a drug fuelled binge. Personally I prefer to believe if you give people education and opportunity, they wouldn't choose a life of addiction and hopelessless. I accept this may be a naive viewpoint.

It must surely be obvious the "war on drugs" has been well and truly lost by the authorities. When I lived in the UK, my sense was that illegal drugs could easily be obtained in the smallest towns up and down the country, never mind the big cities, inclusing crack and smack. If you mention legalisation, the moral majority brigade will go into overdrive, turning their outrage on the evil of drugs and the wasted lived. However in any rational assessment you have to distinguish between the harm that illegal drugs do - which can undoubtedly be severe - and the impact of the status quo. The status quo does nothing to stop the growth and impact of drugs and is nothing more than a sticking plaster on a severed artery in my opinion. We can bang on all day about the miserable life of addicts and how hard drugs ruin lives and most people won't disagree. It's what to do about it. You may as well march up and down in the Commons making laws against wasps, cow turds and the tide coming in. You may not like it but it solves nothing just because you make it illegal. Tony Blair never seemed to figure this out, typical lawyer. There's got to be a better way, but it's unpalatable to a large number of voters, many of whom are of pensionable age, and would therefore be political suicide for a government. To control the distribution of drugs, and the crimewave associated with taking hard drugs, there has to be a massive programme of medical intervention, treatment, education and a base level improvement of vulnerable people's lives. Criminalising addicts, locking them up, and laughable attempts to "crack down" on dealers and the like isn't going to work, it never has and it can't be done imo. To me, it would be far better to register and treat addicts to hard drugs, and if necessary give them free drugs for life if they can't be turned away from it. The key is trying to prevent future generations falling into the same traps, this takes education and involves giving people informed choices. It would take real moral courage to try to legalise and control drugs. I don't think it will happen in the UK in the next twenty years.

That Groucho Marx quote, about not being a member of a club that would have me as a member, springs to mind. Not that I received the offer, gadzooks

You would nly need to charge them a quid each to get in. Probably a fair price at the moment.

Yes, but how much of that is down to having rubbish managers? I'm all for getting rid of rubbish players but motivation of capable players is the manager's job. It's hard imo to judge whether we've had a lot of poor signings, because most of our managers since Robson have been incapable of getting performances out of the players. We might have a clear out if we go down - and that depends on players with longer term contracts being willing to go - but it doesn't mean we'll get any better players in.