Hamilton Saint

Bialkowski Thomas Jaidi Perry Harding Papa James Hammond Lallana Connolly Lambert Subs: Davis, Trotman, Mills, Wotton, Gobern, Mellis, Antonio.

2.33 p.m. No team news yet on OS. No sign of Saints Player coverage yet. Jeez!

It's all a matter of perspective. When you say BA "have it very very very cushy", do you mean that a unionised workforce is well-paid and has good benefits compared to those who do similar jobs for other airlines? The workers at Easyjet and Ryan Air don't have the same advantages because they are working for an airline that cuts corners and benefits in order to offer the cheapest flights. Cheap flights are possible because overheads are kept low - i.e., lower wages and fewer benefits. Your comparison seems to say that BA employees are somehow in the wrong ("very very very cushy"). Or, to put it another way, that BA employees ought to be treated in the same inferior way as those working under poorer conditions. I'm making the same point again - don't pit some workers against others. Don't blame workers for improving their lot through unions and professional associations. Look to improve the conditions of ALL workers.

Blackwater Worldwide is a private corporation involved in military and security activities. They have been linked to controversial activities in Iraq. Some basic info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_Worldwide

There's a new book about the history of the Lancaster bomber. I think it's called Lancaster. There's also a book about the Battle of Britain called Spitfire Summer that's interesting.

All the best to Michael. He's probably the player I have admired most in the last ten years - not just for his performances on the pitch, but the courageous and dogged way he dealt with his knee injury. His injury was probably the decisive element (not the only one, of course) that led to our relegation.

It's not "we", unless the workplace is a true democracy. Very few workplaces are, or can be, a democracy. The best you can hope for is benign dictatorship. Ultimately, though, some have power and control, others don't. Realistically, the dynamic is invariably an adversarial one, no matter how reasonable and fair the administrators are. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss".

1. Too many private American contractors involved - e.g., Blackwater security. 2. Bush claimed it was partly self-defence in response to 9/11, but that was fallacious; he also claimed it was preventing Hussein's oppression of elements in his own country. The latter argument is somewhat true, but the aftermath brought other detrimental effects. Which of the two situations are worse? 3. Law and order has not been returned to the country. It was evident pretty quickly after the invasion that the war-planners had not considered how to deal with the post-war situation. 4. The Bush administration rushed into the war - definitely not war as last resort. 5. A concern for civilians may have been exercised during the fighting but not during the post-war period.

Our former PM, Jean Chretien, sensed the mood of the Canadian public (well, he read the poll results!), a definite majority of whom were opposed to participating in the "coalition of the willing", and decided that Canada would not be assisting in the invasion of Iraq. Tony Blair, on the other hand, in the face of a similar reluctance from the British public, made the opposite decision. It was my impression that he was ingratiating himself with Bush in order to advance the U.K.'s economic and strategic position vis-a-vis the Americans. I think he also had a Thatcherite/Churchillian moment, and persuaded himself thast there were moral/religious reasons that prompted his support for the invasion. Man, was he wrong!

I see Jeff Beck and Eric Clapton are doing a show together in Toronto on February 21st. I've seen Clapton before, but not Beck. 'Twould be a great show!

I love his version of Stardust.

1) A Charlie Brown Christmas by Vince Guaraldi - a classic Christmas album for jazz lovers. 2) Phil Spector's Christmas album, which has been re-released many, many times. It features popular Christmas songs done in Spector's familiar wall-of-sound production style with Darlene Love, The Ronettes, The Crystals, and Bob B. Soxx & The Blue Jeans.

One to mention Rupert for no apparent reason. .

Good comments, as usual, from Pardew. He is a very good communicator - always seems to say something that is commonsensical and right for the moment.

Well, yes, that commentary left a lot to be desired, but on the other hand, I am eternally gateful that we have something instead of nothing. We need to remember (some of you, of course, have never even experienced this) that there was a day when the only coverage of a Saints game was a written description of the game published in the Echo's pink edition early Saturday evenings. In those days there was no live televison coverage, no radio coverage, no internet discussion groups. No nothing! What we have now is fantastic. And I for one am grateful for it. Sure, there are problems with the system, but let's keep things in perspective. Things have never been so good for the keen football fan.

I don't disagree with you at all (I wish people would read what is actually written and not jump to conclusions). Yes, it was a nice moment (I said that). Yes, pitch invasions are wrong. So, yes, his parents need to have a word. I said that. I also added that if it's true that this boy has done this several times before (read post #2), then this is an extra concern. In other words, my point was a "yes, but", in response to some who were saying it was nothing but a laugh. And then the heavy hitters arrived ...

If the cap fits ... but, no, it wasn't aimed specifically at you. Can't we debate a point without being characterised and dismissed?

Oh, dear ... whatever you say.

What's surprising is the number of posters who can't manage a subtle and nuanced discussion - a "yes, but" sort of debate. Too "serious" for them, apparently.

I'm just going on what was written in post #2 and #3. And if it's true what's written there, then there is something to be concerned about.

Speaking of over-reaction ...

Yes, and Papa (interesting coincidence!) comes across as being a good-hearted and compassionate fella. But Papa didn't know that the boy has been set up to do this several times before (apparently). Now that we know this, it puts a different complexion on the situation, doesn't it?

My point wasn't designed as a criticism of you.

A matter of perspective. For the spectators, yes, "good fun and a bit of a laugh". But since he has, reportedly, done this a few times, this is a parental issue; he needs to learn that this is not acceptable behaviour and should not happen again. Unfortunately, his antics seemed to have been condoned and reinforced.

Yep, sounds like Will Cope to me.