stevegrant

Dunno about that, Lee Hughes ran away from the scene of his death by dangerous driving crime but only served 2 of a 4-year sentence.

Poor finishing cost us just as much as poor defending tonight. We had more than enough chances to get something from the game, but you can't fail to mark people like we did tonight and expect to take any points.

How many times do you need it banging into your skull that, for as long as I have been an admin on here, not a single person has ever been banned because of their views. Rules have been put in place in an attempt to keep discussion civil. We don't expect everyone to agree on every issue that's discussed, that would be boring and would defy the point of a forum like this, but we do expect people to at least show a modicum of respect for other posters, regardless of whether you agree with them or not. That is why you were banned under one of your previous guises on the old forum, because you were abusive and rude towards anyone who disagreed with your point of view. I don't remember ever saying that I won't listen to peoples' views. I'm always willing to listen to opinions about the forum and how it's run, but it's entirely up to me whether I then act on them. Do you honestly think Hilton Hotels, an international corporation, are going to change their policy off the back of your single complaint? You know as well as I do (or at least you should do) that they've probably got a set of pre-defined "thank you for your comments" letters which they drop the customer name and hotel name into a space and hope that settles the matter. If it was a really bad ****-up, someone might get a bollocking and they might include a voucher as well for goodwill, because it doesn't cost them anything. Do you seriously believe that?? The diversity of opinions on the main board is still as wide as ever. The overall number of posters is down since we moved to the paid subscriptions, but in my opinion, the actual quality of posts has risen significantly. People are much more careful when there's money at stake (even if it is only a fiver), which I believe has led to many more "considered" replies than before when people would bash the keyboard in response to someone's comments and then all hell would break loose. As I've said before, this forum is NOT a democracy. How we run the forum is entirely up to us. We're happy to listen to peoples' opinions, but it's still entirely up to us whether we alter the way we run things. There are plenty of "minority" views available to view on the forum, they don't tend to hide, and like every other view, they are tolerated by pretty much everyone on the forum.

Er, since when has the forum ever been a "democracy"? Have you (or anyone else) ever been asked to vote on who runs the forum or how it's run? A handful of us run the forum, and we do so as we see fit. That has never changed, even back in the old Saints Forever days. If we decide we don't want somebody posting on the forum, that's our prerogative. As it is, we try to be as fair and even-handed as possible, but, quite simply, you are very very wrong if you have got it into your head that this forum is a democracy. Put it another way, I wouldn't expect to have a say in how you ran your own website, so why should you expect to have a say in how we run ours?

At least you can rely on one site to get its facts right...

or David Icke...

I'd suggest you check it again then. I'm pretty sure that, when I signed up for the loyalsaints forum god knows how many years ago, it didn't mention anything about being sent e-mails "asking for help" (let's face it, you and I both know it's advertising, albeit subtly worded) to further a commercial venture that wasn't even close to being in your thoughts when you launched that site/forum. As an example, it's like Rupert Murdoch using all of his contact details from Sky Digital customers to advertise The Times and then turning around and saying "well they're linked because they're part of the same group of companies". News International simply wouldn't get away with it, simply because BSkyB and whatever limited company The Times officially comes under (Times Publishing or something like that, I think), are different entities. Whether there's a link in ownership is irrelevant. Customers aren't necessarily aware of that link (and almost certainly don't care), and I'm sure they'd get pretty ****ed off if they got e-mails from Sky advertising a completely different product.

Dyer was reportedly on £5k a week, and I'd be stunned if Robertson and Smith are on even half that between them.

Also consider the fact that he might just not fit into the system Millwall are playing this season, rather than him not being good enough. After all, they were happy to pay £150k for him last summer.

Might be worth pointing out that I believe Saints DO get a small percentage of the away ticket sales, by the way...

He played for Millwall's reserves against our second string on Wednesday night, so someone obviously liked what they saw in that game. I'm also intrigued by the need for more midfielders when our need is certainly defensively.

He was arguing with the ref for about 20 seconds, presumably aiming a torrent of abuse at him, and then eventually got fed up and threw the ball at him

Keegan didn't make those signings either, though. It's all well and good him whinging at the players who have looked crap who were forced upon him, but strangely he's not complained about the likes of Coloccini coming in... Redknapp fairly publicly turned the Newcastle job down because Ashley told him transfer dealings would be left to the as-yet-unappointed director of football (or "Executive Director (Football)" as Wise is bizarrely titled). I'm pretty sure he would have told Keegan exactly the same thing. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if KK just said "yeah yeah, that's fine, just give me the job" without actually thinking what it meant to his role.

There's also some intriguing editing which has put Sibierski's header that hit the post ahead of McGoldrick's effort that hit the post, the latter of which clearly happened first!

That sending off was hilarious. What a pillock.

I keep getting e-mails telling me I've won $57m on the Nigerian lottery and that I just need to deposit $10,000 in order to facilitate the transfer of funds to my account - I wonder if that's what Ashley's contact was?

Totally agree. Ashley has already put £100m into clearing Newcastle's debt (which only covered about half of the total, apparently) and committed himself to injecting another £20m per year on top of what the club generated in revenue. To be honest, I'll be surprised if he finds a buyer for a profit as the club's such a poisoned chalice.

Speaking of these bits of malware... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7645420.stm

They are only impossible to comply with if HMRC (and other creditors who reject the CVA proposal) makes up more than 25% of the creditors. Given that Norwich Union and Barclays account for £20-25m between them, I can't imagine that applies in this case. Luton only lost 20 points because of the failure to agree a CVA. 10 of the 30 points were a punishment for various dodgy agent-related payment misdemeanours. Totally agree.

He's hardly likely to back the idea of *not* building a third runway, though, is he?

There is one at the bottom of the page, but I will get one put in at the top as well when I get a chance.

Only going by what I saw from Block 5 - looked like he basically put as much of his body in the way as possible and it ricocheted off his shoulder.

My match report is now on the main site. A good win, but let's not get carried away yet. Remember what happened last time we did that? And just as a coincidence, our next game is on Sky...