Dark Munster

You really ought to, though. Because if we go on to get promoted, and stay in the PL for 7 years, win the cup, all by paying players 100K or more a week and building up debts to over 100m with no intention of paying back, and continue to trade while insolvent, you'll have every right to call us CHEATING BASTARDS

Remember, now it's at the knockout stage, the Germans have a 1/2 goal advantage. NO-ONE beats the Germans at penalties.

That would be more than nice. But do you honestly think that's even remotely possible?

Nigeria captain Kanu has criticised fellow striker Yakubu for missing an open goal during their 2-2 draw with South Korea, a result which put the Asian side through to the last 16 at the expense of the Super Eagles. "As a striker that's the easiest one to score, so if you miss it then I don't know what you will do," Kanu said. "If we didn't create the chances we'd complain, but in fact we made them." Former England international striker Alan Shearer said on the BBC: "I reckon that's the worse miss I've ever seen." http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2010/8755587.stm Um, Messrs. Shearer and Kanu, I reckon you forgot about this one then (Kanu vs. Boro)? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jQG73v7X0U

Because, unlike the rest of the world, Capello thinks the donkey (7 goals in 61 appearances) is better than Crouch (21 goals in 40 appearances - some for a few minutes).

Not if we draw 3-3 and the Yanks draw 0-0.

It's quite simple really. If said billionaire owner decides to spend, for example, £100m on Ronaldo and pays him £200k per week out of his own pocket, then the club is living within its means (even if the club only has an average crowd of one man and his dog). The same is true if the money is borrowed and the billionaire owner pays it back at whatever time frame is agreed upon. It may seem unfair for a few clubs to have a sugar daddies, but that's life and it doesn't break any rules. Unless ML defaults on any debts (and by all accounts there aren't even any) Saints are living within their means. It's when an owner (rich or not) borrows money to fund a squad of highly paid mercenaries for a tin-pot club, and otherwise could not afford players on 1/4 of the salaries, and then goes into administration, paying back creditors 20p in the pound, that's when they were living beyond their means. Not only did they steal from creditors, but also from other teams who lived within their means but were denied a place in the PL or progress in the Cup by the CHEATING BASTARDS

Yes, but who wants one year of foreplay without a climax?

More importantly, did Saints actually vote in favour of the CVA??

I'd wait 28 days before getting too cocky, pfc.

Pub level football. But the skates are so proud of their Granddads.

Sooner than England doing it again, then?

As well as being a cheat, Keita is also an idiot: by having Kaka sent off he is helping Portugal (their rivals for 2nd place) in their final match against Brazil.

Hands up anyone who thinks Heskey should be in the team on Wednesday? http://whitenoisemp3s.com/previews/Nothing_but_Crickets_preview_whitenoisemp3s-com.mp3

That's one plan, and it may or may not be better than having him upfront with Crouch. But both alternatives are infinitely better than having Heskey in the team.

That certainly is the £140m question.

1) It is unsecured debt, even though it gets paid back 100%. A disgrace that football creditors can vote, but those are the rules. 2) Why indeed? I think you've answered your own question there.

But in between NP and GB we had Dudd and Gormless, who left NP with sinking ship to save.

What about Crouch?

ooops.

Just swapping Heskey and SWP with Crouch and Cole would be a huge improvement. Simples.

Apart from Heskey, you mean?

This.

And I bet the Germans have been practising penalties with them, day in day out.

You're lucky. Here in the States we have Martin Tyler (on ESPN), the most boring commentator ever.