tajjuk

Exactly, Sharia law is just an extremist interpretation of Islam. I mean most Christians eat shellfish despite the bible saying you shouldn't, there are also extracts of the bible that encourage abortion despite the fact that many so called Christians are against it. At the end of the day fundamentalist religious views don't really have that much that ties them to the actual religion and it's truths, these people have basically become a cult of extreme social conservatism. Its more a collection of social ideas they all agree on rather than about the religion, and there are actually a lot of similarities in these approaches between christians like this and muslims like this. They interpret their religions in ways that agree with the views on society and how society should be and then want to inflict those views on everyone else. The far right in the US constantly is advocating for basically a Christian Theocracy in the US, the other day one far right commentator flat out called for a dictatorship so their views could be forced on others because support for LGBT people, and other views they don't like are popular.

lol you cant cross the channel 'illegally', it's just a stretch of water. Also refugees and asylum seekers are exempt from immigration laws as per the 1951 Refugee Convention of which we are a signatory. This whole use of the word 'illegal' is just nonsense, it's just part of the language used to dehumanise these people.

What a categorically dumb argument. It's not our 'will', its their law being forced on other people and forcing people to accept their outdated views, all of which entrenched in fundamentalist religious dogma. It is saying that something people do not have a choice over should not happen and should be illegal. Making homosexuality illegal is akin to Arabic countries banning people for being white or being tall. All those countries are doing is speaking out against a disgusting law that should not exist anywhere in the world, its a fundamental human right, there is no argument here. The Qatari regime and anyone who supports that law are wrong and that should be pointed out at any opportunity. Also if you don't want your country scrutinised, don't bid for the World Cup and invite the entire world to look at your country. I mean they only did this to sportswash their awful regime and turns out it hasn't worked, it's just highlighted how awful they are. Infantino's hypocrisy argument was also spectacularly dumb on so many levels. Is being gay illegal in any of the countries that have called Qatar out on it? No, so there is no hypocrisy. I mean he hilariously basically said that if a country had done bad stuff in the past it basically rules them out from commenting on bad things happening now in other countries, that is so stupid you have to wonder how the man who uttered it got to such a profile position. We (the UK) basically created slavery, but we can't now comment on slavery being bad and other countries shouldn't have slavery? It's just a stupid point. As for the abortion thing, pretty much the entire western world came out against the US supreme courts ruling on that and said it was a bad move. Most of the population of the USA also disagrees with it as well and it was in large part why the GOP did not perform as well as expected in the mid terms. There is also a big difference between a fundamentalist religious minority not liking gay people and it literally being illegal in a country. The US has literally just voted into law more protections for same sex marriage rights just in case the far right Supreme Court went after that as well so not really getting your point there either.

There are certainly risks but we are unlikely going to get a good striker who scores regularly and efficiently in the PL without some sort of gamble, be it on unproven youngster, player with injury record (i.e Ings) or maybe someone who's attitude has not always been the best. Also it does seem that Vickery was mainly commenting about his past, the guy has been banging in the goals regularly in all competitions for many seasons now, he's only 25 as well so still can probably improve, plus you'd think he might want to prove himself in Europe after his first failure and missing out on the World Cup squad.

Well we already knew how incompetent she was, I mean she is the Home Secretary, the key lead for the safety and security of the UK who directly liaises with the security services on matters of national security yet she was sharing sensitive material via personal e-mail and couldn't even do that sending it to the wrong person., It is good we get to see these select committees though, they are much better than the 'theatre' of the House of Commons with all its jeering and shouting, where you can't even call a liar a liar (not to mention how awful the speaker is at the moment as well). In these committees government ministers face a direct questioning by very knowledgeable people and it just exposes their ignorance and incompetence. Let's not forget as well the Tories are trying to gut the civil service, the people who actually have the skills and knowledge to run these departments.

Might depend if Walker is fit, he's probably one of the few defenders in the world that can match Mbappe's pace. The problem with playing France on the front foot and being aggressive (which I agree I think with England's attacking talent and speed would trouble that France defence, especially without protection from Kante) is that you'll leave space in behind and Mbappe would thrive. With Walker as insurance as a covering RB or maybe even CB you might more be able to play that way. To be fair to Southgate I was pleasantly surprised by the tempo and attacking play we showed against Iran, yet it's only Iran but England have tended to always make heavy going of beating team's like Iran and have often played too safe but he played with only one DM and the fullbacks pushed really high and wide. But I do think the only way we will beat France is if we outscore them to be honest and manage to shackle Mbappe. I also think some sh*thousery would work well against France, just have a feeling there are a lot of egos in that team and that if you get about them a bit you might get some reactions.

I do like this Tory MP showing just how incompetent Braverman is - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpZAS0yqkJM Whilst also highlighting the issue with asylum seeking in this country, we wouldn't have anywhere near as big an issue with boats crossing the channel if there were safe available routes through normal ports of entry. (outside a few specific and limited schemes like the one for Ukrainians)

At least with them possibly thinking about this it show their might be some adults in the room, though their thinking is still 'have your cake and eat it', we can't re-join the single market without agreeing to freedom of movement. It's not only that the EU won't accept it, because they won't, but it's fundamental to the system working anyway, you can't have goods moving freely into and out of the UK if the people taking those goods or doing those services can't move freely as well, as then the whole thing fails as 'free' trade. If we want to grow the economy, especially to get out of recession we need to be able to freely trade with our main trade partners. That is the EU, that is the reality the country needs to accept and that means single market AND freedom of movement, there is no other way. (plus we need to the labour force, there is no quick fix to our multiple skill shortages) The ERG and the right dominated media have absolutely ruined this country and weak centre-right Tory leadership has allowed them to do it, Cameron started it by allowing the farce referendum in the first place and Sunak is continuing it by being scared of them. Again we need some senior Tories to stand up and do what is right for country, not what is right for their fractured party and stop being bullied by a small mad minority. But of course that won't happen. I do also hope that Labour's non-sensical plan on Brexit is basically Starmer avoiding riling up the Brexit media and the xenophobic red wall voters for no reason before the election and that he has real plans to re-join the single market. I think he is a lot smarter than what he has currently been saying on the matter, but its still a worrying position for Labour to appear to be almost as braindead on this issue as the Tories.

I think we'll lose to France in the quarter final, unless they get a few more injuries. I just can't see us containing Mbappe with our defence, we should score as I don't think France are good defensively either, Lloris is nowhere near the player he was and I don't think the likes Kunde, Upamecano or Fofana are in form. Australia probably have less talent than most championship teams but opened up France quite a few times and probably should have scored another. It does seem to me, on these initial games that its the younger players and teams with younger players who are generally shining.

I'd imagine if we were willing to spend £30 million plus on a forward in the summer then we are still likely to do that, but it obviously has to be the right choice and getting someone mid season is more difficult. I wonder if we might dip into the South American market considering their season will be finished, I see no one has taken another punt on bring Gabi Barbosa to Europe for another go despite him bagging a lot of goals over the last 5 years, something like 130 in around 190 games. Has to be probably the best striker outside of Europe right now.

I think you could make an argument for pretty much everyone from Fulham down bar maybe Leicester who likely had a bad start and will probably be way out of the picture. IMO there is a much of muchness about 10-11 PL teams, anyone can beat anyone, games will come down to a bit of luck, a dodgy decision, a flash of quality etc. all those teams are capable of decent runs and horrible slumps in form. Consistently on this forum I have seen people be massively negative about most of our players and massively over estimate other team's squad and signings. Villa being a huge example, people creaming about their signings when in reality most of them have flopped, Forest similar, Palace similar, etc. There are just 9 points between 9th and bottom, all those teams could get involved in relegation and again none bar maybe West Ham or Leicester have stand out squads above anyone else. There is more than half the season to go and team's have avoided relegation after losing their first 7 straight or barely having any points on the board, yet we seem to have people panicking because we are ONE WIN from 15th..... Personally I think with Lavia, KWP back fit and Tino back, our back of 4 of KWP, Bella-Kotchap, Salisu and Tino, with Lavia in front of them is probably the best back line out of those teams mentioned. Of course going forward we have issues, but one or two players could easily see us be transformed in this regard.

I think 28 would be fine within the clubs policy, whilst we tend to go more for the 21-24 sort of bracket we have occasionally signed an older player over the years. It's hardly like he's 32. I mean 28 I think was the age we got Pelle in the past?. Culeta-Car is 26, Armstrong must have been 26, and wasn't Ings 26/27? So not too different to those.

I think he needs to be involved further forward and he's never really had that chance often playing in a two. He's got good technical ability, we know he can score goals as well he just doesn't often get close enough to the box and we have also seen he can put good crosses in. I think he has the potential if freed up a little to play more like a De Bruyne role, ok nowhere near as good but still working that inside right channel with his good passes, crosses and getting onto the odd cut back for shots I think would be a better use of his abilities.

He was back running on the pitches like a month ago, I think he's ahead of schedule. Some players come back from ACLs in 6 months, so i think he'll be ready in the new year. I mean to be honest he was one of our best players last season, certainly for the first half, having him, Lavia and KWP out over recent games is a massive blow to the squad and impacts performances. Just getting those 3 back fit will improve the team massively. Our fullbacks have always been key in creative play as well. ---------------------- I think the Gakpo ship has sailed, he seems to be getting better and better, he has 18 goals and 16 assists in all competitions so far this year from just 30 games. In the league he has 21 goal contributions from just 13 games. I think clearly you'll see a Champions League level club go for him, maybe not a Man City or Bayern level just yet but I think like a Spurs, Dortmund, Milan etc. level club. -------------------------- Didn't Manji say in another thread that we already have two signings lined up for Jan?

They will probably thump us with one of their struggling players doing well and the Liverpool biased media will hail it as the rebirth of their season. I just want to see the team put a shift in, be disciplined but still have a go, so aggressive not timid. If they then beat us with their superior ability than so be it. I'd also maybe go for someone like Djenepo or Edozie and just have him constantly go at TAA, as well as getting JWP to drift into the right hand channel to deliver cross between TAA and the right centre-back, instructing Adams to attack that space.

I think the comment about the Stoke thing is the club being a mess from top to bottom, we are nowhere near that IMO. We are well run club, with good people about, owners who have a clear idea about what they want to do, a good academy, some very good young players, clearly no real financial issues if we were going to whack £30 million plus on an attacker etc. I mean really if we had managed to say get Gakpo over the line in the summer then I think we would probably be sitting 10-12th and Ralph would still probably have his job. From what I have read about his time at Stoke and from comments about from the man himself, I think he basically didn't look before he leapt. He was a young league 1 level manager, in his first job and a much bigger Championship club, that had very recently been in the PL, came knocking and he jumped at the chance, probably thinking he'd take the club back in the PL within a year or two. But when he got there he found a disorganised club, with no real identity or plan, loads of player turnover before he got there and the following summer and when he tried to do what had worked at Luton it just didn't work because the whole club was set up wrongly for it and he didn't get the support to do the change needed. He said in his interviews that hes had multiple approaches from clubs but wanted one with a similar ethos to Luton and the people at Luton, which is what he said attracted him to us, that the two clubs shared similar approaches. I think people under estimate how a club's atmosphere, behind the scenes etc. can really impact players and managers. Just look at Utd, huge resources as club, gone through what 5 managers now since Fergie left, all struggled to get the team to perform consistently, get signings working etc. which just indicates that what goes on behind the scenes, the staff they have, how transfers are handled, the whole direction of the club is just bad. Also not really worried about the style of football in the short term, doesn't sound like he's some dedicated hoofball merchant just a manager being adaptable to the players he has got, what they can do and how good they are compared to the opposition.

Still even if you debate the merits of JWPs form, at least he is fit and playing regularly. I am pretty sure I read that Phillips hasn't completed a full 90 mins since December last year, so he's basically hasn't played a full match in a year. Neither Gallagher nor Henderson are playing regularly either. Also I think all of Gallaghers last 5 starts for Chelsea have come in defeats. There is no logical argument for most of the people he is supposedly competing with to be there aside Bellingham and Rice, and even Rice hasn't been at his best. If Phillips was like a Gerrard level player then you might understand the gamble, but he's just a fairly decent PL level centre mid. Also as I said the Tomori thing is absurd and just shows Southgate does not know what he is going. To pick Coady and Maguire ahead of a guy regularly playing for AC Milan, who won the league last year and is getting help with his game from Maldini is just bonkers IMO.

And Trent. If we knocked their golden boy out of the world cup just when he had got in by default they would hate us forever I reckon.

He's not been in great form, but then Maguire is there, Phillips is there, Henderson is there, so that argument goes out the window IMO. Those players are out of form and/or unfit. Phillips is not fit and is injury prone, and then when fit wasn't playing anyway. The guy has played a consistent run of games for about 18 months, so is going to be useless in a tight schedule mid season World Cup where the games come every few days. He did the same last year taking an unfit Henderson and he was a complete waste of space in the squad, he couldn't play the full rotation games needed and looked completely off the pace when he came on. Gallagher is also questionable considering again he's not a regular. At least one thing you can guarantee with JWP is fitness and availability, he plays every game, works hard and his set pieces would offer something different. Tomori is also a hilarious omission, he is probably the best English centre-back right now, consistently playing well for a top Milan side who won the league last year and playing Champions league football. Stones is a back up to Dias and Laporte when they are both fit, White has lost his centre-back place and fills in at right back, Eric Dier is well Eric Dier and then there is Harry Maguire who has been a liability for about 2 years now.

How is he 'under valued'? He was Championship manager of the year last year. Also according to him he has had multiple approaches from clubs (and youd have to presume they were bigger championship and lower PL clubs for them to be a step up) but he was wanting the right fit, presumably as he'd jumped into Stoke and then realised what a shambles they were from top to bottom (as evidenced by their continued struggles and changes of manager). What I find odd is people seemed to like the potential of Steve Cooper until he signed his new contract, who until this season had never managed in PL before and basically only had Championship experience. Plus despite is promotion last year, Nathan Jones was voted manager of the year ahead of Steve Cooper.

The more I read and hear the less I am worried, seems a really good fit for the club and what we need.

You can have an opinion but please try to base it on more than complete bollocks. 'Done ok at Luton'? In his first spell they were pretty much the best attacking team in the football league and got them promoted. In his second spell he stabilised a them when they looked doomed for relegation and then took a club with around the 5th or 6th lowest budget in the division into the play offs, so outdoing teams with two or even three times the budget and won manager of the year. As for Stoke, he didn't spend 'plenty of money', he spent about £5 million that summer and they had a massive overhaul of players, they lost 9 players to end of loans or free transfers. They also brought in like 10 players, not only do Forest show that sort of turnover struggles to build a team but Stoke have been a shambles for years, they are 15th now and finished 14th last season, so hardly like they have done much since he left and have already been through another manager. It was Gary Rowett who spent a fortune at Stoke whilst they failed in the Championship, he spent over £50 million.

Personally I don't understand the vitriol and very extreme reactions. If we were going to sign a young player who had just been Championship player of the year last year I think most here would be excited about the signing, or at the very least understand it. Yet doing the same with a manager, a guy who has consistently made a lower resourced team punch above its weight (and ok has a very short failed spell at Stoke) and people are somehow convinced the guy is going to be terrible and should be nowhere near the club. It doesn't really make any sense, there is no logic behind from what I can see, many just seem to not know much about him and thus that ignorance seems to propel them to being fully convinced he is not the right choice. I mean if this is how many of you seem to make decisions I don't really know how you get through life. I voted unsure because I just don't know enough to make an informed decision, but the little I have seen I can't see many alarm bells. He is a young manager, who seems very dedicated and passionate about his job, seems known to be a good man manager (something clearly missing with Ralph), seems to have been praised for helping young players develop (ticks a box with us again), and as said has consistently made a team with resources lower than many around them perform better than their level. It's also not a particularly unusual appointment for us considering how we have appointed managers in the past and its pretty similar to how we approach player recruitment as well. It's just baffling that you see people preferring a known failure like Gerrard over someone like Jones who is more of an unknown but has IMO more chance of being very successful. Then you have people being envious of Lopetegui, and again I have to ask why? A guy who has only ever managed in Portugal or Spain, failed spectacularly at Real Madrid and despite being given vast resources didn't win anything with Porto either, one decent season aside with Sevilla he's hardly been that successful yet again we people seeing that as some sort of coup, but Nathan Jones is some sort of disaster that should be nowhere near the club, it just makes no sense.

Er Spurs protested against Gattuso for good reason, he has said some very poor stuff in the past and had a clash with them back as a player. None of that controversy exists about Jones.

Did anyone say they were ALL genuine Asylum seekers? Or are you projecting again because your point has been destroyed multiple times, so you are now arguing a point no one actually made. I mean you literally put up the list of the countries they are coming from, was it 100% Albanians? Oh no it wasn't it had Afghanistan, Iran, Iran, Iraq, Syria, actually your own list showed that just 16% of them were from Albania. So why all this focus on just Albanians when even in your own evidence they are just a small proportion of the people crossing. The vast majority of the people who are crossing are from countries that have serious issues right now, issues which in many case we had a large role in causing. That would logically indicate that most of them are likely people seeking genuine asylum. 16% is a bit more than the Lib Dems got in the last election, they way you are focused on Albanians so much is the equivalent of deriving all UK government policy on what the Lib Dems are doing. Should we treat all football fans like hooligans? Also the Population of the UK is 67.4 million, why would we ever need to 'make room' for what 40k thousand people? Also don't worry the incoming Tory austerity policy will kill plenty of people to 'make room' as you so eloquently put it, between austerity and Boris' bungling of Covid we have hundreds of thousands of 'room'. But hey let's make a giant fuss about a few thousand desperate people crossing the channel on boats, rather the horrific 12 years of Conservative government that is the real problem.