paulsfc

Well as a self confessed liberal leftie i think smacking is.....ok. There is a difference between smacking and beating your child. I don't think it should ever be the first choice of discipline or even a regular one but there are certain circumstances where it can be necessary. For example, what if your child ran into or near a road? Do you try and reason with them and hope they understand the dangers or perhaps a short sharp shock that lets them know in no uncertain terms that it isn't acceptable? Anyway it's a personal choice (i have on very rare occassions smacked my daughters bum) and whether you choose to or not, it really isn't anyone else's business how you discipline your own child.

Good news. Can be a game changer on his day. Miles better than De Ridder. The only thing Steeeeve has that Guly hasn't is pace.

Cracking deal for them then. Never been there so wonder how it compares to SMS in terms of facilities, leg room, views etc.

Compared to newer stadia St Mary's is a bargain but was substantially more expensive than both the Riverside in Middlesbrough (£16m) which opened in 95 and Sunderlands Stadium of Light which cost a bargain £23m for 49000 seats!

I like the home, LOVE the away and will get that one. Saints play in red and white do they not? So next season we will be playing in....err...red & white! Don't get all the histrionics on here about a kit. If you don't like it fair enough but some of the stuff spouted on here about boycotts, worst kit ever (in 127 years!!!), disgrace, blah, blah blah is laughable. Get a grip.

Well I did say it's a balance between punishment and rehabilitation so someone should always be punished for their crime within the remit of the law (it is after all not Mccormicks fault that he only served 3 and a half years, that was what the judge felt he could impose within the guidelines he is given). Whether that balance is right in this case I guess time will tell, i.e. if he is genuinely remorseful I'd expect to see him quietly going about his job whilst doing lots for the community and trying to spread the messsage on the consequences of drink driving (not just for himself but for victims as well). Remember he isn't a habitual criminal so it's not the same (or at least I'd hope not) as letting out someone who has a load of previous convictions. There should be less risk of re-offending and more chance of trying to contribute something to society. Leave him in prison for longer and you run the risk of him becoming institutionalised, then on release being at the margins of society and that doesn't benefit anyone. FWIW I agree that it is galling that he has walked straight back into a very decent job and I can't imagine what that must be like for that poor family. I have no sympathy for the man, he made a choice to drive whilst drunk and it has cost 2 innocent kids there life but he has served his punishment and he now has an opportunity to do something positive so perhaps he ought to be left to do that.

There is a balance with all crimes in terms of punishment/rehabilitation. You can't keep every prisoner banged up forever so at some point the vast majority will be released back into society, part of the process of being in prison is to rehabilitate the offender so that when they come out they can re-integrate and become a useful, productive, tax paying, law abiding member of society. The alternative is they come out of prison and either commit more crimes or just generally don't contribute and thus becoming a burden on the state and us as taxpayers. So which would people prefer? I'd prefer they contributed something. If Mccormick was left in prison for 20 years what good would that do? It won't bring those boys back and when he eventually came out he'd be far less likely to be of any use to society.

Dunno why I just didn't post the link in my first post! http://www.saintsfoundation.co.uk/CharitiesPolicy/CharityRequests/tabid/125/Default.aspx

Yes I have, got a stadium tour for a raffle a couple of years ago. Go to Saints Foundation Website, click on Charities Policies, then Charity Requests. There is a form to fill in and send off. Good Luck

8th June

7.30am - 8.30am - wasting time i should spend doing housework reading this forum 8.30 - 11.30 - rush around getting me and my 2 year old ready, doing housework, going shopping, wishing I hadn't wasted an hour reading this forum 11.30 - 12.30 slow meander to SMS, convincing myself that that feeling in my stomach is excitement and not nerves 12.30 - 2.30 - watch saints canter to promotion/watch saints ring every last drop of emotion from me as they wait until 94th minute to score a scrambled winner 2.34pm - dry humping rickie lambert on the pitch

As I wasn't born until 1980 I can't comment on 76 or 78, though 76 has been the clubs shining moment of glory so far which makes it's the clubs biggest achievement but for me as a post 76'er this is at least on par with the 03 cup final. There is potentially more at stake in terms of the future of the club on this game than on a cup final. Having said that if we lose and West Ham go up then the play off semi final first leg will be more important. As for whether the last few years trophies aren't important - for crying out loud we're hardly Barcelona, we can't sniff at any silverware that comes our way! History suggests that we probably won't win a lot else so lets just enjoy it.

1.Lambert 2.Lallana 3.Davis Notable mentions for Cork, Jos, Richardson and Fox who have all been outstanding at times. Schneiderlin has also been great but injuries have c*cked up his season a bit.

I'd take it tonight (though I've already convinced myself that West Ham have this one won) but in a weird sado-masochistic way would like it to go down to the coventry game as the feeling when we beat them would be immense.

Good riddance to the scumbag - his attitude was (as he said in court, albeit i am paraphrasing) I'm a rich footballer, I can get any girl I want. Doesn't exactly sound like the romantic type does he? With the little info that has been released it seems like the rape occurred when he had sex with someone who either was unaware of what was happening or too intoxicated to give any kind of consent (just because she had sex with one man does not mean she would want to have sex with another). The sh*tbag should have realised that she was in no fit state to agree to anything but he went ahead anyway. That is rape any which way you look at it. That is why he went down and the other fella got off, she had agreed to go back to the hotel with him, whether he took advantage of her drunken state is a different matter but obviously the jury felt that he hadn't acted unlawfully (or couldn't prove that he had) As for the tosspot, no mark footballer that called her a money grabbing tramp on twitter he should remember that she hasn't sold her story she went to the police. Don't think they pay victims for info. Hope he gets the sack.