anothersaintinsouthsea

just pointing out that it was in no way "boom and bust".

It is laughable that people on here can claim that PR is undemocratic or unworkable compared to FPTP. Don't forget it is FPTP that has delivered this current impasse. In the 2005 election Labour won a majority of seats with 35% of votes by 60% of the total electorate - is that democratic? One of the only resons that there is so much horsetrading going on at the moment is because of the absurd situation where together Labour and the Lib Dems polled well over 50% of the votes but can't get 50% of the seats. I'd say that was undemocratic and unworkable. People are fearful of change but surely you can see the need for a system that more fairly represent the spread of votes? Additionally it gives voters more choice - if they want it. Once PR was more ingrained this sort of hung parliament would be resolved much more quickly because it would be expected. The understanding between parties would be established and this would be fairly clear to voters when they make their votes.

If playing the markets was that easy we'd all be speculating on the price of oil, gold etc. If it was that obvious that gold was going to shoot back up then they wouldn't have sold, even the IMF were reducing their reserves.

lol you wouldn't score too highly in an ecomonic essay with that superficial argument. "A country in fine shape"? not really, you must be forgetting the hospital waiting listings and crumbling public services. The economy was moving forward in the last couple of years under the Tories but then so was the rest of the world and the recession of the early 90s (under the Tories if you recall) was so bad that it laid waste to all but the strongest businesses and left them a nice vacuum to fill once things picked up a little. I don't see how you could say that boom and bust had been eradicated for good when Britain had only recently been in recession. Brown was an idiot for saying an "end to boom and bust" because it was always going to be misinterpreted and there is no way that any economy can guarantee no recession. In economic terms "boom and bust" refers to a short term cycle of growth followed by recession, often because of political medalling in the money supply. The number of years of growth under Labour are unprecedented in modern times and certainly not "boom and bust" that we saw in the 70s and 80s. Don't get me wrong I'm not a Labour voter and they could have managed the economy in the last few years much more successfully (a rainy day fund would have been good) but your view is a tad lopsided.

Same here but there were more than one or two who embarrassed themselves

Anyone creaming themselves at the thought of Highes becoming manager remember that he spent £25m plus on Julian Lescott at the same time as getting rid of Dunne for peanuts. As for the Torres/Lambert arguments. You are so fking mental it is untrue.

yep. Was trying to sing the words on Saturday but got drowned out by superfast na-na-nas.

Does anybody know the words to the Lambert song?..... .....cos no one around me in the Itchen did. On another note if the Southend fans take the **** out of themselves by singing "that's why we're going down.." you look a bit of a tool by joining in with vitriol. IMO of course.

No, you're right Wiltshire. I guess I was trying to put a brave face on things and hold myself together. Now that my real feelings have come to the surface I just can't keep the tears back. In recompense for my earlier heartlessness I will start a facebook campaign to ban cats from dying.

Do you really think a video of a dead stray cat and his pining mate constitutes "one of the saddest videos ever"?

oh don't be such a tart. A stray cat is dead and we have a thread entitled "possibly one of the saddest videos ever". Utterly rediculous.

+1. they are only cats FFS.

Looking at this afresh today I'm not convinced they will get a points deduction if this plan goes through. As I understood it, if a CVA was agreed before the deadline then you avoid the points penalty. That's what Pompey will be doing, if liquidating the old company is part of the CVA then why would they get a further punishment?

Pompey are like that floater that keeps bobbing back up. Irritating but you know it'll get flushed sooner or later.

Don't forget this plan still relies on HMRC voting yes on the CVA and it now looks like they may have enough % to block.

Oooooh how cunning but the League, if they want, will say "new company? no worries but if you want your golden share you'll have to start on -x points"

But what would be the point of that? They may have agreed in principle to let Andorid work up a CVA but still vote no once it is presented. They'll want this to drag over the deadline for points deductions.

From bitter experience we know that even if there is a clever dodge around the rules the football authorities will ignore the technicalities and apply punishment anyway. If they want to apply a punishment they will no matter what Android does. Who is Loz anyway? With only a couple of exceptions, journalist have consistently shown a poor understanding of the Pompey trainwreck.

Rest in Peace

I love HMRC http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYfi34rfhHc

if this is true lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol

Goodluck FF, for starting that Pompey thread you are a legend!

What does this mean for the likely £wedge that will get Pompey out of admin? I know Android is trying to put together a CVA but that will only procede once someone injects new cash.

Keiron Dyer - great value at £70k per week! Has any player in the history of football cost more per game over his career?

in a nutshell.