Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[beninho]

First topic message reminder :

https://officiating.worldrugby.org/?module=3&section=36&subsection=129&language=en

"It is not mandatory for the team receiving the challenge to face it."

How many effing times. If they don't face it up silently and respectfully they get massive media criticism.

No they don't!

This is getting crazy!

[McLaren]

dyna

You tried wikipedia?

[pedro]

Corbyn was political advisor to the Venezuelan government.

[kwinigolfer]

Corbyn was political advisor to the Venezuelan government.

And Boris Johnson was (and still is) a young apprentice for Drumpf. A pox on both of their houses.

[super_realist]

Jas, don’t think anybody disagrees high earners should pay higher taxes. And they also do. Question is how much more.

PS: then why shouldn’t the 40-fags-a-day-fat-loser pay an extra ‘insurance’ when he’ll most likely be a much higher burden on the NHS than the guy in the country house?

They're already paying a ****load of tax on their fags. Consider that as their insurance against lung disease perhaps?

Surely fag smokers should also be paying a climate change levy on the polluting aspect of their revolting habit?

Maybe they are, given the % of a pack of 20 that's tax?

Nothing as ever been said about climate levy's on fags, so pretty sure that it's not part of the taxation. It's a demerit tax primarily on the basis of "health".
They could add a quid to a pack easily. Furthermore, they should double the price of a pack in general, like they did in Australia. No one needs to smoke, and not a single person in the world doesn't know it's bad for you.

Is it, bollox. We assume as much, but can you tell me that tax is all spent in the NHS? Talking about emissions, not health so won't comment on rest.

A demerit tax isn't required to be spent on any particular consequences of consuming a certain product. It's supposed to be a method to reduce the number of people buying it.
If you smoke and if Corbyn is being consistent (which he never is) he should be talking about a Climate Levy on fags.

[super_realist]

Does anyone know what Corbyn and for that matter McDonald/Abbot did up till now ?

Corbyn and Abbot have been in politics since their early 20's. Corbyn Steptoe was as a Trade Unionist in 1971, so he's never had a proper job.
I suspect Abbot is the same although I didn't want to look her up on Wikipedia incase I was confronted with a picture of her fat ugly face.

McDonnell according to Wikipedia was training to be a Catholic Priest, which tells you that he's already got a predilection for being a complete moron which is reflected in his current position. He was also privately educated but wants to get rid of Private Schooling. The guy is mental.

You could say the same for most MP's though from all parties, most have never had an actual job, most understand nothing about any industry they talk about and more are laughably out of touch with the population at large.

I'm enjoying watching Andrew Neil absolutely roast these hapless leaders. Sturgeon was a classic.

[navyblueshorts]

Jas, don’t think anybody disagrees high earners should pay higher taxes. And they also do. Question is how much more.

PS: then why shouldn’t the 40-fags-a-day-fat-loser pay an extra ‘insurance’ when he’ll most likely be a much higher burden on the NHS than the guy in the country house?

They're already paying a ****load of tax on their fags. Consider that as their insurance against lung disease perhaps?

Surely fag smokers should also be paying a climate change levy on the polluting aspect of their revolting habit?

Maybe they are, given the % of a pack of 20 that's tax?

Nothing as ever been said about climate levy's on fags, so pretty sure that it's not part of the taxation. It's a demerit tax primarily on the basis of "health".
They could add a quid to a pack easily. Furthermore, they should double the price of a pack in general, like they did in Australia. No one needs to smoke, and not a single person in the world doesn't know it's bad for you.

Is it, bollox. We assume as much, but can you tell me that tax is all spent in the NHS? Talking about emissions, not health so won't comment on rest.

A demerit tax isn't required to be spent on any particular consequences of consuming a certain product. It's supposed to be a method to reduce the number of people buying it.
If you smoke and if Corbyn is being consistent (which he never is) he should be talking about a Climate Levy on fags.

May as well tax flatulence by volume. Almost certainly more contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.

[pedro]

Jas, don’t think anybody disagrees high earners should pay higher taxes. And they also do. Question is how much more.

PS: then why shouldn’t the 40-fags-a-day-fat-loser pay an extra ‘insurance’ when he’ll most likely be a much higher burden on the NHS than the guy in the country house?

They're already paying a ****load of tax on their fags. Consider that as their insurance against lung disease perhaps?

Surely fag smokers should also be paying a climate change levy on the polluting aspect of their revolting habit?

Maybe they are, given the % of a pack of 20 that's tax?

Nothing as ever been said about climate levy's on fags, so pretty sure that it's not part of the taxation. It's a demerit tax primarily on the basis of "health".
They could add a quid to a pack easily. Furthermore, they should double the price of a pack in general, like they did in Australia. No one needs to smoke, and not a single person in the world doesn't know it's bad for you.

Is it, bollox. We assume as much, but can you tell me that tax is all spent in the NHS? Talking about emissions, not health so won't comment on rest.

A demerit tax isn't required to be spent on any particular consequences of consuming a certain product. It's supposed to be a method to reduce the number of people buying it.
If you smoke and if Corbyn is being consistent (which he never is) he should be talking about a Climate Levy on fags.

May as well tax flatulence by volume. Almost certainly more contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.

Not gonna happen. Politicians don't impose taxes on themselves.

[pedro]

He was also privately educated but wants to get rid of Private Schooling. The guy is mental.

Maybe he wants to protect the country against types like himself?

[dynamark]

Thanks folks I kinda thought that would be the answer.Dont think I would rely too much on Wikipedia . Plenty of career politicians in all parties which is why I would rather we had people with previous careers and experience in the HOC . McDonnell is still preaching in a lot of ways

[navyblueshorts]

Does anyone know what Corbyn and for that matter McDonald/Abbot did up till now ?

Corbyn and Abbot have been in politics since their early 20's. Corbyn Steptoe was as a Trade Unionist in 1971, so he's never had a proper job.
I suspect Abbot is the same although I didn't want to look her up on Wikipedia incase I was confronted with a picture of her fat ugly face.

McDonnell according to Wikipedia was training to be a Catholic Priest, which tells you that he's already got a predilection for being a complete moron which is reflected in his current position. He was also privately educated but wants to get rid of Private Schooling. The guy is mental.

You could say the same for most MP's though from all parties, most have never had an actual job, most understand nothing about any industry they talk about and more are laughably out of touch with the population at large.

I'm enjoying watching Andrew Neil absolutely roast these hapless leaders. Sturgeon was a classic.

I find Neil's style a little irritating normally, but having watched both the Corbyn and Sturgeon interviews, I almost have some sympathy with them. Both of them absolutely skewered refusing to answer simple questions and having absurdities displayed on national TV. Ouch.

Looking forward to the remainder. This and the QT show the other day should be compulsory in future. About time they were all challenged on the soundbites and asked to explain/justify their positions.

[JAS]

He was also privately educated but wants to get rid of Private Schooling. The guy is mental.

I’m not sure I understand the assertion here or why it makes him mental (in your opinion). Wouldn’t being privately educated himself have given him more of an insight?

Personally I wouldn’t scrap them I’d just end their charitable status and tax them to buggery.

[JAS]

With regard to the Andrew Neil interviews, I like when he exposes absurdity but I don’t have much time for his trying to browbeat a completely out of context and meaningless apology out of an interviewee. I think Corbyn did remarkably well to keep his cool, I’d have warned him once, twice then throat-punched the shouty fool (90% of the reason why a political career would not be a good choice for me)

[McLaren]

Super

Saying that someone can't object to an activity they have been subjected to or carried out is an odd line of reasoning.

For example you would want people to abandon their religious beliefs.

[McLaren]

Andrew Neil is increasingly incapable of hiding his own political beliefs. Also the idea that he knows something about economics is a complete myth. He has mastered a half decent dinner party passable FT derived patter but he has nothing beyond that.

[kwinigolfer]

Reading Clive James's obit, I see that he described religion as "an advertising agency for a product that does not exist".
Nice way of putting it.
No doubt super would approve.

(Also sad to see that Jonathan Miller has finally eschewed his "au revoir" for "goodbye". Brilliant man whether one liked him or not.)

[navyblueshorts]

Andrew Neil is increasingly incapable of hiding his own political beliefs. Also the idea that he knows something about economics is a complete myth. He has mastered a half decent dinner party passable FT derived patter but he has nothing beyond that.

So sayeth the descendent of Keynes, Smith et al.

[navyblueshorts]

With regard to the Andrew Neil interviews, I like when he exposes absurdity but I don’t have much time for his trying to browbeat a completely out of context and meaningless apology out of an interviewee. I think Corbyn did remarkably well to keep his cool, I’d have warned him once, twice then throat-punched the shouty fool (90% of the reason why a political career would not be a good choice for me)

But it isn't seen to be meaningless is it (unless you're an ardent Labour fan) ?

He was asked if he'd apologise. He didn't do so; Neil only kept on because he didn't get an answer one way (i.e. apology) or the other (i.e. definitive comment that he wouldn't/didn't see need etc). I think it's reasonable to assume that he won't and/or doesn't see a need to do so. Even on behalf of his party. I'm afraid this is the way the World is these days. He could have closed that line of challenge down last night, but no, he failed. He's a pillock of the first order.

[McLaren]

[quote="kwinigolfer] "an advertising agency for a product that does not exist".[/quote]

That would probable apply to Facebook and Google just as well.

[super_realist]

He was also privately educated but wants to get rid of Private Schooling. The guy is mental.

I’m not sure I understand the assertion here or why it makes him mental (in your opinion). Wouldn’t being privately educated himself have given him more of an insight?

Personally I wouldn’t scrap them I’d just end their charitable status and tax them to buggery.

It's the irony.
It gave him an insight into one school, nothing of the rest. Plus he's a complete madman if he thinks there is capacity and money in the state school system to accommodate the number of people in private schools.

I'd be happy to see the end of the charitable status, but if you're going to do that, then you absolutely must do the same for religions. Currently they enjoy a tax free status and the Church of England is one of  the wealthiest land/property owners in the UK, and they pay nothing for it. That's disgraceful and any party who went after them would surely gain some votes in a country which is largely non fairy tale believers. They should also get rid of clergy from the House of Lords.

[super_realist]

Andrew Neil is increasingly incapable of hiding his own political beliefs. Also the idea that he knows something about economics is a complete myth. He has mastered a half decent dinner party passable FT derived patter but he has nothing beyond that.

Mac, more confirmation bias? Have you never seen Neil attack every politician of every stripe he ever interviews? He's consistent in his robust style.

[Be_the_ball]

Andrew Neil is increasingly incapable of hiding his own political beliefs. Also the idea that he knows something about economics is a complete myth. He has mastered a half decent dinner party passable FT derived patter but he has nothing beyond that.

Mac, more confirmation bias? Have you never seen Neil attack every politician of every stripe he ever interviews? He's consistent in his robust style.

Hmmm, and yet Andrew Neil the Chairman of the Spectator can't get an interview with the ex-editor of the Spectator Boris Johnson? Perhaps Andrew could have a word with the current deputy editor so she could enlist the help of her husband Dominic Cummings?

[super_realist]

Now Labour pledging to plant 2bn trees in the next twenty years. Must have had Abbott on the figures again, that's 273,972 a day Corbyn. How the hell are you going to manage that?

My point about Neil was that he treats all politicians the same. No one gets an easy ride.

The irony of Mac claiming Neil doesn't understand what he's talking about when Mac is the king of a swift Google search , book blurb or Wikipedia search to make an argument.

[beninho]

Andrew Neil is pretty right wing, but he's a good interviewer,in that he skewers everyone.

But the beeb have been pretty shocking this election. No interviews with neill shoukd have been shown until all were recorded. Johnson ducks out, and gets off pretty lightly in comparison.

The other been editing has also been pretty shoddy.

[super_realist]

Corbyn is a complete idiot for getting into an interview with Neil without have confirmation that Johnson would be doing one too.

Getting into an interview with Neil is like getting into a debate with Christopher Hitchens, there's only ever going to be one winner.

[navyblueshorts]

Andrew Neil is pretty right wing, but he's a good interviewer,in that he skewers everyone.

But the beeb have been pretty shocking this election. No interviews with neill shoukd have been shown until all were recorded. Johnson ducks out, and gets off pretty lightly in comparison.

The other been editing has also been pretty shoddy.

Absolutely agree with this. All should have been recorded w/o other leaders knowing contents. Should have been released all at once.

[McLaren]

Neil is a strong climate change denialist. His twitter feed is often him saying scientists don't know what they are talking about.

[super_realist]

Neil is a strong climate change denialist. His twitter feed is often him saying scientists don't know what they are talking about.

Who cares? You said he didn't know about economics.

Been hearing some stuff on the radio about Corbyns tree plans this morning. It's funny how unachievable it is. Basically you'd need to cover an area the size of Wales and at a rate of 48,076 an hour based on a 40 hour week for twenty years. Totally laughable Abbott style policy.

[super_realist]

Neil is a strong climate change denialist. His twitter feed is often him saying scientists don't know what they are talking about.

Are you sure you know the difference between a climate change denier and someone who doesn't accept the hysterical claims of crackpot groups like Extinction Rebellion which are not backed by science?
I'm not sure there is anyone, with the exception of Corbyn's brother in the UK media who is an actual climate change denier in the context that it isn't actually happening.

[McLaren]

Super

I understand the difference and Neil is an outright denier.

[super_realist]

Super

I understand the difference and Neil is an outright denier.

OK, that's what I wanted to know. Doesn't mean he isn't consistent in his interviews and doesn't mean he doesn't know anything about economics. It's not as if you are more knowledgeable is it, so not like you are in a position to comment on his knowledge? Clearly it's more than dinner party knowledge or he wouldn't be in such a prominent position would he?

Got any evidence of him actually denying climate change?

[McLaren]

Check his twitter feed, it has been going on for years. Or Google it, I am sure someone has reported on it.


The problem I have with Neil is that he makes out his political position is not known, which is clearly not true. He is fairly obviously pro brexit, on the right, climate denier, anti indyref, socially Conservative, pro imperialist.

[super_realist]

You keep saying that Mac, but he's no more lenient on the Tories than he is on Labour or the Lib Dems. I don't see him trying to pretend he's impartial, got any evidence or is it just how you "see" it because you can't stand to know there are people around who don't believe the same as you?

What has his alleged climate change denial got to do with anything? Do you only listen to people who you agree with everything they believe in?

I don't see you complaining about people like Jon Snow who is a blatant leftie.

[McLaren]

Super

He is a hard interviewer, that isn't in question, I just want him to acknowledge that he doesn't actually hide his own position very well.

[super_realist]

Prove to me he does try to hide it? Youve already said that it's clear that he's pro Brexit, right wing, etc so he's not doing a good job.
Persuade me he tries to pretend he's neutral.

[super_realist]

By the way the media are subject to electoral purdah at present. They are not permitted to express their own political views during an election period.

[navyblueshorts]

Super

I understand the difference and Neil is an outright denier.

Would you mind proving that, please? Have a link you might share?

[navyblueshorts]

Check his twitter feed, it has been going on for years. Or Google it, I am sure someone has reported on it.


The problem I have with Neil is that he makes out his political position is not known, which is clearly not true. He is fairly obviously pro brexit, on the right, climate denier, anti indyref, socially Conservative, pro imperialist.

Who cares?? Everyone has their own views, but they can still be professional in their day job. You expect a robot to conduct interviews? Or are you suggesting he's demonstrably biased, based on his own views? Quite a claim - got any evidence?

[beninho]

He seems like the sort of person I wouldn't like, but he still does his job well. This is a good video https://youtu.be/PRF3r3zUGqk when some right wing yank called him to be on the left.

[kwinigolfer]

That bloke is straight out of the Stephen Miller playbook, ben.
Believe it or not, there's a very strong constituency for that sort of garbage over here, the sort you could never give thanks for. Trust GB&NI doesn't fall into the same hard right trap, but from 3,000 miles away it's tough to be optimistic about that.



PS: Nice work vs Ipswich the other evening . . . . . . hopefully my boys have hit some form and start to chase you down. HW used to be a nice place, back in the fifties day; hope it still is.

[beninho]

Should have been more against Ipswich, but missed a pen!

But 5 ppints clear after 19 games. At some point I will have to change my mindset from expecting us to fall apart to thinking we might actually be half decent. Though still don't expect us to stay top 2. But even.play offs would be sone season.

[dynamark]

Super a couple of lads can plant 500 trees a day so all you need is about 500 tree planting gangs and a shed load of land plus the saplings wait 30years and climate change is sorted .
Simples .
its like the bricks and the brickies for the new houses they just appear from over the new horizon.

[super_realist]

Super a couple of lads can plant 500 trees a day so all you need is about 500 tree planting gangs and a shed load of land plus the saplings wait 30years and climate change is sorted .
Simples .
its like the bricks and the brickies for the new houses they just appear from over the new horizon.

I'm sure you could get the man power if you got a load of unemployed untermenschen to plant them, but if you restrict it to a working week, you need to obtain 48,076 trees PER HOUR. It's not happening, and any interviewer should be laughing in their face at such a preposterous idea.

[JAS]

So...after predicting Rangers would probably get 4-6 points possibly 8 in what looked a very tough group they’ve topended even my optimism and still have a home game left.

Only 3 defeats in 27 European matches in 2 seasons after rebuilding from scratch represents a pretty impressive journey. 4th seeds sitting atop a fairly classy group with one game to go? It’s easy to heavily criticise Scottish football and of course it does have shortcomings but the more the Scottish league is ridiculed, the more impressive it makes Rangers recovery look. Quite clearly Celtic have a burning desire not to be outdone and have also raised their game.

Of course Rangers ain’t through yet, they could still fold at home in the last game, slight concern that it comes on the Thurs after an Old Firm Cup final, clearly the most important week so far in Gerrard’s tenure, be interesting to see if he really can take that next step up. A draw will confirm qualification. They could even go through with a defeat if Feyenoord get a win or draw in Porto.

Now all that I was saying about the coefficient 2-3 months ago (and before) now looks to have a lot more validity.

Rangers 5 year absence savaged the Scottish coefficient. At the point Rangers returned to Europe it was in a pathetic state (think it got as bad as 22-23rd at one point), now 16th and almost certain to get to the desired 15th which will get a 2nd champions league berth.

[westisbest]

I’ve started to watch a bit of SPL this season.
Watched St Johnstone v Aberdeen last Sunday. Decent enough game.

St Johnstone finished the game with 9 men. 2 sending offs in 4 minutes, some kind of unwanted record.

Game finished 1-1.

Aberdeen are in third, 9 points behind Celtic and Rangers.
Maybe wrong, but they seem to be the team that finishes third behind those two.

Push them for a little bit, then C & R widen the gap.
From Ross County in seventh down, they are all in a relegation play off. Seems strange way to do it.

[super_realist]

So...after predicting Rangers would probably get 4-6 points possibly 8 in what looked a very tough group they’ve topended even my optimism and still have a home game left.

Only 3 defeats in 27 European matches in 2 seasons after rebuilding from scratch represents a pretty impressive journey. 4th seeds sitting atop a fairly classy group with one game to go? It’s easy to heavily criticise Scottish football and of course it does have shortcomings but the more the Scottish league is ridiculed, the more impressive it makes Rangers recovery look. Quite clearly Celtic have a burning desire not to be outdone and have also raised their game.

Of course Rangers ain’t through yet, they could still fold at home in the last game, slight concern that it comes on the Thurs after an Old Firm Cup final, clearly the most important week so far in Gerrard’s tenure, be interesting to see if he really can take that next step up. A draw will confirm qualification. They could even go through with a defeat if Feyenoord get a win or draw in Porto.

Now all that I was saying about the coefficient 2-3 months ago (and before) now looks to have a lot more validity.

Rangers 5 year absence savaged the Scottish coefficient. At the point Rangers returned to Europe it was in a pathetic state (think it got as bad as 22-23rd at one point), now 16th and almost certain to get to the desired 15th which will get a 2nd champions league berth.

Fair play to the ugly sisters. I hadn't expected them to do well at all given how laughable they've been for the last decade.
Important to remember this is one season and in the second tier of Europe.
Given how bad they've been in CL qualification do you think Europa League standard is their limit?

[JAS]

So...after predicting Rangers would probably get 4-6 points possibly 8 in what looked a very tough group they’ve topended even my optimism and still have a home game left.

Only 3 defeats in 27 European matches in 2 seasons after rebuilding from scratch represents a pretty impressive journey. 4th seeds sitting atop a fairly classy group with one game to go? It’s easy to heavily criticise Scottish football and of course it does have shortcomings but the more the Scottish league is ridiculed, the more impressive it makes Rangers recovery look. Quite clearly Celtic have a burning desire not to be outdone and have also raised their game.

Of course Rangers ain’t through yet, they could still fold at home in the last game, slight concern that it comes on the Thurs after an Old Firm Cup final, clearly the most important week so far in Gerrard’s tenure, be interesting to see if he really can take that next step up. A draw will confirm qualification. They could even go through with a defeat if Feyenoord get a win or draw in Porto.

Now all that I was saying about the coefficient 2-3 months ago (and before) now looks to have a lot more validity.

Rangers 5 year absence savaged the Scottish coefficient. At the point Rangers returned to Europe it was in a pathetic state (think it got as bad as 22-23rd at one point), now 16th and almost certain to get to the desired 15th which will get a 2nd champions league berth.

Fair play to the ugly sisters. I hadn't expected them to do well at all given how laughable they've been for the last decade.
Important to remember this is one season and in the second tier of Europe.
Given how bad they've been in CL qualification do you think Europa League standard is their limit?

Hmmm, I wouldn’t say they should accept it as a limitation, but currently, realistically they certainly appear a lot more comfortable in the EL rather than CL but CL group stage should continue to be an aspiration. Ideally what’s really needed are the 3rd & 4th teams to start making more of an impression. Encouraging investment and ambition signs at Aberdeen and Hearts, more of that required and converted into results would be good.

For the big 2 though, yes it’s fragile and one swallow does not a summer make. Lennon has surprised to be fair, I thought they’d fall further and quicker after Rodgers departure but no they haven’t really fallen at all. The biggest risk at Rangers is that Gerrard walks in the next season or two. He has been fundamental to their recovery back toward some degree of respectability and to lose him now/soon would be crushing. Although still very much on a learning curve he has already displayed some decent man management skills, how he’s managed to turn Morelos from an indisciplined basket case with talent going to waste into a prolific disciplined striker speaks volumes.

[westisbest]

Emery has been sacked.

[Be_the_ball]

Emery has been sacked.

Will Poch do a Campbell?
the plot thickens!

[McLaren]

I hope Poch has higher ambitions than Arsenal.

[navyblueshorts]

Emery has been sacked.

Many warned them be careful for what they wished for with their pathetic 'Wenger out!' rubbish. Chickens? There's your roost, just there...

[Sponsored content]