|
|
Post by happyhornet on Mar 7, 2024 12:53:19 GMT
Ah yes, David Lawrence,thats the man who said that England lost to Italy on penalties in the Eurpean Champions because the players who took the penalties were black. And that IS precisely what this Dickhead said And he was correct: They were selected for reasons other than an ability to score goals.
And it was a disaster. And that's what happens when diversity is prioritised over ability.
They were selected based on their penalty record in training: "According to the Daily Mail, England's players have been practicing penalties after every training session since last September and the coaches have been taking notes. Since Saka earned his first call-up in October and joined those practices, no England player has a better penalty record in training. The two other players who missed penalties for England, Marcus Rashford and Jadon Sancho, have also been among the team's top performers from the spot in these sessions." www.marca.com/en/football/uefa-euro/2021/07/13/60ed78ad46163f6c748b4579.htmlI personally think managers are too dependent on stats these days but they were selected for purely football reasons. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Mar 7, 2024 14:13:42 GMT
And he was correct: They were selected for reasons other than an ability to score goals. And it was a disaster. And that's what happens when diversity is prioritised over ability.
They were selected based on their penalty record in training: "According to the Daily Mail, England's players have been practicing penalties after every training session since last September and the coaches have been taking notes. Since Saka earned his first call-up in October and joined those practices, no England player has a better penalty record in training. The two other players who missed penalties for England, Marcus Rashford and Jadon Sancho, have also been among the team's top performers from the spot in these sessions." www.marca.com/en/football/uefa-euro/2021/07/13/60ed78ad46163f6c748b4579.htmlI personally think managers are too dependent on stats these days but they were selected for purely football reasons. Oh, so they were among the top performers but not the top performers. So they were selected for reasons other than their penalty taking ability. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Mar 7, 2024 14:27:02 GMT
Most of the content had been leaked already — in bygone times almost a capital offence. Now the Commons just erupts in schoolyard yah boo sucks. Doesn’t the U.K. deserve better…? It was rather boring, although I enjoyed the chancellors dig at Angela Raynor. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Mar 7, 2024 14:30:16 GMT
Most of the content had been leaked already — in bygone times almost a capital offence. Now the Commons just erupts in schoolyard yah boo sucks. Doesn’t the U.K. deserve better…? It was rather boring, although I enjoyed the chancellors dig at Angela Raynor. Brilliant ......... LOL
I bet she felt like saying ...f*** off you t*** of a c***, that's her usual response.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Mar 7, 2024 14:49:15 GMT
It was rather boring, although I enjoyed the chancellors dig at Angela Raynor. Brilliant ......... LOL
I bet she felt like saying ...f*** off you t*** of a c***, that's her usual response.
I wonder if her open legs policy will boost labours budget funds if they ever mangage to infest NO 10? |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Mar 7, 2024 14:51:38 GMT
They were selected based on their penalty record in training: "According to the Daily Mail, England's players have been practicing penalties after every training session since last September and the coaches have been taking notes. Since Saka earned his first call-up in October and joined those practices, no England player has a better penalty record in training. The two other players who missed penalties for England, Marcus Rashford and Jadon Sancho, have also been among the team's top performers from the spot in these sessions." www.marca.com/en/football/uefa-euro/2021/07/13/60ed78ad46163f6c748b4579.htmlI personally think managers are too dependent on stats these days but they were selected for purely football reasons. Oh, so they were among the top performers but not the top performers. So they were selected for reasons other than their penalty taking ability. They were 3 of 5 penalty takers, Harry Kane and Harry Maguire went before them in the order so they wouldn't have to have been THE best to be selected as 3rd, 4th and 5th choice. Saka is a regular penalty taker for his club side, Rashford has taken penalties for his club side and scored for England in a previous penalty shootout. Not everyone shares your obsession with woke. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Mar 7, 2024 14:53:08 GMT
Brilliant ......... LOL
I bet she felt like saying ...f*** off you t*** of a c***, that's her usual response.
I wonder if her open legs policy will boost labours budget funds if they ever mangage to infest NO 10? LOL........  |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 7, 2024 15:49:24 GMT
Yes if they win put your watch back 60 years I thought the right wanted to return to the good old days? No that’s the ex remainers. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Mar 7, 2024 15:50:08 GMT
Oh, so they were among the top performers but not the top performers. So they were selected for reasons other than their penalty taking ability. They were 3 of 5 penalty takers, Harry Kane and Harry Maguire went before them in the order so they wouldn't have to have been THE best to be selected as 3rd, 4th and 5th choice. Saka is a regular penalty taker for his club side, Rashford has taken penalties for his club side and scored for England in a previous penalty shootout.
Not everyone shares your obsession with woke.LOL!. The irony. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Mar 7, 2024 20:30:52 GMT
Thought I'd share this snippet. Just listened to Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg speaking on GB News, still am actually. Anyhoo, he has just revealed the reason the chancellor in yesterdays budget only increased the VAT threshold for small businesses by £5k (from £85k to £90k) was because to increase it further would have been against EU rules.
It seems prior to the budget a group of Tory backbenchers had a meeting with the chancellor because they wanted the VAT threshold increased by more than £5k to help small businesses, a perfectly reasonable demand. They were surprised to be told the chancellors hands were tied by the EU.
And some people actually think Brexit happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Mar 7, 2024 21:34:20 GMT
Thought I'd share this snippet. Just listened to Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg speaking on GB News, still am actually. Anyhoo, he has just revealed the reason the chancellor in yesterdays budget only increased the VAT threshold for small businesses by £5k (from £85k to £90k) was because to increase it further would have been against EU rules. It seems prior to the budget a group of Tory backbenchers had a meeting with the chancellor because they wanted the VAT threshold increased by more than £5k to help small businesses, a perfectly reasonable demand. They were surprised to be told the chancellors hands were tied by the EU. And some people actually think Brexit happened. Well, ish...
The gummint agreed a deal with the EU which included us not under cutting them on VAT matters.
So we're voluntarily bound to keep within certain rules.
Those being the rules of the agreement.
Of course, we can ditch that at pretty much any time but then we cease to benefit from the agreement.
And, before anyone goes off on one, I don't like the EU either but as with any other deal, there will be conditions on both sides.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Mar 7, 2024 21:46:55 GMT
Thought I'd share this snippet. Just listened to Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg speaking on GB News, still am actually. Anyhoo, he has just revealed the reason the chancellor in yesterdays budget only increased the VAT threshold for small businesses by £5k (from £85k to £90k) was because to increase it further would have been against EU rules. It seems prior to the budget a group of Tory backbenchers had a meeting with the chancellor because they wanted the VAT threshold increased by more than £5k to help small businesses, a perfectly reasonable demand. They were surprised to be told the chancellors hands were tied by the EU. And some people actually think Brexit happened. Well, ish...
The gummint agreed a deal with the EU which included us not under cutting them on VAT matters.
So we're voluntarily bound to keep within certain rules.
Those being the rules of the agreement.
Of course, we can ditch that at pretty much any time but then we cease to benefit from the agreement.
And, before anyone goes off on one, I don't like the EU either but as with any other deal, there will be conditions on both sides.
Not quite. If the government were still operating under the agreements negotiated by Boris Johnson, the chancellor would have been free to increase the VAT threshold to whatever he liked. The reason he couldn't is because of the so called Windsor Framework adopted March 2023, which was signed by Sunak and is the biggest act of capitulation since the N.A.Z.I.S surrendered in 1945. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Mar 7, 2024 22:39:25 GMT
Well, ish...
The gummint agreed a deal with the EU which included us not under cutting them on VAT matters.
So we're voluntarily bound to keep within certain rules.
Those being the rules of the agreement.
Of course, we can ditch that at pretty much any time but then we cease to benefit from the agreement.
And, before anyone goes off on one, I don't like the EU either but as with any other deal, there will be conditions on both sides.
Not quite. If the government were still operating under the agreements negotiated by Boris Johnson, the chancellor would have been free to increase the VAT threshold to whatever he liked. The reason he couldn't is because of the so called Windsor Framework adopted March 2023, which was signed by Sunak and is the biggest act of capitulation since the N.A.Z.I.S surrendered in 1945. Yes but... They signed up to deal/agreement which has terms.
It's not about Brexit. We have Brexited.
But they signed up to new thing. So we're not bound by the EU, we're bound by the agreement that they chose. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Mar 7, 2024 22:49:51 GMT
Not quite. If the government were still operating under the agreements negotiated by Boris Johnson, the chancellor would have been free to increase the VAT threshold to whatever he liked. The reason he couldn't is because of the so called Windsor Framework adopted March 2023, which was signed by Sunak and is the biggest act of capitulation since the N.A.Z.I.S surrendered in 1945. Yes but... They signed up to deal/agreement which has terms.
It's not about Brexit. We have Brexited.
But they signed up to new thing. So we're not bound by the EU, we're bound by the agreement that they chose. Squeezed, the British government are bound by EU law because of Sunak, not Brexit. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Mar 8, 2024 10:31:14 GMT
Yes but... They signed up to deal/agreement which has terms.
It's not about Brexit. We have Brexited.
But they signed up to new thing. So we're not bound by the EU, we're bound by the agreement that they chose. Squeezed, the British government are bound by EU law because of Sunak, not Brexit. Yes, that's what I said. |
|
