chipdawg

I hope nothing comes of this Sakho nonsense; I'd rather we just went out with grace rather than sneaking through on a technicality, even if said technicality was nothing to do with us PS nice to see some reasonable and gracious comments from WHam fans

I think that both handballs would have been harsh (though having watched it a couple of times, I think perhaps Carroll knew what he was doing on the goal line), but on another day they could have been given. But it wasn't another day I suppose

The team did us proud today, that's all I would have asked for at kick off COYR

Even in slow motion it was difficult to spot and it certainly wasn't deliberate. They've been very good at the back and a bit lucky up front. On another day and all that

I'm pretty sure they got their smiths mixed up. Reid has been immense for them though

Agreed, though as others have said I could see Agard having a bit more luck. Maybe Elliot for Saville too

Winston Reid is a bloody good player That said, on this showing we've got some bloody good players too

It's not surprising that he's zone for Saville; two holding midfielders to try and stop them playing

To be fair, it doesn't matter what we do today that was the result of the round by a country mile I hope the boys do us proud today. Can't see us winning- we're too used to playing on the front foot and that's too strong a West Ham line up for us to be able to do that- but as long as they show the country what we're all about I'll be happy COYR!

I've just put this into google translate and it's broken the Internet...

My intense frustration at the dodgy wifi in this restaurant is tempered by the fact WE WON 3-0 AWAY AT PETERBOROUGH!!!!! Tis a good evening

Just heading to get the train from Sheffield, looking forward to this immensely. The word from 'Tarn' fans I've spoken to is that they're good going forward but awful at the back- Danny Wilson's modus operandi perhaps?! So I guess we should be expecting goals galore today I just have a feeling we might come undone today, we seem to have been getting less and less convincing and if Barnsley offer a genuine goal threat, we could ship a few. As someone else said though, if Cotts puts a rocket up them and maybe even makes a few changes, minds may be refocused

top support

The ants of Manila have declared war on tea consumption! The response? "We shall fight on the biscuits, we shall fight on the tea caddies, we shall fight in the mugs and in the tea cups, we shall fight in the kettles; we shall never surrender..."

Quick question: why do you keep your tea bags in the fridge?

I'm more than happy to be proved wrong!

Got a feeling we might taste our first defeat today. Sorry everyone

Calm down sweetheart, I was joking

Maybe nothing happened?!

I think your final point is a fine one to make And as for the thesis proposal, I should have added "and a bigger brain than mine!"

I would agree that the Cathars and the Albigensian Crusade is the perfect example of the horrors or Christianity. If you want to know more, there's a fascinating book called 'The Perfect Heresy' which chronicles it. However, we do need to remember that it's over 800 years since that took place and it was as much a product of the politics of Medieval Europe as it was religion. It may be valid to argue that as Islam is in effect 400 years younger than Christianity, it is still prone to commit the atrocities that Christianity committed 400 years ago, but it would probably take one hell of a post-doctoral thesis to get anywhere near proving that

You are starting to lose me here. You brought the whole Brunei thing into the debate as a comparison to the UK- a warning of what might happen, a look at what might become of us. I am not and never have contested that such extreme interpretations of Sharia law are not awful. I agree that the debate is valid I just don't think that the context is in this case. You also mis-interpreted my survey point, which again was related to the idea that Brunei and The UK (and specifically their Muslim populations) could be directly compared I was of course joking; I'm sure we'd have plenty in common away from religion and politics. But with that greatest of respect, that's all we ever interact about and I'm sure we'll both have family and friends we wish to catch up with over Christmas; especially as I'm going to Canada for much of it. I also may have some trouble selling "would you like to go to Harrogate for dinner with a bloke I met on an Internet forum and his wife?" to be honest PS while you're in Harrogate visit the 'Harrogate Tap' at the railway station. Some friends of mine run it, excellent beer

If you pay for the flights to Sydney it's a deal! I'd give it less than an hour before we've fallen out and the missus has told me off! But the point is that the outrage caused by Brunei's actions are because of the change in the law, yet it's been a Muslim country for centuries. While Sharia law applies in most Islamic countries, there are many, many interpretations of that- as there have been in countries who's rule of law had been derived from Christian teachings. I'm fairly confident (though couldn't prove it) that if you surveyed British Muslims as to whether they wanted a Brunei-style Sharia system across the whole of the UK, the overwhelming majority would want no such thing. Some would and that should always be a concern, but then again if you surveyed British Christians there would unfortunately be a minority who, for example, would want to make homosexuality illegal. Not to the same extremity as Muslim extremists but there would be a breadth of opinion. I do agree that to an extent the adoption of Halal as the norm is the thin end of the wedge, but it's being driven by commercial concerns rather than religious ones. Could it be hijacked by religious zealots? Perhaps, but I refuse to live my life in fear of what might happen. Perhaps that's niaive, but it's my decision

I do so enjoy our chats SX225. Or the lectures you give, I guess would be a more appropriate term Please read what I said again. I don't agree with this interpretation of Sharia law anywhere in the world. I did say that previously. What I object to is you scaremongering by saying "if it's happened in Brunei, we're next!" You're the one that brought the example of Brunei's new legal system into a thread about whether or not it's right for Subway to stop stocking pork products in some of their stores, not me So insult my "wishy-washy" political outlook all you like, feel free to call me a "muppet" and (rather perversely) envisage a future where my wife both cheats on me and is stoned to death for it, but at least read the post your responding to and try to join the debate rather than ranting and insulting those who don't share your world view I will concede that I probably shouldn't be so harsh on the George Clooney's and Richard Branson's of those world. They may well be boycotting all manner of businesses for all manner of reasons and not crowing about it

You do know that Brunei has been a culturally Islamic country for hundreds of years don't you? And that as a jungle-covered, oil-rich sultanate on the Island of Borneo it's one of the least comparable countries to the UK you could come up with? Don't get me wrong; I think it's absolutely right that pressure is being put on the Sultan of Brunei to reverse laws (almost all of which already applied to 70% of the population) which are barbaric and contrary to every idea of 'human rights' going. But let's not pretend this is part of the creeping rise of Islamification; it's an autocratic ruler making a bad decision for the people he rules. In the name of his religion, yes. But in the name of a religion that has been an intrinsic part of Brunei culture for hundreds of years As for all the celebrity boycotts, good on them for standing up for what they believe in. It's a shame that they haven't previously boycotted other hotels owned by rulers that enforce Sharia law, such as Fairmont Hotels owned by the Saudi royal family