Monkeh

Almost 200 branches of Subway have stopped serving ham, bacon etc and are serving halal meat only.

 

As many of you know I'm fine about Halal meat and happy for it too be on the menu, but removing non-halal meat, especially bacon and ham is too far. Muslims make up 3% of the population of Britain and some how the rest of the population cannot have a meat they want from a SANDWICH shop because Subway want to please 3%. Ridiculous.

 

I shall never go to one of the branches again, mainly because I always have bacon or ham with my sub, but also out of sheer disgust.

 

And before someone makes this anti-Islam, I have no problem with their belief's but the problem is with Subway for becoming a Muslim shop and forgetting most of their consumers.

 

Rant over.

quick question,

where did you find out subway are doing this (ie what proof?) which country is it happening or even area? and why go to subway when you can make a better sarnie yourself?

London, Glasgow, Madrid, Milan.

 

Belgrade?

Lisbon?

It goes to the court of appeal they have 21 days to do this, if it is turned down in the court of appeal that's the end of the road and it gets built

As the nimbys have form a plc they will simply bankrupt the company and be banned from directorship for 8 years

The only lose will be the Bristol tax payer

Also having worked on many major construction projects I can tell you most don't get finished on time

The gas simply ask to play their first 4 fixtures away from home or request us to share ( won't happen) bath or Cheltenham (both won't happen ether

It's the same judge too, so in a sense it gets personal - they are questioning his original decision.  Therefore I see this as no more than a final f** y** by the opposition and this time next week it'll have been kicked to touch.

it won't be when it goes to the court of appeal, it will be a different judge,

back to the orginal judge first who will turn them down

then to a different judge at the court of appeal if that one turns them down it goes ahead if he finds that Trash have a valid arguement then it can go to supreme court,

its a limited company thats appeal so the only loser is the Bristol Tax Payer

Out of interest how high can they go with these appeals?

 

With both developments, we've seen and heard this all before -waiting for the first brick to be laid

If the judge and court of appeal turn them down thats it, it can't go any further,

one disagrees and the appeal goes through it can go up to the supreme court I think

If Rovers getting their stadium sees Tesco out of pocket and with egg on their faces then I'm all for it!! Regardless of the rivalry there is room for two sporting arenas in the area (one in Bristol and one in South Glos obviously). And I'm positive that something will get built at Ashton Vale eventually - whether it's a ground for us, who knows?

They'll be house on AV by 2016, that was all about not having a stadium and nothing to do with protecting green belt

ITs delays that cost rovers as such not anymore Lawyers or legal bills this is nimbys v's the courts now ... if they are turned down at the court of appeal thats its . As as soon as 2 courts ( high court and court of appeal) turn it down legally you cant appeal anymore (according to Trash's own laywers website)

 

The judge from the JR could turn it down on Friday or up to 7 days ... then it could be as little as 14 days after that before its all over ....

 

Big IFS but none of this was unexpected ( by me anyway) NIMBYS do this its how they work ... but they rarely win

they'd find away, Money always does

agree to a point... they can only take the money thats in the pot though...... the big question is how much is in the pot and who put it in there ... my money is on Co-Op (big mentions in the JR ) Tesco (in their interest) and possibly Bristol Uni ( high up employee started a petition for the Memorial) and it effects them if UWE get better facilities

and if those 3 supermarkets are behind it you can bet it will go on for a long time yet, all have more money then Rovers

I thought they have to appeal to the same judge, isn't that a massive waste of time?

they do at first then if he says know it goes to the court of appeal

delaying the enevitable... as nimbys do...

 

make no mistake Sainsburys and the UWE are happening

 

 

The appeal is to the same judge... do u think he will say  oh yeah i got it wrong...

 

he will chuck it out then its 14 days to appeal to the court of appeal and then they will throw it out even if it goes that far!

 

building work wasnt due to start till 1st week of june at best... prep work /ground clearence has already started.

 

 

Im more worried about winning a game or 2 to be honest!

 

The greens have pulled out ... leaving 4 local people and some cash from co op or tesco

it will go though via the court of appeal because the legal profession hasn't finished milking money out of the process yet

I did warn them last week...don't celebrate until close of play tomorrow.

 

Seems the Green Party are now distancing themselves from the process: http://daniellaradice.org/2014/03/26/trashorfield/

they are only distancing theirselfs because local elections are round the corner

Trash have signified leave to appeal, but Radice seems to be distancing herself from it all now...

http://daniellaradice.org/2014/03/26/trashorfield/

they have no ground to appeal imo

The gas are going down and now you better believe us

That was 6 weeks ago, Monkeh. Keep up

So jet is the laziest player and should be dropped

Baldock is an awful striker and will never get 20 goals and steve cotterll is the worst city manger since tony pulis...............

I'm the judge and I can inform you that this is not the case.

It depends on how much tax payers money the judge and barristers want to milk

They will get there's there are little if any grounds for trashes tvg,

Etherway the redeveloped ag will still be a million time better the the Lego break uwe

The ONLY criticism - and I dont like the word criticism for last night because we all played our part in a great win - was that I would have brought Wes on a little earlier as a get out option.

 

There was a classic "Burns" scenario which Baldock was put clear with the entire Peterboro half - but because of tiredness and the defender being that bit quicker, Sam had to check himself, waste a bit of time and it ended up with their keeper.

 

Their defender would not have seen Wes for dust and he would have been clean through.

 

Again - feels like I am being picky there on such a good win.

11 v 11 he would of with out a doubt in my mind, but with 10 men you need the experianced players to stay on the pitch and try an play more direct,

SoD's formations which led to so many tedious draws was perfect for last night after El Adb got sent off

Really sticks in the throat he's doing so well, doesn't it?

yes it must do, I couldn't give a **** about long term its all about staying up and thats why SoD was sacked because we were going down faster the a whore in amsterdam,

Everyone's misconseptions about SC have been proven wrong,

Yep a lot of humble pie to be had here

Peterborough have to attack we need to be coy and play on the counter,

Can I start a told you so thread about baldock now?

Flint is shocking but need to see the goal before we lay blame

That's your version of reality, mine is different.

 

There are very few who disagree that he's been exceptionally blessed with an extraordinary number of takeable chances this season - including Baldock himself.

 

The debate is only really about just how many more of those we could reasonably expect him to have taken.

 

It's not absurd at all to believe he could, and should, have taken alot more, and it seems to me that if you're content to argue his conversion rate is acceptable then your expectations of Baldock are remarkably low.

the top scorer in the league has 15 goals baldock has 12, your expectations are extremely high in fact only 3 players in the world meet them currently Messi, Ronaldo and Suarez, I can't see any of those dropping down for a league 1 relegation battle,

The fact 2 players have have scored 2 thirds of our goals is the shocking thing and the fact we can't keep a clean sheet in the last 4 years is equally shocking,

But still lets pick on one of our top scorers for missing chances even though he has one of the best strike rates in the league we are in,

Bristol City trying to destroy good players since 1894

******* hell, nobody is disputing that his goals return is bad, what were saying is if he takes his easy chances the games will be different, I guarantee if you spoke to SB he would more than likely agree he should be on more goals with the chances he's had.

The defence is an issue but for a completely different thread, just because they have been awful it should not excuse the chances SB has missed and I'm unsure why you would try and use the defence as a justification for this?

Let me be clear here, I like SB, he's hard working and seems a decent level headed bloke, I just think he should be putting away more of the chances he's had.

no there is a 6 page thread because idiots like you bowie and taylor10 are making him a scapegoat like you always do

first it was Johnson then Elliot, fontaine now its baldock its as if city fans want to destroy players simply because they are jealous of them and their ability