lager loud

I partly agree with this, in that it clearly took a while before NP worked out how to change things after the red card, and it’s not clear why Wilson or Tanner couldn’t have done the RWB job. But TC and AW were clearly running out of steam before they were taken off (TC in particular). NW, I thought, could still have done a job (but hasn’t played 90 minutes much, recently). And the players who did come on all did a decent (and ultimately successful) job. It’s possible that I’m comfortable with NP ignoring the right backs on the bench because I still have occasional nightmares about the time Jimmy Lumsden decided to play Steve Neville there (in what was essentially a back two, if I remember correctly) rather than bring Andy Llewellyn off the bench.

Agreed. I thought he was going to be sent off about two seconds before he actually made the tackle: I could almost see the red mist in his eyes from the Dolman. Freeman should have gone too, mind. No excuse at all for barging a player, off the ball, well after the whistle has gone.

Cheers. Windscribe. That may have been the issue. With a bit of @Davefevs helpdesk assistance I have managed to buy a pass. I did ’move’ to a different location, so perhaps it was the IP causing the problem. Although I tried so many things (log off and on, remove and reload the City app etc) that I’m not sure what made the difference in the end!

Should I be able to buy a video pass for the Hull game by now? I’ve taken a ‘trip’ to Frankfurt this morning. I’m definitely ‘there’ as iPlayer won’t let me access any content, but Robins TV is only offering me audio passes. ?

I’d go further. Once the free kick is awarded any opposition player who deliberately moves closer to the ball (within 10 yards) has to leave the pitch until the ball next goes out of play (other than for a free kick awarded against the offending team). Want two or three players to slow down a free kick? Feel free. But you’ll have to defend it and the follow-up play with eight or nine players. With footballers being so fit and so well organised these days, taking a quick free kick is one of the few ways a team can use its nous to gain a clear advantage. Seeing that possibility frustrated by players standing in front of the ball - often abetted by refs whose response is to insist that the FK can’t be taken before he whistles - drives me crazy.

Cheers

Me: Snow Leopardess (11/1) and Two for Gold (40\1) Mrs Loud: Dingo Dollar (40/1) and Eclair Surf (14/1). All at £5 E/W. Any tips on where we’ll be able to get to to watch it within range of the ground after the match? (I can probably watch it on my phone at a push but I’d rather see it on a bigger screen). Good luck everyone!

You might find her view on that changes when you stop working. I retired before my wife. It only took her a few weeks of bringing me a cup of tea in bed before she left for work to decide that maybe she’d like to stop too!

I’m not a tax expert but I’m not aware it’s ever been possible to claim the whole of a spouse’s Personal Allowance - at least not in the last 30 years or so. In the right circumstances your wife could transfer 10% of her Income Tax Allowance to you, giving you an extra £1,250 or so before you start paying tax. I’ve not heard that this is being removed, and will be disappointed if it is, as my wife and I take advantage of it! Of course you can always try to make sure your wife uses her own tax allowances by investing more of your joint money (including your lump sum) in her name, as long as your circumstances allow (doesn’t always work in ‘blended’ families).

No, not saying that. You can leave the fund untouched for as long as you like and the lump sum option will be there for you when you do ‘break into’ your pot. (Actually there are some rule changes at age 75 but you don’t need to worry about those ATM. And of course, the rules could always be changed, although taking away the tax-free lump sum would not be a vote-winner!) As things stand, you’ll need to make a decision about whether to take the lump sum whenever you decide to access your fund (or part of it). If, at that time, you decided not to take the lump sum you couldn’t have it later on that part of your fund. But if you didn’t use all your fund at once, for whatever reason, the lump sum option would still be there for the rest of the pot. Hope that makes sense. I’m not sure ‘keeping things simple’ was ever my strong suit as an adviser!

You’re right: there is a way to use your pension fund like that. Essentially you are entitled to take a 25% lump sum whenever you move money from the “pre-retirement” to the “in retirement” state (“crystallising” funds, to use the jargon). You don’t have to crystallise all your fund at once. The option you are describing generally involves crystallising just enough each year to cover that year’s income - with the 25% lump sum being released at that time (and often treated as a bit of tax-free income). The rest of the fund remains “uncrystallised”, in its pre-retirement state, so the 25% entitlement will still be there whenever you decide to access that part of the fund. But if you were to crystallise some (or all) of your fund without taking the lump sum - creating a drawdown pot from which you could withdraw income whenever you wanted - then you wouldn’t be able to take the 25% lump sum from that bit later. https://thepeoplespension.co.uk/compare-retirement-options/a-bit-at-a-time/

Advising people on this was my job for a good few years, and I’ve been ‘living’ this question since I retired five years ago. A few thoughts. To feel fairly confident that an invested fund like drawdown will generate a given level of income for the rest of your life (with increases to offset inflation) I’d suggest looking to draw no more than about 4% a year from the pot. It might not sound a lot, but a combination of taking more and a couple of bad years of investment returns can quickly put a big hole in a fund’s buying power. Even at that level, there's no guarantee the fund will perform well enough to maintain your income (although it could do better, of course). Having some guaranteed income (annuity, State Pension) massively reduces the risks of you ending up with insufficient income in future. Make sure you’ve got a decent amount in cash (either in the bank or within your drawdown fund) so that you’re never forced to sell investments. Having to sell investments when prices are down is one of the surest ways of demolishing your long-term savings. As well as enough for emergencies and any lump sums you can anticipate (next car, house maintenance/improvement) it’s worth having a year or two’s income in reserve. I try to keep myself in a position where if I had to I could fund between two and three years' income without having to sell investments. That doesn't mean a whole 2-3 years income is in cash, as the investments in my drawdown and ISAs pay dividends of between 3 and 4%, so I only have to keep the shortfall as cash. I actively top up the cash in my drawdown by selling units whenever markets are high, so that I can sit tight during the inevitable bad times. Obviously not everyone wants to be that ‘hands on’. As others have mentioned, you can take account of other income that will kick in, so that you don’t need a fund big enough to support your total income forever. So, let’s say you need £24,000 a year, but you’ll get £7,500 from your annuity at 65 and £8,500 a year from the State at 67: at 60 you need a fund big enough to pay you £24,000 a year until 65, then £16,500 for two years then £8,000 a year indefinitely after that. The calculations can get a bit involved (particularly when you take account of any tax on the withdrawals), but hopefully that makes sense. Don’t underestimate the effects of inflation over the medium term (you could easily be retired for 20 years plus; even 2% a year inflation can put a big hole in your real income over that timescale). This is often particularly relevant for annuities, where most people choose an annuity that will never increase. In your case, if you opt for drawdown the annuity will be a fairly small proportion of the total once your State pension kicks in, so it may be less of a factor for you. It’s often worth taking the 25% lump sum. Even if you think of it as part of your retirement pot, you can invest it back into similar funds in things like ISAs, where you’ll then be able to take money out tax-free, whereas you’d have to pay Income Tax to take it out of your drawdown. And if you don’t take the lump sum when you move a pension fund into drawdown, you can’t do so later. Have you worked out how much money you’ll actually need in retirement? Perhaps surprisingly, people often struggle to answer this question - but obviously it’s crucial, and, if you haven’t already, it’s worth sitting down with a bit of paper or a spreadsheet and working out what you’ll have to spend and what you'd like to spend once you’re not earning. With my work history I would say this, but…this really is one of the times when it might be worth paying a fee to get a bit of advice. Making the most of your investments, pensions, tax allowances etc for what you specifically need to achieve can be quite complex. I really think advice can pay for itself at times like this, even if it’s just a one-off to make sure you set off on the right track. Finally, on a non-financial point, have you thought about what you will do with your time once you retire? In my experience some people don’t think beyond “I won’t have to work any more - hurrah” and can then struggle to enjoy retirement because they don’t have any firm plans of how to use all their spare time. Doesn’t matter what they are, but it’s great to have an idea of what things you will do to fill your time enjoyably. Hope this rather lengthy response is helpful. Good luck with the decision making - and I hope that if you do decide to retire early you enjoy it as much as I have so far!

Cheers. I still haven’t seen the Tier 3 rule that prevents going to footy, but as I’m not planning to go to the footy I’m not going to worry about that!

No, some of it is law, including bits which prohibit pubs from opening in Tier 3. Not all of what you’ve linked to is couched in terms of ‘must’; and it was noticing that some of the guidance didn’t say you must do things that set me off to explore what the legislation actually said. Anyway, work tomorrow, so thanks for the contributions but I really must switch off. I promise to come back on here and own up if I pick up a Fixed Penalty Notice in the Midlands over the weekend because I’m wrong!

I think if you look at the the “Latest available” version, the SI you’ve linked to has actually been superseded by later legislation (it's not been easy to keep up this year). To be fair much of the wording in later legislation is the same - but I don’t believe the legislation says the things you ascribe to it. I don't feel attacked - no issue there; and I set out what I did to explain my thinking rather than to justify it. I agree that keeping to the rules for a certain period of time doesn’t give me a pass to break them occasionally when it suits me. I’m also not someone who would generally look to find loopholes in the law to exploit. It’s clear what the intention is. But ultimately I have to do what the law says, not what the guidance does; and as I’ve explained, on this occasion I’ll probably stick to the law rather than the guidance (I hadn’t quite decided earlier, but had a conversation with my wife this evening). Anyway, I need to sign off now, as I have work, involving a 6.30 alarm, tomorrow morning. Thanks for engaging.

Again, that’s guidance. The legislation doesn’t say an individual can’t go to a pub or a football game or, as far as I can see, that a pub or football club can only accept the custom of someone from a suitable Tier. Sticking to Tier 3 rules in Tier 1 means, for instance, that you couldn’t be part of a group of 6 people from different households indoors, which Tier 1 allows but Tier 3 doesn’t. Now it wouldn’t surprise (or annoy) me if businesses looking to comply with the spirit of the guidance, including BCFC, chose to limit their customers to those in particular tiers so as not to encourage unnecessary travel. But I haven’t yet seen any law that requires them to do so.

Yes. I understand that the guidance is that there should be no unnecessary travel. But I don’t believe there's actually a law against travelling. I’ve complied with both the letter and the spirit of the law throughout this year (whilst regularly observing others ignoring both); I have very few social interactions ATM - I do one day of work a week, when I might encounter perhaps 20 people, with appropriate social distancing and other precautions, and apart from that, see no-one else in person apart from my wife. I might therefore just decide that as long as I’m not breaking the law, the risks involved in my wife and me spending a few hours in our car and maybe an hour walking around a park with my family are low enough for me to ignore the guidance on this one occasion. I’d argue, for instance, that it’s a lower risk than going to the gym, which is permissible but which I haven’t done since March. I accept that travelling to Leicestershire is against the spirit of the recommendations, and accept that other people would disapprove and would make a different decision. I’m not sure there's any distinction made in the guidance between travelling to watch sport and travelling for other leisure purposes. And I don’t know what leads you to say that it would be OK to travel to Tier 2, say, to see my family, but not to go to AG. As ever, happy to be educated if there’s something I've missed.

So some SC holders will miss out because they can’t get online or demand is too high? I suppose you could let all SC holders apply for a ticket then have a draw to see who’s successful if they're oversubscribed. Problem then is you may not know which seat you’ll end up in when you put in the request - and collecting the money would be complicated. Not sure there is a manageable solution that suits everyone. There might be less ‘oversubscription’ if the club only allows sales to people from Tier 2...

A fair system would be that initially, tickets are only available to SC holders, who can buy them for 1/23 of the price of their SC if after a certain time (first day?) there are any tickets left then members can buy them for POTD price less whatever discount membership gets you. (Do we have a membership scheme this season??) Then, after another time period, general sale - in the unlikely event any seats remain. 11998.

I’ve also been discussing this with my AG companions this afternoon, which prompted me to look up what the legislation says about a meal served with alcohol. It says it should be a “table meal” which is “such as might be expected to be served as breakfast, the main midday meal or main evening meal, or as a main course at such a meal.” I’m not sure which of those categories the £1 bowl of peanuts which can be selected at one of my mate’s local falls under! As you say, simple - and black and white - would be good.

I agree, by and large. One problem in the UK, though, is that for the last few months a significant minority haven’t been sticking to the rules anyway. In my (fairly civilised, considerate and law-abiding as far as I can tell) cul-de-sac I reckon about half the houses are having regular visitors, and I’m pretty sure most of them don’t qualify as “bubbles” (adult children and their other halves etc). Not a big deal in itself, but multiply that nationwide and it makes quite a difference - and suggests many people will just ignore any Christmas rules anyway. Add to that the fact that the actual rules are quite complex and that even if the police do catch people out they won’t generally do anything beyond telling people not to do it again and you have a recipe for mass non-compliance. Are people keeping to the rules in France? I watch a bit of French TV news so I’m aware of some of the big breaches (were there various raves a week or so ago?) But I don't get much impression of how compliant the general population is. I know there were more spot checks and more fines for those out and about without good reason in the early days, but haven’t seem much recently.

I’m sure most people with local family won’t give it a second thought. The fact that my sister and nephew are 130 miles away meant I wanted to know what the law said before I arranged anything. Welcome to the world of an “Analytical”! Technically Bristol doesn’t go into T2 until midnight 00.01 on Saturday so this evening and tomorrow are under the ‘old’ rules anyway...

Is this right? My understanding is that there aren’t any restrictions as such on travelling: gov.uk talks in terms of advising people not to travel and I can’t see anything in the legislation banning travel between tiers or more generally. Someone who lives in Tier 3 remains subject to the T3 rules if they travel to T1 or T2: 2) No person living in the Tier 3 area may participate in a gathering outside that area which— (a)consists of two or more people, and (b)takes place in a private dwelling or in any indoor space. (from The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (All Tiers) (England) Regulations 2020). But I think that still leaves someone free to visit a pub in a different tier, alone or with members of their household/bubble. I’m not promoting it, by the way: my interest in the travel rules is not to do with going to the pub (or to AG from South Glos) but to work out whether I’m allowed to meet my Leicestershire-based sister outside somewhere to exchange Xmas presents. Whether that’s a reasonable risk is, of course, a different question, which I’m also considering. Happy to be corrected if someone can show me the rules.