Jump to content

Recommended Posts

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mick Mac Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > You're the expert.

>

>

> You told me home advantage for England was

> immense.


I've forgotten what happened this morning never mind what I say to you when I'm half cut. But yes it is I think a massive advantage and probably a decent bet. if someone can beat the AB's for you that would be nice too.

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Indeed. I bet the US at 34/1 :)


Trade it quick.


Stick to your original England bet.


Don't forget that in rugby, on the line is over the line, so it will all be a legit home world cup this time. No Azerbeijani officiados needed.

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Fiji to be leading at HT tomorrow is 8/1.

>

> USA and Scotland are in the same Group as S.Africa

> so I don't think DC meant both.


Well obvs I didn't mean that both will qualify - given RSA are a given that's not possible. But without looking at the odds I thought both might be given a decent shout of reaching the QFs. USA have some very mobile backs with a 7s pedigree. Shame Carlin Isles isn't here though - the quickest man in rugby.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Mick Mac Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > You're the expert.

> >

> >

> > You told me home advantage for England was

> > immense.

>

> I've forgotten what happened this morning never

> mind what I say to you when I'm half cut. But yes

> it is I think a massive advantage and probably a

> decent bet. if someone can beat the AB's for you

> that would be nice too.


Will Twickenham be filled with Englishmen - or is there a

quota for us Wales fans :)

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And the biggest news in the world of rugby today

> ... The Gavin Henson interview

>

> http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-new

> s/gavin-henson-interview-still-believe-10079935


"but I age differently to most people"... Dorian Grey

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Alan Medic Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > England drop Ford for Farrell. Anyone agree

> that's

> > a good decision? I don't.

>

> Gives us hope - Apparently to counter Welsh play -

> but

> you play to your strengths - don't you.


Ford must be peed off. As for having Burgess in the centre I think that's an experiment waiting to fail. I hope I don't have to eat my words if England wallop the Wales 2nd XV

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I think that's a big assumption.  Many people vote for the candidate precisely because they are a member of a particular party and represent that party's policiies.  I personally didn't know who McAsh was in the last election, but I knew what party he represented.  When politicians don't act "morally" what are we to think of them and their motivations? But I think there will be people who want to vote Labour, don't know that McAsh has defected and accidentally vote Green precisely because they do vote for the name.  Yes, you could say they need to read the ballot paper more carefully but it's possible to see one thing and not notice another.
    • Morally they should, but we don't actually vote for parties in our electoral system. We vote for a parliamentary (or council) representative. That candidates group together under party unbrellas is irrelevant. We have a 'representative' democracy, not a party political one (if that makes sense). That's where I am on things at the moment. Reform are knocking on the door of the BNP, and using wedge issues to bait emotional rage. The Greens are knocking on the door of the hard left, sweeping up the Corbynista idealists. But it's worth saying that both are only ascending because of the failures of the two main parties and the successive governments they have led. Large parts of the country have been left in economic decline for decades, while city fat cats became uber wealthy. Young people have been screwed over by student loans. Housing is 40 years of commoditisation, removing affordabilty beyond the reach of too many. Decently paid, secure jobs, seem to be a thing of the past. Which of the main parties can people turn to, to fix any of these things, when the main parties are the reason for the mess that has been allowed to evolve? Reform certainly aren't the answer to those things. The Greens may aspire to do something meaningful about some of them, but where will they find the money to pay for it? None of it's easy.
    • Yes, but the context is important and the reason.
    • That messes up Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland - democracy being based on citizenship not literacy. There's intentionally no one language that campaign materials have to be in. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...