Dr. Gonzo

No deal is the default position if there is no deal by the deadline. A deal has been reached with the EU, it’s not a good deal (which plenty of people predicted would happen as the EU has so much more leverage in negotiations). What indications do you have that the EU will sit back down and give us a better deal, extension or no extension. And right now the EU position is no extension unless we accept their deal. So yes, it is the default position. But also: yes, no deal is a political choice. It’s one we’re making on our own though - the EU’s stance in negotiations has been predictable and expecting them to suddenly have the UK’s best interests at heart over the EUs is blind optimism.

I get what you’re saying, but in @nudge‘s post it seems much worse than what you’re describing. Particular with the falsified papers - that seems no longer like a tolerable risk (although I think with planes, most risks of crashes with no survivors should be considered intolerable). Here we’ve got Boeing and the FAA acknowledging hazardous planes to themselves but deciding to move forward for the sake of profits. Anyone that signed off on this is responsible for over 200 people being killed in those 2 crashes

I find that take surprising. The EU doesn’t have to make anymore moves for a No Deal to happen - they negotiated a deal with us and said those terms are final. Parliament rejected that deal twice. No ideal is the default position if there is no deal in place by the deadline. The deadline is just over a week away. If we have a no deal, it’s from the clumsiness of our leaders over the last 2 years. They’ve got less than 9 days to sort it out, or to drive us over the edge. In the meantime we’ve got to hope the EU agrees to give us an extension to sort it out. The EU is now saying they’ll only agree to an extension if we agree to the deal that’s failed in parliament twice. So we only get an extension on the deadline if we agree to a Brexit that displeases most in the remain camp and most in the leave camp. The government couldn’t sort anything out in 2 years, I doubt they get anything done in 8 days and a few hours (assuming there’s no extension that lets us renegotiate terms with the EU).

I think the problem is that Chelsea have had so much success with someone coming in to paper over the cracks... but they've now lost that core group of players that were part of those very great Chelsea sides - players like Terry, Fat Frank, Makelele, etc... They've still got a good group of players, but I don't think they've got the same leadership qualities as those core group of players - nor do they have the character to turn things around when things don't look great at the club. And the board at Chelsea has done a lot to create a very toxic culture at the club. Because what they've got now are a group of mostly good players (because you don't win the league 2 years ago and keep most of the same players and just suddenly look hopeless), but they've got serious motivational problems and they clearly know that if things look bad at the club and tough for the manager... they can be the end of that manager, all they have to do is continue to not give a fuck. I agree that they need to give Sarri more time if they're actually serious about giving him a chance to make Chelsea a club that plays fluid attacking football. I think Chelsea need to clean house at the top though - the people above the manager have been appalling at their jobs. But after over 10 years of short term planning taking centre stage and neglecting long term planning... I'm not sure that's going to happen at the club. But they need to have a board and a director of football that are working towards long term goals for the club - they're no longer the richest club in the league and they're no longer the only club that can splash serious cash - they've got no long term direction. Even their excellent youth program is just being used for short term purposes, to loan on young kids and sell them on at a profit to fund other first team signings. Look at the top players they've let go that are now at rival clubs ahead of them in the league. That's really the first thing Chelsea need. A real long term plan to work towards. That's not saying they need to neglect short term goals - but expecting to simply buy success in this day and age requires both short term and long term planning. Especially when there's another oil club in the league that's richer, run a lot better on and off the pitch, that's got players that are part of one of the most historically significant title winning sides in the league's history (because they did just break the points total). But that means Chelsea need to operate more like an actual football club rather than a billionaires plaything - it means an adjustment of expectations at the board level... and probably for the fans too. Because Chelsea fans got a bit spoiled in the last 10 years with sustained success in the league (winning it multiple times, used to always qualify for the CL) and in Europe (2 CL finals, 1 CL victory, and a Europa League) and other domestic trophies - and in the recent past, sacking a manager and a quick change has worked out. The next thing that happens after Chelsea do come up with an actual long term plan (if that ever happens) is selling toxic players and breaking up dressing room cliques. IMO, Chelsea have a lot of these toxic players - anyone with any sort of "leadership" role at Chelsea that didn't haul Kepa off the pitch after that refusal to be subbed off, like Azpilicueta (the supposed captain) would be on my list of players to go, regardless of how good they might be (Azpilicueta is a pretty good player, but that was unacceptable from a captain). Players that are clearly not good enough, like Alonso, Zappacosta, and Morata, also need to go. No point in keeping them around paying Chelsea wages for players that are dogshite. And then wantaway players, like Hazard, I think should probably be shipped out because when you've got a culture of players downing tools to get a quick manager sacking don't need the added distraction of their best player constantly going to the Belgian media and begging Real Madrid to sign him. That's a bit harsh on Hazard, because despite his dickhead teammates, I think he's one of the few players at Chelsea that hasn't looked like they don't give a fuck. But a massive clearout is needed. Then the manager and DOF need to work together to sign the right types of players to meet those long term goals first and foremost - more of those promising kids at Chelsea should be given a chance in squad roles. Granted, none of this is really realistic with a transfer ban looming over the club's head. But that transfer ban comes again from them breaking rules to sign young players... for their youth team that they hardly use to supplement their first team; which would infuriate me as a Chelsea fan, but is a mildly amusing fact if you're not a Chelsea fan... it's just an example of how the people above the manager at Chelsea either don't plan for the long term or they are all reading off different pages of the plan and aren't working together to push Chelsea forward.

Power CPube

I really hope so because he's the best midfielder we have at connecting the midfield to the front 3, but he's been out for almost a year so probably not - we didn't see much of Lallana until recently after his long injury issues.

I somehow missed this. Tbf, if you listen to Cannibal Corpse without thinking about killing people at least a little bit, you probably need to turn the volume up a bit.

A lot of articles seem to use them as synonyms tbh - here's just one example: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/01/17/france-triggers-hard-brexit-plan-warns-no-deal-less-less-unlikely/ I've always considered a soft-Brexit to be something along the lines of us leaving the union, but getting to keep a number of the advantages of EU membership for the good of free trade and freedom of movement. And a hard Brexit I've always viewed as us leaving the union fully and reverting to WTO rules - which is the default no deal situation. I think the vote before yesterdays was even more of a reason to hold a second referendum. The government essentially asked MPs to change their mind on the vote of a few months ago - if it's reasonable to expect that MPs can change their mind after a few months, why is it not reasonable to believe the voting public can change their mind after a few years? Especially as many who voted leave did not vote for a hard Brexit, and many leave campaigners explicitly stated that there would not be a hard Brexit.

That's actually fucking hilarious. For anyone to believe Boeing pulled the planes themselves, they'd need people to 1.) not be aware that almost everyone else grounded their planes before this announcement, 2.) not be aware that Trump made the announcement to ground them, 3.) get most of your aviation news from Boeing's twitter

I mean I do agree with you, she was given an impossible task - and even in negotiating with the EU, when she comes back she has to either sell a bad Brexit deal to both Brexiteers and remainers. And the EU held all leverage in negotiations, but the problems domestically really made it unfeasible. You've got around half the country that didn't want to leave in the first place, then the leave camp that's made up of shitloads of views with very few of them being realistic.

They’re the same

Hooray the orange moron did something not moronic for once, the planes will be grounded.

If they knew about the glitch but didn't do anything, then some Boeing execs and engineers should be going to prison. I've just seen my next business trip is supposed to be on one of these planes … hopefully the FAA removes it's head from it's anus, so I won't be flying on a plane that 45 other countries, including the one I'm from, thinks is too unsafe.

My flights to and from Harbin were on that plane, I feel pretty fortunate. Norwegian air prices do seem too good to be true... but I flew with them to England recently and it was actually pretty nice. A bit worrying they use these shite planes.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/science-environment-47543875 @Happy Blue and I already knew this though

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-water/desperate-venezuelans-swarm-sewage-drains-in-search-of-water-idUSKBN1QS2SN?utm_source=reddit.com Sounds pretty horrific tbh. Guess a small and corrupt country shouldn't have their economy based around oil exports and only oil exports and use a dictionary definition of socialism as it's blueprint.

On the one hand, I feel a bit bad for her because this is really all David fucking Cameron's fault - I think he has to go down as one of the worst British people in the history of Britain for this. On the other hand, it's her fault (and her party's fault) that we've spent 2 years of negotiation with the EU just utterly wasted and are 17 days from No Deal.

Her Brexistential crisis is clearly taking a toll on her.

Lads it’s could have not could of.

I’ve only played it on my brother’s computer and I’m shit at it, so I never made the mun. He knows what the fuck he’s doing. When I play it’s basically astronaut disaster simulator.

It's a really fun game, but it's hard as fuck. It's definitely a game of trial and error.

I think they should sack Silva because it's a stupid thing to do and it would mean another year of rebuilding there.

So what do Chelsea do if they tell Kepa he's been fined and he wags his finger and says "no"?