Stan

I don't live in London but I do see what you're saying. There are various rail companies down this end of the country anyway that are just as bad when it comes to cancellations, packed trains, no seats available etc. It's not just a northern thing. I've never been charged for a refund - that is pretty bad. I'm surprised Consumer Rights companies haven't got involved about that. If they've promised a serviced and don't deliver it, it seems obscene to then charge for anyone wanting their money back.

Only depending on the time the train is delayed/cancelled, which to be fair is clearly marked out in T&Cs when buying the ticket, and if not that then their refund policy. For all the times I've had trains delayed/cancelled, I've contacted them and just explained the frustration to them without losing my rag in the complaint, and they've been generous enough to give full refund (or thereabouts even if the train was delayed). If the train is delayed by only a few minutes, I wouldn't even expect a full refund anyway.

Who's the prick asking the question? Klopp's facial reaction is exactly what I did. Just sheer bemusement blended in with confusion and basically 'wtf'.

Chelsea looking at other managers. Bet Potter feels really secure after that trust put in him

The police have an absolute shit load to answer for as to how they've handled all of this. I don't claim to be an expert by any means, but it just wreaks of unprofessionalism in general, but also a huge lack of respect for Bulley and her family.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/64704532

3 points. Never used a rotary phone. Never listened to music on a boombox. Never paid for something with a paper check. Have been given cheque-books when opening accounts (not anymore), but never used them.

In the river, too, after it was checked more than once. Sad, nonetheless .

Ugh, another test ends prematurely. Was hoping for it to at least last the whole weekend Same with the NZ vs England test.

Finely poised test. Not that usual for teams get almost exactly same scores in 1st innings. Sets it up nicely for the rest of the test.

It's exactly what your own club is doing, yet I didn't see you criticising that? Hypocrite, much?

And as if by magic...

Qatar bid submitted apparently.

How beautiful

Really? It's tiny!

I think it's utterly despicable the police have gone down this route and divulged the personal vulnerabilities to this extent. It's like they're deflecting away from their own shortcomings and handling of the case.

I'm not sure I can agree with this. Approx 1000 people per country is a very tiny amount. And then tarring that country with a whole brush of 'you're a racist country' is unfair. Because that's fundamentally what it's doing. Take Netherlands. 17.5m population. 1000 people surveyed in that country is only approx less than 1%. Are you telling me that % of people is a fair reflective and representative sample of the whole country?!

Fair, lots of Western European countries. But having said that, when you think about the amount of countries (61 or 78) it's relatively small. And only 85,000 people. 'Only' seems odd, but when you think about the populations of all the countries they've surveyed, that's relatively small, too. The survey itself even acknowledges its limitations: The below, also doesn't seem right: The first survey was conducted by the Washington Post and broadly asked if people would like having people of other races as neighbours. Answers saying no were assumed to have some form of racial basis. The second survey was more direct, asking whether respondents had seen or experienced racism. All answers that we not a direct “no not at all”, were considered as a check next to racism. So just because someone had witnessed/experienced racism, meant they were racist? That seems very counter-intuitive and misleading, and dare I say quite frankly incorrect. They also acknowledge that the sample sizes surveyed were not actually indicative of the whole country. And a lot of it can be anecdotal.

Hmm. It classes them, as the title, as 'most racist countries in the world' but clarifies this point almost immediately as some kind of caveat The other potential flaw is that only 61 countries were surveyed in one study, and only 78 in another survey. It's not even half of the world's countries. It's hard to see what other countries were surveyed other than a 'top 25'. Only from a quick look and going through some of the links on the page. Were Western European countries even surveyed? It's such a difficult and subjective topic to cover. It's rare you'll see any large volume of people admit they're racist. But I don't think the questions they ask point to 'being racist'. At least not by way of the definition of racism that we know or follow. Just because someone doesn't want to live next to a 'foreign neighbour' doesn't automatically make them racist. They might have a valid reason for doing so. But they're ticked on a checkbox as 'racist' because they said no.

Do you have a link to this survey?

And so it continues... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64650310

Sturgeon has resigned.

@Tommy, your rock-throwing expertise is required! Forget the loved-up couples, these are your real targets!