Honey Honey

Sunderland is a left field shout to be fair. You wonder what Leeds and Sheffield did.

He likely be banned from playing. Joey Barton got an 18 month ban reduced on appeal to 13. But he bet on his own team to lose. Toney could still be looking at a few months out of the game. You can't have someone in that situation playing for England.

Didn't local councils have to put their cities forward in conjunction with the stadium owners? It wasn't just some bloke picking what he wanted. The list will also be reduced down in April.

Wouldn't be surprised if FA informed him what was likely to come out. May have even timed it to be after squad announcement and not before. Will never know.

Right decision not to call him up after that.

Kremlin parrots whatever line these online "truth tellers" come out with. That a questionable kimdotcom tweet can have the Kremlin demand answers and tell everyone the Royal Navy did it is pathetic.

We are currently in the 2008-10 cycle all over again. A global crisis with local nuance, 2 years out of an election. Brown was able to go into the election with the topline figures improving but the reputational damage of being at the wheel was too much. The same should likely be the case here. Our two party state seems to only change hands at a major economic impasse. Could be a coincidence but likely not. A decade of Labour should be coming. An election now might jeopardise that, whilst Labour would win, inflation, currency value and interest rates are likely going to cause further negative headlines in the coming months regardless of what any government does or does not do. Let that fall at the Tories feet to increase liklihood of a long term Labour government.

I don't think this is true so much anymore. Maybe in the 80s when interest rates were 14% back when trickle down theory first came up. In some ways that design flaw became a beneficial feature for topline ecomomic reads given savings takes money out of the economy and the environment was highly inflationary at the time. Now the best ROI for the last decade has been in property and the stock market. I suspect the tax breaks for those who may be on around £150-250k will simply be spent maintaining their existing lifestyle in the face of inflation, nice for them ey. The millionaires, who may get substantial benefits depending on the way they do their accounts will possibly look for investments they think will survive the current crisis. Or should I say their portfolio managers would. Still, it's questionable whether this whole thing is trickle down at all. There's certainly no hard intention for it to be that way in the classical sense. What the Conservative party seeks is topline growth which is seen as the means to a shrinking state "burden" as they put it. In other words if the economy grows they will cut taxes more and more. The premise isn't necessarily bat shit, its the delivery which is morally questionable, the idea that this can and should be delivered by making the rich richer and fracking the shit out of labour areas. That this gamble of state funds should be made in this way. Whilst they do look like a dead party walking, Conservative policies have caused recessions or at least single quarter falls through their policies on at least three occasions in the last 40 years. Two of which they pitched as a necessary hardship. This situation here looks similar. Worst case Labour scenario is we may well have an election during topline GDP figures of +1.5-2.5%. That is the only threat to Labour and even then it likely isn't a big one.

Illegal immigrants can't vote. Even legal immigrants can't vote.

On the surface, to be expected that information wouldn't be shared discussing vision 2030 privately. You'd expect that from any government. It's not the first refusal on the takeover and it won't be the last. That doesn't make something a "cover up" of illicit activity but in this age of conspiracy the most nefarious possibility is automatically assumed. You don't need an FOI to know the takeover is the strategic will of the state.

Think we are also fortunate we didn't sign Botman or Carlos now. Schar has been able to rediscover his form and will now be vital squad member. Centre back in the summer yes, in January might not have went as well

To some extent we've got lucky in January because we were possibly turned down by Dele Alli, Lucas Digne and Donny van de Beek. This summer players like that will say yes, some of them just won't have the right mentality, hard judge. I don't know whether we will sign Matt Targett but he has been as important as any signing. He's given us a defensive stability. We were a side with no confidence and the defensively stability has allowed confidence to come back. Though Targett might be one of those situations where we don't sign him because better become available. Difficult decision.

Matty Longstaff?

What needs to happen is those at the bottom of the squad are sold and we sign new players better than what we've got, but keep the existing. So Gayle for example 3rd choice striker, let him go sign a new one. Whereas if Ashley was around and we wanted a new striker we'd have to sell Wilson not Gayle. Would say Sean Longstaff, Dwight Gayle, Matt Ritchie and Fernández to be replaced. Maybe Almiron.

Since that game, 9 wins, 2 draws, 3 defeats. Top 4 team results wise and Joelinton best midfielder in the league

Cancel culture the war strategy of this era.

Out of interest who is Chelsea's £1.5bn of debt to?

Sounds like sponsors are now looking at how to jump ship and see if they can end contracts early. Could Chelsea Football Club collapse? What's the Premier League going to do?

I wouldn't be surprised if the ticket decision is reversed. It looks like your classic public servant fuck up. Right to sanction Abramovich, it was ridiculous that he could have just sold the club for £3bn and fucked off with that money. A sanction implies something that can be lifted. At some point we might get beyond the point of return on that the way things are going, then compulsory purchase orders and confiscation would be required to rid the South East of Putin puppets. Let's image Ukraine is occupied by Russia, in part or full. How then can sanctions be lifted at all for years? What then for Chelsea?

Abramovich sanctioned. Chelsea not allowed to sell tickets. Only season ticket holders allowed to continue to attend matches. Can't help but think that particular ticket decision is in part down to those fans who sang his name during the support for Ukraine. Though Chelsea are de facto owned by Putin and the Russian state. Abramovich has to have all major purchases sanctioned by Putin and he did sanction the takeover of Chelsea as a means to promote Russian business ownership in the UK according to Catherine Belton.

This is an important moment to send a warning message to the dirty money from Saudi Arabia and China by coming down hard on Russia. If we fail here what was the point of our engagement strategies?

As some analyst on the telebox said the amount the Tories receive isn't worth the cost to them of not doing enough about Putin's pals. Isn't there a high court case right now against an author who has claimed Putin gave the approval for Abramovich buying Chelsea? As he supposedly does for all big purchases those he made rich with stolen money make.

What is this government doing allowing these Putin puppets to disinvest and get out with all their money.

If things continue to escalate a compulsory purchase order of Chelsea by the government could become realistic. One where the government transfers funds to a bank account that Abramovich then can't access anymore than £50k of