aaid

I was at this game on Saturday and I've got to say that Dave Tarpey's second of four goals for Maidenhead against Dartford is possibly one of the best goals I've ever seen. https://mobile.twitter.com/188BET/status/810413688431738880?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet

Bloody predictive text is a nightmare.

This comment is the only one on this thread that is hallway sensible.

It was Cesc Fabregas that threw it at Sir Alex.

Let's face it, the guy currently lives in Liverpool so just about anywhere in Glasgow is going to be an upgrade on that.

Obvious questions, what's your budget and what are you looking for?

Do you read the Daily Mail?

It's Dave McGowan, he also plays live with Belle and Sebastian.

I think you've answered your own question there. Vincent Tan wants the hearings in public so that - regardless of the outcome - any mud that is thrown around towards Mackay and others will stick. You really have to wonder what exactly it is that Mackay did - or he thinks he did - that was so bad for him to go to these lengths. I imagine "loss of face" has a lot to do with it,

I got 87 without any help, but given that even with all the answers, there's a couple that I can't even work out what the clue is supposed to be I wouldn't have had a chance of completing it

You'd have a point, if wasn't for the fact that Aberdeen have about the worst record in. The top flight for producing Scottish Internationalists. I could be wrong but I think the only player to come through the Aberdeen youth system in the last 20 years or so who could be considered even a semi-regular internationalist was Russell Anderson and even then he was largely a fringe player.

Not as if he doesn't have form for that.

All football is the the same - the possible exception being Dutch football, where everyone criticises everyone else all the time apparently. It's a small industry and there's every likelihood you'll end up working with someone so it's not surprising that everyone is pretty anodyne about it.

The clue is in the picture.

Chelsea's youth system is not wholly set up to provide players for the Chelsea first team, that is only one of the objectives. The other two major objectives are to provide a revenue stream via either loan fees or transfers and also to prevent rival clubs from having control over promising young players. Chelsea have a development squad - which is officially under 23 but in reality the players are a lot younger, most of them are 18/19 and under. They generally start to send players out on loan after that age - there are exceptions but that is the norm - these fall into two categories. Firstly, those they've decided aren't good enough to make it as they just want to get them off the books so to speak. Secondly those they want to develop and how they progress is dependent upon how successful those loans spells are. There are a raft of players playing in the top European Leagues and for their countries who have come through the Chelsea youth system. A young player joining Chelsea may have a slim chance of playing for the first team however they have a good chance - accepting all the things that can go wrong with young players - of having a very good pro-career.

Or alternatively they got away with it on Saturday but not last night.

A few years ago, the office I was in had a major power outage. The main transformer for the building was in the underground car park, which was flooded, and it was completely fried. We were on generator power for about two months before the transformer was replaced. It wasn't a particularly large building, three stories, maybe a couple of hundred people working there and there were two temporary generators and they were absolutely massive, bigger than shipping containers. There were loads of issues with them, we were sent home on 2-3 occasions and on several other occasions couldn't get into the office until mid morning due to them breaking down. Based on that experience, it's pretty staggering that a top flight football club tried to put on a match using temporary power.

Is this a new rule, that you're not allowed to comment on something you don't agree with?

Given that the story over the last couple of weeks has been that Russia hacked into US government files and provided black propaganda to discredit Clinton and help Trump, then that's what I - and I imagine 99% of people who saw Kelly's ramblings - assumed he meant. If you'd said propaganda I'd agree with you, you didn't you got funding from somewhere, God only knows where. As for your last point, don't flatter yourself.

Reminds me of what an old school teacher said when someone in my class - not me - got 3 out of 20 in a multiple choice science test. "A blind monkey with a pin could do better". Supportive and understanding in those days.

I know, I saw the tweet, so where is the mention of funding? You've a very active imagination. Clearly he - Michael Kelly - is talking bollocks, something I would have thought you'd be able to recognise.

There you go again, making things up. Are you a 16 year old from Skopje?

it's not a jumper

Can I move my seat to my living room?

It's not a drink and it's not a glass. Well it is glass but it's not *a* glass.