May Contain Nuts

He didn't "put his arms around him" though.
It was a hand placed (without force) on the shoulder that had absolutely f*** all impact on whether the opposition could stay on his feet and get to the ball or not - had he not gone down he'd likely have still got the ball first.
It isn't a no contact sport. 
Was it an attempt to win the ball? No. Was it an attempt to impede the opposition player? No again. 

He didn't "put his arms around him" though.
It was a hand placed (without force) on the shoulder that had absolutely f*** all impact on whether the opposition could stay on his feet and get to the ball or not - had he not gone down he'd likely have still got the ball first.
It isn't a no contact sport. 
Was it an attempt to win the ball? No. Was it an attempt to impede the opposition player? No again. 

"it couldn't be a yellow"
says the Bamford on Sky
It absolutely could have been a yellow you tit. It could even have been... f*** all 

Yes but when the proposition is basically:
We've got some eggs. All we could get is eggs, we weren't able to get anything other than eggs and won't be able to get anything else for months, and even then it might just be more eggs, and they might be rotten eggs...  Do you want eggs for breakfast?
And the options are:
A. Yes please I'll have some eggs.
B. No thanks,  I'll starve to death while you take another few months trying to get something else.
 
...well you're not likely to pick B are you? It's a sham of a vote.

Yes but when the proposition is basically:
We've got some eggs. All we could get is eggs, we weren't able to get anything other than eggs and won't be able to get anything else for months, and even then it might just be more eggs, and they might be rotten eggs...  Do you want eggs for breakfast?
And the options are:
A. Yes please I'll have some eggs.
B. No thanks,  I'll starve to death while you take another few months trying to get something else.
 
...well you're not likely to pick B are you? It's a sham of a vote.

...but it will be 20,25,30 years too late by the time it happens and the damage already done.

Yes but when the proposition is basically:
We've got some eggs. All we could get is eggs, we weren't able to get anything other than eggs and won't be able to get anything else for months, and even then it might just be more eggs, and they might be rotten eggs...  Do you want eggs for breakfast?
And the options are:
A. Yes please I'll have some eggs.
B. No thanks,  I'll starve to death while you take another few months trying to get something else.
 
...well you're not likely to pick B are you? It's a sham of a vote.

Oooops...looks like the Police don't like the new King 😁

Ooh!  Are you sure!  Have you seen what happened to the last mob that voted/spoke against the last EFL TV deal!  😲
It went from having The EFL on strings, to not having two bootlaces to tie together!
The EFL are not to be messed with.  They'll chew you up and spit you out, as fast as you can say "But you can't change the rules retrospectively"!
They can... and they will.
... But watch them deny it!
👀
 

Yes but when the proposition is basically:
We've got some eggs. All we could get is eggs, we weren't able to get anything other than eggs and won't be able to get anything else for months, and even then it might just be more eggs, and they might be rotten eggs...  Do you want eggs for breakfast?
And the options are:
A. Yes please I'll have some eggs.
B. No thanks,  I'll starve to death while you take another few months trying to get something else.
 
...well you're not likely to pick B are you? It's a sham of a vote.

Yes but when the proposition is basically:
We've got some eggs. All we could get is eggs, we weren't able to get anything other than eggs and won't be able to get anything else for months, and even then it might just be more eggs, and they might be rotten eggs...  Do you want eggs for breakfast?
And the options are:
A. Yes please I'll have some eggs.
B. No thanks,  I'll starve to death while you take another few months trying to get something else.
 
...well you're not likely to pick B are you? It's a sham of a vote.

Yes but when the proposition is basically:
We've got some eggs. All we could get is eggs, we weren't able to get anything other than eggs and won't be able to get anything else for months, and even then it might just be more eggs, and they might be rotten eggs...  Do you want eggs for breakfast?
And the options are:
A. Yes please I'll have some eggs.
B. No thanks,  I'll starve to death while you take another few months trying to get something else.
 
...well you're not likely to pick B are you? It's a sham of a vote.

Yes but when the proposition is basically:
We've got some eggs. All we could get is eggs, we weren't able to get anything other than eggs and won't be able to get anything else for months, and even then it might just be more eggs, and they might be rotten eggs...  Do you want eggs for breakfast?
And the options are:
A. Yes please I'll have some eggs.
B. No thanks,  I'll starve to death while you take another few months trying to get something else.
 
...well you're not likely to pick B are you? It's a sham of a vote.

No wonder their expenses are high if they've been taking Marinakis out for dinner with them!

Has it only just come to light, or has it only just been formally applied for?  Just because Smuguire wasn't aware of it before it was filed, doesn't necessarily mean that those who are actually involved in the distribution of funds didn't know about it already and that it hasn't already been provisionally accounted for?
 
Sorry but you've made this accusation a few times, but never provided a shred of evidence for it and I can't see anything online that backs it up?
The only thing adjacent to this is Portsmouth's owner being investigated (and eventually jailed) for money laundering in Lithuania / Russia. You could attach fault to the administrator (Andronkiou) to that because he's the one who 'allowed' the dodgy Pompey chairman to take over, but there's no hint of any legal wrongdoing by or investigation into the administrators for this? 

Peter Risdale was (still is) a Director at Preston at the time their relationship with Kirchner ended, and was the one publicly disputed CK's claims in a statement. Peter Risdale was (still is) on the EFL board (club representative) at the time Kirchner passed the EFL's checks and approved his bid.
It's clearly not as simple as 'seeing through him'

And stuff like this is why I don't trust Maguire on anything - spots something somewhere, immediately jumps on Twitter to show off and then ends up having to delete the tweet when it turns out it was nonsense.

Andy Hoskins has been forced into a life of hard labour on the French Riviera...

'Out of his skin', no.
There was just a spell in January where he made 6 goal contributions across 4 games, then was given 68 minutes of a league game (Port Vale away) & 62 minutes against West Ham (where nobody impressed) before he found himself back on the bench.
I can understand why we gave Dobbin starts in the 3 league games following Port Vale because he did come on and make a difference, but it came at the expense of Barkhuizen having any real opportunity to build on his January form and he's only had 45 minutes-or-less to impress in of our 10 of our 17 matches since.
 

That would likely have been Burley's chief scout, Simon Hunt?
It was lot easier to bring in overseas players back then though, so a far bigger pool of players (and styles) to choose from.
Players like Rasiak, Idiakez & Bisgaard came into the Championship largely as unknown qualities so there was an element of surprise which can work in your favour. Signing players who've already been knocking around the English/Scottish leagues and been scouted by all of your rivals doesn't isn't quite the same.

Almost impossible!  Forest are still on a spawny streak, don't forget.
Honestly wouldn't be surprised if if Forest managed to get another 4 points minimum, while Leeds/Everton/Leicester pick up no more than 2-3 points each. (I'd be surprised if Leeds even got 1 the way they're going!)
Forest will be rubbing their hands together at the prospect of playing Chelsea, none of the others have that advantage.
...but you see, by having this expectation it means it'll only be even more pleasing if they do c*** it up.
 

Almost impossible!  Forest are still on a spawny streak, don't forget.
Honestly wouldn't be surprised if if Forest managed to get another 4 points minimum, while Leeds/Everton/Leicester pick up no more than 2-3 points each. (I'd be surprised if Leeds even got 1 the way they're going!)
Forest will be rubbing their hands together at the prospect of playing Chelsea, none of the others have that advantage.
...but you see, by having this expectation it means it'll only be even more pleasing if they do c*** it up.
 

Based on neither being able to pick up 3  points in a vital game against another team around them I think it's all in Forest's hands with a game which is almost impossible to lose in Southampton and a good chance for a victory against a 'big' underperforming side in Chelsea.

Put headphone in you be fine or betend you need the toilet and stay in them till half time just betend oh drats did I miss it.

...but it also bears remembering that the results achieved earlier on in the season were done so against the disadvantage of a having a squad which had only just been assembled, with less preparation time on the training ground than everyone else and with certain key players only available for limited minutes (or none at all) as they worked their way back to fitness and form. The importance of a fit McGoldrick doesn't need pointing out to anyone at this stage, I'm sure!
This squad was thrust into a fixture schedule averaging a game every 4 days and didn't really get a chance to catch its breath until the international break during which we appointed Warne.
I'm not making a broader point btw, just adding another factor into judging how winnable any particular game might have been.