Stive Pesley

That's not quite what it says is it? - They ask if that is the guideline and the response says
In these circumstances, the League in which a club is to be placed is at the absolute discretion of the Leagues Committee of The FA
I think that's good news in a way - I've been berated for suggesting that the FA would not place a phoenix club the size of Derby in non-league. It would be disastrous for the other clubs - their facilities simply wouldn't cope with the number of fans
The other part of interest is the timings
The issue is addressed at Regulation 6.3 (i) (page 177/178). An initial application would need to be made to The FA (Leagues Committee) by 1 March or within 21 days of the liquidation of the Former Club if later. A full application would be required by 31 March or within 21 days of the liquidation of the Former Club if later
Which means, if we're going to liquidate - it has to be soon if we want to play any football next season
 

Interesting that it says the guidelines for  a pheonix club involve dropping no more than three divisions. 
Starting again in the Conference doesn't seem too disastrous as worse case scenarios go.

As an aside, I've spent quite a lot of time in the former Yugoslavian countries - and their "Yugonostalgia" is very real. They know they were freed from a dictatorship but there are *some* parts of that way of life they now realise were much better than what they have now. For example the comment I always remember was "everyone had a house, and a job, and food to eat. No one was allowed two houses, because why would one person need two houses? Apart from Tito (laughter)"
Same with friends I have who grew up in East Germany - for every horrendous tale of the authoritarianism if you stepped out of line, they also miss the feeling of not being in some squid game type rat race
Probably humanities greatest failing that we've never been able to get this right one way or the other

Personally I've enjoyed the spectacle of grown-men idolising a pensioner who spends most of his time looking like  he's trying to poo in a bucket

You're absolutely right, but I think it is all interconnected. Latvia and Estonia are not seen as Mother Russia, nor Poland etc. The one thing that any Russian will tell you, and has been echoed time and again in the past months, is that they will never again tolerate foreign boots on their land so if you appreciate they believe Ukraine is intrinsically part of 'Malorossiya' / Little Russia then it all connects. And yes, there is a walloping paradox in there about not tolerating foreign boots on their land but no less than Kamala Harris stating that big countries invading small ones is wrong.
BTW - if you have time to see it Lavrov's speech to the UN yesterday was a very good way to understand their perspective. Which is why it was so disappointing to see the co-ordinated walk out as soon as he started. The key point Russia has been making is that they are judged before action (not wrt Ukraine but wrt the last 30 years) so that action simply reinforced (and demonstrated) that belief.
Probably if I could distill my seventeen pages of banging on here into one statement it would be "seek to understand before you seek to be understood" and nobody has taken the time to do that to Russia in the years of build up to these events.

Thank you, that was how it was intended and also as response to the previous post about the Russian ambassador in Iceland. But i do appreciate that many are acutely sensitive - with very good reason - so I do reiterate I apologise if I caused offence in any way.

You can assume / conclude with some degree of certainty that the majority of the population east of Dneiper would choose to be part of Russia given the option - not all, it is somewhat akin to Northern Ireland in that you have divided desires but 18% of the population is considered Russian in all of Ukraine, large parts of the East are Orthodox, Russian passport holders and Eastward looking. Zelensky speaks for the majority but he does not speak for all of his country, unfortunately.
I remain hopeful that Putin's endgame is to invade all of Ukraine and then sue for a peace in which he retreats but takes Donbass and Lugansk. Sadly I am told by many it's all moved far beyond that now.

It's a really interesting juxtaposition, the mentality of people from east and west. It feels like the distrust is almost equal. Without living in that culture it's impossible to fully see how the other group think. 
Western democracy is heralded as something to aspire to, yet I see plenty of problems caused by it. I still see it as a "better" system than Russia adopted, but if I'd lived 50 years in Russia/USSR I can imagine that I might have a different opinion. 
I can't accept Russian imperialism without feeling discomfort for the rights of the Ukrainian people. But I also can feel sympathy for the culturally Russian areas of Ukraine that feel more closely with the Russian state. 
I don't know what the best course of action is, but appeasement feels like a mistake. In the name of reducing casualties? Why did we not accept the Taliban in Afghanistan, that would have saved lives? 
I know the west is highly hypocritical in the way it deals with intervention into foreign affairs, and there's plenty of opposition amongst the people to invasions such as Iraq. I also see the double standards with regards to self determination for states when we can deny some groups autonomy but arm the population of others to defend theirs. It's not a defense to the actions of Russia to point out what the US have done in the past. 8
And the EU looks more and more appealing to me, as a solid safety net against Russian imperialism. Why wouldn't Ukraine apply now? Russia can't use the threat of invasion to prevent it. 

I hope you've spell-checked your thesis

Isn't this a big problem for an invading army though - having troops who don't really get why they are there and have no appetite for killing those who resist their invasion?

I hope you've spell-checked your thesis

It matters a lot, if you go back about 15 pages you will see me suggesting that I don't consider Putin a despot (let's not, we've done it to death) but that was part of my rationale. The Russian people are important to him and up until now he has enjoyed significant popularity - indeed this could well be the first time in his tenure where he is likely to feel a significant groundswell of opposition (Navalny, Nemtsov, Yavlinsky were all irritations - and yes, we all know what happened to two of those - but not really a threat).
It could, to your earlier point, lead to disillusionment in the armed forces but more importantly there are civil fissures that could erupt at any time. Chechnya is no longer a large concern, due to the funding it now receives (ifyou are interested Google images of Grozny, it is like Las Vegas now) but Dagestan, Ossetia and others could see this as opportunity to re-open previous conflicts.
Which is why I repeat, the people pulling the strings at the moment don't understand half of what are the implications of their potential actions. All through the Cold War the one thing that was avoided was destabilisation of Russia, a power vacuum there is potentially catastrpohic for us all. And no, before anyone piles on, that is not me saying let Ukraine fall to prevent that - I'm just saying that is a potential consequence of what has been put in motion on all sides. But there will be little sympathy to prevent it given the sort of tweets and information shared earlier in this thread.

They changed th writer after series 1 and it shows ?

Isn't this a big problem for an invading army though - having troops who don't really get why they are there and have no appetite for killing those who resist their invasion?

FWIW I think we've all been playing nicely - even when disagreeing on stuff. I'm glad the topic was approved as I've read a lot of interesting viewpoints that I otherwise wouldn't have thought about. 
But you're right - it does feel like frightening times

FWIW I think we've all been playing nicely - even when disagreeing on stuff. I'm glad the topic was approved as I've read a lot of interesting viewpoints that I otherwise wouldn't have thought about. 
But you're right - it does feel like frightening times

I hope you've spell-checked your thesis

No, not seen that but thx for the link. Tim Marshall's Prisoners Of Geography is a good read on this, various parts of the world analyzed in short chapters that even someone with my limited attention span can manage. Well worth it.

FWIW I think we've all been playing nicely - even when disagreeing on stuff. I'm glad the topic was approved as I've read a lot of interesting viewpoints that I otherwise wouldn't have thought about. 
But you're right - it does feel like frightening times

haha I have, I should not have been multi tasking... 

I hope you've spell-checked your thesis

I hope you've spell-checked your thesis

FWIW I think we've all been playing nicely - even when disagreeing on stuff. I'm glad the topic was approved as I've read a lot of interesting viewpoints that I otherwise wouldn't have thought about. 
But you're right - it does feel like frightening times

That much is true - but would you not say that he has an end-game, which is to take back a number of the former soviet states?
In which case, a Ukrainian surrender might save bloodshed, but is exactly the result he wants, and would empower him to keep going into Lithuania, Latvia etc

I hope you can still contribute and bring your experiences to the thread. It's exactly the kind of thing I was hoping to learn from having these conversations with the broad range of dheads we all are on this forum 
?