Strewth!

[REDCAR]

15 hours ago, Half fan said:

In previous unstable times, I have written on this forum how consoling and supportive the contributions have been.

I accept that we all have differing opinions and that this great forum is the place to express them.

But the critical judgements levied in the past 24 hours against David Clowes and Paul Warne are bordering on a disgrace.

Give our owner-saviour a chance please, and allow our new football boss to show us what he can do, rather than write him off before he has started.

I hope he's signed his contract, because some of the comments on here might encourage him to return pronto to Rotherham.

Have we forgotten the example of our blessed and departed monarch already? Surely the Elizabethan Age has not disappeared so rapidly.

COYR fans! DCFC always has been a roller coaster. All apsects of the ride are there to be enjoyed, or we are not supporters!

Half a fan

[strawhillram]

1 minute ago, REDCAR said:

Half a fan

what's the other half?

[REDCAR]

7 minutes ago, StrawHillRam said:

what's the other half?

Dunno, just going by the username home slice.

[LazloW]

21 minutes ago, Alty_Ram said:

… but I'm really not seeing much in the way of hysteria that you seem to hint at and besides, debating such developments is surely the point of a forum.

 

In all seriousness, I agree with this. The debate has been quite balanced and calm really.
I’ve hardly called anybody a wrist slasher (well, apart from a couple of the usual suspects but they revel in that anyway) ?

[Ellafella]

The notes of the Supporters' Charter Meeting held yesterday are very encouraging; go read. The Club is being run wisely and with a plan in mind. All's well.  

[Premier ram]

4 hours ago, Half fan said:

Thanks Jono for your accurate perception.

Sadly our wise words are falling on stony ground.

I shall depart this forum until after the Cambridge match, as it's sunk to new depths and is best left to wallow meantime.

                                       

                          

                                                  

[Ram-Alf]

5 hours ago, Half fan said:

Thanks Jono for your accurate perception.

Sadly our wise words are falling on stony ground.

I shall depart this forum until after the Cambridge match, as it's sunk to new depths and is best left to wallow meantime.

[Reggie Greenwood]

14 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Sure I dated her in the 70”s 

[jono]

13 hours ago, YorkshireRam said:

The level of pretentiousness in your pompous drivel is genuinely amusing. 

Was she a ''wise head'' when she came out with this howler?

Pathetic ! So a bean counting civil servant at the palace floated a dumb idea to ministers .. translated as “shock horror Queen asks for hand out”. You really have dredged the depths of the Daily Mail Gutter and the One eyed Grauniad with aplomb. Take a bow.
 

 

[Brammie Steve]

I've  just read through this thread and wish to ask a perfectly serious question:-

What is everyone rabbiting on about?

[plymouthram]

4 minutes ago, Brammie Steve said:

I've  just read through this thread and wish to ask a perfectly serious question:-

What is everyone rabbiting on about?

Yes it's a bit confusing, CAN SOME ONE CLOSE IT DOWN

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

13 hours ago, REDCAR said:

Half a fan

Half biscuit

[Ram-Alf]

11 hours ago, Brammie Steve said:

They're not Reds then ?

[YorkshireRam]

On 23/09/2022 at 22:33, jono said:

Pathetic ! So a bean counting civil servant at the palace floated a dumb idea to ministers .. translated as “shock horror Queen asks for hand out”. You really have dredged the depths of the Daily Mail Gutter and the One eyed Grauniad with aplomb. Take a bow.
 

 

The Daily Mail are pro-royal because they're a right wing publication... the fact you don't understand that correlation is just another marker in the tally for pro-royalists being firmly out of touch with reality. I'd love to hear your justification for her using taxpayer money to pay off the victim of her nonce of a son...

I'm not even anti-royal, I just dislike those, like yourself, that endorse through perpetuation the ridiculous hysteria that surrounded her death. Then subsequently painting her posthumously as some morally-flawless individual, when she was far from.

[RodleyRam]

[jono]

4 hours ago, YorkshireRam said:

The Daily Mail are pro-royal because they're a right wing publication... the fact you don't understand that correlation is just another marker in the tally for pro-royalists being firmly out of touch with reality. I'd love to hear your justification for her using taxpayer money to pay off the victim of her nonce of a son...

I'm not even anti-royal, I just dislike those, like yourself, that endorse through perpetuation the ridiculous hysteria that surrounded her death. Then subsequently painting her posthumously as some morally-flawless individual, when she was far from.

And there’s the problem. Full of polarised posturing, pigeon holing all sorts of people on the basis of hearsay, guesswork and personal bias. The Mail is a rag but if it decides a particular Royal is due for some muck spraying (sometimes deserved) they  are only too happy to do it. (Same with the Guardian and most of our media )

The queen has personal wealth and may or may not have paid hush money for Andrew’s “problems” I think you’d struggle to call it tax payers money though. If you used your capital to pay a siblings debt what would you call that money ? If you work for the government, and bail your sibling out with your salary .. is that spending “tax payers money?”  Your arguments just don’t hold water. 

For the record, I am not a “Royalist” Despite having an interest in the history and culture of how countries are governed. Your suggestion that I am is  another of your simplistic  box placing of people. It’s true I liked the Queen and I find it interesting having a constitutional monarchy,but it’s an anachronism in todays age and makes little logical sense, yet the Queen, over a very very long time has to most rational people proved to be a far more treasured, able and respected head of state than so many presidents around the world (That would also have cost the tax payer money ) The Queens knowledge, subtlety and sense of duty will be very difficult for anyone to top. Be that Charles OR an elected president .. Fancy a President Tony ? Or Boris Or Jeremy or Dave ? Would they serve with such balance wisdom and consideration ? Oh and what’s the tax payers budget for their offices and support staff, and how much income would they bring in to this country ? How much respect would they garner from countries that aren’t modern social democracies (there are quite a lot you know ! ) 

I’d love to hear who you think should be our first president but then we’d be getting in to politics which isn’t really allowed !