M'crayons

Not sure myself really... I suppose it was attempting a dash across the road in front of a car, and its trailing back leg was caught.

Great news.. wish we'd stop trying to use him as a winger though....

My girlfriend's family paid TWO ragging GRAND when their cat had one of its legs run over last year. They didn't have pet insurance then - they do now. It's absolute madness.... except I managed to persuade them to call it 'Jay Jay' when they first bought it, so I was glad to see it pull through.

Even if it wasn't actually in his written contract, it seems very likely he had a verbal agreement to that effect. There have been loads of quotes from the Club over time, saying that they wouldn't stand in his way if a Champions League club came in for him. I too believe that the Club had no choice, and that we did well to extract ?15million for him under the circumstances.

One important factor in Anelka being here in the first place was that we wouldn't stand in his way if we got a sensible offer from a club playing in the Champions League, wasn't it? Did we really have a choice?

Alright mate, given that your opening contribution to this thread was 'private schooling is the biggest load of bollocks this country has ever had to deal with', perhaps we were never likely to get anywhere. As one last point on this, let me reassure you that I know Cambridge University goes to enormous lengths with its 'Target and Access' schemes to address how it is perceived in 'comps and with ordinary teachers'. The truth is, misconceptions and myths will always survive as long as this English penchant for class warfare does....

Well, yes, different places have different strengths. Equally, these tables often have questionable methodology, and there can be large discrepancies between them (and that THE table that Satan produced is generally regarded as being significantly less 'academic-based' than the Shanghai one, but nevertheless still does little to support his statement that Oxbridge are a pile of wank). Just exactly what is it that you think two of the world's best universities aren't doing "to make themselves more acceptable to a bright kids who are coming out with 3 or 4 A's from local comps" that they should be doing? And if you do want to know my background - my dad's from Little Lever, my mum's from Salford, both went to Farnworth Grammar, my mum went to university (Nottingham), my dad didn't, and both sacrificed a lot to put me through Birkenhead School, a private school on the Wirral.

But it's the school education system that fails people - the elite universities should just be choosing the best people available, rather than being instruments of social justice. Firstly, where have you come with that stat from - that Oxford and Cambridge get more government money than all the other British universities put together? Secondly, if Oxbridge has to choose its candidates on any grounds other than academic ability, does that not compromise the value for money that the taxpayer gets? They should not be open to everyone, they should be open to those who are most able, regardless of background. Targets are a nonsense - I'll repeat my view that Oxbridge should not be able to see what kind of school their applicants attended (though I accept that there will often be plenty of clues). And I've never heard of Beech House...

Cambridge and Oxford are the only two UK representatives in the 'Premier League' that is the world's top 20 universities - it was just a fairly blunt response to the idea that Oxbridge is just a pile of wank, or whatever else it was that said... cunts in punts aside, as genuinely world class universities, they are a rare and valuable thing in the UK. http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2007/ARWU2007fulllistbyrank.pdf Is it elite universities that should be held to account though, or those that organise the education system that feeds them? The 90% figure is probably a misleading place to start - would it not be better to look simply at the pool of applicants who achieve something like 3 As at A-level in proper academic subjects? If the percentage of this group coming from state schools is disproportionately low, then that is a matter for the Government, not Cambridge University, in my opinion. Elite institutions should not be given quotas to meet. Elites are not inherently a bad thing - if I need complicated surgery at some point in the future, you bet your arse I want that person to be a member of an academic elite. Cambridge does have a duty (to itself more than anybody else) to try and make sure that the right information is out there concerning what it is to study at Cambridge, and what it is not, busting the various myths along the way. Able people should not be put off from studying at Cambridge because of a fear that they don't have the right background, or their face doesn't fit - this is absolutely in Cambridge's own interest. Equally, studying at Cambridge should not be expensive, so as to deter gifted people with limited resources. To be fair, I think a huge amount of progress has been made in this regard over the last 40 years, to the extent that it's now one of the most affordable places to study in the country. There is a hell of a lot of funding to tap into if money is tight, and accommodation is cheap - I'm actually abroad this year, but last year I was paying half the amount living in Cambridge that my sister was in Nottingham (proud of being number 70 in the world, by the way...).

I was a big Bruno fan too, great player. Arguably the first big name foreign star to sign and get all of that going... I think what he gave Cahill was more of a clip round the ear for being a pussy....

I think Brunel, LSE, UCL, and a whole host of redbricks who have top specialties would take issue with that statement. Ok, sweeping statement perhaps, but the fact is that Cambridge and Oxford are not only the only British universities to feature in the world's top 10, but also the top 20. It is true that some places like Imperial are then close behind, and that are several world class individual departments scattered around other universities, but what I said is more or less true. It's all about money - Harvard University spends more in a year than every single English university put together. Anyway, this isn't what this thread about - just pisses me off when Cambridge is the subject of ignorant inverted snobbery, but I'm not going to change anyone's mind here, am I.... It is a bad thing that Labour have cut off access to independent schools for those who are gifted but can't afford it... I have heard that the Conservatives would revive the Assisted Places Scheme should they be elected, so there you go...

They are the only places in the UK that come close to competing on the world stage, such is the relative lack of funding in our system.

Ok, I wasn't clear, but I meant 'today'. One member of the Royal Family almost 20 years ago hardly proves the point....

Not really, have a look at the stats. Now you could argue that those with the most money are the brightest in society anyway and therefore can aford to send their sprongs to public school with the money they have made through their hard work and talent, and not pissing around on internet football chat rooms. Therefore the kids who are at our great public schools come from the top end of the gene pool and deserve their place at Oxbridge. As for public schools being discriminated against at Cambridge don't talk such rot Crayon. The bit I put in bold was your bollocks about 'often finding' people with 3 Cs at Cambridge, who have only got in because of their school. Where on earth did you get that from? Where are these stats you speak of? You will not be able to give me an example of somebody who has been admitted to Cambridge with 3 Cs. I am telling you as somebody who knows and is part of the system, it does happen now that there is positive discrimination towards applicants from the state sector. There are some colleges in Cambridge that somebody from a private school would be mad to apply to if they were playing the odds.

Nah, he'd only try and sell them back to us as pitch fertilizer, and play us off against Pompey and Celtic to get the price up.

The mind boggles as to what it might have been that you saw fit to correct when you went back and edited that post...

The fact is, there is no 'typical scenario', most generalisations are ill advised, and each case should be judged entirely on its merits, completely ignoring the name of a school. Ordinary people people making significant sacrifices to put their kids through private schools because they don't fancy the alternatives is actually a fairly common scenario - it's not all Ruperts in Mercedes 4x4s.

It would be a hell of a kick in the teeth though wouldn't it, to the the single mum who has skrimped and saved to send her bright kid to private school, because she believed she was doing the best thing for that kid in making those sacrifices, only for the kid to lose out to someone educated in the state sector because positive discrimination towards him/her by one of the top universities?

I see - discrimination is only a bad thing in one direction. I'd suggest it would be a step forward if universities weren't allowed to know which school their applicants attended.

The bit in bold is nonsense. The situation in Cambridge now has pretty much reached the stage of discrimination against those from private schools in some colleges. Anyway... on the matter of funding for places at private schools for those that can't afford it. For years, something called the 'assisted places' scheme ran for gifted kids with limited resources. One of the first things that the boys in red did when they got in 1997 was to abolish this scheme, at the behest of plenty of their small minded back-benchers.

I was talking about this season really... if Everton fans have been rather chirpy of late then it's with good cause. I too would make that bet, not surprising given what Liverpool have spent over the last 5-10 years, and will spend in the next 5-10 years. All the more reason why it would be good if Everton could force the fat waiter into 5th place and forced unemployment.

I've not seen much Everton delusion. If they think they're a good side it's because they are. I don't think there's much between Liverpool and Everton at all, and i for one would be pleased to see them beat the real deluded scousers to the fourth spot.

I was talking to a couple of AZ Alkmaar fans while I was watching the Newcastle game, and they both said that he's known as a good personality to have in the dressing room, and as somebody who connects with the fans and gets them going. Much the same was said on their forum too. And if Saturday's showing is anything to go by, he can play a bit as well.

Not this bollocks again...

Some sense at last. What has Bent got to do with anything? Spurs paid over the odds for him because he's English, and that comes with a premium attached, and West Ham were entertaining delusions of getting him, and ?16million was how much of their Icelandic money that they bid. Having said that, he's only 23, so anyone buying Darren Bent is buying a player with far more playing years ahead of him than Anelka, who will be 29 in March and is probably on a downward slope now and is very unlikely to hold his value in another transfer move when is 30+. If we get more than this ?12million then we have made a very tidy profit indeed on the investment, and if that money is spent well, we should be a better team than the shite one we have been ever since Anelka arrived.