exiledwhite2

Maybe not but it is to do with having potentially lethal animals around children. You put your stair gates on, cover your plug sockets, but leave your kid with a dangerous dog? Why keep dangerous animals as pets at all? It just seems absolutely retarded, the proliferation of these dogs is a really depressing, shite aspect of our culture that has emerged this last 20 years IMO. Can't take your kids to a park without some spastic having these dogs tearing about the place.

I've seen a fella fitting that very description near Salford Sports Village / Littleton Road Though I thought it was a rottweiler he had

Depends who it was asking for help and how much! If you borrow money from a loan shark you WILL need to pay it back so if it was somebody close to me I'd have to help them out Next time, I wouldn't

His trademark was the toepoke finish

Shop my mum works in is opening on xmas day Fucking joke. Nobody needs to shop on xmas day and it's horrible for the staff who have to work

I think it did Dunno if he'd still be top scorer But for years he would have been Ah fuck my memory is shite too, thought to be fair I'm remembering that fact from about 25-30 years ago!

Kids are going to grandparents, so will go out for a meal and drinks with the enemy during the day, and piss off home before the idiots hit town, probably about 7 Then have a couple more indoors and possibly be asleep before midnight

You say other side of the wall... other side to what?

Interesting because a West Ham fan I know told me it was the 5th season in a row Nolan had been banned for xmas Amazing how these BS myths go around

If you are claiming that reducing tax rates might stimulate the economy to the extent that the tax take goes up... fine. Maybe that could be the case. Who knows. But that's absolutely not the same as saying if you make tax rates lower, the rich will not strive to avoid them. Which is what you said. There is a whole financial advice industry and anyone with a few quid will seek this advice. Financial advisers / accountants won't say 'well, that rate of tax seems quite fair, let's just pay up and not actively find ways to pay less tax'. That's naive in the extreme. On the 'fair' thing, you're proving my point, you can't apply an adjective to an arbitrary number can you? What we do know is that the government is spending more than it takes.

Absolutely no way, the mentality of big earners will always be to take as much as they can and contribute as little. In fact that goes for most folk. Rightly so as long as it is legal, arguably. Why isn't income tax 'fair' anyway, surely you can never come to a definitive 'fair' %. If you are earning your money in this country you should pay towards its upkeep. It's hardly like we're running a surplus is it?

Having two toddlers myself, reading things like this always worries me Cos you think (hope) everything will be easy and plain sailing once they hit, say, 18!

I dunno. He's had two shots at a title now, which I don't really think he's earned. His mouth (which is the opposite of his style, in truth) has got him a long way. I like the guy, but he's just not world class. And struggles badly at the weight I believe. Clev-Bellew at Cruiser seems to make sense for both guys at this point, a crossroads fight. Kovalev is a monster though, like Golovkin. These guys hit like fucking mules!

A lot of inner London is very different after dark, when the 1 million plus commuters piss off back to the home counties, and the locals emerge! Deptford is pretty ropey 24/7 mind you, never mind late at night (or at least it was 10 years ago when I lived out that way)

That's my neck of the woods and era, I was 19 in 1992 Agreed - in those days you would be very likely to get strife down there if you were an 'outsider' It had its charms, and a lot of my mates were from Kenyon Way. Some absolute scumbags though.

Well, you shouldn't read too much into what I think is silly tittle tattle. I bet a penny to a pound of shit that he also liked 'Froch to win in 3' - 'Groves to win in 8'. But Groves' camp won't put that out there will they? In fact the whole thing is probably utter bollocks anyway

Don't be a loon. He probably likes everything that gets posted. Jesus wept, get a grip

Being knocked down from a cold start in round one is treated slightly differently to accumulated punishment and its associated vulnerability by round nine, rightly so too That said it's a fair point you make, because Groves was not at the point he should have been stopped - everyone agrees on that though. And maarsh - Groves also used his head numerous times, he's not as naive as he likes to pretend

Nah, Froch had more or less a 'free' shot - Groves had his guard up and was in control of himself mind you - in the final salvo I thought it was a horrendous stoppage at the time but the more I've watched it the more I can (only very slightly) understand it But despite all that I still don't get why people are blaming Froch, the premature stoppage has actually cost him too

Terrible stoppage but British refs do stop fights early. These blokes were probably reffing back when Michael Watson was allowed back out for the 12th round when staggering around, brain bleeding. There's a sensible medium but it's hard to find in the heat of the moment. Froch WAS about to stop him IMO. I've no idea why Froch is copping so much flak, it could be argued that the ref cost him a great comeback victory. Not to mention that Froch took a shellacking, his head was scrambled throughout the fight from a heavy KD, but he still was on the point of turning it round. He deserves respect if anything

Haha pull the other one, that camp would leak nothing with McCracken in charge

Worth waiting up for though, can't see how it won't be a corker

No mention of it on any boxing forums I use... I agree!

Hmm, very strange thing to put out there at this point. You either can't fight or you keep schtum is the traditional way of thinking.

No way it ends Haye's career IMO He's got something else on the horizon Vitali in the summer I reckon