pink_triangle

All the protesting and gestures from the media and players looks a bit knowing you should protest, but not really having the inclination to go through with it. Saying that if I was a footballer, I probably would end up doing the same.

I think the reality is that politically Burnham is probably in the same space as Rayner, Nandy and Starmer. In going to the left to try and get support of the members he is just doing what Starmer did in the leadership contest.

I think calling Nandy and Rayner right wing is really pushing the definition. Nandy and Rayner are pretty much bang in the middle of labour in my view.

I think Reeves is too tied to Starmer. They rise or fall together. Burnham has one big disadvantage that he isn't an MP. If he wanted to succeed Starmer he would need to get a seat in time.

Agreed Burnham is the labour version of Liz Truss who will change his political ideals when it suits. It worked for her (in terms of getting in power, but not keeping it) so we will see if it works for him.

Burnham only route to the labour leadership is to hoover up the left support which is why I always expected him to move left. There will be so much pressure for labour to pick a female leader next that I can't see Burnham competing as the moderate candidate where all the high profile females will be. Seeing how bad RLB was in the last leadership campaign there seems to be more space there.

France now without Benzema, Kante, Pogba, nkunku, maignan and kimpembe because of injuries. That's pretty harsh for one of the favourites. At least Griezmann should be fresh playing 20 minutes a game.

Of course things like procurement and ordering PPE are management by committee. Do you really think because Hancock is health secretary he has the expertise to do this. There will be a whole host of civil servants, advisors etc involved in these types of things. Of course he is the figurehead, but to think he was doing everything in isolation is silly. In terms of procurement I have no doubt friends of him and other Tory MPs benefited. This to me is more Torys being torys than any judgement on job effectiveness. My point stands that I think whoever was the Tory health secretary would have probably made very similar judgements leading to very similar outcomes. I support labour but have no doubt a labour health secretary would have probably made mistakes as well. Another key point is that PM Boris could have removed him at any time if not happy with the job he was doing.

Out of interest do you know it's true just because he said it is? Have Burnham and Rotherham confirmed the story? Have the local politicians had their say? That's not me saying it's not true (how would I know) but I am wary of just assuming something is true because it was on social media.

Those regulations were not just put through by him, they were supported by many cross party. The health secretary serves the PM and can be removed at any time if he/she chooses. I guess one question to ask is if Hunt, Javid or another had been health secretary would we have tackled things in a significantly different way and ended up with significantly different outcomes. My guess is probably not. This is not me defending Hancock, but more I think people may have exaggerated his role and influence. If people want to watch him in a jungle fine, if people don't then protest by not watching. Those who think they are punishing him by making him do trials (which in general he is unphased about) are raising his profile and not harming him.

I personally don't care either way whether Hancock is in the jungle. However the narrative from some seems to be that he is responsible for every decision that was made. While he may have been the front man, the post of health secretary doesn't give you exclusive power for health, just as chancellor doesn't give you exclusive power over finance. I'm by no means a fan of Hancock, but I feel it's unfair to hold him responsible for everything that went wrong.

I think the reason they don't do 12 groups of 4 is it would result in a big increase in games. I think I read 16x3 leaves the total games similar.

I can see how someone who supports a nation who qualifies every year under the current format won't like the change, but there are many (me included) who don't and the expansion is an opportunity.

Although when the allegations were dismissed Athwal comfortably beat Tarry. I guess the Corbyn supporters will be happy the members eventually got what they wanted.

Didn't they stop the choice of local members standing to give Tarry (favoured candidate) a clear run.

I agree. The lib Dems leverage in 2010 was in theory they could get into bed with either side. I don't see either lib Dems or SNP in that position this time which weakens their hand.

I have no doubt that the labour leadership is rigging the system to promote their candidates of choice, it would be naive to think the Corbyn leadership didn't do the same.

I suspect it will be the SNP they will need to find an agreement with and not the lib Dems. I think labour could play fairly hardball with the SNP if the alternative is a Tory government and find areas of shared interest to legislate.

Its interesting how different protests are treated differently. In terms of strikes the public seem relatively wiling to accept disruption. I remember fairly recently seeing a protest where middle class kids were pouring milk on the floor of posh shop and probably only disrupting the (relatively,) poorly paid cleaners. It's easy to see how that type of protest will never win public support. I actually don't know what the answer is. Unless protest movements can find charismatic leaders, they will probably struggle to gain public support.

I think there is plenty of interest in Wales. I grew up not thinking I would ever see Wales in a world cup!

I think it's swings and roundabouts. I would argue that in previous world cups many of the best players have come into the tournament after a long, hard season.

Carragher using the fact players will miss the world cup injured as a reason why the world cup shouldn't be played. There are many reasons why we shouldn't be having a Qatar world cup, but players being injured isn't one.

You can't afford to pay for a decent social care and health care system without tax rises in my view. The trouble is who will vote for the rises.

I agree with Streeting the current model doesn't work. Not enough invested in social care which has the consequence of adding both strain and expense to the NHS.

Kane awarded freedom of the city of London, shouldn't you need to win something first?