Torquay United Fans Forum

with garlic mayo

You're taking that miles too literally.

Thea is not Bill Clinton, or HMQEII, she isn't blessed with bags of natural charisma or in benefit from dozens of degree educated script writers. She is asked for a quote and she gives an answer. She's not thinking about how it'll read or what it'll sound like when decontextualised and read dispassionately on the BBC news. She just answers the question as best and as truthfully as she can. Have we been looking for new sponsors? Yes, since the minute WTS agreed to step aside. Reading it in any other way is just looking for things which simply aren't there.

Damn this computer, logging me into the wrong account!

M'kay, I've decided to get in on the action after a long time thinking about how you might all hate me for making you think about boarderline boiler men....but here goes!


Steven Tyler.

Look at him (or maybe don't if you're eating)
http://cdn01.cdn.justjared.com/wp-conte ... rtless.jpg


Buuuut, it's STEVEN FRIGGIN TYLER. Arguably the lead singer of one of the best bands in the world..... I rest my case.

Well, because I'm a child, and we're posting Nick Farage videos I thought I'd get in on the action



[youtube]kK3D-zEHDy0[/youtube]

Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe!!

tommyg wrote:You have to assume that Cooper has triggered the option to extend his contract by another 12 months which is a bit cheeky considering he hasn't kicked a ball for us but he's perfectly entitled to do that. Surely, though, the club should have inserted their own clause, where we had the option of stopping him from doing this - especially as we knew there was a strong possibility of being relegated.

Or maybe there's an option where the club are smart, rather than stupid...?

We have a whole board for this, to which I'm sure this thread will be moved imminently.

I'd like to see us sign Chris Hargreaves, combative central midfielder with a (small) eye for goal.

wearing red ribbons

American

AustrianAndyGull wrote:The tonsillitis I managed to keep at bay so I could get to the Mansfield game has arrived with a vengeance and I've been up all night.

Feel better soon!



I feel so old, I've gotten into my first proper topic about Politics, whatever next? It'll be days before I'm waddling outside still in m'slippers!!

AustrianAndyGull wrote: Nothing like stereotyping an entire demographic Pea, some may call THAT racism. =D

I saw that 'oop 'ere' on local telly and they were at Beverley races, Beverley a small, pretty little town at the edge of the Yorkshire Wolds and between Hull and the seaside. Great place. I had actually planned to go to that race meeting myself and if they had asked me about the immigration issue I would have probably given a more balanced response. A bit like many of the other racegoers no doubt had they been afforded the opportunity. It's just another case of getting a load of white northern men together and getting them to say something that could be construed as racist - which quite frankly could be anything these days.

I do see what you mean, I've worded that pretty awfully, it wasn't meant as a sweeping generalisation. (I couldn't remember the races, it was doing my fruit, so if nothing else, thanks for that). I do appreciate the media will have manipulated the responses, of all those gathered they will have shown us the most extreme, with no real "middle ground" or "balance/rationality" to their responses. Whether or not the people gave them and Beebz cut them out I don't know, but that's the information I was presented with. I wasn't stating that the crowd was all white for any other reason that the news had made a point of it, and the footage that was displayed made that seem like a truth. Nor am I saying that every man in Yorkshire is against there being some kind of ethnic diversity, I was merely meaning to explain what the BBC had portrayed, and the irony of the statements, when seeing the crowd.

I still stand by you all being stern northern blokes though! :na:

AustrianAndyGull wrote:


At my practice there is my doctor, a thoroughly professional and nice Indian chap whom I trust implicitly (I have to with all the health sh*t I've got! ) and there are also two white women doctors. Personally I don't care what 'colour' my doctor is so long as he helps to get me better. And as for student debt being so high, that's total rubbish. Nobody is forcing anyone to go to University and rack up debt, you could start up your own business for example or find low paid menial employment. I do think the rise in course fees is a f**king joke, especially myself being on the end of lecturers who don't really give a sh*t about their profession but as for all the other associated debt then one doesn't start paying it off until a certain income threshold is reached and even then it's only a splash in the ocean. So I really don't see the issue with this either. It's not as if you leave Uni, go on the dole and then the SLC are bashing your door down for £100 a month.

At the risk of sounding like a scorned student, I somewhat disagree with this. Nobody "forces" us, sure, and with all due respect, that's right on the surface, but in practice, not so much. I can only draw on experiences I know about first hand, so I use my own, and a couple of experiences from my friends, but first, I'll talk about me (because I'm all self important like that =D ).

I come from a family who have never had anybody attend higher education up until I arrived. (Nuclear family at least, I have one cousin who is a few years older who went to uni, but we are the first in our families, and I am the first on either of my parent's sides). I wasn't forced by my parents to go to university. My school was a little different. Again, nobody "forced" me to go to university, but from the age of 14 I was expected to start choosing my G.C.S.E options, and it was constantly reiterated that if I chose the wrong options, I'd not get the grades, I'd make the wrong choice for my A-Levels, and I'd fail those, and then I'd not be able to go to University, and then I'd not get a job (as a working professional) so life would be difficult for me.

I'm estranged from my family, I'm a 21 year old female, with little else to show for my life other than my degree because I'm only just starting out, but I'm proud of that degree. For somebody like me, getting a menial job stacking shelves in Tesco (other supermarkets are available), simply ISN'T an option. No minimum wage job is. How do I live (whilst starting out), with no savings whatsoever for reasons out of my control, how do I afford the deposit for a rental property, what do I do? So yes, I made the choice that I was going to go out and get a degree, and some of that was selfish indulgence making my decision for me (I mean, come on, have you seen what psychiatrists can earn these days?) but it wasn't really a choice I had any say in.

The choice I had was where, how and what I studied. Its a silly argument to suggest that people can get by without degrees now. I've worked on and off since I was fifteen around school, and all I was ever able to do was work cleaning, or at Debenhams and the likes, but I want my life to be about more than that. If I want to have any hope of doing anything, I need a degree, or I simply wont earn enough money.

Now take one of my friends. They decided from a very young age that they didn't want to attend university. They didn't need it, and, with all due respect to them, they didn't have the aptitude (the national "average" A-Level student takes three, this friend took one). Lovely guy, really brilliant person, but education wasn't for him. What's he spent the last three years doing since leaving school..... he spent the first year bumping along from "menial" job to "menial" job, it wasn't enough for him after six months. He realised that maybe what the teachers had been telling him along was true, he got his ar*e down to SDC and got himself some proper qualifications, he's now at uni studying zoology (or something zoo related at least).

I'd suggest there was a reason that this kid changed his mind, whether that be down to the fact that we expect our young children to decide so early on in life what they want to do and it's just not helpful because they're too young and he grew up one day and understood, or whether that be he hated his jobs so much he needed a change I can't say, but there must be a reason.

So no, nobody forces me to go to university, but there is a great deal of societal pressure placed on school children from a very young age that university is the "right of passage" if you will.

Again, in the same notion, SLC won't come banging on my door expecting I pay them back while the ink is still drying on my degree certificate, but if I've racked up £30,000+ of debt before I'm 25, that's going to have an impact on life. I'm going to want to pay it off, and as quickly as possible. Look at it this way, lets say you live in Torquay, and you see a pet dog that you really fancy, he's £200 from a lady down by the beach. However, you also see the exact same dog (breed, age etc) from another nice lady. She lives in Paignton, but she's willing to sell you her dog for £100, which are you going to choose?

If when I qualify, Australia (or any other country) offer me more money and a better lifestyle than I will be afforded here, I'll bite their bleedin' hand off for it!! Not because I'm a money grabbing swine, but because it's better for me. I get a job, I get to pay off my debts quicker, as soon as I start paying off a handsome chunk of my SL I'll be able to afford and moreover get accepted for a mortgage, I'll be able to buy a new shiny car etc etc. Until that point I'm hamstrung by the debt. People do get rejected for mortgages because of student loans (I know a young couple who had to fight and fight and fight against the bank before they eventually got their home).

It's not so much an argument that just because I have a degree I'm going to bugger off somewhere else, its more an argument that living costs, on top of the loan I need to pay back at some point (even if its pennies a month, it still hangs over my head, as I cant take out any other loans for living until I've made a sizeable contribution to the existing one), on top of the ridiculous hours i'd be expected to work for the NHS, on top of the young family I want to support (hypothetically) just isn't a viable option when other things are available. So if and when I do a bunk, the nation needs somebody to fill my position, we need working professionals.

What happens if my SL wasn't enough to cover my outgoings, and I had to take a separate loan out with a bank, I have to pay that back right away (these days they give you a month after graduation as a grace period).

AustrianAndyGull wrote:
I agree that immigrants aren't stealing our jobs but the rest of this is generalized rubbish Pea IMO. I know quite a few Polish people and a Lithuanian couple and there are 2 reasons why they are in a more favoured position to get on in Britain IMO based on anecdotal evidence and also from querying things such as housing policy with my local authority.

First of all any immigrant needs somewhere to live when they arrive in Britain so invariably they apply to the local authority for housing. Unlike years gone by when you could put your name down on the housing list and then wait in line until your turn came around, now it is a case of whoever is in the bracket of the highest priority. Therefore an immigrant family arriving here will automatically usurp many British nationals in the housing stakes largely because they do have families to bring with them and for example, a hard working British couples / families say on the minimum wage are being forced to shell out exorbitant private rental prices because they are already here and have to live somewhere. When they apply for local authority housing then they get told that because they already have a suitable home that they are not being considered for housing.

Many immigrant families are simply turning up in Britain, entering emergency housing and then getting set up with subsidised properties all because they are in the 'highest need' bracket. That is perfectly legal and they are fully entitled to do this. Meanwhile, low income British families faced with all the costs and traps of private renting will never be in a position to improve their lot and escape the trap by 'working in a petrol station' or whatever. Whilst their is a housing shortage and a steady stream of EU immigrants then they will ALWAYS be top of the housing list IMO simply because they often arrive with nothing but a family.

Another common scenario is that immigrants arrive here and manage to get low paid work but often there will be several workers sharing a house so that means they have somewhere affordable to live on low wages as the costs are shared and they can build then build their working skills and eventually progress to better paid jobs and obtain their own housing. If the minimum wage was actually reflective of a decent days work then maybe many British workers would be content with doing 'menial' work because they know they could live their lives once again instead of simply existing.

Another issue is the baffling intricacies of the benefits system and also employers taking the piss. I've known people in the past who have refused work because of the growing trend of zero hours contracts, temporary work and so on. Not because they are work shy but because they could do a months work at say Royal Mail as a temp, let the DSS know and then get told that the work has ended. Then what invariably happens (it has happened to me many years ago) is that once it comes to sorting out the benefits again one has to jump over the moon and back just to get the process started. Then there is a long delay and you get left up sh*t creek without a paddle with no cash until the clueless bureaucrats get round to sorting your claim out. Nobody is willing to do these types of work because of the frequency they get left without income by the numpties in the DSS.

I got a job at Morrisons about 15 years ago and continued claiming my JSA for the first month because I didn't get paid until the end of the month and thought I would be without money for a whole month. Obviously I needed travel to work costs etc. So when I got my first wage packet I informed the DSS that I had started work and wanted to sign off. They said that I had obtained money falsely for the month as I should have let them know as soon as I started work. I argued that I would have been left penniless for a whole month and they assured me that wouldn't have happened.

Anyway, the exact same scenario happened with another job I had and this time I told the DSS that I had started work and they stopped my benefits!!! I had no money for a month and had to borrow it from family. So you see, those who operate the system by and large are completely f**king clueless and they cannot be trusted not to leave you in the sh*t. If you've got a family to feed then it's not worth the risk of taking low paid, non contract work.

I fully understand what you're saying here Andy, and I do agree in some respects. The system is a little skewed, and this is my only argument against immigration, we need to sort ourselves out first. In an ideal world, I'd prefer that we only allowed immigrants in who can somewhat support themselves, perhaps we have a system on a "probationary" period. Immigrants are given a three month grace period in which they can stay in emergency housing, but they need to be actively seeking their own place to stay. Of course, in practice this would never work.

We really need to tackle the issues we have in this country with unemployment, teenage pregnancy, etc etc (the main cohorts of those who need emergency housing but had they made some different, or even better choices in life they wouldn't need it) and give them a bit of a leg up in life. This is where I feel let down by the system. As a student, I receive my SL and nothing else. £3000 a year is not enough to live on. I am a full time student so working isn't a viable option for me, when I can, I do. If I go to the government now and ask for a helping hand I get told to p*ss off. Little Ann-Marie with her seven kids in tow at the grand old age of 17, with several different substance dependencies pretty much has the money duper trucked to her front garden.

Of course, I know I'm demonising those on benefits. I know in the real world not all who claim benefits are the likes of John Turner street, BUT it does get my back up knowing that there are people out their that at the end of the day, one way or another, I'm paying for to abuse the system. If it were up to me, I would set up a scheme were claimants can only claim up to £15,000 in a life time. You have the option to go to school and leave at 16 and use your £15,000 but once its gone, its gone. If you choose to work, your pension scheme is added to the £15,000 and when you retire you have a healthy sum of money. If you dip into the £15, 000 because your boiler blew up and pay day is three weeks away, then fine, but your wages end up replenishing that. Again, of course, this would never happen, because it's not humane to watch people suffer because of a few wrong choices, but it would be interesting to see if it could work, if it would change the thought process in this country.

I'd love to live in a world where we all get what we need, but I know it wont ever happen, and certainly not in my life time, but the government really could do so very much to help make life easier - as you've displayed with your own personal experiences.

I'm not saying we need to let people suffer, I'm not saying I deserve more - I am saying we need to do something about the state this country is in, and currently, the way we are running ourselves.

So nope, UKIP doesn't do it for me, but any party that comes forward with some sort of solution to the current issues modern Britain is facing might just get my vote














Annnnnnd, I've finished

"Are you voting Ukip?" No.

"If not why not?" Aside from being exceptionally excited that this will be my first real chance to vote, I don't really understand why we're having this vote. It's not like the EU have scorned us, it's not like we're being over run by every man and his dog from every European country (or any other for that matter).

I watched the BBC new the other day, and they were in Yorkshire, asking people this very thing. A bunch of northern, stern looking men said yes, absolutely yes they were voting for Ukip, because there were SO many non British "dark folk" (according to one man, his words, not mine) in Yorkshire it was doing their head in. The irony of the story? They were at the races, the crowd was made up 100% of white people.

What do we actually stand to gain from leaving the EU? A whole lot less than we stand to lose thats for sure. We are in a truly beautiful, enviable position right now. We have the support of the EU countries when we need it, but we still have our own currency etc.

We are a tiny little nation plonked way out of the way up north. We aren't the awe-inspiring, formidable British Nation that we once were, and that okay, but that means that we rely on others - imports, exports, and general livelihood.

The cost of living has been too expensive for sometime in this country - which is why all our educated doctors and nurses go elsewhere. If we start closing our boarders we will grind to a halt. Look at the NHS. When was the last time any of you were seen by a White English Doctor, for most, I bet the answer is some time ago. Not because of anything other than the aforementioned point that our young professionals get a better deal elsewhere, and with student debt being so high, you can't really afford to not seize the chances for better pay when you get them.

If boarders get closed, suddenly the NHS collapses, we have to send our doctors, nurses, and any other professional individual who isn't British, home. That isn't going to force our young professionals to return, so what do we then do?

"Foreigners" are not stealing our jobs, the jobs these people take (when not "professionals") are usually not the jobs you and I would want to take, they take the cleaning jobs that we'd rather forget existed, or the petrol station night shifts that we don't want because we've a young family that we want to spend time with rather than sleeping all day or what not.

Immigrants aren't our problem, our ethos as a country towards work is what is. We are more than happy to dole out money to 16 year old's, three months after they leave school with their G.C.S.Es (if they even have any) and let them live off the government for the rest of their lives, rather than expecting them to work.

Nick Farage and Co. would be better off addressing those sorts of issues in my opinion. Why should we constantly give money to those who wont help themselves? I for one have no problem with immigrants coming here and working hard. I do have problems with the idea that I will be paying for some people to never lift a finger their whole life (and don't be so naive to think this doesn't happen, I can think of a whole family who take money from the government when they don't "deserve" it, because to put it simply, there is NOTHING stopping them working).

We, as a country, need to take a long hard look at ourselves long before we start closing doors to others. In real terms, what is there to "hate" about Europe, what does it stop us from doing? How does it, really, on an every day life scale, impinge on our lives here in Blighty?

So, there you have it!

being chased by

Scott Brehaut wrote: For those pedants amongst us, she means GH

Damnit Scott, I was hoping nobody would notice!!

SuperNickyWroe wrote:
have you actually bothered to read posts?

there were better candidtates than CH that appiled.

he constantly played the wrong team,tactics etc.

eg yeoman scores, gets dropped....plays stevens instead of top goalscorer. brings stevens on instead of top goalscorer....

CH has no idea.

Supes, I have read the posts, and I know where you're coming from in some respects, but, there most be a reason CH made these decisions. Whether that be something he saw in training (lets just say hypothetically here, that he was reluctant to put Yeoman in the team, not because he saw him score and held no credit to it, but because Yeoman had a small injury that he'd rather miss a game for and mend in time for the next instead of aggravating further. It's hypothetical, but not impossible).

We don't know the ins and outs of the goings on at training and in the changing rooms. Given the amount of correct decisions that CH has made along the way, I'd suggest it's more than chance or luck. Sometimes he might drop the ball, but don't we all?

Steven's hasn't done anything wrong for us since his return either, so I think that might be a little unfair.

As for the signings CH has made, he's done the best he can with a bad deal.

Look at it from the point of view from potential signings: By the time CH got hold of us, we were in a state of disrepair, we could barely string a pass together, let alone back to back wins (or even draws). The morale of the team must have been shot (I say that like we didn't see it on the pitch every game, the hang of everybody's shoulders and head when the opposition, inevitably scored despite Torquay doing their very best). The team looked set for relegation, sliding further and further down the table. As a signing, would that inspire you to come and play for us?

As much as we like to think these young men are driven by a passion for playing football, money plays a big part too, now, if they're happy to do very little for their money, then they'll be happy to stay with their parent club and do very little, rather than muck in down the bottom, and take the inevitable flack if and when it all goes wrong from supporters who simply expected that little bit more from their new shiny toy.

CH made a really good choice in Coulthirst, and the boy has worked his socks off. Somebody said about CH putting him on the wing rather than the centre which he prefers, again, I'd quibble there's a reason for that. I know CH is new to the managing game, but we seem to be forgetting he played a lot of football, and captained Torquay, so he should probably know a bit more about managing a team than we're giving him credit for.

I don't know, maybe the bloke is an idiot and I'm trying to see good in everybody, or maybe there's a whole lot more going on that all of us haven't the first clue about.......







As for better candidates, maybe there were better people, but could we realistically afford them? And another point to consider, would they have actually done any better than CH, or did they just have a better CV? On paper, my A-Levels say I'm as thick as nine short planks, yet in a months time, I'll be able to present you with another piece of paper which says I'm a clever 2:1 BSc Hons degree holder.

yellowwot1 wrote:Yes lock it, matt you and Scott are defiantly trolls and clearly stupid and dont like losing a debate, I would have thought you would be used to losing stuff by now. It's insult after insult from you 3 as I said hilarious, and clearly your motives are all self obsessed, cheers it's been emotional lol, PMSL at you

Oh do shut up, you pechalent, whiney, little so and so.

yellowwot1 wrote: hope you both enjoy the conference with CH and the board. You both crack me up , hilarious.

Nice to see you're such a dedicated supporter of the team too.....!

SuperNickyWroe wrote: and there is the reason why he should never have got the job.

And who else would you have given the job? We're Torquay United, not Northampton, we can't afford to throw money at a problem and hope it will go away, Chris was the best option all ways around.

SuperNickyWroe wrote:
the fact that CH acutally played him in front of our top scorer perhaps?

get your head out of your ar*e.

As for this, lets just take a look at the facts shall we? Chris was appointed on the 6th January, so his first game was Wimbledon away on the 11th Jan. Since then he has lead the team to a win on 7 occasions, a draw on 1, and losses on 12 occasions. So that's a total of 20 games.


Lets look at Knill's track record shall we: Wins 4, draws 8, losses 12 (Not including cup matches) making a total of 24 games played.


Knill didn't secure his first win as manager until 5 games in, Hargeaves managed it in his first. CH has managed a team to get Torquay 28 points, Knill managed to get us 20. I think what I'm saying is pretty clear.





So, tell me again how CH is no good for Torquay...... :Oops:



**for those of you budding mathematicians going, that's only 44 of the 45 games we've played, I've not included the draw that JH got us.

yellowwot1 wrote:you think that's funny, not half as funny as your favourite player lol get a life

Oh God, I've returned to primary school with the scorned five year olds. Perhaps spend a little more time growing up before playing with the big boys eh?