Couldn’t think…. The next part

IronHerb

Be as cynical as you like but Rice has already turned £200k a week so nothing to gain by making any claims.

OldCastleSwift

I think there's something to gain. A record contract offer puts all previous offers to bed, one month before the transfer window opens. It's getting lots of media attention and now puts the ball in Rice's court. If he doesn't sign it (if indeed it exists), they may believe they have the justification to sell with his market value so high. Or, as it was discussed on Talksport:

Jim White to Simon Jordan: "If you know he's not going to sign it, why would you offer it?"

Jordan: "Because you're playing to the gallery; that's what Gold and Sullivan do; that's their game, that's their Modus Operandi"

As with most things like this, only a handful of people know the truth, so we'll have to wait and see what transpires.

Lukerz

It will be 6 years, 2 year option & if it includes a release clause of over £100m active after one year (minimum) it makes sense for all parties.

BubblesNeverDies

Jordan: "Because you're playing to the gallery; that's what Gold and Sullivan do; that's their game, that's their Modus Operandi"


Rearrange the following words into a well known phrase or saying.

black pot kettle calling

MrsGrey

OldCastleSwift said:

Jim White to Simon Jordan: "If you know he's not going to sign it, why would you offer it?"

Jordan: "Because you're playing to the gallery; that's what Gold and Sullivan do; that's their game, that's their Modus Operandi"

Isn't that what all clubs, agents etc do.... the contract dance and the 'he's not for sale' chorus is performed for the media, fans, and other club/agents.

PS, I'm not convinced the right verb has been used in the sentence 'TalkSport reports that...blah blah blah)

yoyo

The most stupid thing of all is asking Simon Jordan's opinion

Fortuneseeker

Not wishing to back Simon Jordan but didn’t we bid for Phillips, Raphinha & Nunez according to G&S but none of them arrived. 😉

Pearces_Left_Foot

The only think i would ask Simon Jordan's opinion on is sunbeds and then do the complete opposite :-)

IronHerb

BubblesNeverDies said:

Jordan: "Because you're playing to the gallery; that's what Gold and Sullivan do; that's their game, that's their Modus Operandi"

But this is what most West Ham fans think every transfer window so SJ doesn't deserve to take too much stick for saying it.

Bazshuayi

West Ham owner David Sullivan is funding a proposed £35m takeover of Birmingham City that could see him regain control at St Andrew's if the club's prospective buyer Laurence Bassini fails to repay the loan

My reaction.... 'Really'. Then... Does he want to go back there after he sells us?

Bazshuayi

Lionel Messi has become an ambassador for Saudi Arabia tourism.

Two thoughts:

I didnt know there was such a thing (Saudi tourism)
Secondly, how much money does Messi need? How much is enough? Who would want to be associated with Saidi Arabia outside of financial gain and if you really do have a lot of money (Messi must have a stupid amount), shouldn't that afford you a choice of what you do, endorse, turn down etc.? Answer, he's greedy? Has no moral fibre?

IronHerb

Funnily enough Baz I saw, for the first time I can remember, a TV ad this afternoon saying holiday in Saudi.

Bazshuayi

Did it tempt you?

IronHerb

Err, no.

Bazshuayi

They're wasting their Messi money then

Expat_Hammer

Maybe they should have got Burka-mp to endorse it

Pass the coat please

MrsGrey

Or Oily Gunnar Solskaer...

ScotHammer

,

ASLEFshrugged

From the latest Private Eye.

"Tory MP Neil Parish had to resign for watching porn in Commons – but why on earth is it legal?" thunders Sun columnist and Tory peer Karren Brady. "It seems that pornography has become so commonplace that many of us have become desensitised to it."

She should know. Although she forgets to mention it, Baroness Brady has spent her entire business career since the age of 20 working with porn baron David "The Slug" Sullivan, initially at mags such as Adult Sport, Sport Babes and Sport Readers' Wives.

As sales and marketing director she oversaw pages of adverts that were, in the words of the Competition Commission, "with very few and occasional exceptions directed to sex-orientated products. 'adult' videos and magazines"

Whoops

IronHerb

Never mind the quality, look at the wages.

MrsGrey

ASLEFshrugged said:

From the latest Private Eye.

"Tory MP Neil Parish had to resign for watching porn in Commons – but why on earth is it legal?" thunders Sun columnist and Tory peer Karren Brady. "It seems that pornography has become so commonplace that many of us have become desensitised to it."

She should know. Although she forgets to mention it, Baroness Brady has spent her entire business career since the age of 20 working with porn baron David "The Slug" Sullivan, initially at mags such as Adult Sport, Sport Babes and Sport Readers' Wives.

As sales and marketing director she oversaw pages of adverts that were, in the words of the Competition Commission, "with very few and occasional exceptions directed to sex-orientated products. 'adult' videos and magazines"

Whoops

Not really whoops - unless you are referring to the Private Eye quoting selectively and misleadingly. Because if they quoted accurately their ' point ' would fall flat.

MrsGrey

And to save you reading The Sun, what she actually said was why is watching porn in a public place legal.

Dodger58

Why is there a connection to t’internet available in the House of Commons (and Lords) when they are supposed to be involved in debate?

buffybegood

Dodger58 said:

Why is there a connection to t’internet available in the House of Commons (and Lords) when they are supposed to be involved in debate?

I'm sure there is 4G or 5G available pretty much throughout London, so it's no as though they can just turn off parliament's Wifi.

ScotHammer

Dodger58 said:

Why is there a connection to t’internet available in the House of Commons (and Lords) when they are supposed to be involved in debate?

I remember seeing a still photo of a debate in parliament last year. I don’t recall who was at the despatch box, but there were only 5 MPs behind him, all of whom were looking at their phone!! 🤦‍♂️ Maybe they were debating wifi speeds in Central London!!

ASLEFshrugged

MrsGrey said:

And to save you reading The Sun, what she actually said was why is watching porn in a public place legal.

I read her column in the Sun but it doesn't change the fact that she and our owners made their money from porn/sex shops

It is pure hypocrisy but then she is a Tory so why should we expect anything else!

MrsGrey

ScotHammer said:

Dodger58 said:

Why is there a connection to t’internet available in the House of Commons (and Lords) when they are supposed to be involved in debate?

I remember seeing a still photo of a debate in parliament last year. I don’t recall who was at the despatch box, but there were only 5 MPs behind him, all of whom were looking at their phone!! 🤦‍♂️ Maybe they were debating wifi speeds in Central London!!

Maybe they were fact checking the speech 🙂

Dodger58

buffybegood said:

Dodger58 said:

Why is there a connection to t’internet available in the House of Commons (and Lords) when they are supposed to be involved in debate?

I'm sure there is 4G or 5G available pretty much throughout London, so it's no as though they can just turn off parliament's Wifi.

Agreed, but it is actually quite easy to block the 3G/4G/5G signals in confined spaces such as the Houses of Commons & Lords

MrsGrey

Dodger58 said:

buffybegood said:

Dodger58 said:

Why is there a connection to t’internet available in the House of Commons (and Lords) when they are supposed to be involved in debate?

I'm sure there is 4G or 5G available pretty much throughout London, so it's no as though they can just turn off parliament's Wifi.

Agreed, but it is actually quite easy to block the 3G/4G/5G signals in confined spaces such as the Houses of Commons & Lords

They'd have to block it only in the actual chamber, though. The rest of the building would need to retain access.

But surely the point is, the MPs should not have to have their access blocked to stop them from surfing the net inappropriately.

No wonder Gove et al are anti-wfh. They are judging everyone by the standards of their political colleagues, who need to be monitored like primary school kids.

Dodger58

I don't disagree with you Mrs Grey and it is still relatively easy to do. It is only in the actual chamber that I feel it should be done - the fact that the need exists is shameful.