Quantcast
Keir Starmer - Page 186 - GF - General Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
rb14

Keir Starmer

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

I should also stress I'm talking generally really. Starmer hasn't had a great deal of time to prove what the Labour Party is or will be under him. 

 

However I don't really like the black and white nature of determining what is the reality of the situation because it ignores the future. Saving those babies now might lead to more dying in the future. Can the dynamic exist indefinitely? If Labour remain slightly less a shit than the Tories do we vote for them for the next decade? 20 years? 40? This is something every individual has to decide. Balancing this with the damage of what a handful more years of Tory cuntery will do. 

 

I just don't think it's as clear cut as you make out. 

 

I guess if you were to think the Tories winning power is less likely to maintain the baby killing paradigm than if Labour won, that argument could be a flaw in the ‘it’s between those two’ view in the long run. I just don’t see how that could possibly be true. 

 

Skaro asked a valid question earlier. Also, the ‘Tory lite’ angle that seems to be accepted in the last few pages for the basis of this discussion actually requires something to back it up. There are substantive differences between any Labour government and these Tories, just because of the collective ideological differences. We just have to look at the Blair/Brown ‘red Tories’ years to see how much better that was in terms of socialist programs than the Tories. 
 

Is there a better way? Yes! Will it become reality by letting the Tories gain more power and by increasing the number of Green votes from 327 to 328? I’m thinking it’s unlikely. If it’s not black and white, it’s a grey that’s so dark you need a colour calibration tool to tell the difference. 
 

I’d have the Greens in a second. Hell, I’d have a new party that represented my views even better than the Greens. Half of my views are borderline communist; there’s a reason I’m not a Labour member. But I’ll be damned if anyone actually gives a fuck what I think because it’ll be the Labour leader or the Tory leader in power next. That’s just how it is. Tories staying in power will - burying their talons deeper in into the flesh of the lifeless cadaver that is the UK -  make any substantive change leas likely not more. 
 

Considering the difference a Labour government could have made had they been in power since 2010, it’s no small difference to real lives. Let’s imagine that world. Years and years of erosion of social projects under austerity don’t happen (Sure Starts, libraries, police cuts, etc). No Universal Credit. No Brexit. Lives saved by ver Covid response. They might not be paradise, but it’s also not a choice between slightly worse baby killers and slightly better ones. Sure, we can moan about lots of stuff with Labour, I’m just asking for us to moan about it whilst they’re in power and not Boris FUCKING Johnson. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post from Jairz. 

 

I don't know what to pigeon myself as but my ideal society would be the Nordic ones, high taxes but quality public services, free (or subsidised) education and healthcare. They have a healthy brand of positive patriotism too (don't the Danes make you do time in the military?)

 

What they're missing, and what Canada and New Zealand are missing, are a Murdoch press. The countries which do have one, the States, us and Australia all have a working class that are rife with right wing views. 

 

The damage has been done over a course of decades and it needs somehow to be unpicked. I think it's important to have the likes of 'a' Corbyn and Momentum challenging that at grassroots level, with social media, whatever means needed. 

 

What I don't understand, and will never understand, is the fact they turned those guns on Starmer before he'd even brylcreamed his hair.  

 

We need a two pronged attack. Grassroots movements trying to shape the narrative,  but also a capable and professional party that can actually win elections. They should be allies, not foes. 

 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Numero said:

I guess if you were to think the Tories winning power is less likely to maintain the baby killing paradigm than if Labour won, that argument could be a flaw in the ‘it’s between those two’ view in the long run. I just don’t see how that could possibly be true. 

 

Skaro asked a valid question earlier. Also, the ‘Tory lite’ angle that seems to be accepted in the last few pages for the basis of this discussion actually requires something to back it up. There are substantive differences between any Labour government and these Tories, just because of the collective ideological differences. We just have to look at the Blair/Brown ‘red Tories’ years to see how much better that was in terms of socialist programs than the Tories. 
 

Is there a better way? Yes! Will it become reality by letting the Tories gain more power and by increasing the number of Green votes from 327 to 328? I’m thinking it’s unlikely. If it’s not black and white, it’s a grey that’s so dark you need a colour calibration tool to tell the difference. 
 

I’d have the Greens in a second. Hell, I’d have a new party that represented my views even better than the Greens. Half of my views are borderline communist; there’s a reason I’m not a Labour member. But I’ll be damned if anyone actually gives a fuck what I think because it’ll be the Labour leader or the Tory leader in power next. That’s just how it is. Tories staying in power will - burying their talons deeper in into the flesh of the lifeless cadaver that is the UK -  make any substantive change leas likely not more. 
 

Considering the difference a Labour government could have made had they been in power since 2010, it’s no small difference to real lives. Let’s imagine that world. Years and years of erosion of social projects under austerity don’t happen (Sure Starts, libraries, police cuts, etc). No Universal Credit. No Brexit. Lives saved by ver Covid response. They might not be paradise, but it’s also not a choice between slightly worse baby killers and slightly better ones. Sure, we can moan about lots of stuff with Labour, I’m just asking for us to moan about it whilst they’re in power and not Boris FUCKING Johnson. 

It isn't about the Tories winning in isolation, it's what happens to the Labour Party. Or any other party that isn't the Tories. Or stuff out side of parliamentary politics. Does legitimising a party that you fundamentally disagree with help long term? Maybe, maybe not. It isn't clear cut. What is more likely to lead to substantive, systemic change? 

 

I don't know the answer, but I don't think anyone else does either. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

Great post from Jairz. 

 

I don't know what to pigeon myself as but my ideal society would be the Nordic ones, high taxes but quality public services, free (or subsidised) education and healthcare. Small gap between rich and poor. They have a healthy brand of positive patriotism too (don't the Danes make you do time in the military?)

 

What they're missing, and what Canada and New Zealand are missing, are a Murdoch press. 

 

The damage has been done over a course of decades and it needs somehow to be unpicked. I think it's important to have the likes of Corbyn and Momentum challenging that at grassroots level, with social media, whatever means needed. 

 

What I don't understand, and will never understand, is the fact they turned those guns on Starmer before he'd even brylcreamed his hair.  

 

 

 

Mine too. I am basically a centre left Nordic Social Democrat. I see some merit in proper socialist policies that would democratise the work place but honestly if people were just paid enough money to have somewhere to live, go out for dinner once a week, and have a decent summer holiday, I'd take that. 

 

I want people to be able to get rich. Not billionaire rich, because I think that requires people to drop off the other end of the scale, but I have no issue with a society that rewards people handsomely for innovation, for invention, for producing work for others, for solving problems. Just not to the point where nurses have to go to food banks. 

 

That is centre left economics. However, the political and economic spectrum in the UK has flown off towards another galaxy. Merkel would be seen as a socialist in the UK. Pedro Sanchez a communist. The Portuguese government would be behind bars, locked up as domestic terrorists. 

 

 

As for those that turned on Starmer, it wasn't because it was him. It was because the lefts once in a generation chance was shit on from within. It was fucking galling. It stuck in the throat, and it made the fringes bitter. I reckon in a year it won't be as toxic. Also, the significance of some randoms on Twitter is greatly overstated. Most people don't fucking care. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

Great post from Jairz. 

 

I don't know what to pigeon myself as but my ideal society would be the Nordic ones, high taxes but quality public services, free (or subsidised) education and healthcare. They have a healthy brand of positive patriotism too (don't the Danes make you do time in the military?)

 

What they're missing, and what Canada and New Zealand are missing, are a Murdoch press. The countries which do have one, the States, us and Australia all have a working class that are rife with right wing views. 

 

The damage has been done over a course of decades and it needs somehow to be unpicked. I think it's important to have the likes of 'a' Corbyn and Momentum challenging that at grassroots level, with social media, whatever means needed. 

 

What I don't understand, and will never understand, is the fact they turned those guns on Starmer before he'd even brylcreamed his hair.  

 

We need a two pronged attack. Grassroots movements trying to shape the narrative,  but also a capable and professional party that can actually win elections. They should be allies, not foes. 

 

 

I don’t think the grassroots did that personally. I think they were sceptical and then small things happened that fed the scepticism and it has snowballed from there.

 

Someone will be a long in a minute (probably Numero) and start banging on about the previous guy but as I keep saying, it’s not about the leader it’s about the direction for now and then the policies down the line.

 

Agree with your post in general mate. I think it comes down to who you blame for the disconnect between the grassroots and the party. You could easily say that it’s the job of the party to keep the grassroots onside.

 

I’d prefer it to be a grassroots-based party fundamentally though, as it kind of was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

It isn't about the Tories winning in isolation, it's what happens to the Labour Party. Or any other party that isn't the Tories. Or stuff out side of parliamentary politics. Does legitimising a party that you fundamentally disagree with help long term? Maybe, maybe not. It isn't clear cut. What is more likely to lead to substantive, systemic change? 

 

I don't know the answer, but I don't think anyone else does either. 

 

I think we’ve got quite a lot of data about where a winning party drags the losing party. I’d be surprised if the message the Labour Party get from Tory victory is ‘be less like the Tories’, honestly. So, with that in mind, I think it’s probably better - even when thinking longer term - to get into power and then grow into something better as life gets better for people at the same time. 
 

I honestly can’t see any logic - not that any has really been offered - as a reason not to vote for the best of a bad bunch. I certainly can’t see the logic in doing something that will likely make it easier for the Tories to gain power. I’d change my mind in a second if there was something effective in doing so. The only argument I see merit in is ‘because I want to vote for somebody I like more’. That’s totally fine. I personally just have an issue with it empowering the people they don’t like. 
 

Anyway, you’re right; it’s overdone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Numero said:

I think we’ve got quite a lot of data about where a winning party drags the losing party. I’d be surprised if the message the Labour Party get from Tory victory is ‘be less like the Tories’, honestly. So, with that in mind, I think it’s probably better - even when thinking longer term - to get into power and then grow into something better as life gets better for people at the same time. 
 

I honestly can’t see any logic - not that any has really been offered - as a reason not to vote for the best of a bad bunch. I certainly can’t see the logic in doing something that will likely make it easier for the Tories to gain power. I’d change my mind in a second if there was something effective in doing so. The only argument I see merit in is ‘because I want to vote for somebody I like more’. That’s totally fine. I personally just have an issue with it empowering the people they don’t like. 
 

Anyway, you’re right; it’s overdone. 

It’s been offered countless times but you just pretend like you’ve not been told it over and over again.  For a clearly intelligent person you’re completely blinded on this.  Some people believe that voting for a further to the right Labour Party just enables the Tory party to go even further right with their policies than they would do than if they had a further to the left party opposing them.  If Labour get in you get right wing policies or a continuation of previous Tory policies and if they actually lose then the tories have got free reign to go wherever they fancy.

 

We’ve all been here before and bought the t shirt.  Labour moved to the right to get elected under Blair.  Keeping the same tax rates as Thatcher, deregulating banks, introducing private finance to the NHS and schools and so on and so on is what made Labour attractive to the mainstream right wing media and made Labour electable and gave them the landslide wins.  Left wing grassroots people ate the shit and voted Labour regardless.  Hoping that a Tory lite would be better than full on Tory.  What they got was all the things I mentioned above subsequently followed by a Tory party increasing the lot of them when they finally got in.

 

The most stupid thing of all being that what the country needed was more regulation and left wing economic policy to boost the economy but the electorate had nowhere to go for that which led to the country being in the worst possible hands at the worst possible time.  Labour’s move to the right under Blair has potentially permanently muddied the waters between the two party’s that the vast majority of the country has no clue what the difference is between the two of them other than on immigration is.

 

You’re now of the opinion that everyone should just eat the shit again.  Well I won’t be.  If we keep going in this cycle it won’t be long before kids will be taking loans out to do A levels and one of the Murdochs will be the governor of the Bank of England.  It will probably be Labour introducing it as well and there will be some muppet telling us it’s a good idea because at least it’s keeping the tories out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, The Guest said:

It’s been offered countless times but you just pretend like you’ve not been told it over and over again.  For a clearly intelligent person you’re completely blinded on this.

I’m not blinded, I just don’t agree it’s logical. I’m just not willing to dismiss the reality of the system and placate a few people with fantasies of perfection. Read what I actually said, I’m not saying people haven’t given their motivations for it, I just think it is illogical and actually I think it’s absolutely fucking idiotic. 
 

20 minutes ago, The Guest said:

Some people believe that voting for a further to the right Labour Party just enables the Tory party to go even further right with their policies than they would do than if they had a further to the left party opposing them.

Oh my lord. This is something else. I’ve tried really hard not to resort to snark, but how the fuck can I keep a straight face when we’ve just seen a left wing Labour Party beaten up and down the street for half a decade. The last Labour administration - left wing - allowed and enabled the formation of the most right wing government in generations. It isn’t the lack of a left wing opposition that is has been causing the Tories to push to the right, we’ve seen that over the last few years. That’s just ridiculous. It’s the lack of an electable Labour Party that allows them to do whatever the fuck they like. 
 

25 minutes ago, The Guest said:

You’re now of the opinion that everyone should just eat the shit again.  Well I won’t be.

Yes you will. You’ll be eating it no matter what. You just won’t be ordering it from the menu because of some ‘further to the right’ fantasy that has been concocted. You’ll be eating the same shit as the rest of us. It’ll be wrapped up in blue but at least you will be sat in the comfort that you didn’t vote for the boy party that could have stopped it. Well done you. If you don’t think that makes you more of a shit-eater than those taking the only practical step to avoid it, you’re passed saving. 

 

27 minutes ago, The Guest said:

If we keep going in this cycle it won’t be long before kids will be taking loans out to do A levels and one of the Murdochs will be the governor of the Bank of England.  It will probably be Labour introducing it as well and there will be some muppet telling us it’s a good idea because at least it’s keeping the tories out.

It won’t be Labour because they won’t get back into power. It’ll be the Tories serving up whatever because left and the centre left, the two biggest bunch of utter cunts in the country, can’t unify and beat them for the common good. Daft twats deserve every minute of the upcoming Tory governments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Labour Party, and most left parties around the world are just absolutely shit.  It's really annoying.

Just clearly offer people the opportunity of secure jobs, good education and healthcare.  

It shouldn't be so hard.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Section_31 said:

We need a two pronged attack. Grassroots movements trying to shape the narrative,  but also a capable and professional party that can actually win elections. They should be allies, not foes. 

Shouldn't be too much to ask for, but here we are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Just clearly offer people the opportunity of secure jobs, good education and healthcare.  

It shouldn't be so hard.

"How are you going to pay for that? You Commies would bankrupt Britain.  I'm going to vote for a safe pair of hands like good old Boris."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

"How are you going to pay for that? You Commies would bankrupt Britain.  I'm going to vote for a safe pair of hands like good old Boris."

If you communicate your message clearly enough then people will go for it, regardless of the opposition arguments.

 

You don't even then need to point out how the country is already in massive heaps of debt or the billions that have been given to Tory mates instead of PPE and diagnostics that actually work.  Although that would also help.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Section_31 said:

I don't know what to pigeon myself as but my ideal society would be the Nordic ones, high taxes but quality public services, free (or subsidised) education and healthcare. They have a healthy brand of positive patriotism too (don't the Danes make you do time in the military?)

 

What they're missing, and what Canada and New Zealand are missing, are a Murdoch press. The countries which do have one, the States, us and Australia all have a working class that are rife with right wing views.

 

Not sure how this take is squared with the reality of far right parties making massive electoral gains in Denmark and Sweden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Not sure how this take is squared with the reality of far right parties making massive electoral gains in Denmark and Sweden.

Denmark Peoples Party lost seats at the last election I believe.  Although I'm sure one of the Dutch cunts on here will be able to provide more details.

And obviously Code has his wildly popular fascist party in Sweden.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Not sure how this take is squared with the reality of far right parties making massive electoral gains in Denmark and Sweden.

 

I'm not sure of the specifics but don't they tend to be centred around immigration/fear of Islam rather than any discontent with how their societies are organised (i.e we want lower taxes let's vote for nazis).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Section_31 said:

Great post from Jairz. 

 

I don't know what to pigeon myself as but my ideal society would be the Nordic ones, high taxes but quality public services, free (or subsidised) education and healthcare. They have a healthy brand of positive patriotism too (don't the Danes make you do time in the military?)

 

What they're missing, and what Canada and New Zealand are missing, are a Murdoch press. The countries which do have one, the States, us and Australia all have a working class that are rife with right wing views. 

 

The damage has been done over a course of decades and it needs somehow to be unpicked. I think it's important to have the likes of 'a' Corbyn and Momentum challenging that at grassroots level, with social media, whatever means needed. 

 

What I don't understand, and will never understand, is the fact they turned those guns on Starmer before he'd even brylcreamed his hair.  

 

This part of your post is simply not true and I've seen you repeat it a few times. The questions started on Starmer started in earnest when Corbyn was expelled from the party after the anti semitism verdict. In Corbyns statement after the report he gave his full support to Starmer in fighting the tories, their was nothing remotely critical of the leader. After the Long Bailey sacking the response from the left was imo fairly muted and resigned. Around a third of labour members have asked for Corbyn to be reinstated so the figures prove its hardly a small faction of trouble makers. Starmer has had a fairly trouble free ride thus far compared to the outright mutiny and treachery endured by Corbyn by a large portion of the parliamentary labour party. He had to contend with continuous front bench resignations and the hullabaloo of prominent members forming a new party, you can also throw in a hostile media and tenuous charges of racism. In my opinion the divisions now surfacing against Starmer are mainly self inflicted and instigated by himself.

 

11 hours ago, Section_31 said:

We need a two pronged attack. Grassroots movements trying to shape the narrative,  but also a capable and professional party that can actually win elections. They should be allies, not foes. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

This part of your post is simply not true and I've seen you repeat it a few times. The questions started on Starmer started in earnest when Corbyn was expelled from the party after the anti semitism verdict. In Corbyns statement after the report he gave his full support to Starmer in fighting the tories, their was nothing remotely critical of the leader. After the Long Bailey sacking the response from the left was imo fairly muted and resigned. Around a third of labour members have asked for Corbyn to be reinstated so the figures prove its hardly a small faction of trouble makers. Starmer has had a fairly trouble free ride thus far compared to the outright mutiny and treachery endured by Corbyn by a large portion of the parliamentary labour party. He had to contend with continuous front bench resignations and the hullabaloo of prominent members forming a new party, you can also throw in a hostile media and tenuous charges of racism. In my opinion the divisions now surfacing against Starmer are mainly self inflicted and instigated by himself.

 

 

 

I can't even be arsed looking for the proof but "Keith" was getting loads of shit LONG before Corbyn was suspended, pretty much from word go and even before. Stories about him in the canary being in league with MI5 to create a surveillance state, the usual knobheads making a big deal of the fact he was a  'Sir' or a middle class/establishment goon, to crazy stuff about him being somehow responsible for the Rotherham grooming scandal and Jimmy Saville.

 

As with Corbyn, all genuine criticism of him is lost in the madness. Russian hats, KGB asset and whatnot. This is one of the ironies of the situation, many Corbyn supporters subject Starmer to a lot of the shit Corbyn himself was subjected to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jose Jones said:

The Labour Party, and most left parties around the world are just absolutely shit.  It's really annoying.

Just clearly offer people the opportunity of secure jobs, good education and healthcare.  

It shouldn't be so hard.

It’s almost as if they’ve been taken over by right wing people who are doing this on purpose to keep the argument drifting to the right.  Shut up and vote for them though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, skend04 said:

What are the right wing policies that Labour, under Starmer, are pitching to the electorate?

Bump. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Numero said:

I’m not blinded, I just don’t agree it’s logical. I’m just not willing to dismiss the reality of the system and placate a few people with fantasies of perfection. Read what I actually said, I’m not saying people haven’t given their motivations for it, I just think it is illogical and actually I think it’s absolutely fucking idiotic. 
 

Oh my lord. This is something else. I’ve tried really hard not to resort to snark, but how the fuck can I keep a straight face when we’ve just seen a left wing Labour Party beaten up and down the street for half a decade. The last Labour administration - left wing - allowed and enabled the formation of the most right wing government in generations. It isn’t the lack of a left wing opposition that is has been causing the Tories to push to the right, we’ve seen that over the last few years. That’s just ridiculous. It’s the lack of an electable Labour Party that allows them to do whatever the fuck they like. 
 

Yes you will. You’ll be eating it no matter what. You just won’t be ordering it from the menu because of some ‘further to the right’ fantasy that has been concocted. You’ll be eating the same shit as the rest of us. It’ll be wrapped up in blue but at least you will be sat in the comfort that you didn’t vote for the boy party that could have stopped it. Well done you. If you don’t think that makes you more of a shit-eater than those taking the only practical step to avoid it, you’re passed saving. 

 

It won’t be Labour because they won’t get back into power. It’ll be the Tories serving up whatever because left and the centre left, the two biggest bunch of utter cunts in the country, can’t unify and beat them for the common good. Daft twats deserve every minute of the upcoming Tory governments. 

I take it back.  I actually thought you were intelligent and maybe you were just one of these grifter types but you’re actually just that thick.

 

I know the word Corbyn seems to send you into some sort of mental episode when you see it so I’ll try not to use it too much. Corbyn changed the landscape of British politics.  Before he came into power Labour were abstaining on austerity measures and being out-lefted on manifestos by the Liberal Democrats.  The conversation about raising taxes or reducing/abolishing tuition fees wasn’t even an after thought for the cunts running the party and it was haemorrhaging votes which is the whole reason they opened up the “left” conversation with the whole party.  It then took a massive amount of McCarthyite smearing over years and getting into bed with the tories to try to destroy him.  Throughout the whole period he forced the conversation left and defeated the tories in parliament a laughable number of times.

 

Labour occupying the centre right position means the tories shift right.  It’s just a fact evidenced over years in British politics.  The fact you just flat out deny it’s happening ends the conversation for me.  It’s going to take you to educate yourself and have that lightbulb moment before you can evolve.

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Available Subscriptions

  • Last Match Report

  • Latest Posts

    • But @Denny Crane the governing model of Liverpool hasn't changed since the club's founding has it?  The club has always been owned by a variety of rich people and governed by a board made up of these rich people.  In the past there have been different majority shareholders, right now it's FSG.   I think there would have been an outside chance of majority fan ownership at the price that Moores sold at - plus he might have been persuaded into it rather than looking to maximise his cash out - but it would have needed to be managed by the club itself and not competing supporters groups.  Unfortunately at the time the club board and Parry had no vision whatsoever, and couldn't even keep the season ticket waiting list on a computer.  Never mind being able to organise a membership scheme.    The only way we're getting a different ownership model now is if the club goes bust or you have a time machine.
    • Nice to see Timmy Cahill in the back there 
    • I thought a new corporate structure was required but here he walks through the steps.                                                   
    • Usual Twatter rumours that Jota is injured as wasn’t pictured in training and could be out for Utd game too....Sad thing is they’re usually true
    • Lee, Labour have had a bit on football ownership in their election manifestos for around a decade. The focus has been on good governance and supporters trusts to get stakes in football clubs. The sound argument put forward has long been that football is incapable of regulating itself. It needs people whose sole aim isn't growth to have an influence or veto. This is why we are where we are today. A sport with Oligarchs, Hedge Fund owners and Sheikhs dictating the terms of how football evolves.     
  • Latest Round Up

  • Popular Contributors

  • top casino sites
  • new UK casino
×