The Golden Eel

Looking like the DUP are going to reject the deal 

34 minutes ago, No2 said:

But the DUP only matter if you allow them to matter. They hold no sway now, all the early signs are come along or get fucked.

The point of the talks process was to change/remove the protocol to get the DUP and unionists in Northern Ireland on board in a bid restore the Assembly. If the DUP don't support it, then nothing has changed. So they definitely do hold sway in that regard. It's essentially up to them... There are already signs of opposing views emerging, it'll be interesting to see how it pans out. 

1 hour ago, No2 said:

Quick glance at the front pages and they are all running with positive headlines. It's easy to ignore the hardline crackpots of the papers decide to.

It depends what you're talking about. Is it likely to get the support of the HOC? I would suspect so.

Is it likely to get the support of the DUP and therefore their voters? I'd say that's 50/50. I have no particular insight into what might happen there but my gut instinct is that there will be opposing views in the DUP. The more pragmatic element will probably want to support the deal but others will conclude that it hasn't addressed the issues. 

56 minutes ago, No2 said:

It depends on how you approach it, if you come at it from the point of view that squaring this circle was impossible then it's a good bit of political maneuvering. Very little has actually changed but then nothing happened at all when Brexit got done and when the cake was oven ready. That was all fluff and so is this but can be sold as good enough for the King of the Union, therefore good enough for disciples. 

Yeah, that probably was the idea involving the King - to give it weight and extra Britishness or whatever. I'm just saying that, from what I've picked up, people aren't going to be falling for that. I've seen a fair few high-profile unionist figures criticising it for the reasons I mentioned in the previous post. 

3 hours ago, No2 said:

Sunak has played this Northern Ireland impasse well in my opinion. Just including Windsor in the title is enough to give Unionists credibility among their vote. Northern Ireland is probably the best off part of Europe with this deal yet they half of them are too fucking thick to see it.

Not really. It's been seen by most as a fairly cynical move and unnecessary politicisation of the monarchy. 

6 minutes ago, dave u said:

I'm almost certain he is, because you can't completely ignore a problem because you're waiting for a solution further down the road unless you know that solution is definitely coming.

 

I'd be amazed if we haven't had assurances from Bellingham that he's coming here. The world cup merely confirmed that to me. He's not spending all of his time with Trent and Hendo if he's joining Man City or someone. 

 

If he does end up going elsewhere then everyone involved needs their fucking arses kicking, including Klopp.

100%. It all adds up. And I was only half joking earlier about the captaincy thing. 

https://www.football365.com/news/major-liverpool-target-would-love-to-change-their-fortunes-as-hes-keen-on-club-who-need-him

Obviously this is just hearsay, opinion, etc but I honestly think Bellingham is coming here 

16 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

I think he might be pointing to Madrid though.

He's coming here regardless of how much you hate him. 

1 hour ago, Barrington Womble said:

The real question then though is who? We've very few candidates you'd want to go for. Most of our players who could be candidates are around the 30 mark and many of them have their own form issues. The only nailed on starter who isn't, is probably Trent. But does anyone want to give him the burden of captaincy when his form is so poor? 

He's already got the pointing aspect covered. 

Seemed a pretty blatant yellow there 

4 minutes ago, Josef Svejk said:

Trent is embarrassing. 

He should be embarrassed by some of his performances but he actually barely seems arsed 

Palace are awful, thankfully 

12 minutes ago, Carradona said:

I didn't specifically say that it directly caused the shooting of this police officer. I meant that they're stirring up hate that could impact the relative peace in NI. And if you want specifics of that, it's basically everything the DUP do and say when they open their mouths. At this moment, the Protocol is their little thing to get in a tizzy about.

Grand. So unionist politicians don't shoulder any blame whatsoever for this dissident attack, yes? 

4 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

And before you start coming the big man. 
 

Carradona said it doesn’t help that there are politicians stirring shite 

 

You said it’s completely irrelevant. 
 

That’s the shit that’s being chatted.

 

It’s not completely irrelevant at all. It never is. I’ve posted a link you’ve conveniently ignored. It isn’t irrelevant at all. As I’ve said , they didn’t pull the trigger but to call it “completely irrelevant” is absolute bollocks. 

Yeah, he said that, presumably implying that unionist politicians and the current situation re the protocol have had some influence on this dissident republican attack. So I quoted his post suggesting that the ongoing tensions within unionism are completely irrelevant in the context of this attack. He may have meant something else, if so fair enough. But I have seen that suggested elsewhere. I'll repeat - it's complete bollocks. 

You then joined in suggesting that it's not completely irrelevant but you still never provided ANYTHING at all, except for one irrelevant link, to back up why you think that politicians in Northern Ireland (presumably unionist ones, who you obviously don't like) aren't completely irrelevant in this situation. All you did was make some pointless generalisations, which I've already told you I agree with anyway... 

Nor am I suggesting that politicians in Northern Ireland, unionist or otherwise, aren't at times (and arguably even now but, crucially, in a completely different context) capable of flaring tensions. I wouldn't have thought I'd need to make such an obvious point, as someone from the place... 

So unless you're going to tell me in what way, specifically, unionist politicians in Northern Ireland should shoulder any blame - any at all - for this attack, then don't keep implying it... 

3 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Read back. I was talking in general (which I clearly typed). Politicians whip up hatred and often it has consequences. That’s what I’m saying. If you disagree or find that difficult then that’s on you. If not then ask Carradona who he meant. I’ve posted a link for you. 
 

Im not chatting bollocks here at all. If you’re suggesting politicians in Northern Ireland aren’t a cause of tensions increasing then it’s you who is chatting absolute bollocks 
 

Mind you, I’m not convinced yet that it was dissidents who shot the copper. Far too convenient timing for me. 

Yeah, so you haven't got a clue what you're talking about basically... 

8 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

The DUP are very inflammatory. Are you suggesting they aren’t? Are you really suggesting that inflammatory words from politicians don’t fan the flames of violence and activism? Really? 

Of course I'm not suggesting that. I haven't said anything like that. That can and does happen, yes. 

I've been talking about this specific example. It seems like you're suggesting that the DUP are in some part to blame for dissident republicans shooting a police officer. That's absolutely and unequivocally complete bollocks so if you are suggesting that, then explain specifically how and why. 

42 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

 

This might be worth a read? 

 

Most Unionists Would Now Ditch the Good Friday Agreement, According to Polls – Byline Times

 

I'm sure Carradona can speak for who he was referring too but I was mainly talking about politicians in general. Politicians whip people into a frenzy. They don't pull the trigger but fuck me they aren't 'irrelevant'. 

 

 

Yes, I'm aware that unionist support for the GFA isn't great. What's it got to do with dissident republicans shooting a police officer? 

Again - which politicians, in your opinion, are whipping people into a frenzy that would lead to someone shooting a policeman? 

1 hour ago, Bjornebye said:

 

It's hardly 'completely irrelevant' at all. Of course whoever did this is responsible but to suggest the hate that politicians stirring up isn't a factor is nonsense. Look at the migrant stuff in the UK. They know full well what they're doing. 

Which politicians are stirring up hate that would lead to someone shooting a policeman? 

14 hours ago, Carradona said:

Dissidents are absolute scum of the earth who are threatening the relative peace that took so long to achieve. I have mates in Belfast, Derry, Donegal, Dublin and Cork and have never heard any of them talk about support of dissidents. 

 

It doesn't help that there are politicians stirring up hate at the moment, with stupid people happy to lap it up.

 This is completely irrelevant. The ONLY people who should be shouldering any blame whatsoever for this are the few dickheads who planned it, carried it out and support it.

This show:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001jhgx/the-view-23022023

21 hours ago, SasaS said:

What is the level of support for dissident Republicans in the nationalist community (among people, not the political establishment) at the moment, is it on the rise or dwindling, compared to like five or then years ago?

 

 

Some decent and interesting insight into dissident republicans in the first segment of this show last night.

2 hours ago, SasaS said:

What is the level of support for dissident Republicans in the nationalist community (among people, not the political establishment) at the moment, is it on the rise or dwindling, compared to like five or then years ago?

 

 

It's hard to say (I have no particular insight into republican mood) but my instinct is pretty low and probably about the same as it was five/ten years ago. You're not going to find many people openly admitting support for it anyway. 

23 minutes ago, Harry Squatter said:

There's been a couple of rumours of Tsimikas having a few offers from Italy. Adrian is a waste of money and a homegrown space in the squad, he isn't cheap either as he earns almost 60 grand a week and has played no games at all. 

 

The club also needs to stop all these cheap punts and endless loanees like van den berg who will never make it here. I think Carvalho may end up the same. 

An interesting one. He did well in the Championship, only turned 21 in December, been injured most of the time at Schalke.

Keita and Ox are definitely gone. Matip probably, and fair enough, though he's been a great player. Firmino, I'm not sure what will happen, nor am I sure what I'd do - probably let him go on balance.

Jones seems like a pretty clear sell to me. And Phillips, I guess, will be up for sale. I'd also sell Fabinho if there are takers.

I'd still keep Gomez - he's still a useful enough player to have, especially given he can play RB. Should be 4th choice though, no doubt. He does still have some good games but the problem is he too often has games where you'd be generous giving him 2/10. Presumably Matip will leave in the summer and be replaced by someone better than Gomez, which would be OK with me. Konate's fitness issues are also a massive problem.