Search results for:

The chrome on that Faggin...

Gonna get rained off, this, isn't it?

Sharma looking dangerous.

So, how bad a mauling do you reckon we'll get from the Indians?

Still looking; don't make me buy a TA Specialites one...

I've got an HT-5R and it takes barely any time to warm up. Though I usually kick things off then faff with pedals before switching it fully on. But from memory (i.e. before I could be arsed with pedals) it doesn't take long.

Edit: I could do a quick timing experiment if you like.

Needless to say I'm cheering Georgia on.

I get the impression he's on a go-slow so Southgate will play him in a slightly deeper role.

Ah cool. Cheers.

As per the title, I'm after a 50-tooth Campagnolo chainring, 110mm BCD, 9/10 speed to replace the rather worn one on the 'new to me' Centaur compact chainset I've acquired.

Ta in advance.

I've looked into this as I was considering sending a bike out to a mate of mine's place in Spain for when I visit. Shipping turned out to be just as expensive as me flying out with the bike, but meant I didn't get a holiday. So I think if I'm going to do it, I'll box it up and fly.

I've taken bikes on planes before and I used a massive, hard-shell bike box, which worked well. If I were doing it again, I'd probably just cardboard box it and get extra padding, which would mean I could ditch the cardboard and ride the bike when I arrived.

I can see the USA turning us over.

Somebody spoke FAR TOO SOON. *glares at villa-ru *

Narp. Game's gone.

Yep, fucked it. Dismal batting.

Doing our level best to cock this chase right up.

Bairstow back to his usual uselessness.

We've lost this.

Like scoring a 50, the job's only half done.

Archer's managed to prise de Kock out at last...

Well, at least that one's beyond Blind Joel Wilson's doubt.

Thankfully, de Kock appears to be out.

No, that's just the way he's standing, etc.

We're getting a mauling by the Saffers here.

The quote you've selectively used there is actually quite interesting, because while it criticises 'a lack of leadership within the Labour Party', it stops short of apportioning blame for this. Now, you may say it's the leader's job, the buck stops with him, etc. But that would be to ignore the Party's own internal rule, its structure and the very real evidence of interference in the process from both sides, not just from 'the left'. The EHRC has been quite careful in using the term 'leadership' because as far as it was concerned, that didn't just mean the leader of the opposition, a fact made plain by its distinguishing the two in the summary of its findings. So he was not specifically called out for a failure of leadership in that judgement, as you initially argue. Quite the reverse, in fact - the Labour Party as a whole was criticised for lapses in process, procedure, complaint handling, training. etc.

As for your Forde report quote, that Jeremy Corbyn didn't engage in requests to interview him was neither here nor there. Loads of people declined to be interviewed, including many of those responsible for the outbursts that sparked Forde being called in to investigate in the first place. So to interpret that as 'not tackling the issue and not taking it seriously' (by which you mean the issue of antisemitism) is disingenuous at best.

And actually, it does matter how many people had been 'institutionally discriminated against' when you're talking about the scale of something. That EHRC found evidence it had happened in two cases where it deemed the Labour Party was directly responsible. It also found wider evidence of antisemitic behaviour - but not that much wider. Nevertheless, the findings were acknowledged by Jeremy Corbyn when he made the statement to which you object. And the gravity of it was accepted. Nevertheless, the point that the scale was exaggerated still stands.

As for the the tip of the iceberg thing - I read the same bit of the EHRC report and if that iceberg consists of 18 further borderline cases and evidence of antisemitic conduct among members (that were not deemed the responsibility of the leader of the opposition), then it's not exactly an iceberg, is it? More a perfectly visible snowball.

But ultimately, you're saying Jeremy Corbyn should have had no right to reply, which is pretty wild IMO.

Corbyn was in charge when we received a statutory judgement that we had discriminated against Jewish people, institutionally. He was specifically called out for a failure of leadership in that judgement, and in the subsequent Forde report, in not tackling the issue and not taking it seriously.

That's an interesting interpretation/précis.

Just been through the Forde report and there are no such suggestions, so either you've misinterpreted the report or are making it up.

As far as I remember, the EHRC upheld two complaints after a lengthy investigation. Two. I would ask whether you think the volume of column inches devoted to the crisis was proportionate to upholding two cases of discrimination, but you've already hinted at your view, so I won't bother.

who, incidentally, is still using the same line that got him expelled from the Labour party in recent interviews

Two things:

1. he was right. The scale of antisemitism in the party was way overstated for political reasons
   
2. he wasn't expelled from the party, rather he had the whip withdrawn, which is not the same thing. Ultimate expulsion from the party came when he announced he was running as an independent