True, but I am not loving the mention of Saka in there...

I'd hate for those type of goals to be chalked off. But more important for me was that this was a statement win, and a crucial one in the context of the weekend's results. But their *second* talking point was this refereeing decision. One which didn't change the course of the game

The second talking point in a game like that - NLD, us showing our title credentials, Tottenham looking toothless - is VAR talk. Honestly

For all the loveable village green gentle matey tweeness on TMS, they really do have some nasty fuckers on there

To be clear, this is an abhorrent solution to the climate change crisis, sacrificing the lives of billions. But, for those in power, it is also a much easier solution that tackling climate change itself

I, for one, appreciated his niche fascinations of the game, like "going to the football", "watching football" and "cheering when my team scores"

Relatedly, it's funny how 'working classes' never ever includes non-white working classes in this discussion

*Vichy

This is exactly it!

Didn’t watch the game but saw BBC headline for its live coverage say “Foden assists Eze for England’s second” and thought that Eze’s finish was a tap in. Then saw the goal. Not sure Foden even warranted a mention…

I don't know what epigenetic means, but I am guessing it has something to do with cross breeding

I think he's probably right in that respect

Oh yeah, that was a given. Really interested to see how this was, in fact, misinterpreted by people who are so stupid as to listen to what Starmer said and believe that’s what he actually means

Thanks for the tip! I read it in full and it is horrific. Uses BNP-style language. "Chaos", "squalid chapter", "experiment in open borders". Downing Street said he stuck by his words. (Admittedly, he expressed "regret" after seeing the backlash from anyone who wasn't a frothing mouthed racist.)

Oh yes, good point. The government should know that taxing charitable donations is very unBritish!

I'm sorry, but if you are bringing such vulgar concepts as "money" and "cost" into the debate, you clearly don't understand British class

My experience of the BBC is that they follow the national press. But the national press is overwhelmingly right wing. So they end up amplifying right wing talking points. Their investigative journalism is never looking at systemic issues, only individual wrongdoing