Jos

@GersCollective Good luck from Australia ❤️ Going to be a cracking game

Never been so nervous in my 4 days as a Hearts fan

@slbsn True …I guess the only the thing they both have in common is deliberately cheating.

@JosJules Drug offences are strict liability offences. Spying isn’t. Also drugs do not equal spying.

🚨🤓 Southampton Spygate personal view: 1. Expect the breaches will be straightforward to establish (ie liability) and almost certainly admitted to try and get some sanction credit/discount 2. Expect aggravating factors such as other examples of Soton spying this year to be raised 3. Fundamental question of how serious a breach of rule 127 and good faith is will be key. We know good faith alone was £200k in the Leeds case. The new rule makes it worse and spying obviously seeks a sporting advantage - why else do it? So that does point to sporting sanction of some sort 4. Being thrown out of the Play Offs appears excessive especially given Southampton finished 7 points clear of 6th and 9 clear of 7th 5. A 3-0 in the first leg would have been an option again excessive retrospectively unless 2nd leg re-playable (not feasible) 6. More likely sanction is points deduction next season in the Championship as much as that won't help Middlesboro 7. Unlikely that the PL will take a points deduction recommendation from the EFL (no fixed rule) - doubt EFL will push for it, so would apply in first season back in Championship (when and if) 8. My best guess is SIX EFL points in first season in EFL and £500k-£1m fine 9. Boro compensation claim can be dealt with separately subject to any claim brought by Boro - difficult claim to establish due to causation issues

Anthony Albanese is getting absolutely rinsed on instagram. @DrewPavlou @john_macgowan #auspol #springst

@RayJCapo79 It’s the modern day Benson and Hedges, Marlboro, Winfield of sports sponsorship…in 20 years time everyone will be wondering what we were thinking..in this the year an umpire worked for a sports betting agency

Online gambling is a bigger issue than illicit substance abuse amongst the AFL players, but because head office get a handy sum of money from them, it’s not an issue… The entire industry should be ashamed

@JacobHorsfall_ Ha!…a tree to hide behind..brilliant…next we will find out that he was a fatty!

Hell of a hiding spot

@secondtierpod Selles # 10 🤮

Never doubted Jakirovic.

@secondtierpod Happy for McBurnie ⚔️

Good content 😂

@Statler482686 @twitkhou25 @MykhailoRohoza Honesty Statler-you cannot argue with these types like “Golden Age” they are the ones in the middle of bum fcuk nowhere that voted this idiot in.Trump doing it because with this fool’s reasoning he is “likely” to give it back. Sadly there is/was77 million of these backward fools.

@twitkhou25 @MykhailoRohoza Sorry, too stupid to answer. Enjoy your golden age of prosperity 🤣🤣

🇺🇸🧐 This is beyond outrageous. Openly, shamelessly, without fear of anyone, he is robbing America right in front of the entire country — robbing all of us. Kaitlan Collins, host of CNN’s The Source with Kaitlan Collins, described the situation this way: “Imagine suing the government for $10 billion while also being the person who controls that very government. That’s exactly what is happening right now. Donald Trump, sitting in the White House, has filed a $10 billion lawsuit against the Treasury Department and the IRS — the very Treasury he controls, the very IRS he oversees, the very government he leads. He is effectively both the plaintiff and the defendant, and he wants taxpayers — you, me, every working family in America — to hand him $10 billion. Just think about that.” Trump even appeared on television boasting that he had already “won,” essentially bragging that he was negotiating a settlement with himself. Then his lawyers walked into federal court asking for a 90-day delay — not to fight the lawsuit, but to “reach an agreement.” An agreement between Donald Trump and Donald Trump, paid for with your money. But then something unexpected happened. Judge Kathleen Williams looked at this circus and basically said: “Wait a second. You are telling me you are suing yourself and expect me to approve a $10 billion payment from the U.S. Treasury directly into your personal pocket? Absolutely not.” She rejected the 90-day delay. She demanded separate reports from both sides — despite both sides effectively being controlled by the same person. Then she took the extraordinary step of appointing three of the nation’s most respected law firms as independent advisers to the court. Why? Because $10 billion of taxpayer money is at stake. What is really happening here is terrifying: a sitting president allegedly using the power of his office, and a Justice Department under his influence, to settle a personal lawsuit with himself and funnel public money into his own bank account. Constitutional law already has a name for this: a collusive lawsuit. The Supreme Court ruled on this principle more than 200 years ago. If both sides are effectively the same party, the courts have no authority to proceed. The Constitution requires a real conflict, real opposing sides — not a friendly deal between a man and his reflection in the mirror. And this is not some isolated stunt. Critics argue it is part of a broader strategy: stage a fake legal battle, force a surrender, cash the check, and walk away. But this time the number is staggering: $10 billion. Money that could repair roads, fund schools, support veterans, or feed hungry children. Instead, critics say it is being redirected through one of the most transparent legal scams America has ever witnessed. And the people supposed to defend the public interest? The Justice Department. Government officials whose job is to protect taxpayers. They are not fighting. They are not even pretending to fight. The judge sees it. Top legal scholars see it. The Constitution itself sees it. The only remaining question is whether the system still has enough courage to say “No.” Because if a president can sue himself and pay himself with public money, then the word “government” no longer means anything. It simply means: the person holding the pen writes the check — and everyone else pays the bill.

There was a time when a European final belonged to the supporters who dragged their club there. Not anymore. When Aston Villa were handed roughly 11,000 tickets for a Europa League final in a 70,000-plus stadium, the number itself told the story. UEFA can package the event however it likes — “festival of football”, “European showpiece”, “global celebration” — but the modern European final is no longer built around supporters. It is built around clients. The supporters fund the journey. The corporates inherit the destination. Villa fans will have spent thousands following the club across Europe. Flights, hotels, time off work, loyalty schemes built over years. Yet when the final arrives, huge sections of the stadium are reserved for sponsors, hospitality guests, executives, delegates and “neutral” allocations that often end up on resale sites within hours. And supporters are expected to accept it. UEFA’s defence is familiar. Sponsors fund competitions. Broadcasters need space. Hospitality drives revenue. All true. But football crossed a line when the event surrounding the final became more important than the supporters inside it. The optics are awful because fans can see it themselves. A finalist gets 11,000 tickets while corporate packages costing thousands remain available. Genuine supporters scramble through ballots with lottery-like odds, while neutral areas fill with tourists taking photos during the warm-up. And UEFA wonders why resentment grows. Supporters are constantly called “the lifeblood of the game” until ticket allocations are discussed. Then they become an inconvenience to work around premium inventory. Football did not become Europe’s dominant sport because sponsors created atmosphere. The noise, colour and emotion UEFA sells globally every season is generated by match-going supporters — the same people increasingly pushed aside at the biggest games. The “neutral fan” concept is perhaps the biggest fiction of all. In theory it promotes access. In reality it fuels resale markets, inflated prices and thousands travelling ticketless out of desperation. UEFA could change it tomorrow. Finalists could receive 70 per cent of the stadium combined. Corporate sections could shrink. Hospitality would still exist. But that would mean sacrificing revenue. And modern football has shown repeatedly which side wins that argument. #AVFC #scfreiburg

"I've never experienced anything like that!" 😳 Tommy Conway on the atmosphere outside the ground ahead of kick-off 💭

@VeteranDave @MattWalshMedia @tim_michell Nailed it 💯

@MattWalshMedia @tim_michell Has any footy fan come home from a game in the last five years and thought, gee, how good is the Stand rule?

Had to go back and find this. Ump tells McGovern to stay at the nine, while he is 20 metres away as his opponent trots away. This can’t be a rule.

@FreoPope Biggest road trip in footy @ GABBA in three weeks. Rest the skipper and Youngy and also less game time mins on the day for the Unicorn

So, do we rest a few next week? Pearce looked a bit sore. Or just go for the jugular? 10 day break and a bye in a month's time enough?

The World Cup should bring us together, not keep us apart.

🇪🇸 İspanya Benjamin Netanyahu: "İspanya, dünyanın en ahlaki ordusu olan İsrailli askerlere iftira attı. İspanya'ya Kiryat Gat'taki askeri koordinasyon merkezinden dışlanmasını emrettim. " İspanyol yanıtı – Bakan Sira Rego: "Seni iftira etmiyoruz; seni olduğun gibi tanımlıyoruz." "Siz bir imha ve suç sistemisiniz ve hepiniz Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi'nin önünde duracaksınız."

Future historians will call this legendary trolling 😂

Вдумайтесь. Посол Америки в Украине ушла в отставку и открыто обвинила Трампа в заключении союза с Путиным. Респект Бриджет Бринк. Смелая и честная женщина

Football Australia calls on Victorian Government to overturn FIFA World Cup 2026™ Live Site ban 📰 Statement: bit.ly/Fed-Square

@Ready1976 Was offensive …ridiculous!

How tha fk can Dunstall criticise Dudley in that?

Jimmy Kimmel just dropped the only pharmaceutical ad I've actually watched till the end... "Ask your conscience if Rezyne is right for you" 💊🇺🇲