Glenn Innes

The topic of social class among MSPs who have just been elected to Scottish Parliament is 👀

@SPFLWatch I have no dog on this fight but on what world does a game get ended early because the fans ran on the pitch even if the game is all but over.

Waiting for Ewen Murray’s “The Stolen Premiership” article in The Guardian

@AberIytics @AnalysingTSP would this make him a player similar to Kevin Nisbet? I have no idea what his "wheel" would look like, but the description seems to fit?

Thank you to @AnalysingTSP for the data. Think it really shows Jermain Nischalke is a really effective poacher at the Regionalliga level and deserves a move up, especially at 23 with good development behind him in the future years.

@AFCHereWeGo I’m not convinced the game of football suits us!

Games getting a bit more stretched, not convinced that suits us.

Those religious people and lobbyists in full:

@edstetzer Fantastical to replace calendar and the subscription for that includes cardhop which is a massive upgrade on contacts.

@AbzPodcast Wonder if we might get a winger instead of inside forwards. They might get to the outside and create space and opportunities for our strikers.

You can have your view as to the overall effectiveness of Karlsson's spell here but, his departure, leaves us looking incredibly bare when it comes to attacking options. Much to do still in relation to the squad as we move ever closer to the end of the window....

2025 has NOT seen a Christian revival, quiet or otherwise, in the UK. It has seen, in my view, a "quiet awakening" - with many people experiencing inexplicable promptings to explore faith. And the conditions for actual society-changing revival are in place. A thread:

Yesterday, I posted about asking your pastor to lunch or coffee, and apparently a lot of folks have strong feelings about such things. I noted that it would be excellent if you'd tell your pastor what you'd like to talk about beforehand - "Pastor, can we get lunch? I'd like to talk about..." Several (5) more thoughts on this:

What’s unconstitutional is a govt bill (but not trailed in manifesto) masquerading as a private members bill; ministers assisting in voting down amendments in Commons committee; now pretending the Lords have no right to vote to amend or reject the result.

On @talkSPORT they are promoting “safer gambling week” this is an industry initiative that does nothing to help people in gambling harm. It’s about the industry pretending they are safe and if you have a “problem” it’s your fault. It’s not. Gambling is addictive by design, it is not safe. The industry must be taxed to pay for the harm caused. Hopefully that is what the chancellor will do in the budget

The CEO of Dignity in Dying claims that peers are merely discussing “the practicalities” and are therefore “ready to deliver this change.” This is highly misleading. At second reading, critics of the bill outnumbered supporters by more than 2 to 1. Here is a sample of their comments: “A D-minus for its draftsmanship… not fit for purpose.” (Lord Carlile, senior KC) “As matters stand today, the Bill is not fit for the statute book.” (Lord Wolfson, Shadow Attorney General) “This Bill is wrong, and in my opinion it should not pass.” (Baroness May, former prime minister) “I wish we did not have to deal with this flawed Bill.” (Baroness Falkner, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission) “Seriously flawed.” (Baroness Butler-Sloss, former President of the Family Division of the High Court) “Evident and substantial risk.” (Lord Stevens, former NHS CEO) “When the vulnerable are encouraged towards the view that it is better for them to die, the Orwellian-named assisted dying service will be there to step in… No so-called safeguard will persuade me that this Bill is safe or right.” (Lord Herbert, former criminal justice minister) “Deeply flawed.” (Baroness Finlay, former president of the BMA) “Neither safe nor workable as it stands today.” (Baroness Hollins, former president of the BMA) “Without substantial clarification and reform, it could devastate the NHS and our healthcare system.” (Lord Bethell, former health minister) “Wherever you start, laws framed as modest and limited expand… There is a real risk of vulnerable people being pressurised to end their lives because they fear being a burden.” (Lord Hunt, former health minister and former CEO of the NHS Confederation) “It is going to take a lot of fixing... I will be doing my best to scrutinise and to try to get something that may work—but I fear it may not.” (Baroness Coffey, former deputy prime minister) “I am not opposed to assisted dying in principle, but I am opposed to this appallingly drafted Bill… The Delegated Powers Committee…report alone should be enough to condemn this Bill to the scrap heap.” (Lord Blencathra) “Profoundly dangerous and flawed... The Constitution Committee rightly affirms our right to scrutinise, amend or reject it… It should be rejected.” (Baroness O’Loan) “I oppose this Bill. It is poorly constructed and it was rushed through the Commons with inadequate scrutiny.” (Baroness Keeley) “At the moment, the Bill is not fit for purpose.” (Baroness Smith) “This Bill should be rejected. It is not fit for purpose.” (Baroness Goldie) “Not fit for purpose.” (Baroness Morris) “I cannot support the Bill… I believe in letting us fulfil the duty of the State to protect the vulnerable and not encouraging them to die.” (Baroness Ritchie) “The Bill as it is at the moment is not satisfactory.” (Lord Lamont) “Those who are most vulnerable in society will become more vulnerable… I cannot in all conscience support the Bill.” (Lord Bishop of Southwark) “I cannot lend support to [the] Bill… the very essence of the Bill—that assisted dying should be available as an option—represents a major shift in the values we uphold as a society.” (Lord Ahmad) “Both unsafe and unworkable in its current form.” (Lord Bishop of Newcastle) “A thoroughly bad measure and should be rejected.” (Lord Gold) “How many innocent elderly or sick people will die through this legislation if it is enacted? I have no doubt that the number will be great and I strenuously oppose the Bill.” (Lord McCrea) “Inhuman and devastatingly cruel.” (Baroness Monckton) “The law should not send the message that some lives are not worth living. For that reason, I will be opposing the Bill.” (Lord Morrow) “There is a kind of nightmare scenario of assisted dying becoming the default option… It is safer not to go down this road at all.” (Lord Harries) “I…do not consider it either safe or deliverable.” (Baroness Cass) “I cannot see how the Bill can be made adequate, no matter to what degree it is amended.” (Lord Goodman) “Cruel and regressive. This House should do the mature thing and reject it.” (Lord Weir) “Not worthy of enactment.” (Lord Craig) “Grossly deficient.” (Lord Dodds) “Dreadful … This Bill gives the opportunity for maximum damage to a huge number of individuals.” (Baroness Nicholson) “The very opposite of compassion… The Bill cannot be improved; it must therefore fail.” (Lord Jackson) “I do not think that the Bill in its current state meets the exacting standards we should demand of it.” (Lord Bridges) “This Bill is not worded so as to end suffering; it is worded so as to end life… I am here to speak against the Bill.” (Baroness Debbonaire) “Desacralizes and cheapens death, life and humanity itself.” (Lord Farmer) “If the Bill passes, how long before my son or my mother are softly and subtly made to feel that perhaps it is time, as the cost of their care rises, that their life, however full of love, could and should be ended, dressed up as mercy?” (Baroness Uddin) “We should be legislating for wider access to higher-quality palliative care, not a state-assisted death regime.” (Lord Carter) “Unjust and imprudent, and I cannot support it.” (Lord Biggar) “The Bill overrides the wonderful work of palliative care in providing every help to a dying patient. That brings me to oppose the Bill.” (Lord Hacking) “Seriously procedurally flawed. I am against it.” (Lord Murray) “An abdication of responsibility… I cannot support it.” (Baroness Goudie) “This Bill cannot be put into acceptable shape.” (Lord Sandhurst) “We risk a descent into barbarism.” (Baroness Lawlor) “Should not pass in this current form.” (Lord Evans) “Its potential consequences are too grave…I cannot support it.” (Lord Ashcombe) “Not fit for purpose.” (Lord Empey) “Will lead to more suffering and more pain.” (Baroness Maclean) “We need…to protect and safeguard those at risk…which I think the Bill fails to do.” (Lord Patten) “Legally and practically defective in many ways… I hope this Bill will founder.” (Lord Frost) “If [major amendments] cannot be achieved, some of us would feel that we should give up on the Bill and start again.” (Lord Beith) “Creating a burden to die because we have not addressed the burden of care is not a legacy I want for this House.” (Baroness Foster) “To pass the Bill in its current form…would be a very profound mistake … At the very least, we need a Select Committee.” (Lord Tyrie) “Would undermine the very foundation of our societal values.” (Lord Curry) “I do not believe that our country, particularly our National Health Service, can successfully contain such a contradiction in public policy and morality.” (Lord Moore) “The legislative embodiment of a suicide influencer.” (Baroness Fox) “Could be quite dire for some communities.” (Lord Rees) “The safeguards in the Bill with respect to coercion are inadequate and I am not convinced that they can be satisfactorily improved.” (Lord Grabiner) “It should not proceed.” (Baroness Stroud) “We are right to be ashamed of what is in this Bill…if it is the view of the House that it should not pass, that is the view the House should take.” (Lord Moylan) “Simply too many flaws… It should be rejected.” (Lord Truscott) “Lacks genuine safeguards for vulnerable people… I oppose this Bill.” (Lord Taylor) “We should not be coerced into believing that we must pass such flawed legislation.” (Lord Browne) “We cannot legislate for irreversible decisions on the basis of incomplete protections.” (Baroness Berger) “We need much more substance in the Bill before we can proceed any further.” (Lord Bellamy) “A most fearful piece of proposed legislation…the flaws are legion.” (Lord Magan) “Our scrutiny of the Bill must also assess its disproportionate effect on many people…who already doubt whether they are valued and understood… It is a fundamental assault on their dignity.” (Lord Bishop of Chichester) “This legislation should be put out of its misery.” (Lord Grade) “Sets us on a dangerous drift… I cannot support this Bill.” (Baroness Mobarik) “This will destroy the Hippocratic oath… I… cannot support the Bill.” (Lord Robathan) “A profound and troubling move.” (Baroness Bray) “How on earth will this be resolved?” (Lord Brennan) “Cannot and should not pass into law. It is built on a flawed assumption and will expose the most vulnerable in our society to irreparable harm.” (Lord Bailey) “An unwholesome Bill, and I will oppose it.” (Lord Mackinlay) “I simply cannot see how the introduction of this legislation will not pressurise those who, unlike my father, are without access to first-rate care.” (Lord Rook) “Too great a risk.” (Baroness Fulwood) “The Bill is not safe; there are just too many defects in it that need to be dealt with.” (The Earl of Oxford and Asquith) “I face the realistic possibility, as a severely disabled person, of being killed as a result of legislation passed by this House.” (Lord Shinkwin)

What a treat to be at @lokiscottishrap show today looking at trauma and how we interact with it. Thoughtful, creative, moving, funny and entirely disturbing. I hope the book is half as good as the show

@RollDukes17 @kenbonham @BR_OpenIce @wyshynski Why they can’t employ an AHL caliber goalie to be the team practice goalie and EBUG is beyond me. Helps practice, helps rest NHL goalies and solves the EBUG nonsense. This league shoots itself in the foot over and over again.

@RollDukes17 @kenbonham @BR_OpenIce @wyshynski 3 games in about 3000. The point is it basically doesn’t happen. Apart from when it does and it’s bad press for NHL. Why block retiring/alt career AHL guys from this.

New criteria for emergency backup goaltenders (EBUGs) has been introduced in the new CBA. Teams will also be required to submit a designated EBUG 48 hours before the start of season, and 24 hours before a game 🥅 (h/t @wyshynski)

@RollDukes17 @kenbonham @BR_OpenIce @wyshynski There have been 3 ebug appearances since 2020. These guys won’t play in games either.

@kenbonham @BR_OpenIce @wyshynski Bullpen catchers don’t ever play in games.

@MartinSLewis This is rearranging the deckchairs in the Titanic. Modernise the system not the language.

Today's Poll: A Commons committee is discussing modernising parliamentary language to make it more understandable eg scrapping terms like 'bill', 'division', 'early day motion'. Do you want that or prefer to keep longstanding historic traditions. What's closest to your view?

"The Pedaei sacrifice & feast on anyone who reaches old age. It does not happen very often, however, that anyone comes to be thought of as old. It only requires someone to fall sick before reaching that stage of life, after all, & he or she is killed" - Herodotus

Thank you @NazShahBfd for speaking for vulnerable people. I beg voting MPs to ask why the @rcpsych, groups representing people with disabilities, & the majority of palliative care doctors & geriatricians are opposed to this bill. I am not anti AD - but this bill is dangerous.

@KyleStrobel Congratulations mate. That is amazing news.

Big news today! I’ve accepted a new position. Lots of changes coming and I’m excited to share my hopes for the future of theological education for the care of souls.