politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The betting markets are slightly less certain that the UK will

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The betting markets are slightly less certain that the UK will leave the EU on March 29th next year

Above is the trend in the Betfair exchange market monitored, as ever, by Betdata.io

Read the full story here

OldKingCole

First? I fear we will Leave, but I hope not.

TheScreamingEagles

I said we could see an extension of Article 50 and we could get that.

Fenman

Leave? I think we are just as likely to be thrown out.

AlastairMeeks

Right now the choice is between no deal and the EU's deal. I don't see any chance of an extension while the government is so chaotic that it cannot put together constructive proposals of its own on key aspects. Extending the deadline is not going to assist in that task.

Meanwhile, as pb's resident Leavers are spinning moonbeams from cucumbers and fantasising about the sort of timescales for implementation of dream scenarios that they angrily insisted were ridiculous before the referendum, Jonathan Lis has given a damning assessment of where we are:

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/the-chequers-summit-cannot-save-mays-premiership

TOPPING

fpt for Max:

On Javid. He is absolutely a Leaver and altered his views in conjunction with Dave to join the Remain side.

On sartorial protocol, Jermyn Street for shirts, Savile Row for suits.

FrancisUrquhart

Dura_Ace said:

Pulpstar said:

MaxPB said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Team Sky's unprecedented release of data reveals how British rider won Giro d'Italia

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44694122

Does it begin with a "d" and end with an "e"?

Salbutamol plus extreme nutrition management.

And a team that costs 30m/year in salaries. Froomestrong has a world champion and monument winner (Kwiaktowski) just to bring him his bidons.

Be interesting to see how Sky get on without Mikel Nieve and Mikel Landa driving up the hills.

Anorak

TOPPING said:

fpt for Max:

On Javid. He is absolutely a Leaver and altered his views in conjunction with Dave to join the Remain side.

On sartorial protocol, Jermyn Street for shirts, Savile Row for suits.

Primark for socks.

OldKingCole

O/t (not sure if it’s mentioned before) the fire on Saddleworth Moor East of Manchester, is being treated as arson.

MaxPB

TOPPING said:

fpt for Max:

On Javid. He is absolutely a Leaver and altered his views in conjunction with Dave to join the Remain side.

On sartorial protocol, Jermyn Street for shirts, Savile Row for suits.

Hmm, that's probably true, but he is officially a remainer, a reluctant one anyway. It would make him a reasonably pragmatic PM though, which is partly why I would vote for him.

Yes, that's how it is, but I find that Savile Row is for tourists. Jermyn Street offers better value and a superior tailoring experience, IMO.

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/gabydvj/status/1014251136499572736?s=21

FrancisUrquhart

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/gabydvj/status/1014251136499572736?s=21

https://twitter.com/gabydvj/status/1014231595757293574

TheScreamingEagles

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

fpt for Max:

On Javid. He is absolutely a Leaver and altered his views in conjunction with Dave to join the Remain side.

On sartorial protocol, Jermyn Street for shirts, Savile Row for suits.

Hmm, that's probably true, but he is officially a remainer, a reluctant one anyway. It would make him a reasonably pragmatic PM though, which is partly why I would vote for him.

Yes, that's how it is, but I find that Savile Row is for tourists. Jermyn Street offers better value and a superior tailoring experience, IMO.

I understand he backed Remain because he thought Leave’s plans were too optimistic/disruptive.

Privately he wasn’t happy at the tone of Leave’s campaign and told Gove that.

MaxPB

HYUFD said:

By taking enough moderate Labour supporters and pro EEA Tories and LDs.

Remember Macron won the first round of the presidential election in France as well as the second as did En Marche in the legislative elections, leaving the conservative Les Republicains and the left-wing Socialist Party trailing in its wake

France has direct democracy, they vote for their head of state, we vote for representatives by FPTP. There is no arithmetic that can make a Labour centrist PM in 2027. 2032 is the earliest that a centrist fightback can occur, either in or out of the Labour party.

Our style of government is not in anyway comparable to other countries which have had insurgents and populist uprisings.

TOPPING

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

fpt for Max:

On Javid. He is absolutely a Leaver and altered his views in conjunction with Dave to join the Remain side.

On sartorial protocol, Jermyn Street for shirts, Savile Row for suits.

Hmm, that's probably true, but he is officially a remainer, a reluctant one anyway. It would make him a reasonably pragmatic PM though, which is partly why I would vote for him.

Yes, that's how it is, but I find that Savile Row is for tourists. Jermyn Street offers better value and a superior tailoring experience, IMO.

Interesting. Not sure I could name a serious tailor on Jermyn Street which makes suits. And you're right to an extent on Savile Row: if you walk into Huntsman these days it's usually full of Japanese tourists on account of Kingsman.

On the far lesser matter of the next potential leader of the Conservative Party, on this @archer101au has a legitimate view. Which is that Javid would sell out his Leave views to give us a soft Brexit in power, a la May. But we can't tell and his Leave credentials would prevent many at least Cons MPs from supporting him.

Dura_Ace

FrancisUrquhart said:

Dura_Ace said:

Pulpstar said:

MaxPB said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Team Sky's unprecedented release of data reveals how British rider won Giro d'Italia

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44694122

Does it begin with a "d" and end with an "e"?

Salbutamol plus extreme nutrition management.

And a team that costs 30m/year in salaries. Froomestrong has a world champion and monument winner (Kwiaktowski) just to bring him his bidons.

Be interesting to see how Sky get on without Mikel Nieve and Mikel Landa driving up the hills.

Nieve has moved to perpetual shower of shit Mitchelton-Scott (a lead out train with no sprinter). His place on Sky's TDF team has been taken by Colombian wonderkid and Brailsford"s next science project Egan Bernal.

MaxPB

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

fpt for Max:

On Javid. He is absolutely a Leaver and altered his views in conjunction with Dave to join the Remain side.

On sartorial protocol, Jermyn Street for shirts, Savile Row for suits.

Hmm, that's probably true, but he is officially a remainer, a reluctant one anyway. It would make him a reasonably pragmatic PM though, which is partly why I would vote for him.

Yes, that's how it is, but I find that Savile Row is for tourists. Jermyn Street offers better value and a superior tailoring experience, IMO.

Interesting. Not sure I could name a serious tailor on Jermyn Street which makes suits. And you're right to an extent on Savile Row: if you walk into Huntsman these days it's usually full of Japanese tourists on account of Kingsman.

On the far lesser matter of the next potential leader of the Conservative Party, on this @archer101au has a legitimate view. Which is that Javid would sell out his Leave views to give us a soft Brexit in power, a la May. But we can't tell and his Leave credentials would prevent many at least Cons MPs from supporting him.

Yes, you're probably right on that. However, faced with the alternative of Boris I think Javid walks it with MPs and the members. I personally think we're looking at a Javid/Gove ticket vs the true ERG candidate, Boris or whoever they think can win.

TOPPING

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

fpt for Max:

On Javid. He is absolutely a Leaver and altered his views in conjunction with Dave to join the Remain side.

On sartorial protocol, Jermyn Street for shirts, Savile Row for suits.

Hmm, that's probably true, but he is officially a remainer, a reluctant one anyway. It would make him a reasonably pragmatic PM though, which is partly why I would vote for him.

Yes, that's how it is, but I find that Savile Row is for tourists. Jermyn Street offers better value and a superior tailoring experience, IMO.

Interesting. Not sure I could name a serious tailor on Jermyn Street which makes suits. And you're right to an extent on Savile Row: if you walk into Huntsman these days it's usually full of Japanese tourists on account of Kingsman.

On the far lesser matter of the next potential leader of the Conservative Party, on this @archer101au has a legitimate view. Which is that Javid would sell out his Leave views to give us a soft Brexit in power, a la May. But we can't tell and his Leave credentials would prevent many at least Cons MPs from supporting him.

Yes, you're probably right on that. However, faced with the alternative of Boris I think Javid walks it with MPs and the members. I personally think we're looking at a Javid/Gove ticket vs the true ERG candidate, Boris or whoever they think can win.

Yes it's thin gruel.

We should look to a known unknown amongst the Cons MPs.

MaxPB

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

fpt for Max:

On Javid. He is absolutely a Leaver and altered his views in conjunction with Dave to join the Remain side.

On sartorial protocol, Jermyn Street for shirts, Savile Row for suits.

Hmm, that's probably true, but he is officially a remainer, a reluctant one anyway. It would make him a reasonably pragmatic PM though, which is partly why I would vote for him.

Yes, that's how it is, but I find that Savile Row is for tourists. Jermyn Street offers better value and a superior tailoring experience, IMO.

Interesting. Not sure I could name a serious tailor on Jermyn Street which makes suits. And you're right to an extent on Savile Row: if you walk into Huntsman these days it's usually full of Japanese tourists on account of Kingsman.

On the far lesser matter of the next potential leader of the Conservative Party, on this @archer101au has a legitimate view. Which is that Javid would sell out his Leave views to give us a soft Brexit in power, a la May. But we can't tell and his Leave credentials would prevent many at least Cons MPs from supporting him.

Yes, you're probably right on that. However, faced with the alternative of Boris I think Javid walks it with MPs and the members. I personally think we're looking at a Javid/Gove ticket vs the true ERG candidate, Boris or whoever they think can win.

Yes it's thin gruel.

We should look to a known unknown amongst the Cons MPs.

Kwasi Kwarteng is probably the most likely of those. Leaver credentials, had a real career before becoming an MP, has the kind of backstory that the party is looking for and he's a really very slick operator.

Pulpstar

Is the runner up to Khan being announced today ?

TOPPING

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

fpt for Max:

On Javid. He is absolutely a Leaver and altered his views in conjunction with Dave to join the Remain side.

On sartorial protocol, Jermyn Street for shirts, Savile Row for suits.

Hmm, that's probably true, but he is officially a remainer, a reluctant one anyway. It would make him a reasonably pragmatic PM though, which is partly why I would vote for him.

Yes, that's how it is, but I find that Savile Row is for tourists. Jermyn Street offers better value and a superior tailoring experience, IMO.

Interesting. Not sure I could name a serious tailor on Jermyn Street which makes suits. And you're right to an extent on Savile Row: if you walk into Huntsman these days it's usually full of Japanese tourists on account of Kingsman.

On the far lesser matter of the next potential leader of the Conservative Party, on this @archer101au has a legitimate view. Which is that Javid would sell out his Leave views to give us a soft Brexit in power, a la May. But we can't tell and his Leave credentials would prevent many at least Cons MPs from supporting him.

Yes, you're probably right on that. However, faced with the alternative of Boris I think Javid walks it with MPs and the members. I personally think we're looking at a Javid/Gove ticket vs the true ERG candidate, Boris or whoever they think can win.

Yes it's thin gruel.

We should look to a known unknown amongst the Cons MPs.

Kwasi Kwarteng is probably the most likely of those. Leaver credentials, had a real career before becoming an MP, has the kind of backstory that the party is looking for and he's a really very slick operator.

I've met him and I liked him but any candidate would have to spell out their views on Br*x*t for the membership to make an informed decision.

TheValiant

Off topic almost straight away and my apologies for all the non-football fans out there, but last night I noticed a few people talking about Qatar in November 2022.

I know there had been ideas to move the next World Cup tournament to the winter, but didn't know it was official. However, after checking I see this decision was made three years ago now!

So some questions for the PB (football) brains trusts:

1. Is Qatar going to be ready for 2022?
2. Is it really likely to be held in November 2022 as presently planned?
3. What is going to happen to domestic football, not just in the UK but across the world? Even a shortened World Cup would take half the Premiership players out for six weeks?
4. Is it likely to be cancelled, and if so, who (England) might get the nod (and when would we know)?

MaxPB

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

fpt for Max:

On Javid. He is absolutely a Leaver and altered his views in conjunction with Dave to join the Remain side.

On sartorial protocol, Jermyn Street for shirts, Savile Row for suits.

Hmm, that's probably true, but he is officially a remainer, a reluctant one anyway. It would make him a reasonably pragmatic PM though, which is partly why I would vote for him.

Yes, that's how it is, but I find that Savile Row is for tourists. Jermyn Street offers better value and a superior tailoring experience, IMO.

Interesting. Not sure I could name a serious tailor on Jermyn Street which makes suits. And you're right to an extent on Savile Row: if you walk into Huntsman these days it's usually full of Japanese tourists on account of Kingsman.

On the far lesser matter of the next potential leader of the Conservative Party, on this @archer101au has a legitimate view. Which is that Javid would sell out his Leave views to give us a soft Brexit in power, a la May. But we can't tell and his Leave credentials would prevent many at least Cons MPs from supporting him.

Yes, you're probably right on that. However, faced with the alternative of Boris I think Javid walks it with MPs and the members. I personally think we're looking at a Javid/Gove ticket vs the true ERG candidate, Boris or whoever they think can win.

Yes it's thin gruel.

We should look to a known unknown amongst the Cons MPs.

Kwasi Kwarteng is probably the most likely of those. Leaver credentials, had a real career before becoming an MP, has the kind of backstory that the party is looking for and he's a really very slick operator.

I've met him and I liked him but any candidate would have to spell out their views on Br*x*t for the membership to make an informed decision.

Yes, definitely. I think he's definitely signed up to the "global Britain" stuff, what it means in practice is going to be harder to pin down. I expect from both final candidates we'd end up getting a few vague ideas on what Brexit means and the membership will be none the wiser and vote on the personalities and whichever candidate they think gives us the best chance of a majority in 2022.

surby

TheValiant said:

Off topic almost straight away and my apologies for all the non-football fans out there, but last night I noticed a few people talking about Qatar in November 2022.

I know there had been ideas to move the next World Cup tournament to the winter, but didn't know it was official. However, after checking I see this decision was made three years ago now!

So some questions for the PB (football) brains trusts:

1. Is Qatar going to be ready for 2022?
2. Is it really likely to be held in November 2022 as presently planned?
3. What is going to happen to domestic football, not just in the UK but across the world? Even a shortened World Cup would take half the Premiership players out for six weeks?
4. Is it likely to be cancelled, and if so, who (England) might get the nod (and when would we know)?

Qatar will happen in November. The world is not run by Premier League football.

dixiedean

TheValiant said:

Off topic almost straight away and my apologies for all the non-football fans out there, but last night I noticed a few people talking about Qatar in November 2022.

I know there had been ideas to move the next World Cup tournament to the winter, but didn't know it was official. However, after checking I see this decision was made three years ago now!

So some questions for the PB (football) brains trusts:

1. Is Qatar going to be ready for 2022?
2. Is it really likely to be held in November 2022 as presently planned?
3. What is going to happen to domestic football, not just in the UK but across the world? Even a shortened World Cup would take half the Premiership players out for six weeks?
4. Is it likely to be cancelled, and if so, who (England) might get the nod (and when would we know)?

Would be above six weeks for a start. 2 months minimum with training camps etc. 48 teams means lower leagues (certainly Championship) would lose plenty of players.
So October and November. Guess we would have to start in July and finish mid-June.

TheValiant

surby said:

Qatar will happen in November. The world is not run by Premier League football.

If Wikipedia is right (I know, I know) the first complaint came from the Australian football league. Hence my question about ALL domestic schedules.

TheScreamingEagles

‪Well he would know about monumental thefts in World Cup matches. The cheating little scumbag. ‬

https://twitter.com/mailsport/status/1014497831279874050?s=21

MaxPB

TheValiant said:

Off topic almost straight away and my apologies for all the non-football fans out there, but last night I noticed a few people talking about Qatar in November 2022.

I know there had been ideas to move the next World Cup tournament to the winter, but didn't know it was official. However, after checking I see this decision was made three years ago now!

So some questions for the PB (football) brains trusts:

1. Is Qatar going to be ready for 2022?
2. Is it really likely to be held in November 2022 as presently planned?
3. What is going to happen to domestic football, not just in the UK but across the world? Even a shortened World Cup would take half the Premiership players out for six weeks?
4. Is it likely to be cancelled, and if so, who (England) might get the nod (and when would we know)?

1. Difficult to tell, but reports on the ground say that they are well behind their building schedule and their current spat with their neighbours is hurting their ability to finance and build projects.
2. If it goes ahead, then yes. There is no way the players could survive playing in 40-45 degree heat in the desert.
3. The main European leagues are consulting on what to do, the main idea is to start the season a bit earlier and have a 5 week break for the tournament, 1 week post tournament and then finish the season a few weeks late.
4. If it gets cancelled then England is seen as one of the few countries that could host it without needing any investment in infrastructure. I think Germany is another nation, but they hosted it too recently. What might happen is England gets it and then the FA supports some Asian bid for 2030, maybe China.

Pulpstar

TheValiant said:

surby said:

Qatar will happen in November. The world is not run by Premier League football.

If Wikipedia is right (I know, I know) the first complaint came from the Australian football league. Hence my question about ALL domestic schedules.

I thought they were going to air condition the stadiums. Yes I know that would cost a fortune, but Qatar is loaded.

MaxPB

dixiedean said:

TheValiant said:

Off topic almost straight away and my apologies for all the non-football fans out there, but last night I noticed a few people talking about Qatar in November 2022.

I know there had been ideas to move the next World Cup tournament to the winter, but didn't know it was official. However, after checking I see this decision was made three years ago now!

So some questions for the PB (football) brains trusts:

1. Is Qatar going to be ready for 2022?
2. Is it really likely to be held in November 2022 as presently planned?
3. What is going to happen to domestic football, not just in the UK but across the world? Even a shortened World Cup would take half the Premiership players out for six weeks?
4. Is it likely to be cancelled, and if so, who (England) might get the nod (and when would we know)?

Would be above six weeks for a start. 2 months minimum with training camps etc. 48 teams means lower leagues (certainly Championship) would lose plenty of players.
So October and November. Guess we would have to start in July and finish mid-June.

Isn't the US/Can/Mex WC the first 48 team one? I think Qatar is still the current format.

OldKingCole

dixiedean said:

TheValiant said:

Off topic almost straight away and my apologies for all the non-football fans out there, but last night I noticed a few people talking about Qatar in November 2022.

I know there had been ideas to move the next World Cup tournament to the winter, but didn't know it was official. However, after checking I see this decision was made three years ago now!

So some questions for the PB (football) brains trusts:

1. Is Qatar going to be ready for 2022?
2. Is it really likely to be held in November 2022 as presently planned?
3. What is going to happen to domestic football, not just in the UK but across the world? Even a shortened World Cup would take half the Premiership players out for six weeks?
4. Is it likely to be cancelled, and if so, who (England) might get the nod (and when would we know)?

Would be above six weeks for a start. 2 months minimum with training camps etc. 48 teams means lower leagues (certainly Championship) would lose plenty of players.
So October and November. Guess we would have to start in July and finish mid-June.

And bugger up the cricket season. Bloody football.

OldKingCole

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪Well he would know about monumental thefts in World Cup matches. The cheating little scumbag. ‬

https://twitter.com/mailsport/status/1014497831279874050?s=21

Well, he’s right, that the referee wasn’t very good, but for the wrong reasons.

surby

TheScreamingEagles said:

I said we could see an extension of Article 50 and we could get that.

An extension of Article 50 is, of course, NOT the beginning of the transition period. It would mean an extension of where we are now - fully inside the EU!

Let's have that extension for 10 years and, in time, people will even forget we had a referendum. Many of the Leave voters would be dead by then [ naturally ] and Remain will have a big majority.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/MatthewWells/status/1014497606213537792

OblitusSumMe

OldKingCole said:

dixiedean said:

TheValiant said:

Off topic almost straight away and my apologies for all the non-football fans out there, but last night I noticed a few people talking about Qatar in November 2022.

I know there had been ideas to move the next World Cup tournament to the winter, but didn't know it was official. However, after checking I see this decision was made three years ago now!

So some questions for the PB (football) brains trusts:

1. Is Qatar going to be ready for 2022?
2. Is it really likely to be held in November 2022 as presently planned?
3. What is going to happen to domestic football, not just in the UK but across the world? Even a shortened World Cup would take half the Premiership players out for six weeks?
4. Is it likely to be cancelled, and if so, who (England) might get the nod (and when would we know)?

Would be above six weeks for a start. 2 months minimum with training camps etc. 48 teams means lower leagues (certainly Championship) would lose plenty of players.
So October and November. Guess we would have to start in July and finish mid-June.

And bugger up the cricket season. Bloody football.

The ECB are buggering up the cricket season unaided.

dixiedean

MaxPB said:

dixiedean said:

TheValiant said:

Off topic almost straight away and my apologies for all the non-football fans out there, but last night I noticed a few people talking about Qatar in November 2022.

I know there had been ideas to move the next World Cup tournament to the winter, but didn't know it was official. However, after checking I see this decision was made three years ago now!

So some questions for the PB (football) brains trusts:

1. Is Qatar going to be ready for 2022?
2. Is it really likely to be held in November 2022 as presently planned?
3. What is going to happen to domestic football, not just in the UK but across the world? Even a shortened World Cup would take half the Premiership players out for six weeks?
4. Is it likely to be cancelled, and if so, who (England) might get the nod (and when would we know)?

Would be above six weeks for a start. 2 months minimum with training camps etc. 48 teams means lower leagues (certainly Championship) would lose plenty of players.
So October and November. Guess we would have to start in July and finish mid-June.

Isn't the US/Can/Mex WC the first 48 team one? I think Qatar is still the current format.

You are right.

CarlottaVance

Where Owen leads, Jeremy follows.....

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/21/why-nobody-complaining-bus-services-deregulation

And in fairness, buses are better run where there is still local government oversight - Tyne & Wear had a brilliant integrated bus/metro system, but deregulation stuffed that.....

RobD

surby said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I said we could see an extension of Article 50 and we could get that.

An extension of Article 50 is, of course, NOT the beginning of the transition period. It would mean an extension of where we are now - fully inside the EU!

Let's have that extension for 10 years and, in time, people will even forget we had a referendum. Many of the Leave voters would be dead by then [ naturally ] and Remain will have a big majority.

I'm sure the EU will find a way to extract a concession for such an extension.

Nigelb

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/gabydvj/status/1014251136499572736?s=21

why are my sweet colombian boys picking a fight with these pasty fucks??

—

OldKingCole

OblitusSumMe said:

OldKingCole said:

dixiedean said:

TheValiant said:

Off topic almost straight away and my apologies for all the non-football fans out there, but last night I noticed a few people talking about Qatar in November 2022.

I know there had been ideas to move the next World Cup tournament to the winter, but didn't know it was official. However, after checking I see this decision was made three years ago now!

So some questions for the PB (football) brains trusts:

1. Is Qatar going to be ready for 2022?
2. Is it really likely to be held in November 2022 as presently planned?
3. What is going to happen to domestic football, not just in the UK but across the world? Even a shortened World Cup would take half the Premiership players out for six weeks?
4. Is it likely to be cancelled, and if so, who (England) might get the nod (and when would we know)?

Would be above six weeks for a start. 2 months minimum with training camps etc. 48 teams means lower leagues (certainly Championship) would lose plenty of players.
So October and November. Guess we would have to start in July and finish mid-June.

And bugger up the cricket season. Bloody football.

The ECB are buggering up the cricket season unaided.

Very true. Whether or not the present Chairman is simply incompetent or actually malevolent is a matter for debate.

FrancisUrquhart

This weird withdrawal feeling is starting...not sure I can manage until Friday...

CarlottaVance

Good Speccie cover:

https://twitter.com/spectator/status/1014500755984801792

FrancisUrquhart

Gareth Southgate went straight to Mateus Uribe following England's victory over Colombia

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5916705/England-fans-heap-praise-ultimate-gentleman-Southgate.html

Southgate for PM....is great at PR with the media, tactically savvy and appearing to be uniting the nation.

Sandpit

TheValiant said:

Off topic almost straight away and my apologies for all the non-football fans out there, but last night I noticed a few people talking about Qatar in November 2022.

I know there had been ideas to move the next World Cup tournament to the winter, but didn't know it was official. However, after checking I see this decision was made three years ago now!

So some questions for the PB (football) brains trusts:

1. Is Qatar going to be ready for 2022?
2. Is it really likely to be held in November 2022 as presently planned?
3. What is going to happen to domestic football, not just in the UK but across the world? Even a shortened World Cup would take half the Premiership players out for six weeks?
4. Is it likely to be cancelled, and if so, who (England) might get the nod (and when would we know)?

1. Genuine 50/50. It’s all well behind schedule and they’re struggling to find people and materials thanks to a little local difficulty with their Arab neighbours. Even if they complete the stadia they’re going to struggle for hotels and training facilities sufficient to cover competitors and officials, let alone fans.
2. If it’s in Qatar then it will be in November, they won’t be able to play there in the summer.
3. The Premier league and other European leagues will take a break from a couple of weeks before the tournament until a week afterwards, starting the season early and finishing late to accommodate the break.
4. From purely an infrastructure and logistics viewpoint (stadia, training facilities, transport, hotels), the only countries that could likely hold the tournament at short notice would be England/UK, France, Germany and USA. The WC was in Germany recently, France a couple of decades ago and will be partly in the US for the first of the 48 term tournaments in 2026. All of these teams will want a summer tournament to avoid inclement weather, so any decision to move to summer 2022 (as opposed to Qatar winter 2022) will need to be taken by winter 2021 at the latest. I doubt summer 2023 would work due to other events.

I have a gentleman’s bet with a friend out here in the sandpit (I live in Dubai) that England will host the 2022 World Cup.

williamglenn

FrancisUrquhart said:

This weird withdrawal feeling is starting...not sure I can manage until Friday...

For your fix of cabinet Brexit wars?

Richard_Nabavi

It rather seems to me that punters have missed a rather important point, which is that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent on the 26th June.

Section 20(2) of the Act says:

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day..

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

williamglenn

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1014500701391777792

Casino_Royale

This market is the gift that keeps on giving.

TOPPING

CarlottaVance said:

Good Speccie cover:

https://twitter.com/spectator/status/1014500755984801792

Isn't it their party this evening, whereat virtually the entire Cabinet will be present?

Better make sure the food and drink tasters are working overtime in case anyone has any nefarious intentions.

OldKingCole

Richard_Nabavi said:

It rather seems to me that punters have missed a rather important point, which is that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent on the 26th June.

Section 20(2) of the Act says:

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day..

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

Oh dear. More trouble ahead for Mrs May.

I’m with Oscar Wilde. On this sort of thing anyway.

Scott_P

Richard_Nabavi said:

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

This seems to be what JRM was talking about on DP

Parliament can vote to change the existing law, but only if the Government propose the legislation, which they can't do if they get toppled...

Scott_P

FrancisUrquhart said:

This weird withdrawal feeling is starting...not sure I can manage until Friday...

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1014503711949967360

dixiedean

Richard_Nabavi said:

It rather seems to me that punters have missed a rather important point, which is that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent on the 26th June.

Section 20(2) of the Act says:

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day..

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

Well it can be superseded by another Act of Parliament obviously.
More fun and games were they to try.
EDIT: I missed your reference to primary legislation. Forgive me. It is too hot.

Sandpit

This is awesome, well done Penny.
https://twitter.com/imrichardmorris/status/1014464443189747712

williamglenn

TOPPING said:

We should look to a known unknown amongst the Cons MPs.

Sandpit said:

This is awesome, well done Penny.

I didn't know she could sign.

dixiedean

Sandpit said:

This is awesome, well done Penny.
https://twitter.com/imrichardmorris/status/1014464443189747712

Impressive.

AlastairMeeks

Richard_Nabavi said:

It rather seems to me that punters have missed a rather important point, which is that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent on the 26th June.

Section 20(2) of the Act says:

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day..

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

I'm not sure that's true. The definition does not put a direct prohibition on the government asking for an extension to Article 50, nor so far as I can see does any other clause.

Britain would then be in the EU without any legislation under the European Communities Act 1972 remaining in force, see section 1. That legislation might still have direct effect (by application of section 3 and/or the Francovitch case) in many circumstances. It would be a heaving mess.

david_herdson

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

By taking enough moderate Labour supporters and pro EEA Tories and LDs.

Remember Macron won the first round of the presidential election in France as well as the second as did En Marche in the legislative elections, leaving the conservative Les Republicains and the left-wing Socialist Party trailing in its wake

France has direct democracy, they vote for their head of state, we vote for representatives by FPTP. There is no arithmetic that can make a Labour centrist PM in 2027. 2032 is the earliest that a centrist fightback can occur, either in or out of the Labour party.

Our style of government is not in anyway comparable to other countries which have had insurgents and populist uprisings.

I'll say it again: the SDP-Liberal Alliance polled well into the 40s for several months in late 1981. Think about how that would have translated into seats. And that was at a time when the electorate was supposedly more loyal to political parties.

williamglenn

david_herdson said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

By taking enough moderate Labour supporters and pro EEA Tories and LDs.

Remember Macron won the first round of the presidential election in France as well as the second as did En Marche in the legislative elections, leaving the conservative Les Republicains and the left-wing Socialist Party trailing in its wake

France has direct democracy, they vote for their head of state, we vote for representatives by FPTP. There is no arithmetic that can make a Labour centrist PM in 2027. 2032 is the earliest that a centrist fightback can occur, either in or out of the Labour party.

Our style of government is not in anyway comparable to other countries which have had insurgents and populist uprisings.

I'll say it again: the SDP-Liberal Alliance polled well into the 40s for several months in late 1981. Think about how that would have translated into seats. And that was at a time when the electorate was supposedly more loyal to political parties.

I think people outside France also tend to underestimate the level of organisation it took for him to do what he did. He didn't just rock up out of nowhere on his own.

surby

AlastairMeeks said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It rather seems to me that punters have missed a rather important point, which is that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent on the 26th June.

Section 20(2) of the Act says:

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day..

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

I'm not sure that's true. The definition does not put a direct prohibition on the government asking for an extension to Article 50, nor so far as I can see does any other clause.

Britain would then be in the EU without any legislation under the European Communities Act 1972 remaining in force, see section 1. That legislation might still have direct effect (by application of section 3 and/or the Francovitch case) in many circumstances. It would be a heaving mess.

This flies over my head. One thing I am absolutely sure about by, accident or design, everything will be exactly the same as it is today on 30th March 2019 and nobody will be complaining.

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/UniStrathclyde/status/1014175047664197632

Casino_Royale

AlastairMeeks said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It rather seems to me that punters have missed a rather important point, which is that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent on the 26th June.

Section 20(2) of the Act says:

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day..

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

I'm not sure that's true. The definition does not put a direct prohibition on the government asking for an extension to Article 50, nor so far as I can see does any other clause.

Britain would then be in the EU without any legislation under the European Communities Act 1972 remaining in force, see section 1. That legislation might still have direct effect (by application of section 3 and/or the Francovitch case) in many circumstances. It would be a heaving mess.

To all intents and purposes the transition period is effectively already an extension of A50.

I can’t see anything other than the legal technicality of us leaving the EU taking effect at the end of March next year. If a further extension is needed, i think it’ll be of the transition period and not A50.

There’s a blackish swan that all the politics and economics just blows up, somehow resulting in Brexit proper being punted into the long grass, but that’s not a 40% shot.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1014508402863689728

OblitusSumMe

Scott_P said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

This seems to be what JRM was talking about on DP

Parliament can vote to change the existing law, but only if the Government propose the legislation, which they can't do if they get toppled...

Yes. This means that the hard Brexiteers now have the upper hand in the Commons because the status quo is that we leave on March 29th 2019 with no deal. Any alternative has to be agreed and makes its legislative way through the Commons (and the European Parliament, etc)

OldKingCole

Scott_P said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

This seems to be what JRM was talking about on DP

Parliament can vote to change the existing law, but only if the Government propose the legislation, which they can't do if they get toppled...

There will, hopefully, always be a Government. Just not this one.

Please!

williamglenn

Casino_Royale said:

To all intents and purposes the transition period is effectively already an extension of A50.

Reverse Brexit before March 2019 and we keep the opt-outs. Reverse it afterwards and we don't.

FrancisUrquhart

Some people really have been sent insane by brexit.

https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1014380189667790848?s=21

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1014509457773092864

FrancisUrquhart

Can I recommend showtime / bbc4 documentary following NYT since trump got elected.

Sandpit

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

fpt for Max:

On Javid. He is absolutely a Leaver and altered his views in conjunction with Dave to join the Remain side.

On sartorial protocol, Jermyn Street for shirts, Savile Row for suits.

Hmm, that's probably true, but he is officially a remainer, a reluctant one anyway. It would make him a reasonably pragmatic PM though, which is partly why I would vote for him.

Yes, that's how it is, but I find that Savile Row is for tourists. Jermyn Street offers better value and a superior tailoring experience, IMO.

Interesting. Not sure I could name a serious tailor on Jermyn Street which makes suits. And you're right to an extent on Savile Row: if you walk into Huntsman these days it's usually full of Japanese tourists on account of Kingsman.

On the far lesser matter of the next potential leader of the Conservative Party, on this @archer101au has a legitimate view. Which is that Javid would sell out his Leave views to give us a soft Brexit in power, a la May. But we can't tell and his Leave credentials would prevent many at least Cons MPs from supporting him.

Yes, you're probably right on that. However, faced with the alternative of Boris I think Javid walks it with MPs and the members. I personally think we're looking at a Javid/Gove ticket vs the true ERG candidate, Boris or whoever they think can win.

Yes it's thin gruel.

We should look to a known unknown amongst the Cons MPs.

Kwasi Kwarteng is probably the most likely of those. Leaver credentials, had a real career before becoming an MP, has the kind of backstory that the party is looking for and he's a really very slick operator.

Yes, he’s a good future candidate - but not if the vacancy is next week.

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1014510243525652482

OblitusSumMe

MaxPB said:

4. If it gets cancelled then England is seen as one of the few countries that could host it without needing any investment in infrastructure. I think Germany is another nation, but they hosted it too recently. What might happen is England gets it and then the FA supports some Asian bid for 2030, maybe China.

Given the circumstances of having to cancel because the host were not prepared I would suggest that recently hosting the tournament would be an advantage, because you have definite evidence of being ready to do so.

I don't know whether being chosen as hosts for the European Championships in 2024 would be a point in Germany's favour or not, as they might then be in the middle of some upgrade building works for the later tournament.

Incidentally, when Mexico hosted the 1986 tournament after Colombia, the original hosts, withdrew, it was 16 years since Mexico hosted the tournament in 1970. In 2022 it will have been 16 years since Germany hosted the tournament in 2006.

Pulpstar

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1014509457773092864

Does he feel the EU are moving the goalposts ?

Casino_Royale

FrancisUrquhart said:

This weird withdrawal feeling is starting...not sure I can manage until Friday...

Ask your wife very nicely.

Sandpit

FrancisUrquhart said:

Some people really have been sent insane by brexit.

ttps://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1014380189667790848?s=21

And there’s almost certainly going to be a judicial review requested. The EC didn’t even interview the person they just found guilty.

TOPPING

Casino_Royale said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It rather seems to me that punters have missed a rather important point, which is that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent on the 26th June.

Section 20(2) of the Act says:

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day..

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

I'm not sure that's true. The definition does not put a direct prohibition on the government asking for an extension to Article 50, nor so far as I can see does any other clause.

Britain would then be in the EU without any legislation under the European Communities Act 1972 remaining in force, see section 1. That legislation might still have direct effect (by application of section 3 and/or the Francovitch case) in many circumstances. It would be a heaving mess.

To all intents and purposes the transition period is effectively already an extension of A50.

I can’t see anything other than the legal technicality of us leaving the EU taking effect at the end of March next year. If a further extension is needed, i think it’ll be of the transition period and not A50.

There’s a blackish swan that all the politics and economics just blows up, somehow resulting in Brexit proper being punted into the long grass, but that’s not a 40% shot.

Which of course has implications for arguably the most important dynamic of the whole Brexit process:

@williamglenn & @SeanT's bet.

Mortimer

OblitusSumMe said:

Scott_P said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

This seems to be what JRM was talking about on DP

Parliament can vote to change the existing law, but only if the Government propose the legislation, which they can't do if they get toppled...

Yes. This means that the hard Brexiteers now have the upper hand in the Commons because the status quo is that we leave on March 29th 2019 with no deal. Any alternative has to be agreed and makes its legislative way through the Commons (and the European Parliament, etc)

Something that has been blindingly obvious since the article 50 to vote to all but Remainer MPs...

Casino_Royale

williamglenn said:

Casino_Royale said:

To all intents and purposes the transition period is effectively already an extension of A50.

Reverse Brexit before March 2019 and we keep the opt-outs. Reverse it afterwards and we don't.

We all know your ultimate fantasy.

But, as this is a betting website, the probability of it happening is a 10-15% shot now, not a 40% one.

david_herdson

williamglenn said:

david_herdson said:

MaxPB said:

HYUFD said:

By taking enough moderate Labour supporters and pro EEA Tories and LDs.

Remember Macron won the first round of the presidential election in France as well as the second as did En Marche in the legislative elections, leaving the conservative Les Republicains and the left-wing Socialist Party trailing in its wake

France has direct democracy, they vote for their head of state, we vote for representatives by FPTP. There is no arithmetic that can make a Labour centrist PM in 2027. 2032 is the earliest that a centrist fightback can occur, either in or out of the Labour party.

Our style of government is not in anyway comparable to other countries which have had insurgents and populist uprisings.

I'll say it again: the SDP-Liberal Alliance polled well into the 40s for several months in late 1981. Think about how that would have translated into seats. And that was at a time when the electorate was supposedly more loyal to political parties.

I think people outside France also tend to underestimate the level of organisation it took for him to do what he did. He didn't just rock up out of nowhere on his own.

Indeed - and that lack of initial human, data and organisational infrastructure is one of the biggest barriers to making an early breakthrough (and the lack of an early breakthrough is a huge barrier to making a later breakthrough).

RobD

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Some people really have been sent insane by brexit.

ttps://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1014380189667790848?s=21

And there’s almost certainly going to be a judicial review requested. The EC didn’t even interview the person they just found guilty.

Seriously?

In any case, let's have a quick reminder of which campaign spent more.

https://i.redd.it/fqabt51ti1o01.jpg

Morris_Dancer

Good afternoon, everyone.

Mr. Sandpit, that seems somewhat dubious.

Sean_F

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1014510243525652482

Is that Spike?

He'd do terribly in Inner London, but probably poll rather well in Outer London.

Casino_Royale

TOPPING said:

Casino_Royale said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It rather seems to me that punters have missed a rather important point, which is that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent on the 26th June.

Section 20(2) of the Act says:

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day..

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

I'm not sure that's true. The definition does not put a direct prohibition on the government asking for an extension to Article 50, nor so far as I can see does any other clause.

Britain would then be in the EU without any legislation under the European Communities Act 1972 remaining in force, see section 1. That legislation might still have direct effect (by application of section 3 and/or the Francovitch case) in many circumstances. It would be a heaving mess.

To all intents and purposes the transition period is effectively already an extension of A50.

I can’t see anything other than the legal technicality of us leaving the EU taking effect at the end of March next year. If a further extension is needed, i think it’ll be of the transition period and not A50.

There’s a blackish swan that all the politics and economics just blows up, somehow resulting in Brexit proper being punted into the long grass, but that’s not a 40% shot.

Which of course has implications for arguably the most important dynamic of the whole Brexit process:

@williamglenn & @SeanT's bet.

That’s what we’re all waiting for.

But I suspect Alastair doesn’t have much less riding on the outcome himself.

david_herdson

surby said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It rather seems to me that punters have missed a rather important point, which is that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent on the 26th June.

Section 20(2) of the Act says:

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day..

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

I'm not sure that's true. The definition does not put a direct prohibition on the government asking for an extension to Article 50, nor so far as I can see does any other clause.

Britain would then be in the EU without any legislation under the European Communities Act 1972 remaining in force, see section 1. That legislation might still have direct effect (by application of section 3 and/or the Francovitch case) in many circumstances. It would be a heaving mess.

This flies over my head. One thing I am absolutely sure about by, accident or design, everything will be exactly the same as it is today on 30th March 2019 and nobody will be complaining.

Trust me, lots of people will be complaining, though we don't yet know who, or about what.

david_herdson

AlastairMeeks said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It rather seems to me that punters have missed a rather important point, which is that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent on the 26th June.

Section 20(2) of the Act says:

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day..

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

I'm not sure that's true. The definition does not put a direct prohibition on the government asking for an extension to Article 50, nor so far as I can see does any other clause.

Britain would then be in the EU without any legislation under the European Communities Act 1972 remaining in force, see section 1. That legislation might still have direct effect (by application of section 3 and/or the Francovitch case) in many circumstances. It would be a heaving mess.

The Henry VIII clauses within the Act can also be used to amend when its own definition of when Exit Day is.

Sandpit

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/UniStrathclyde/status/1014175047664197632

Very well deserved knighthood for Prof Sir John, for a lifetime’s work in helping the rest of us understand politics.

AlastairMeeks

Casino_Royale said:

TOPPING said:

Casino_Royale said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It rather seems to me that punters have missed a rather important point, which is that the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 received Royal Assent on the 26th June.

Section 20(2) of the Act says:

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day..

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

I'm not sure that's true. The definition does not put a direct prohibition on the government asking for an extension to Article 50, nor so far as I can see does any other clause.

Britain would then be in the EU without any legislation under the European Communities Act 1972 remaining in force, see section 1. That legislation might still have direct effect (by application of section 3 and/or the Francovitch case) in many circumstances. It would be a heaving mess.

To all intents and purposes the transition period is effectively already an extension of A50.

I can’t see anything other than the legal technicality of us leaving the EU taking effect at the end of March next year. If a further extension is needed, i think it’ll be of the transition period and not A50.

There’s a blackish swan that all the politics and economics just blows up, somehow resulting in Brexit proper being punted into the long grass, but that’s not a 40% shot.

Which of course has implications for arguably the most important dynamic of the whole Brexit process:

@williamglenn & @SeanT's bet.

That’s what we’re all waiting for.

But I suspect Alastair doesn’t have much less riding on the outcome himself.

Alastair does not have less riding on the outcome.

El_Capitano

TheScreamingEagles said:

I understand he backed Remain because he thought Leave’s plans were too optimistic/disruptive.

And he's now switched to Leave because, since then, the Government has come up with a plan for leaving the EU which is realistic and non-disruptive...?

Sandpit

RobD said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Some people really have been sent insane by brexit.

ttps://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1014380189667790848?s=21

And there’s almost certainly going to be a judicial review requested. The EC didn’t even interview the person they just found guilty.

Seriously?

In any case, let's have a quick reminder of which campaign spent more.

https://i.redd.it/fqabt51ti1o01.jpg

https://order-order.com/2018/07/04/electoral-commission-ignored-evidence-that-would-have-disproved-central-claims/
This seems pretty comprehensive, and yes I know it’s Guido but he’s been following this very closely.

TheValiant

MaxPB said:

1. Difficult to tell, but reports on the ground say that they are well behind their building schedule and their current spat with their neighbours is hurting their ability to finance and build projects.
2. If it goes ahead, then yes. There is no way the players could survive playing in 40-45 degree heat in the desert.
3. The main European leagues are consulting on what to do, the main idea is to start the season a bit earlier and have a 5 week break for the tournament, 1 week post tournament and then finish the season a few weeks late.
4. If it gets cancelled then England is seen as one of the few countries that could host it without needing any investment in infrastructure. I think Germany is another nation, but they hosted it too recently. What might happen is England gets it and then the FA supports some Asian bid for 2030, maybe China.

Thanks for that. Looks like we'll have to wait and see.

RoyalBlue

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1014508402863689728

Gary Gibbon needs an editor. That’s a dreadful piece of writing.

El_Capitano

Dura_Ace said:

Nieve has moved to perpetual shower of shit Mitchelton-Scott (a lead out train with no sprinter).

Bit harsh - they almost won the Giro.

TOPPING

Mortimer said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Scott_P said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

This seems to be what JRM was talking about on DP

Parliament can vote to change the existing law, but only if the Government propose the legislation, which they can't do if they get toppled...

Yes. This means that the hard Brexiteers now have the upper hand in the Commons because the status quo is that we leave on March 29th 2019 with no deal. Any alternative has to be agreed and makes its legislative way through the Commons (and the European Parliament, etc)

Something that has been blindingly obvious since the article 50 to vote to all but Remainer MPs...

Yep. Brexiters will have the opportunity to plunge the country into chaos.

Huzzah for them!

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1014514165212332032

CarlottaVance

RobD said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Some people really have been sent insane by brexit.

ttps://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1014380189667790848?s=21

And there’s almost certainly going to be a judicial review requested. The EC didn’t even interview the person they just found guilty.

Seriously?

In any case, let's have a quick reminder of which campaign spent more.

https://i.redd.it/fqabt51ti1o01.jpg

Excluding the £9million government leaflet.....so Remain total spending was more than double Leave's......and still they lost....to a bus....as they never tire of reminding us.....

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/MagicMagid/status/1014494400532148225

tpfkar

Sandpit said:

RobD said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Some people really have been sent insane by brexit.

ttps://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1014380189667790848?s=21

And there’s almost certainly going to be a judicial review requested. The EC didn’t even interview the person they just found guilty.

Seriously?

In any case, let's have a quick reminder of which campaign spent more.

https://i.redd.it/fqabt51ti1o01.jpg

https://order-order.com/2018/07/04/electoral-commission-ignored-evidence-that-would-have-disproved-central-claims/
This seems pretty comprehensive, and yes I know it’s Guido but he’s been following this very closely.

I have no particular insight, but I've had the impression that Guido is following it closely because he knows there is danger, rather than as a sign of confidence.

AlastairMeeks

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Some people really have been sent insane by brexit.

ttps://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1014380189667790848?s=21

And there’s almost certainly going to be a judicial review requested. The EC didn’t even interview the person they just found guilty.

I'd be more than a bit wary of leaping to any assumptions just yet as to how the case was handled or indeed what the allegations are. So far all we have is an extensive prebuttal from someone who has apparently been found guilty. We haven't heard the Electoral Commission's version at all.

OblitusSumMe

TOPPING said:

Mortimer said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Scott_P said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

This seems to be what JRM was talking about on DP

Parliament can vote to change the existing law, but only if the Government propose the legislation, which they can't do if they get toppled...

Yes. This means that the hard Brexiteers now have the upper hand in the Commons because the status quo is that we leave on March 29th 2019 with no deal. Any alternative has to be agreed and makes its legislative way through the Commons (and the European Parliament, etc)

Something that has been blindingly obvious since the article 50 to vote to all but Remainer MPs...

Yep. Brexiters will have the opportunity to plunge the country into chaos.

Huzzah for them!

So then it comes down to Corbyn. Does he vote with the government, the Tory government, for whatever deal she brings home from Brussels, or does he follow Tony Blair's example by siding with the Tory Eurosceptics? Hell of a choice for him.

brendan16

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/MagicMagid/status/1014494400532148225

I am sure Trump will be desperately disappointed he won't be allowed to visit Sheffield - not of course that local Lord Mayors have any such powers.

Still it's nice to know the Lord Mayor is focusing on his actual day job rather than grandstanding about foreign heads of state. Has he banned any unelected dictators from his realm?

Sandpit

OblitusSumMe said:

TOPPING said:

Mortimer said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Scott_P said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

So I don't think the government can now ask for an extension to Article 50, without primary legislation to amend the Act. However, IANAL, nor a constitutional expert, so perhaps I'm wrong on this - does anyone know?

This seems to be what JRM was talking about on DP

Parliament can vote to change the existing law, but only if the Government propose the legislation, which they can't do if they get toppled...

Yes. This means that the hard Brexiteers now have the upper hand in the Commons because the status quo is that we leave on March 29th 2019 with no deal. Any alternative has to be agreed and makes its legislative way through the Commons (and the European Parliament, etc)

Something that has been blindingly obvious since the article 50 to vote to all but Remainer MPs...

Yep. Brexiters will have the opportunity to plunge the country into chaos.

Huzzah for them!

So then it comes down to Corbyn. Does he vote with the government, the Tory government, for whatever deal she brings home from Brussels, or does he follow Tony Blair's example by siding with the Tory Eurosceptics? Hell of a choice for him.

That’s a fair point of view, but so far Guido’s Stories on this have been vindicated by a number of printed corrections in the Observer.