Yoss

What benefit's that then? (Incidentally there have been a disturbing number of people using this thread to talk about the actual football over the last couple of days - is that even allowed?)

When I lived in Leeds I preferred to go and watch Bradford.

"have" or "are"?

Okay, I'll see if I can get some prices off them tomorrow.

Most importantly, it's been confirmed that Smith will be in them. Which is good news.

Anyone interested if I were to run a minibus through to away games next season? (Or indeed, any existing groups looking for bus hire?) I should be able to get reasonably cheap hire of a 16 seater through my work and was wondering if I could make use of it.

There are all kinds of answers to that. Firstly the flesh didn't "become" human, I thknk he just said it had stabilised (so that it would no longer cut in and out of the exact form) - it didn't rule out the possibility that someone with the right technology could destabilise it again at some point in the future. Also, it was a much earlier version of the technology. But in any case, the situations were different. The gangers in that episode had ceased to be such, and had become independent entities by virtue of being separated from their originals. Amy's ganger, on teh other hand, was still acting very much as a ganger was supposed to, as a direct conduit of the person on whom it was based. It hadn't acquired a life of its own.

Christ is that still what you're talking about? Two years and none of you have skipped a fucking beat.

Ah, the return of an old friend.

Well no, they might be real living entities but they aren't the same as the people they're copies of. [They're copies not clones, btw.] The real Jennifer Lucas can't extend her neck by ten feet and batter her head through a toiler door - much as it would be cool as f**k if she could. Anyway, having made a point of having Canton dismiss the suggestion that the dead doctor was "a clone or a copy or something", it'd be a right old swizz if he turned out to be lying or mistaken. In fact it would be a right old swizz if that's the solution even if they hadn't had him say that. But I don't for a minute think Moffat would do that to us, I'm sure the copy-of-doctor will be for this story only.

The pundits were wrong, they've gone for Morgan, with Finn as the extra seamer. I'm not convinced by Morgan as a first-class player yet, but good luck to him.

I think we were meant to see the cliffhanger coming, they'd all but shown us it already. I sincerely doubt it's going to be as simple as the clone being the one who was killed in episode one. It'll be a right swizz if that does happen, particularly as they went out their way to deny the possibility at the time (Amy asked if it might be a copy or something and old-Canton said "that most definitely is the doctor"). The big question for me is how did the doctor know so much about the events of yesterday's episode in advance - is that just a part of this story or is that part of the season's story arc?

Back to the proper cricket then ... England squad for the first Test against Sri Lanka to be announced in the morning. The word seems to be that Bopara will get the nod over Morgan to replace Collingwood. There's some doubt about who will be the fourth seamer - Finn, Shahzad or Onions - with Bresnan injured. But assuming Anderson, Broad and Tremlett are all fit then whoever it is won't play anyway. So if the pundits are right about Bopara the team is straightforward: Strauss, Cook, Trott, Pietersen, Bell, Bopara, Prior, Broad, Swann, Tremlett, Anderson

Thart's my understanding of how they're getting round it. The thirteen regens was a timelord imposed law not a physical one. Quite enjoyed tonight's episode anyway. Not as much as last week's, but it was a decent old-style bit of Who.

You don't think Amy and Rory have developed since we first saw them in The Eleventh Hour? Blimey, I'm not quite sure what to say to that. I have to go to work now anyway.

I could handle budget cuts, I'm all for minimilist settings. I wasn't talking about character development at all, as Ad Lib says there's no shortage of that.

Yes yes. The manner and display of emotional issues is culturally-defined and packaged - which is actually quite interesting because of course culture changes and it's already possible to see different coverage and different expectations of coverage over the course of the century or so that we've been making tv and films. But at the moment the manner of it is all very samey and the nature of the commercial competition is making it quite difficult for people to explore things in a different fashion. Which is to say, I can only presume those who are calling for more "emotion" are looking for the sort of laid-on-with-a-fucking-spade schmaltiz of the RTD / Tennant era. If that's your bag then there are about fifteen gazillion other dramas and soaps that cater for you more than adequately, and Hollywood is churning out more shitty vomit-inducing films then you'll ever have time to watch. Arent' we even allowed one - just one - programme that explores some sometimes interesting ideas in a sometimes fun way without having to be packaged in all that shite? (Edit: it runs in my head I may have made an almost identical plea on last year's thread. In which case, apologies for repeating myself, but the point stands, and I expect to have to make it again next year too)

That covers it pretty well too, to be fair.

Yeah, everything Ad Lib said (except maybe I'm not quite so convinced about the essentiality of Rory, but that's not to say I don't like him).

The only thing I'd change about that episode would be to take out the scene where he has that last conversation with a vision of Idris after her death. Bit cloying and unnecessary, that. That's a pretty small detail though, I'm happy to overlook it 'cause otherwise it was right up there with the very best. Gaiman clearly knew his Who, the tardis characterisation was fair to the history and tradition of the show, and yet similtameously added to it. Which was a difficult balance to get right, but very nicely handled. Loved it.

ooh, no no no no no no and no, you've got thatb altogether wrong. (imho, obviously). You're being seduced there by Smith's manner and not by his actions, which is the more important bit. Tennant showed very little darkness - maybe just briefly in The Family of Blood - instead RTD wrote him as basically a human adopting human morality and doing all the right things. Which reached its absurd height on the Sontaran episode when he had to be all nicey-nicey and go and offer them "the choice" at the end, even though it was going to lead to his own death. Smith's doctor has much more believably non-human ethics - indeed his killing off of the Silents in the opening story ("that would be lovely but it's not Christmas", or whatever it was he said) formed a direct point of contrast to the Sontaran thing. It also helps that both the eleventh doctor and Amy have an anarchic streak. Like, say, at the start of A Time of Angels when you see the two of them sprinting out of the museum with the stolen homing box, chased by security guards. It was a completely unnecessary little touch which helped to establish both of their characters - and it wouldn't have been written for Tennant. RTD took his role as guardian of childrens' moral much too seriously. We've also had - particularly in Amy's choice - a glimpse into the darker parts of the doctor's psyche than we ever had in the Tennant era. This week's too, to an extent.

Outstanding episode.

Dougie Hill signed a one year part-time deal when he joined, and a two year full-time deal last summer. That one, at least, is right enough.

There's differences of opinion and then there's

There's no incremental prize money in the first division. Away crowds from Hamilton and Livi won't remotely cover what we're losing from Dunfermline. Cup money is uncertain, we might still only have one game in the Scottish Cup and for all we know at this stage we might have two games fewer in the League Cup.