It is very easy to do that

you post the link saying 'yeah yeah you'll all rip it to shreds'

and the minute anyone posts any response "don't let that stop you ripping it to shreads' etc etc

It's called debate. I have no strong view either way on Cullum - as you'll see from the few things I've posted on it - or on Mick Dennis. The only thing that's clear is that D & MWJ are resisting, and have enlisted Dennis and others to make their case.

But on this particular point - the thing is that the line that says: Cullum should be resisted because he didn't invest before - is not very convincing, to my mind at least.

And the Turners were given a seat on the board - for no cash at all - when exactly the same argument applies to them. What *is* your response to that?

Posted By: Tricky Hawes, Jul 10, 20:53:10