Till Man

Hi Ian. I was (and am) Nigel Watt and was there from Sept 77 to June 79

Ken Hall - You'll find him on Facebook

Try here:- http://www.reuniteinrock.co.uk/

I'm in.....

You HAVE to find this and let me know when it is posted!!

Three years on from this post, and two of these have actually been back in touch. Anyone else had a similar experience?

Panza Division morphed into the Lonely Hearts, also fronted by Glenn. I remember a single - FM Fantasy I think - and saw them several times at various venues. Drummer was Bubbles, who I believe died a year or two back, bassist Andy Fisher, can't remember the other guitarist's name

The medium by which the news is spread after the event is not the issue, the issue is that you or I would never have been having this discussion were it not for the hype from a third party medium. I don't listen to Brand and would have known nothing. Do you listen to Brand's show? A full and (I think) balanced overview is here:- http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/neil_mccormick/blog/2008/10/30/in_defence_of_ross_and_brand

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/neil_mccormick/blog/2008/10/30/in_defence_of_ross_and_brand

I think that the cane should be used to flog Russel Brand within an inch of his life... The Cad!!!

Does anyone know how much The Sun is paying her for all the exclusives?

I believe you may have missed my point here. I am not doubting your ability to form your own opinion, nor am I in any way attempting to defend the utterly infantile and unforgivable actions of Ross or Brand. What I am attempting to point out is that without the story appearing in The Mail on Sunday, and subsequently The Mail and The Sun, most of us who choose not to listen to Brand's allegedly humourous radio show would be blissfully unaware of the content of that show.

I think YOU would be a lot less irritated by them if they were being paid by someone else, rather than from the license fee. I think most people are more tolerant and less easily caught up in a Daily Mail story hype.

Ah... I understand now... YOU were one of the TWO people who heard the radio show at the time it was broadcast and complained. Congratulations on leading the charge. I was under the mistaken impression that the only reason that most of us had heard of this pathetic stunt was because The Mail and The Sun had picked up the story and hyped it in order to sell newspapers... Tut.... silly me....

I'm afraid I subscribe to the view of "If you don't like it, don't listen". I don't like either Russell Brand or Steve Wright, so I listen to neither of them. I do however respect that other people might like them both, and therefore accept that my licence fee goes towards paying them. I am not in any way attempting to justify or excuse the actions of Ross or Brand, as I believe them to be inexcusable, however the only reason that most of us are aware of the (unfunny and distateful) prank is as a result of the involvement of The Mail (Chip Wrapper which supported the Nazis and Oswold Moseley's Browshirts) and The Sun (has everyone forgotten the lies they published after Hillsborough?) Isn't it wonderful to be manipulated by the press?

I like Ross but consider Brand to be a mockney, pseudo Dickensian, big mouthed ******.... However I do not think he ought to have been bullied out of his radio show by a press hate campain led by the Mail on Sunday and The Sun

Oh how fabulous, victory for the Daily Mail thought police. Lets just examine for a moment the timelines and numbers in this. The show is broadcast - TWO complaints are received. A week later the Mail on Sunday publishes its' opinion on the matter. Complaints then rise exponentially over the next 4 days, resulting in suspensions, apologies, politicians making statements etc., etc. Now... the questions in my mind are: Does middle England really have to be told what to think by the Mail? And If the Mail had not published their opinion would the story have got quite so big? And How may extra copies of the Mail, The Mail on Sunday and The Sun have been sold as a result of them hyping the story to this extent? Food for thought people

I use VLC media player for all dvds, whatever region. It works for me.

I think it is a wonderful idea to give us all a days holiday to celebrate her death!!

Well why not put it in this form of reasoned discussion in the first place then. There was a time, not too long ago when I used to visit Sheffield forum regularly. Then the thought police turned up with the simple response to everything being to infer that you had no right to profess or hold an opinion and that they would use sarcasm and abuse to debunk anything with which they disagreed. All this has resulted in is a number of forummers clearing off for protracted periods, as I shall do again now. I do not expect society to "wipe my arse", but equally I do not expect my arse (wiped or unwiped) to be part of any discussion about school hours or holidays!

Start here:- http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/sheffield/consumer.htm Talk to them and explain how what is proposed is supplied now is not what was advertised for sale. I think the sale of goods act and the trades desription act may carry more weight than a restictive and unfair disclaimer.

Gee thanks for the abuse. I put forward a reasoned point and have this hurled back. GROW UP and discuss - abuse is not reasoned or rational discussion.

And presumably prepare them for a life out in the real world, where they will work for 40 hours per week and only get 4 or 5 weeks holiday per year - as opposed to woking for about 5 hours per day and getting 13 weeks a year off. That's not education, that's pampering!!

My little one starts school in September, and the amount of holiday she will get is going to cause some "interesting" issues. Overall the kids get around 13 weeks a year off. I get 5 weeks a year annual leave, and my other half gets the same. Now assuming that we take 2 weeks off together for a family holiday, and the 3 days at christmas that both sets of employers make us take, that means that our holidays only cover 7 weeks of hers. How are we supposed to cover the other 6 weeks off she gets? In my opinion the 13 weeks that kids get off per year is an historic anachonism harking back to the days when large numbers of familys only had one bread winner, or else had grandparents or relatives guaranteed to be living nearby. Clearly neither of these scenarios can be taken for granted in the 21st century. My feeling is that 6 weeks per year should be ample time off for children, and also that the school day should be re-timed to be from 8.45 to 5.30. In this way the kids are brought up with a realistic expectation as to the hours that will be expected when they start work, and also school hours would actually fit around working hours.

How is the Pokeing going? Can I stop yet?