Well exactly. The excuse that we had to line up defensively because been twatted 5-1 by Chelsea in our last away match would be valid if we were twatted because we'd been gung-ho going forward. But Newcastle has never been gung-ho under McClaren, we've just been gung.
We've had like two clean sheets in our last 16 games and two nil-nil draws all season. Hoping to keep a clean sheet and pick up a point that way with this defence is insane. If we don't score, we're not getting any points.
I'd heard that during the trial, that he was being very arrogant and dismissive, yawning, joking about etc. Seeing as it wasn't reported, presumed there was some kind of block on it.
Notable that they only deny knowing he was going to plead guilty, not addressing the claims made by Johnson that he told them about the kissing and showed them the grooming messages, the two counts he eventually pleaded guilty to.
It's a joke about how people keep referring to him as "Aaron's" because of phone autocorrect.
But Aaron's wouldn't mean there's more than one of him, because apostrophes denote omission or possession, not pluralisation.
Dunno like, isn't it often the case that some of the more forthright jurors make a decision and everyone else tends to go along with it? Especially if your verdict would end up overturning what nearly everyone else thinks.