Should there be more bookings for simulation, even when a player is genuinely fouled? When a player is genuinely fouled he will often add simulation to his fall; is this a form of cheating? Afterall, it could result in the opponent getting booked.

If a player is fouled, give a free kick for sure, but why can't the player who wins the free kick be booked also if he's rolled around on the floor for 2 minutes when there's nothing wrong with him?

It's as though there is a hidden double-jeopardy law which exists in the game. Whereby if someone has been fouled (no matter how slight), the player fouled is entitled to add simulation. Surely, this can't be good for the game. It doesn't happen in rugby even when players are genuinely hurt. It only happens in football because players are allowed to do it.

Do you think the FA Cup semi-finals should be played at Wembley?

For
• Wembley has to be paid for somehow
• It's a nice day out

Against
• The old Wembley was financed OK without the need for cup semi finals to be played there and there was less revenue back then from pop concerts and other special events.
• Fans would get just as many tickets at Old trafford
• It takes the edge off getting to the final
• It's not about paying for Wembley - it's about more profit

The Sun newspaper has recently changed its allegiance from Labour to Conservative.

But what allegiance do you prefer your daily newspaper to have? Even if you don't buy daily newspapers, would you rather they were biased or non-biased?
i.e. tell you one side of the story or remained impartial?