Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
Yes - good point on the USA. And they do well against us too.
I also don’t have any kind of grudge against Italy; in fact James Richardson and Channel 4’s brilliant coverage of Italian football in the 90s has given me a long-standing soft spot for the Azzuri.
Argentina through, Netherlands out and Argentina perhaps favourites now with Brazil and Germany already out, maybe v France in the final. Still hoping for England of course
Hopefully it will be Argentina v France or Argentina v England
A really worthy final. Europe v S America
Messi v Mbappe or Messi v The Young Jude Bellingham
The old v the new. The ageing superstar against the young superstar or the coming superstar
Perfect
Pope Francis will be fervently hoping for a win for Argentina, his home nation as a big football fan.
Messi also a devout Roman Catholic so a coup for the Vatican if Argentina win
What rot. You might as well say that Knight being caught allegedly up to dodgy business was a blow for the Vatican.
No it would be a boost for them be sure, Pope Francis will be photographed in Argentine shirt watching the game and will invite Messi and the team to the Papal Apartments as soon as possible after a win.
A win for a largely Roman Catholic team in a Muslim majority country and defeat for increasingly irreligious France and heretic Protestant heritage and irreligious England and Germany would also be seen as divine intervention. Just the pity Catholic Italy and Brazil did not get through
You forget that football is an appallingly frivolous and wasteful pastime in the view of the proper Christian traditions.
Indeed.
Good Christians play cricket and rugby.
Albeit not usually at the same time.
Middle class British and White Commonwealth Anglicans maybe not Roman Catholics
The Scots round here would be very surprised by that. Plenty of working class Presbyterians and atheists for both.
Far more Scottish Presbyterian and atheist working class football fans and players than rugby union and cricket fans and players
You're moving the goalpostds yet again, not to mention the wickets.
I'm not, Rugby Union players in Scotland are more likely to be middle class Anglican historically with some Presbyterians, football players more likely to be Roman Catholic or Presbyterian
Argentina through, Netherlands out and Argentina perhaps favourites now with Brazil and Germany already out, maybe v France in the final. Still hoping for England of course
Hopefully it will be Argentina v France or Argentina v England
A really worthy final. Europe v S America
Messi v Mbappe or Messi v The Young Jude Bellingham
The old v the new. The ageing superstar against the young superstar or the coming superstar
Perfect
Pope Francis will be fervently hoping for a win for Argentina, his home nation as a big football fan.
Messi also a devout Roman Catholic so a coup for the Vatican if Argentina win
What rot. You might as well say that Knight being caught allegedly up to dodgy business was a blow for the Vatican.
No it would be a boost for them be sure, Pope Francis will be photographed in Argentine shirt watching the game and will invite Messi and the team to the Papal Apartments as soon as possible after a win.
A win for a largely Roman Catholic team in a Muslim majority country and defeat for increasingly irreligious France and heretic Protestant heritage and irreligious England and Germany would also be seen as divine intervention. Just the pity Catholic Italy and Brazil did not get through
You forget that football is an appallingly frivolous and wasteful pastime in the view of the proper Christian traditions.
Indeed.
Good Christians play cricket and rugby.
Albeit not usually at the same time.
Middle class British and White Commonwealth Anglicans maybe not Roman Catholics
The Scots round here would be very surprised by that. Plenty of working class Presbyterians and atheists for both.
Far more Scottish Presbyterian and atheist working class football fans and players than rugby union and cricket fans and players
You're moving the goalpostds yet again, not to mention the wickets.
I'm not, Rugby Union players in Scotland are more likely to be middle class Anglican historically with some Presbyterians, football players more likely to be Roman Catholic or Presbyterian
You've never been to the Borders, then, I can tell.
Argentina through, Netherlands out and Argentina perhaps favourites now with Brazil and Germany already out, maybe v France in the final. Still hoping for England of course
Hopefully it will be Argentina v France or Argentina v England
A really worthy final. Europe v S America
Messi v Mbappe or Messi v The Young Jude Bellingham
The old v the new. The ageing superstar against the young superstar or the coming superstar
Perfect
Pope Francis will be fervently hoping for a win for Argentina, his home nation as a big football fan.
Messi also a devout Roman Catholic so a coup for the Vatican if Argentina win
What rot. You might as well say that Knight being caught allegedly up to dodgy business was a blow for the Vatican.
No it would be a boost for them be sure, Pope Francis will be photographed in Argentine shirt watching the game and will invite Messi and the team to the Papal Apartments as soon as possible after a win.
A win for a largely Roman Catholic team in a Muslim majority country and defeat for increasingly irreligious France and heretic Protestant heritage and irreligious England and Germany would also be seen as divine intervention. Just the pity Catholic Italy and Brazil did not get through
You forget that football is an appallingly frivolous and wasteful pastime in the view of the proper Christian traditions.
Indeed.
Good Christians play cricket and rugby.
Albeit not usually at the same time.
Middle class British and White Commonwealth Anglicans maybe not Roman Catholics
The Scots round here would be very surprised by that. Plenty of working class Presbyterians and atheists for both.
Far more Scottish Presbyterian and atheist working class football fans and players than rugby union and cricket fans and players
You're moving the goalpostds yet again, not to mention the wickets.
I'm not, Rugby Union players in Scotland are more likely to be middle class Anglican historically with some Presbyterians, football players more likely to be Roman Catholic or Presbyterian
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
Certainly playing football in perfect conditions (20-24 degrees, dry, perfect pitch) has had a big part to play in the quality of the football.
You’d be looking towards India at Christmas time, or perhaps North Africa in November.
Very hot world cups staged in Southern Europe are looking a bit passé…
The Wembley final last year delivered so much though. A snowstorm of cocaine from the upper stands, fountains of nose claret in the beer queue and a firework up a bum hole.
I have sometimes referred to a job I was offered in 2015 with a public sector body, the pay was advertised at 25k -32k. It has just been readvertised with the same pay, 25k - 32k, 7 years later. They then have to pay a contractor £40 per hour to do the same job, when they cant fill the roles. The system isn't working.
My school has almost as many supply as staff right now. A 15% pay rise that got everyone onto the payroll would work out much cheaper by far.
MaxPB was saying yesterday that all supply teachers ought to be banned because, I paraphrase, they were a bunch of parasites on the decent Tory-voting taxpayer.
Actually, I think he was saying that they were like contractors leeching on the public sector.
Ironically, of course, the left wanted to ban supply teachers and agency nurses too, by banning zero-hour contracts.
Argentina through, Netherlands out and Argentina perhaps favourites now with Brazil and Germany already out, maybe v France in the final. Still hoping for England of course
Hopefully it will be Argentina v France or Argentina v England
A really worthy final. Europe v S America
Messi v Mbappe or Messi v The Young Jude Bellingham
The old v the new. The ageing superstar against the young superstar or the coming superstar
Perfect
Pope Francis will be fervently hoping for a win for Argentina, his home nation as a big football fan.
Messi also a devout Roman Catholic so a coup for the Vatican if Argentina win
What rot. You might as well say that Knight being caught allegedly up to dodgy business was a blow for the Vatican.
No it would be a boost for them be sure, Pope Francis will be photographed in Argentine shirt watching the game and will invite Messi and the team to the Papal Apartments as soon as possible after a win.
A win for a largely Roman Catholic team in a Muslim majority country and defeat for increasingly irreligious France and heretic Protestant heritage and irreligious England and Germany would also be seen as divine intervention. Just the pity Catholic Italy and Brazil did not get through
You forget that football is an appallingly frivolous and wasteful pastime in the view of the proper Christian traditions.
Indeed.
Good Christians play cricket and rugby.
Albeit not usually at the same time.
Middle class British and White Commonwealth Anglicans maybe not Roman Catholics
The Scots round here would be very surprised by that. Plenty of working class Presbyterians and atheists for both.
Far more Scottish Presbyterian and atheist working class football fans and players than rugby union and cricket fans and players
You're moving the goalpostds yet again, not to mention the wickets.
I'm not, Rugby Union players in Scotland are more likely to be middle class Anglican historically with some Presbyterians, football players more likely to be Roman Catholic or Presbyterian
They're more likely to be from the Borders or Edinburgh Public Schools you mean?
He's confusing NE Scotland with S Scotland. Easily done in some circles.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
Argentina through, Netherlands out and Argentina perhaps favourites now with Brazil and Germany already out, maybe v France in the final. Still hoping for England of course
Hopefully it will be Argentina v France or Argentina v England
A really worthy final. Europe v S America
Messi v Mbappe or Messi v The Young Jude Bellingham
The old v the new. The ageing superstar against the young superstar or the coming superstar
Perfect
Pope Francis will be fervently hoping for a win for Argentina, his home nation as a big football fan.
Messi also a devout Roman Catholic so a coup for the Vatican if Argentina win
What rot. You might as well say that Knight being caught allegedly up to dodgy business was a blow for the Vatican.
No it would be a boost for them be sure, Pope Francis will be photographed in Argentine shirt watching the game and will invite Messi and the team to the Papal Apartments as soon as possible after a win.
A win for a largely Roman Catholic team in a Muslim majority country and defeat for increasingly irreligious France and heretic Protestant heritage and irreligious England and Germany would also be seen as divine intervention. Just the pity Catholic Italy and Brazil did not get through
You forget that football is an appallingly frivolous and wasteful pastime in the view of the proper Christian traditions.
Indeed.
Good Christians play cricket and rugby.
Albeit not usually at the same time.
Middle class British and White Commonwealth Anglicans maybe not Roman Catholics
The Scots round here would be very surprised by that. Plenty of working class Presbyterians and atheists for both.
Far more Scottish Presbyterian and atheist working class football fans and players than rugby union and cricket fans and players
You're moving the goalpostds yet again, not to mention the wickets.
I'm not, Rugby Union players in Scotland are more likely to be middle class Anglican historically with some Presbyterians, football players more likely to be Roman Catholic or Presbyterian
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
I don't envy Thanksgiving. You have TWO weirdly awkward and sadly claustrophobic family get togethers with a turkey dinner in five weeks? WTF
Our autumn calendar is fine with Halloween and Guy Fawkes night to liven it up, and then that segues into the party month of Xmas
It is our Jan and Feb which really suck. I envy continental Catholic Europeans with Carnival in Feb. We TOTALLY need that. The Reformation killed off cakes and ale
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
Yes - good point on the USA. And they do well against us too.
I also don’t have any kind of grudge against Italy; in fact James Richardson and Channel 4’s brilliant coverage of Italian football in the 90s has given me a long-standing soft spot for the Azzuri.
I don’t think Italy is a grudge. More a fear. We are scared of them. They tend to win. And the idea that once they’ve scored that’s it: the door closes. Very powerful mental hoodoo.
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
I said this to you the other day and you denied it!
Glad to see you have come around to my point of view.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
I don't envy Thanksgiving. You have TWO weirdly awkward and sadly claustrophobic family get togethers with a turkey dinner in five weeks? WTF
Our autumn calendar is fine with Halloween and Guy Fawkes night to liven it up, and then that segues into the party month of Xmas
It is our Jan and Feb which really suck. I envy continental Catholic Europeans with Carnival in Feb. We TOTALLY need that. The Reformation killed off cakes and ale
We have our own February festival called “half term”.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
I don't envy Thanksgiving. You have TWO weirdly awkward and sadly claustrophobic family get togethers with a turkey dinner in five weeks? WTF
Our autumn calendar is fine with Halloween and Guy Fawkes night to liven it up, and then that segues into the party month of Xmas
It is our Jan and Feb which really suck. I envy continental Catholic Europeans with Carnival in Feb. We TOTALLY need that. The Reformation killed off cakes and ale
Since we're in that neck of the conversational woods anyway, the best thing about February is generally the 6 Nations. Otherwise it's a shitty month.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
The website politicalbetting.com is a poo-house of a dumpster fire, filled with wolverines that have lost their minds. It is a place where the geriatric fool NPXMP rants and raves, while the overwanked ginge Robert Smithson spews his nonsensical opinions. And let's not forget the slippery tit of a man, The Screaming Eagles, who spends all day watching the Test and spouting off about how great he is.
Despite all of this, there are a few shining stars on politicalbetting.com. Liz Truss is surprising on the upside, with her intelligent and thoughtful posts. And of course, there is the elegant and multifarious gentleman Leon, who always manages to rise above the chaos and provide a level-headed and reasoned perspective.
But these few diamonds in the rough cannot make up for the overall terribleness of politicalbetting.com. It is a site that should be avoided at all costs, unless you want to subject yourself to the rants and ravings of a bunch of unhinged lunatics.
On Topic - What this polling suggests to me, is that voters are pretty evenly divided (with slight edge to pro-postie) and mostly conflicted.
Further suggesting that public sentiment could tip one way or the other based on the pain of pre-holiday mail disruptions, along with the public's judgement on the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of government response.
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
Yes - good point on the USA. And they do well against us too.
I also don’t have any kind of grudge against Italy; in fact James Richardson and Channel 4’s brilliant coverage of Italian football in the 90s has given me a long-standing soft spot for the Azzuri.
The Italians manage to be really good at football without ever truly lapsing into arrogance: unlike Germany, France, Spain and - let's be fair - England
I guess losing your major empire 1600 years ago then being divided for 14 centuries gives you a winning wryness about life
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
Not sure who you mean by "they" in last sentence. Certainly NOT the super-majority of American who don't give a hoot about soccer, certainly not enough to have a rivalry with anyone.
Even USA v Iran generated minimal attention outside the quasi-lunatic fringe of American true fans of The Great Game. Thicker on ground here in Seattle than most places in US, but barely noticeable even here outside of a few trendy bars.
Who cares the Supreme Court judgement confirms there will no indyref2 anytime soon and certainly not until Starmer gets in and only if he decides to allow it
The website politicalbetting.com is a poo-house of a dumpster fire, filled with wolverines that have lost their minds. It is a place where the geriatric fool NPXMP rants and raves, while the overwanked ginge Robert Smithson spews his nonsensical opinions. And let's not forget the slippery tit of a man, The Screaming Eagles, who spends all day watching the Test and spouting off about how great he is.
Despite all of this, there are a few shining stars on politicalbetting.com. Liz Truss is surprising on the upside, with her intelligent and thoughtful posts. And of course, there is the elegant and multifarious gentleman Leon, who always manages to rise above the chaos and provide a level-headed and reasoned perspective.
But these few diamonds in the rough cannot make up for the overall terribleness of politicalbetting.com. It is a site that should be avoided at all costs, unless you want to subject yourself to the rants and ravings of a bunch of unhinged lunatics.
Best Sean post in well over a decade.
Or is it?
Multitudinous, rather than multifarious, I think.
No
multitudinous /ˌmʌltɪˈtjuːdɪnəs/
adjective 1. very numerous. "multitudinous rugs kept us warm
multifarious /ˌmʌltɪˈfɛːrɪəs/
adjective 1. many and of various types. "multifarious activities"
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
They had that great eighties team as well.
Yeah. Had forgotten about that tbh. So that explanation can't be right. Maybe it's that the rivalries were established early? They were very poor during the 50's and 60's when we were good. We were both poor in the 70's, they were good in the 80's when we weren't? By the 90's our International football rivalries had already been established? Dunno.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
I don't envy Thanksgiving. You have TWO weirdly awkward and sadly claustrophobic family get togethers with a turkey dinner in five weeks? WTF
Our autumn calendar is fine with Halloween and Guy Fawkes night to liven it up, and then that segues into the party month of Xmas
It is our Jan and Feb which really suck. I envy continental Catholic Europeans with Carnival in Feb. We TOTALLY need that. The Reformation killed off cakes and ale
We have our own February festival called “half term”.
Who cares the Supreme Court judgement confirms there will no indyref2 anytime soon and certainly not until Starmer gets in and only if he decides to allow it
A silly argument, because ultimately laws don't trump votes in a democracy. If there is a strong demand for a further referendum then there will be one.
A stronger argument on the 'who cares' front would be it's quoted, with no link, from the National, a minor news source which has never knowingly told the truth in its short and undistinguished existence, by a poster who is consistently wrong about everything to do with Scotland because he sees everything through his hatred of the English.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
Not true. The Scots have St Andrew's Day.
And Hogmanay. And 2nd January. And Burns Night.
If 2 Jan counts at all it counts as part of Hogmanay. Burns was a talentless twat, not in the top 100 of British poets. If you enjoy sharing that fact with the Swedes, crack on. He was probably not markedly worse than the likes of Erik Axel Karlfeldt.
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
Not sure who you mean by "they" in last sentence. Certainly NOT the super-majority of American who don't give a hoot about soccer, certainly not enough to have a rivalry with anyone.
Even USA v Iran generated minimal attention outside the quasi-lunatic fringe of American true fans of The Great Game. Thicker on ground here in Seattle than most places in US, but barely noticeable even here outside of a few trendy bars.
Soccer was the USA's second sport as late as the 1920's. It has narrow but deep roots.
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
They had that great eighties team as well.
Yeah. Had forgotten about that tbh. So that explanation can't be right. Maybe it's that the rivalries were established early? They were very poor during the 50's and 60's when we were good. We were both poor in the 70's, they were good in the 80's when we weren't? By the 90's our International football rivalries had been established? Dunno.
Their club football has always been weak - it used to be REALLY weak. So English teams were never scared of playing Club Lyonaisse or whatever it is
Contrast with Barcelona, Juventus, Bayern Munich or Ajax (as was)
That's another crucial way a rivalry is built up. Did not happen with France
I remember watching a Euros/World Cup with a French friend in the 90s and he was bewildered that his team was a contender. "So. we are..... quite good?"
Who cares the Supreme Court judgement confirms there will no indyref2 anytime soon and certainly not until Starmer gets in and only if he decides to allow it
I am surprised a supposed supported of the Union does not care if people support it - it would make preserving it in the future a damn sight easier. Indeed, even under your premise of Starmer allowing a vote, if Union support were increased then the risk of him ever deciding to do so would lessen.
Getting ChatGPT to pen imaginary Twitter arguments is fun by the way.
This tweet still needs work but getting a bit closer:
NATO and big pharma are in cahoots to control Russia and stop it from regaining its former imperial territories. And they're using the Covid vaccine as a cover to insert chips into our brains and control us like puppets. Wake up, people. #conspiracytheories #bigpharma #NATO #wakeup
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
Not sure who you mean by "they" in last sentence. Certainly NOT the super-majority of American who don't give a hoot about soccer, certainly not enough to have a rivalry with anyone.
Even USA v Iran generated minimal attention outside the quasi-lunatic fringe of American true fans of The Great Game. Thicker on ground here in Seattle than most places in US, but barely noticeable even here outside of a few trendy bars.
Sorry, but this really is not true, not anymore. Soccer is watched very widely in the USA
eg The recent World Series in baseball got 11.8m viewers (on average), the USA's soccer kick-up game-things against Iran and England got 12m viewers
When soccer is outdoing baseball in the USA then the sport has arrived. That time is now
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
Not sure who you mean by "they" in last sentence. Certainly NOT the super-majority of American who don't give a hoot about soccer, certainly not enough to have a rivalry with anyone.
Even USA v Iran generated minimal attention outside the quasi-lunatic fringe of American true fans of The Great Game. Thicker on ground here in Seattle than most places in US, but barely noticeable even here outside of a few trendy bars.
Sorry, but this really is not true, not anymore. Soccer is watched very widely in the USA
eg The recent World Series in baseball got 11.8m viewers (on average), the USA's soccer kick-up game-things against Iran and England got 12m viewers
When soccer is outdoing baseball in the USA then the sport has arrived. That time is now
Here in the US, my entire office of 20 and 30 somethings watched both penalty shootouts. I would say soccer is now the third sport, after American football and basketball, among young people.
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
They had that great eighties team as well.
Yeah. Had forgotten about that tbh. So that explanation can't be right. Maybe it's that the rivalries were established early? They were very poor during the 50's and 60's when we were good. We were both poor in the 70's, they were good in the 80's when we weren't? By the 90's our International football rivalries had already been established? Dunno.
Sadly I'd say our biggest 2 grudge football rivalries derive from war - Germany and Argentina.
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
They had that great eighties team as well.
Yeah. Had forgotten about that tbh. So that explanation can't be right. Maybe it's that the rivalries were established early? They were very poor during the 50's and 60's when we were good. We were both poor in the 70's, they were good in the 80's when we weren't? By the 90's our International football rivalries had already been established? Dunno.
Sadly I'd say our biggest 2 grudge football rivalries derive from war - Germany and Argentina.
Now that we have exorcised our demons vs Germany, I would now enjoy beating France more than them.
Who cares the Supreme Court judgement confirms there will no indyref2 anytime soon and certainly not until Starmer gets in and only if he decides to allow it
I am surprised a supposed supported of the Union does not care if people support it - it would make preserving it in the future a damn sight easier. Indeed, even under your premise of Starmer allowing a vote, if Union support were increased then the risk of him ever deciding to do so would lessen.
HYUFD's odd way of showing he doesn't care usually involves poring over Scottish subsamples and counting DKs for the No side in indy polls.
And saying 'who cares' every time there's a convincing poll for Yes of course.
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
Not sure who you mean by "they" in last sentence. Certainly NOT the super-majority of American who don't give a hoot about soccer, certainly not enough to have a rivalry with anyone.
Even USA v Iran generated minimal attention outside the quasi-lunatic fringe of American true fans of The Great Game. Thicker on ground here in Seattle than most places in US, but barely noticeable even here outside of a few trendy bars.
Sorry, but this really is not true, not anymore. Soccer is watched very widely in the USA
eg The recent World Series in baseball got 11.8m viewers (on average), the USA's soccer kick-up game-things against Iran and England got 12m viewers
When soccer is outdoing baseball in the USA then the sport has arrived. That time is now
Here in the US, my entire office of 20 and 30 somethings watched both penalty shootouts. I would say soccer is now the third sport, after American football and basketball, among young people.
That chimes with the TV stats, and my recent personal experience of the USA. Soccer has overtaken hockey, for sure, and is now overtaking baseball
It makes sense. America is a nation of immigrants from all over the world, the world loves soccer. So it is imported (plus it now has pretty vigorous native roots). See also Ted Lasso. A huge TV hit
Who cares the Supreme Court judgement confirms there will no indyref2 anytime soon and certainly not until Starmer gets in and only if he decides to allow it
I am surprised a supposed supported of the Union does not care if people support it - it would make preserving it in the future a damn sight easier. Indeed, even under your premise of Starmer allowing a vote, if Union support were increased then the risk of him ever deciding to do so would lessen.
If Starmer allows indyref2 his problem to win it, we Tories will certainly never allow indyref2 for a full generation from 2014
This blog is in serious trouble when Mike retires. Concise, astute, incisive. The other header posters are total also-rans.
We are nearing the end of an era.
I bow to nobody in my admiration for the author of "The Political Punter: How to make money betting on politics", (ISBN-10: 1905641095, ISBN-13: 978-1905641093) and his two sons, but other header posters occasionally catch a little interest. If I may suggest a few?
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
They had that great eighties team as well.
Yeah. Had forgotten about that tbh. So that explanation can't be right. Maybe it's that the rivalries were established early? They were very poor during the 50's and 60's when we were good. We were both poor in the 70's, they were good in the 80's when we weren't? By the 90's our International football rivalries had already been established? Dunno.
Sadly I'd say our biggest 2 grudge football rivalries derive from war - Germany and Argentina.
Now that we have exorcised our demons vs Germany, I would now enjoy beating France more than them.
Well that's fortunate because that's who we've got.
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
They had that great eighties team as well.
Yeah. Had forgotten about that tbh. So that explanation can't be right. Maybe it's that the rivalries were established early? They were very poor during the 50's and 60's when we were good. We were both poor in the 70's, they were good in the 80's when we weren't? By the 90's our International football rivalries had already been established? Dunno.
Sadly I'd say our biggest 2 grudge football rivalries derive from war - Germany and Argentina.
Now that we have exorcised our demons vs Germany, I would now enjoy beating France more than them.
It's not like England's never had a war with France.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
Not true. The Scots have St Andrew's Day.
And Hogmanay. And 2nd January. And Burns Night.
If 2 Jan counts at all it counts as part of Hogmanay. Burns was a talentless twat, not in the top 100 of British poets. If you enjoy sharing that fact with the Swedes, crack on. He was probably not markedly worse than the likes of Erik Axel Karlfeldt.
I'm sure you are a peerless literary critic, so I'd love to see you justifying your claim that Burns is a talentless twat. He wrote a lot so I suppose there is a variety in terms of quality but his best work in my opinion stands up against anyone's.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
I don't envy Thanksgiving. You have TWO weirdly awkward and sadly claustrophobic family get togethers with a turkey dinner in five weeks? WTF
Our autumn calendar is fine with Halloween and Guy Fawkes night to liven it up, and then that segues into the party month of Xmas
It is our Jan and Feb which really suck. I envy continental Catholic Europeans with Carnival in Feb. We TOTALLY need that. The Reformation killed off cakes and ale
Since we're in that neck of the conversational woods anyway, the best thing about February is generally the 6 Nations. Otherwise it's a shitty month.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
Not true. The Scots have St Andrew's Day.
And Hogmanay. And 2nd January. And Burns Night.
If 2 Jan counts at all it counts as part of Hogmanay. Burns was a talentless twat, not in the top 100 of British poets. If you enjoy sharing that fact with the Swedes, crack on. He was probably not markedly worse than the likes of Erik Axel Karlfeldt.
I'm sure you are a peerless literary critic, so I'd love to see you justifying your claim that Burns is a talentless twat. He wrote a lot so I suppose there is a variety in terms of quality but his best work in my opinion stands up against anyone's.
He's not talentless, but he is not a front rank poet. Jolly good second division player, I'd say
I do love "John Anderson, my Jo"
Edit: I've just seen a website that compares Burns to Betjeman, and that is splendidly accurate. Both are beloved for portraying aspects of their nation, both are gifted at lyrical rhyme, and easy to remember - yet neither touches anything like the heights of a Keats, Larkin, Hopkins, Plath, Milton, Frost, et al
So deaths "with Covid" are running in Scotland at 23.0% of the figure for England and Wales. Given that the population size is at ~9.6%, the rate of deaths "with Covid" per population is 2.4 x higher in Scotland.
Anyway, on topic what is the government to do? There is no money, they can't borrow it, they have hiked up taxes till the pips squeak (as Denis used to say) and there are no options left. Those who are seeing their wages cut in real terms are of course right to be angry as they struggle to heat their homes. But the government is fresh out of options.
They could try tackling the mountain of welfare that taxes are going to, which is going up triple locked.
If wages can't go up by inflation, but pensions can, then that's a choice not about affordability.
Rivalries can be one way. For example, it is often important here for Seattle teams to beat teams from Los Angeles. But the reverse isn't true, so far as I know.
And when they aren't tearing up their city, Portland fans really want to beat Seattle, but again, the reverse isn't true.
Rivalries can be one way. For example, it is often important here for Seattle teams to beat teams from Los Angeles. But the reverse isn't true, so far as I know.
And when they aren't tearing up their city, Portland fans really want to beat Seattle, but again, the reverse isn't true.
Indeed. I've never heard of an English person who supports whatever team Scotland are playing against.
Rivalries can be one way. For example, it is often important here for Seattle teams to beat teams from Los Angeles. But the reverse isn't true, so far as I know.
And when they aren't tearing up their city, Portland fans really want to beat Seattle, but again, the reverse isn't true.
Indeed. I've never heard of an English person who supports whatever team Scotland are playing against.
My German colleagues were never much exercised by the thought of playing England.
There is, granted, more interest among the young in the US, many of whom have actually played soccer. Those over, say, forty, may have an anthropological interest in the games, and wonder why corruption is so tolerated, and why those strange folks overseas care so much about this particular game.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
Not true. The Scots have St Andrew's Day.
And Hogmanay. And 2nd January. And Burns Night.
If 2 Jan counts at all it counts as part of Hogmanay. Burns was a talentless twat, not in the top 100 of British poets. If you enjoy sharing that fact with the Swedes, crack on. He was probably not markedly worse than the likes of Erik Axel Karlfeldt.
I'm sure you are a peerless literary critic, so I'd love to see you justifying your claim that Burns is a talentless twat. He wrote a lot so I suppose there is a variety in terms of quality but his best work in my opinion stands up against anyone's.
He's not talentless, but he is not a front rank poet. Jolly good second division player, I'd say
I do love "John Anderson, my Jo"
Edit: I've just seen a website that compares Burns to Betjeman, and that is splendidly accurate. Both are beloved for portraying aspects of their nation, both are gifted at lyrical rhyme, and easy to remember - yet neither touches anything like the heights of a Keats, Larkin, Hopkins, Plath, Milton, Frost, et al
It's a matter of taste I suppose, and I'm probably more into quite direct rather than overly reflective writing, but I think there is both power and subtlety as well as striking and beautiful language in poems like for a' that or to a louse. I'm certainly not an expert on poetry but my mum is and she rates Burns highly. I think a lot of people fall into the trap of seeing Burns as the poetic equivalent of a shortbread tin, but there's a lot more to him than that.
There is, granted, more interest among the young in the US, many of whom have actually played soccer. Those over, say, forty, may have an anthropological interest in the games, and wonder why corruption is so tolerated, and why those strange folks overseas care so much about this particular game.
Does anyone in the US think corruption in sports is anything special, given say the continuing story of major league US baseball (in which the corruption dates back at least to Arnold Rothstein) and internationally the Olympics in which practically all the competitors cheat like hell by taking performance-enhancing drugs? It's organised sport. Doesn't everyone expect it to be filthily corrupt?
Anthropologically I find the interest in cricket interesting though. Talk about an acquired taste. It's true that anything can be interesting if you get into it enough, even throwing dog turds at a wall, and to some extent one has to be sympathetic in many cases to blokes who've gone doolally and don't realise. (Only in many cases, mind. No sympathy for that football fan who stuck a lit flare up his bum for his country.)
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
Not sure who you mean by "they" in last sentence. Certainly NOT the super-majority of American who don't give a hoot about soccer, certainly not enough to have a rivalry with anyone.
Even USA v Iran generated minimal attention outside the quasi-lunatic fringe of American true fans of The Great Game. Thicker on ground here in Seattle than most places in US, but barely noticeable even here outside of a few trendy bars.
Sorry, but this really is not true, not anymore. Soccer is watched very widely in the USA
eg The recent World Series in baseball got 11.8m viewers (on average), the USA's soccer kick-up game-things against Iran and England got 12m viewers
When soccer is outdoing baseball in the USA then the sport has arrived. That time is now
Baseball is dying on its feet in USA. Only thing keeping it going are Caribbean Latinos with some assist from Japanese.
There is, granted, more interest among the young in the US, many of whom have actually played soccer. Those over, say, forty, may have an anthropological interest in the games, and wonder why corruption is so tolerated, and why those strange folks overseas care so much about this particular game.
FIFA is corrupt. It used to be even more corrupt, of course, but pretty much the entire former management of the organization has been arrested.
But let me who is without sin cast the first stone.
College sports and the NCAA would be the first place I'd look. Billions of dollars flows in from broadcasters and ticket sales and video games, and the athletes get... nothing.
But the money goes somewhere.
Lavish salaries. Perks. Expenses accounts. A private jet.
This blog is in serious trouble when Mike retires. Concise, astute, incisive. The other header posters are total also-rans.
We are nearing the end of an era.
I bow to nobody in my admiration for the author of "The Political Punter: How to make money betting on politics", (ISBN-10: 1905641095, ISBN-13: 978-1905641093) and his two sons, but other header posters occasionally catch a little interest. If I may suggest a few?
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
Not sure who you mean by "they" in last sentence. Certainly NOT the super-majority of American who don't give a hoot about soccer, certainly not enough to have a rivalry with anyone.
Even USA v Iran generated minimal attention outside the quasi-lunatic fringe of American true fans of The Great Game. Thicker on ground here in Seattle than most places in US, but barely noticeable even here outside of a few trendy bars.
Sorry, but this really is not true, not anymore. Soccer is watched very widely in the USA
eg The recent World Series in baseball got 11.8m viewers (on average), the USA's soccer kick-up game-things against Iran and England got 12m viewers
When soccer is outdoing baseball in the USA then the sport has arrived. That time is now
Baseball is dying on its feet in USA. Only thing keeping it going are Caribbean Latinos with some assist from Japanese.
That’s a shame. I don’t know baseball but it sounds like cricket. A beautiful, storied sport with elegant complexity
Cricket has saved itself thanks to the British Empire exporting it to Asia, and English innovations like T20
Baseball should similarly experiment with new formats?
This blog is in serious trouble when Mike retires. Concise, astute, incisive. The other header posters are total also-rans.
We are nearing the end of an era.
I bow to nobody in my admiration for the author of "The Political Punter: How to make money betting on politics", (ISBN-10: 1905641095, ISBN-13: 978-1905641093) and his two sons, but other header posters occasionally catch a little interest. If I may suggest a few?
This blog is in serious trouble when Mike retires. Concise, astute, incisive. The other header posters are total also-rans.
We are nearing the end of an era.
I bow to nobody in my admiration for the author of "The Political Punter: How to make money betting on politics", (ISBN-10: 1905641095, ISBN-13: 978-1905641093) and his two sons, but other header posters occasionally catch a little interest. If I may suggest a few?
Who's his other son, and why haven't I been introduced?
It's @TSE, young @rcs1000, who is identical to you in every respect except for his more exquisite taste in shoes. Although I don't know if "exquisite" is the right word, but his shoes certainly brings tears to the eye.
This blog is in serious trouble when Mike retires. Concise, astute, incisive. The other header posters are total also-rans.
We are nearing the end of an era.
I bow to nobody in my admiration for the author of "The Political Punter: How to make money betting on politics", (ISBN-10: 1905641095, ISBN-13: 978-1905641093) and his two sons, but other header posters occasionally catch a little interest. If I may suggest a few?
Law of averages suggests France-England will be decided on open play.
Still wondering at the psycho-historical anomaly that makes France v England simply not a grudge match or derby. Perhaps because no controversial or particularly high profile previous encounters.
For a very long time France weren't major contenders. Not till the nineties really.
1980s, the era of Platini and winning the Euros in 1984. But it’s true they didn’t do much in the WC.
I don’t think it’s that though. Our matches against Portugal are always fruity for example.
Grudge matches:
Germany Argentina Portugal Scotland Any Scandinavian team
Non-grudge:
Spain France Wales Netherlands Brazil Belgium
Hard to place, because they get under our skin but feeling’s not mutual: Italy.
I don't ever feel a particular grudge against Italy?
All the others Yes
Tho I don't give a fuck about Scandi teams
Scotland is fading as they never win
I'd add the USA, a rivalry which is growing (we did not used to care, but we do, as they get better; and they REALLY care)
Not sure who you mean by "they" in last sentence. Certainly NOT the super-majority of American who don't give a hoot about soccer, certainly not enough to have a rivalry with anyone.
Even USA v Iran generated minimal attention outside the quasi-lunatic fringe of American true fans of The Great Game. Thicker on ground here in Seattle than most places in US, but barely noticeable even here outside of a few trendy bars.
Sorry, but this really is not true, not anymore. Soccer is watched very widely in the USA
eg The recent World Series in baseball got 11.8m viewers (on average), the USA's soccer kick-up game-things against Iran and England got 12m viewers
When soccer is outdoing baseball in the USA then the sport has arrived. That time is now
Baseball is dying on its feet in USA. Only thing keeping it going are Caribbean Latinos with some assist from Japanese.
That’s a shame. I don’t know baseball but it sounds like cricket. A beautiful, storied sport with elegant complexity
Cricket has saved itself thanks to the British Empire exporting it to Asia, and English innovations like T20
Baseball should similarly experiment with new formats?
Baseball isn’t really a sport; just something to fill the intermissions during the floor show and other stadium entertainment for what is essentially a fun evening out. Spectators often leave before the end of get their cars, so little do they care about the actual game.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
Not true. The Scots have St Andrew's Day.
And Hogmanay. And 2nd January. And Burns Night.
If 2 Jan counts at all it counts as part of Hogmanay. Burns was a talentless twat, not in the top 100 of British poets. If you enjoy sharing that fact with the Swedes, crack on. He was probably not markedly worse than the likes of Erik Axel Karlfeldt.
I'm sure you are a peerless literary critic, so I'd love to see you justifying your claim that Burns is a talentless twat. He wrote a lot so I suppose there is a variety in terms of quality but his best work in my opinion stands up against anyone's.
He's not talentless, but he is not a front rank poet. Jolly good second division player, I'd say
I do love "John Anderson, my Jo"
Edit: I've just seen a website that compares Burns to Betjeman, and that is splendidly accurate. Both are beloved for portraying aspects of their nation, both are gifted at lyrical rhyme, and easy to remember - yet neither touches anything like the heights of a Keats, Larkin, Hopkins, Plath, Milton, Frost, et al
It's a matter of taste I suppose, and I'm probably more into quite direct rather than overly reflective writing, but I think there is both power and subtlety as well as striking and beautiful language in poems like for a' that or to a louse. I'm certainly not an expert on poetry but my mum is and she rates Burns highly. I think a lot of people fall into the trap of seeing Burns as the poetic equivalent of a shortbread tin, but there's a lot more to him than that.
He is a great poet, witty, wry and romantic.
Burns Night conveniently fills a need for a late January booze up with friends. I always celebrate it despite my Scottish ancestry being rather dilute.
The second save by the Argentina keeper was really something. The first wasn’t a great pen, but incredible reactions (and powerful wrists) on the second.
What a day of football this has been. Just wonderful. I love this game.
Fair play to FIFA. They have secured themselves an incredible tournament
Everything bad is forgotten as the soccer amazes. No one cares about Qatar or migrants or Pride Armbands or any of that any more. Give us bread and brilliant circuses
I don’t think that’s true. The prevailing view that I see (though tbh that is fairly small seeing as I’ve jacked in social media) is “great tournament, shame about the hosts”. I think I said summat similar on the last thread.
And really the quality of the tournament has nowt to do with FIFA. It’s down to the players. It is bloody good though. More to come tomorrow.
I'm not really giving FIFA credit. I reckon they just got lucky
Something about the early winter timing has amped the footie. Dunno. But it is great. And for this reason the negatives WILL be largely forgotten
FIFA must be eyeing up S E Asia. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, etc. All football mad yet no sniff of a Cup ever, and home to 500m people
You Brits who are not AWOL sunning your pale, frail carcasses on some sun-drenched rock (or beach), are prisoners in your own country, confined indoors by compressed hours of daylight under gray skies with soggy shoes outdoors.
AND you have no Thanksgiving (feeling nothing much to feel thankful for) to take the late-fall/early-winter edge off.
Not true. The Scots have St Andrew's Day.
And Hogmanay. And 2nd January. And Burns Night.
If 2 Jan counts at all it counts as part of Hogmanay. Burns was a talentless twat, not in the top 100 of British poets. If you enjoy sharing that fact with the Swedes, crack on. He was probably not markedly worse than the likes of Erik Axel Karlfeldt.
I'm sure you are a peerless literary critic, so I'd love to see you justifying your claim that Burns is a talentless twat. He wrote a lot so I suppose there is a variety in terms of quality but his best work in my opinion stands up against anyone's.
He's not talentless, but he is not a front rank poet. Jolly good second division player, I'd say
I do love "John Anderson, my Jo"
Edit: I've just seen a website that compares Burns to Betjeman, and that is splendidly accurate. Both are beloved for portraying aspects of their nation, both are gifted at lyrical rhyme, and easy to remember - yet neither touches anything like the heights of a Keats, Larkin, Hopkins, Plath, Milton, Frost, et al
It's a matter of taste I suppose, and I'm probably more into quite direct rather than overly reflective writing, but I think there is both power and subtlety as well as striking and beautiful language in poems like for a' that or to a louse. I'm certainly not an expert on poetry but my mum is and she rates Burns highly. I think a lot of people fall into the trap of seeing Burns as the poetic equivalent of a shortbread tin, but there's a lot more to him than that.
He is a great poet, witty, wry and romantic.
Burns Night conveniently fills a need for a late January booze up with friends. I always celebrate it despite my Scottish ancestry being rather dilute.
So far in replies conspiracy theories about state murder due to him having worn a rainbow shirt previously and his death being caused by the Covid vax.
Andrew Neil on Trump: ..it does look as if Trump’s days are numbered. Republicans outside his cult core are tiring of his schtick. His status as a loser is becoming more imprinted on Republican minds. A few brave party voices are now attacking him openly. More will follow as he strays into even wilder territory to keep his face on the news channels. There is a growing desire simply to move on.
The wider benefits would be historic. If Trump is not the Republican candidate, the pressure on President Biden not to run again would be irresistible. So Trump’s departure from the scene would herald a much-needed and overdue generational shift in American politics, on the Left and Right, both wings for too long dominated by the Trump-Biden generation.
Far from being the Comeback Kid, Trump would be relegated to Yesterday’s Man. He won’t like that. But it would give him more time to deal with all the lawsuits and investigations currently pressing in on him.
There is, granted, more interest among the young in the US, many of whom have actually played soccer. Those over, say, forty, may have an anthropological interest in the games, and wonder why corruption is so tolerated, and why those strange folks overseas care so much about this particular game.
Does anyone in the US think corruption in sports is anything special, given say the continuing story of major league US baseball (in which the corruption dates back at least to Arnold Rothstein) and internationally the Olympics in which practically all the competitors cheat like hell by taking performance-enhancing drugs? It's organised sport. Doesn't everyone expect it to be filthily corrupt?
Anthropologically I find the interest in cricket interesting though. Talk about an acquired taste. It's true that anything can be interesting if you get into it enough, even throwing dog turds at a wall, and to some extent one has to be sympathetic in many cases to blokes who've gone doolally and don't realise. (Only in many cases, mind. No sympathy for that football fan who stuck a lit flare up his bum for his country.)
It's only really an aquired taste if your starting point of what a sport should be like is football. Personally, as a spectacle, I would rank them thus: 1) Cricket 2) Throwing dog turds at a wall (there definitely sounds mileage in that) 3) Football.
I would slot rugby in below cricket, and tennis and motor racing in below football.
As a sport, football has the advantage that it's very accessible, both to play and to understand. The downside to this when watching is that it feels like the whole set up has been put together by seven year old boys.
John Kerry, the US climate official, has said he is closely examining the UK government’s approval of a new coalmine, over concerns that it will raise greenhouse gas emissions and send the wrong signal to developing countries.
“Coal is not exactly the direction that the world is trying to move in, or needs to move in. What I want to know is the level of abatement here [such as whether the resulting greenhouse gases will be captured and stored] and the comparison of this particular process in the production of steel,” he said.
I like John Kerry, but he looks utterly ridiculous. Quite simply, Americans have a vested interest in stopping that coal mine.
There is, granted, more interest among the young in the US, many of whom have actually played soccer. Those over, say, forty, may have an anthropological interest in the games, and wonder why corruption is so tolerated, and why those strange folks overseas care so much about this particular game.
Does anyone in the US think corruption in sports is anything special, given say the continuing story of major league US baseball (in which the corruption dates back at least to Arnold Rothstein) and internationally the Olympics in which practically all the competitors cheat like hell by taking performance-enhancing drugs? It's organised sport. Doesn't everyone expect it to be filthily corrupt?
Anthropologically I find the interest in cricket interesting though. Talk about an acquired taste. It's true that anything can be interesting if you get into it enough, even throwing dog turds at a wall, and to some extent one has to be sympathetic in many cases to blokes who've gone doolally and don't realise. (Only in many cases, mind. No sympathy for that football fan who stuck a lit flare up his bum for his country.)
It's only really an aquired taste if your starting point of what a sport should be like is football. Personally, as a spectacle, I would rank them thus: 1) Cricket 2) Throwing dog turds at a wall (there definitely sounds mileage in that) 3) Football.
I would slot rugby in below cricket, and tennis and motor racing in below football.
As a sport, football has the advantage that it's very accessible, both to play and to understand. The downside to this when watching is that it feels like the whole set up has been put together by seven year old boys.
You must be eligible for some sort of mental health intervention, with a grip on reality as fragile as that?
Two men running up and down while a load of others go fetch the ball, as top ‘spectacle’? Priceless comedy!
There is, granted, more interest among the young in the US, many of whom have actually played soccer. Those over, say, forty, may have an anthropological interest in the games, and wonder why corruption is so tolerated, and why those strange folks overseas care so much about this particular game.
Does anyone in the US think corruption in sports is anything special, given say the continuing story of major league US baseball (in which the corruption dates back at least to Arnold Rothstein) and internationally the Olympics in which practically all the competitors cheat like hell by taking performance-enhancing drugs? It's organised sport. Doesn't everyone expect it to be filthily corrupt?
Anthropologically I find the interest in cricket interesting though. Talk about an acquired taste. It's true that anything can be interesting if you get into it enough, even throwing dog turds at a wall, and to some extent one has to be sympathetic in many cases to blokes who've gone doolally and don't realise. (Only in many cases, mind. No sympathy for that football fan who stuck a lit flare up his bum for his country.)
It's only really an aquired taste if your starting point of what a sport should be like is football. Personally, as a spectacle, I would rank them thus: 1) Cricket 2) Throwing dog turds at a wall (there definitely sounds mileage in that) 3) Football.
I would slot rugby in below cricket, and tennis and motor racing in below football.
As a sport, football has the advantage that it's very accessible, both to play and to understand. The downside to this when watching is that it feels like the whole set up has been put together by seven year old boys.
As I've got older I've got less into cricket and more into football. Probably because my son plays football and is passionately interested in every facet of the game and so I've come to understand it better. I think football is the perfect sport.
There is, granted, more interest among the young in the US, many of whom have actually played soccer. Those over, say, forty, may have an anthropological interest in the games, and wonder why corruption is so tolerated, and why those strange folks overseas care so much about this particular game.
Does anyone in the US think corruption in sports is anything special, given say the continuing story of major league US baseball (in which the corruption dates back at least to Arnold Rothstein) and internationally the Olympics in which practically all the competitors cheat like hell by taking performance-enhancing drugs? It's organised sport. Doesn't everyone expect it to be filthily corrupt?
Anthropologically I find the interest in cricket interesting though. Talk about an acquired taste. It's true that anything can be interesting if you get into it enough, even throwing dog turds at a wall, and to some extent one has to be sympathetic in many cases to blokes who've gone doolally and don't realise. (Only in many cases, mind. No sympathy for that football fan who stuck a lit flare up his bum for his country.)
It's only really an aquired taste if your starting point of what a sport should be like is football. Personally, as a spectacle, I would rank them thus: 1) Cricket 2) Throwing dog turds at a wall (there definitely sounds mileage in that) 3) Football.
I would slot rugby in below cricket, and tennis and motor racing in below football.
As a sport, football has the advantage that it's very accessible, both to play and to understand. The downside to this when watching is that it feels like the whole set up has been put together by seven year old boys.
You must be eligible for some sort of mental health intervention, with a grip on reality as fragile as that?
Two men running up and down while a load of others go fetch the ball, as top ‘spectacle’? Priceless comedy!
For most spectators the bowling and batting is the attraction rather thsn the running between wickets and fielding, but yes. Watching a batsman hit a ball heading towards him at 90mph with the accuracy and power to reach the boundary is one of the 'wow' moments of sport. As is watching a ball hit wickets, or a dramatic catch. And this is done within the context of a longer tactical and strategic battle. No other sport comes close. That said, I do concede there is a time investment needed that there isn't with many other sports.
There is, granted, more interest among the young in the US, many of whom have actually played soccer. Those over, say, forty, may have an anthropological interest in the games, and wonder why corruption is so tolerated, and why those strange folks overseas care so much about this particular game.
Does anyone in the US think corruption in sports is anything special, given say the continuing story of major league US baseball (in which the corruption dates back at least to Arnold Rothstein) and internationally the Olympics in which practically all the competitors cheat like hell by taking performance-enhancing drugs? It's organised sport. Doesn't everyone expect it to be filthily corrupt?
Anthropologically I find the interest in cricket interesting though. Talk about an acquired taste. It's true that anything can be interesting if you get into it enough, even throwing dog turds at a wall, and to some extent one has to be sympathetic in many cases to blokes who've gone doolally and don't realise. (Only in many cases, mind. No sympathy for that football fan who stuck a lit flare up his bum for his country.)
It's only really an aquired taste if your starting point of what a sport should be like is football. Personally, as a spectacle, I would rank them thus: 1) Cricket 2) Throwing dog turds at a wall (there definitely sounds mileage in that) 3) Football.
I would slot rugby in below cricket, and tennis and motor racing in below football.
As a sport, football has the advantage that it's very accessible, both to play and to understand. The downside to this when watching is that it feels like the whole set up has been put together by seven year old boys.
As I've got older I've got less into cricket and more into football. Probably because my son plays football and is passionately interested in every facet of the game and so I've come to understand it better. I think football is the perfect sport.
I think any sport your offspring plays is probably the perfect sport! My daughter has taken up football (as well as cricket). Maybe in a few years I will have changed my tune.
There is, granted, more interest among the young in the US, many of whom have actually played soccer. Those over, say, forty, may have an anthropological interest in the games, and wonder why corruption is so tolerated, and why those strange folks overseas care so much about this particular game.
Does anyone in the US think corruption in sports is anything special, given say the continuing story of major league US baseball (in which the corruption dates back at least to Arnold Rothstein) and internationally the Olympics in which practically all the competitors cheat like hell by taking performance-enhancing drugs? It's organised sport. Doesn't everyone expect it to be filthily corrupt?
Anthropologically I find the interest in cricket interesting though. Talk about an acquired taste. It's true that anything can be interesting if you get into it enough, even throwing dog turds at a wall, and to some extent one has to be sympathetic in many cases to blokes who've gone doolally and don't realise. (Only in many cases, mind. No sympathy for that football fan who stuck a lit flare up his bum for his country.)
It's only really an aquired taste if your starting point of what a sport should be like is football. Personally, as a spectacle, I would rank them thus: 1) Cricket 2) Throwing dog turds at a wall (there definitely sounds mileage in that) 3) Football.
I would slot rugby in below cricket, and tennis and motor racing in below football.
As a sport, football has the advantage that it's very accessible, both to play and to understand. The downside to this when watching is that it feels like the whole set up has been put together by seven year old boys.
You must be eligible for some sort of mental health intervention, with a grip on reality as fragile as that?
Two men running up and down while a load of others go fetch the ball, as top ‘spectacle’? Priceless comedy!
For most spectators the bowling and batting is the attraction rather thsn the running between wickets and fielding, but yes. Watching a batsman hit a ball heading towards him at 90mph with the accuracy and power to reach the boundary is one of the 'wow' moments of sport. As is watching a ball hit wickets, or a dramatic catch. And this is done within the context of a longer tactical and strategic battle. No other sport comes close. That said, I do concede there is a time investment needed that there isn't with many other sports.
When those bored medieval Dutch children got home, babbling about their new game, the correct response would have been "that's nice, dear", and that should have been an end to it.
So deaths "with Covid" are running in Scotland at 23.0% of the figure for England and Wales. Given that the population size is at ~9.6%, the rate of deaths "with Covid" per population is 2.4 x higher in Scotland.
So deaths "with Covid" are running in Scotland at 23.0% of the figure for England and Wales. Given that the population size is at ~9.6%, the rate of deaths "with Covid" per population is 2.4 x higher in Scotland.
Since Scotland has a different reporting methodology which would lead to a lower figure (or to be exact, the method used in England and Wales leads to an artificially high figure) that is meaningless.
New Scottish independence poll, Find Out Now 1-8 Dec (+/- 23-26 Mar 21 / +/- IndyRef1 2014):
Yes 54% (+2 / +9) No 46% (-2 / -9)
Not on their Twitter feed. They have the one from 23rd November showing 50% support for the SNP instead. What is your source?
Incidentally I note you were unable to source your claims about vaccination rates.
It's on Wiki.
Then what’s the source? Saying ‘it’s on Wiki’ and leaving it at that does not address the question. It would be like saying ‘Richard III never murdered his nephews’ and linking to an article edited by Johanna Haminga.
If it’s in Wikipedia it should have a source. If there is no source, perhaps it’s like the rest of Stuart’s output that is, made up.
New Scottish independence poll, Find Out Now 1-8 Dec (+/- 23-26 Mar 21 / +/- IndyRef1 2014):
Yes 54% (+2 / +9) No 46% (-2 / -9)
Not on their Twitter feed. They have the one from 23rd November showing 50% support for the SNP instead. What is your source?
Incidentally I note you were unable to source your claims about vaccination rates.
It's on Wiki.
Then what’s the source? Saying ‘it’s on Wiki’ and leaving it at that does not address the question. It would be like saying ‘Richard III never murdered his nephews’ and linking to an article edited by Johanna Haminga.
If it’s in Wikipedia it should have a source. If there is no source, perhaps it’s like the rest of Stuart’s output that is, made up.
There is a source, on Wiki. If that's not good enough, you'll have to lay out the the ydoethur 12 factor verification threshold just so we know in advance.
New Scottish independence poll, Find Out Now 1-8 Dec (+/- 23-26 Mar 21 / +/- IndyRef1 2014):
Yes 54% (+2 / +9) No 46% (-2 / -9)
As relevant as polling on Santa's reindeer at present given the Supreme Court confirmed the UK government and Westminster can refuse indyref2 indefinitely. This Tory government will certainly never allow indyref2.
Though really little change from the 50% 50% before anyway excluding undecideds
John Kerry, the US climate official, has said he is closely examining the UK government’s approval of a new coalmine, over concerns that it will raise greenhouse gas emissions and send the wrong signal to developing countries.
“Coal is not exactly the direction that the world is trying to move in, or needs to move in. What I want to know is the level of abatement here [such as whether the resulting greenhouse gases will be captured and stored] and the comparison of this particular process in the production of steel,” he said.
I like John Kerry, but he looks utterly ridiculous. Quite simply, Americans have a vested interest in stopping that coal mine.
Plus we would just be importing it from abroad for our steel industry otherwise anyway
There is, granted, more interest among the young in the US, many of whom have actually played soccer. Those over, say, forty, may have an anthropological interest in the games, and wonder why corruption is so tolerated, and why those strange folks overseas care so much about this particular game.
Does anyone in the US think corruption in sports is anything special, given say the continuing story of major league US baseball (in which the corruption dates back at least to Arnold Rothstein) and internationally the Olympics in which practically all the competitors cheat like hell by taking performance-enhancing drugs? It's organised sport. Doesn't everyone expect it to be filthily corrupt?
Anthropologically I find the interest in cricket interesting though. Talk about an acquired taste. It's true that anything can be interesting if you get into it enough, even throwing dog turds at a wall, and to some extent one has to be sympathetic in many cases to blokes who've gone doolally and don't realise. (Only in many cases, mind. No sympathy for that football fan who stuck a lit flare up his bum for his country.)
It's only really an aquired taste if your starting point of what a sport should be like is football. Personally, as a spectacle, I would rank them thus: 1) Cricket 2) Throwing dog turds at a wall (there definitely sounds mileage in that) 3) Football.
I would slot rugby in below cricket, and tennis and motor racing in below football.
As a sport, football has the advantage that it's very accessible, both to play and to understand. The downside to this when watching is that it feels like the whole set up has been put together by seven year old boys.
You must be eligible for some sort of mental health intervention, with a grip on reality as fragile as that?
Two men running up and down while a load of others go fetch the ball, as top ‘spectacle’? Priceless comedy!
For most spectators the bowling and batting is the attraction rather thsn the running between wickets and fielding, but yes. Watching a batsman hit a ball heading towards him at 90mph with the accuracy and power to reach the boundary is one of the 'wow' moments of sport. As is watching a ball hit wickets, or a dramatic catch. And this is done within the context of a longer tactical and strategic battle. No other sport comes close. That said, I do concede there is a time investment needed that there isn't with many other sports.
As a long term emotional, intellectual and sporting engagement where the better team generally wins, it's hard to beat a five Test series. Which is wonderful if you have time for that sort of thing.
Soccer is different on so.many levels. 90 minutes plus a break turns out to be the right length for an entertainment. Think plays, movies, episodes of Inspector Morse, (whisper it) The Hundred. The rules are simpler. Best of all, it's generally low scoring enough that random events against the run of play can tip the final result.
I have sometimes referred to a job I was offered in 2015 with a public sector body, the pay was advertised at 25k -32k. It has just been readvertised with the same pay, 25k - 32k, 7 years later. They then have to pay a contractor £40 per hour to do the same job, when they cant fill the roles. The system isn't working.
My school has almost as many supply as staff right now. A 15% pay rise that got everyone onto the payroll would work out much cheaper by far.
But that's sensible. No chance of it happening.
Different budgets. Bedevils all complex organisations - not specifically the governments fault
New Scottish independence poll, Find Out Now 1-8 Dec (+/- 23-26 Mar 21 / +/- IndyRef1 2014):
Yes 54% (+2 / +9) No 46% (-2 / -9)
Not on their Twitter feed. They have the one from 23rd November showing 50% support for the SNP instead. What is your source?
Incidentally I note you were unable to source your claims about vaccination rates.
It's on Wiki.
Then what’s the source? Saying ‘it’s on Wiki’ and leaving it at that does not address the question. It would be like saying ‘Richard III never murdered his nephews’ and linking to an article edited by Johanna Haminga.
If it’s in Wikipedia it should have a source. If there is no source, perhaps it’s like the rest of Stuart’s output that is, made up.
There is a source, on Wiki. If that's not good enough, you'll have to lay out the the ydoethur 12 factor verification threshold just so we know in advance.
Finally, a source, and a load of silly abuse for daring to ask for it despite the fact the initial poster has demonstrated he is a habitual liar and Wikipedia is infamously untrustworthy. The latter par for the course from the current Nationalist movement, sadly. The former anything but, so we make incremental progress.
I am puzzled however as to why it’s only available on the Twitter feed of a different organisation from the pollsters with no tables and nothing to say who commissioned it. Will be interesting to see that data which will presumably be coming through today.
I have sometimes referred to a job I was offered in 2015 with a public sector body, the pay was advertised at 25k -32k. It has just been readvertised with the same pay, 25k - 32k, 7 years later. They then have to pay a contractor £40 per hour to do the same job, when they cant fill the roles. The system isn't working.
My school has almost as many supply as staff right now. A 15% pay rise that got everyone onto the payroll would work out much cheaper by far.
MaxPB was saying yesterday that all supply teachers ought to be banned because, I paraphrase, they were a bunch of parasites on the decent Tory-voting taxpayer.
Just to add that the irony is that supply teaching is much closer to a free market than being permanent staff. And the cost (not just what supply teachers are paid) and conditions supply teachers work for are probably a better reflection of the "true" cost of a teacher, whatever truth is.
The website politicalbetting.com is a poo-house of a dumpster fire, filled with wolverines that have lost their minds. It is a place where the geriatric fool NPXMP rants and raves, while the overwanked ginge Robert Smithson spews his nonsensical opinions. And let's not forget the slippery tit of a man, The Screaming Eagles, who spends all day watching the Test and spouting off about how great he is.
Despite all of this, there are a few shining stars on politicalbetting.com. Liz Truss is surprising on the upside, with her intelligent and thoughtful posts. And of course, there is the elegant and multifarious gentleman Leon, who always manages to rise above the chaos and provide a level-headed and reasoned perspective.
But these few diamonds in the rough cannot make up for the overall terribleness of politicalbetting.com. It is a site that should be avoided at all costs, unless you want to subject yourself to the rants and ravings of a bunch of unhinged lunatics.
Best Sean post in well over a decade.
Or is it?
The best but was the paragraph about you which I see you edited out…
Earliest sunset is Monday, I believe, although we’re basically there already at 4.01pm from here. In the morning we still have the rest of the month and another eleven minutes of morning daylight to lose…
Andrew Neil on Trump: ..it does look as if Trump’s days are numbered. Republicans outside his cult core are tiring of his schtick. His status as a loser is becoming more imprinted on Republican minds. A few brave party voices are now attacking him openly. More will follow as he strays into even wilder territory to keep his face on the news channels. There is a growing desire simply to move on.
The wider benefits would be historic. If Trump is not the Republican candidate, the pressure on President Biden not to run again would be irresistible. So Trump’s departure from the scene would herald a much-needed and overdue generational shift in American politics, on the Left and Right, both wings for too long dominated by the Trump-Biden generation.
Far from being the Comeback Kid, Trump would be relegated to Yesterday’s Man. He won’t like that. But it would give him more time to deal with all the lawsuits and investigations currently pressing in on him.
Yet Biden beats De Santis 42% to 40% with RedfieldWilton but ties Trump 41% each
A great review of Harry and Meghan in The Atlantic.
"Harry and Meghan have a rare talent—pointing out things that reasonable people would agree with, but doing so in the most annoying way possible."
"as if taking on the Royal Family’s racism and the British press’s lack of scruples has become their mission. Us against the world. That is a noble intention, but it has the side effect of centering their entire lives on two institutions that they despise."
Comments
I also don’t have any kind of grudge against Italy; in fact James Richardson and Channel 4’s brilliant coverage of Italian football in the 90s has given me a long-standing soft spot for the Azzuri.
Ironically, of course, the left wanted to ban supply teachers and agency nurses too, by banning zero-hour contracts.
Sainsbury’s £8 Cahors (often 6 or 7 on offer) represents the best value supermarket red wine.
It’s 100% Malbec with all the cocoa flavour, rampant anti-oxidants and suedy tannins but none of the overdone alcohol or fruit of an Argentinian.
Sainsbury’s white cote du Rhône (also about £8, Grenache Blanc, Viognier, marsanne and roussanne) equally good.
Our autumn calendar is fine with Halloween and Guy Fawkes night to liven it up, and then that segues into the party month of Xmas
It is our Jan and Feb which really suck. I envy continental Catholic Europeans with Carnival in Feb. We TOTALLY need that. The Reformation killed off cakes and ale
Glad to see you have come around to my point of view.
And 2nd January.
And Burns Night.
Further suggesting that public sentiment could tip one way or the other based on the pain of pre-holiday mail disruptions, along with the public's judgement on the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of government response.
I guess losing your major empire 1600 years ago then being divided for 14 centuries gives you a winning wryness about life
The National
Even USA v Iran generated minimal attention outside the quasi-lunatic fringe of American true fans of The Great Game. Thicker on ground here in Seattle than most places in US, but barely noticeable even here outside of a few trendy bars.
multitudinous
/ˌmʌltɪˈtjuːdɪnəs/
adjective
1.
very numerous.
"multitudinous rugs kept us warm
multifarious
/ˌmʌltɪˈfɛːrɪəs/
adjective
1.
many and of various types.
"multifarious activities"
So that explanation can't be right. Maybe it's that the rivalries were established early?
They were very poor during the 50's and 60's when we were good. We were both poor in the 70's, they were good in the 80's when we weren't?
By the 90's our International football rivalries had already been established?
Dunno.
A stronger argument on the 'who cares' front would be it's quoted, with no link, from the National, a minor news source which has never knowingly told the truth in its short and undistinguished existence, by a poster who is consistently wrong about everything to do with Scotland because he sees everything through his hatred of the English.
It has narrow but deep roots.
Contrast with Barcelona, Juventus, Bayern Munich or Ajax (as was)
That's another crucial way a rivalry is built up. Did not happen with France
I remember watching a Euros/World Cup with a French friend in the 90s and he was bewildered that his team was a contender. "So. we are..... quite good?"
This tweet still needs work but getting a bit closer:
NATO and big pharma are in cahoots to control Russia and stop it from regaining its former imperial territories. And they're using the Covid vaccine as a cover to insert chips into our brains and control us like puppets. Wake up, people. #conspiracytheories #bigpharma #NATO #wakeup
eg The recent World Series in baseball got 11.8m viewers (on average), the USA's soccer kick-up game-things against Iran and England got 12m viewers
When soccer is outdoing baseball in the USA then the sport has arrived. That time is now
Scotland 73.7%
Wales 63.9%
England 62.8%
N Ireland 60.1%
The Guardian
And saying 'who cares' every time there's a convincing poll for Yes of course.
It makes sense. America is a nation of immigrants from all over the world, the world loves soccer. So it is imported (plus it now has pretty vigorous native roots). See also Ted Lasso. A huge TV hit
Lab 58%
Con 11%
Ref 9%
Grn 7%
LD 6%
Rest of South
Lab 43%
Con 24%
LD 12%
Grn 11%
Ref 9%
Midlands and Wales
Lab 44%
Con 29%
Ref 12%
LD 9%
Grn 3%
PC 2%
North
Lab 56%
Con 17%
Ref 8%
Grn 6%
LD 4%
Scotland
SNP 54%
Lab 24%
Con 9%
Ref 4%
LD 4%
Grn 2%
(PeoplePolling/GB News; 1,231; 7 December)
I do love "John Anderson, my Jo"
Edit: I've just seen a website that compares Burns to Betjeman, and that is splendidly accurate. Both are beloved for portraying aspects of their nation, both are gifted at lyrical rhyme, and easy to remember - yet neither touches anything like the heights of a Keats, Larkin, Hopkins, Plath, Milton, Frost, et al
Meanwhile, in week 47 the numbers of deaths "with Covid" were
* 80 in Scotland
* 348 deaths in England and Wales.
So deaths "with Covid" are running in Scotland at 23.0% of the figure for England and Wales. Given that the population size is at ~9.6%, the rate of deaths "with Covid" per population is 2.4 x higher in Scotland.
If wages can't go up by inflation, but pensions can, then that's a choice not about affordability.
And when they aren't tearing up their city, Portland fans really want to beat Seattle, but again, the reverse isn't true.
There is, granted, more interest among the young in the US, many of whom have actually played soccer. Those over, say, forty, may have an anthropological interest in the games, and wonder why corruption is so tolerated, and why those strange folks overseas care so much about this particular game.
Anthropologically I find the interest in cricket interesting though. Talk about an acquired taste. It's true that anything can be interesting if you get into it enough, even throwing dog turds at a wall, and to some extent one has to be sympathetic in many cases to blokes who've gone doolally and don't realise. (Only in many cases, mind. No sympathy for that football fan who stuck a lit flare up his bum for his country.)
But let me who is without sin cast the first stone.
College sports and the NCAA would be the first place I'd look. Billions of dollars flows in from broadcasters and ticket sales and video games, and the athletes get... nothing.
But the money goes somewhere.
Lavish salaries. Perks. Expenses accounts. A private jet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voCOvUzbhm0
Cricket has saved itself thanks to the British Empire exporting it to Asia, and English innovations like T20
Baseball should similarly experiment with new formats?
Burns Night conveniently fills a need for a late January booze up with friends. I always celebrate it despite my Scottish ancestry being rather dilute.
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1601456511225577472?s=20&t=-myLcmF10cGFXLBwXDZRpg
So far in replies conspiracy theories about state murder due to him having worn a rainbow shirt previously and his death being caused by the Covid vax.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/cricket/62865930
The wider benefits would be historic. If Trump is not the Republican candidate, the pressure on President Biden not to run again would be irresistible. So Trump’s departure from the scene would herald a much-needed and overdue generational shift in American politics, on the Left and Right, both wings for too long dominated by the Trump-Biden generation.
Far from being the Comeback Kid, Trump would be relegated to Yesterday’s Man. He won’t like that. But it would give him more time to deal with all the lawsuits and investigations currently pressing in on him.
https://inews.co.uk/sport/cricket/david-warner-agent-ashes-cheating-claims-australian-cricket-crisis-2017632
Personally, as a spectacle, I would rank them thus:
1) Cricket
2) Throwing dog turds at a wall (there definitely sounds mileage in that)
3) Football.
I would slot rugby in below cricket, and tennis and motor racing in below football.
As a sport, football has the advantage that it's very accessible, both to play and to understand. The downside to this when watching is that it feels like the whole set up has been put together by seven year old boys.
John Kerry, the US climate official, has said he is closely examining the UK government’s approval of a new coalmine, over concerns that it will raise greenhouse gas emissions and send the wrong signal to developing countries.
“Coal is not exactly the direction that the world is trying to move in, or needs to move in. What I want to know is the level of abatement here [such as whether the resulting greenhouse gases will be captured and stored] and the comparison of this particular process in the production of steel,” he said.
I like John Kerry, but he looks utterly ridiculous. Quite simply, Americans have a vested interest in stopping that coal mine.
Two men running up and down while a load of others go fetch the ball, as top ‘spectacle’? Priceless comedy!
Yes 54% (+2 / +9)
No 46% (-2 / -9)
Watching a batsman hit a ball heading towards him at 90mph with the accuracy and power to reach the boundary is one of the 'wow' moments of sport. As is watching a ball hit wickets, or a dramatic catch.
And this is done within the context of a longer tactical and strategic battle.
No other sport comes close.
That said, I do concede there is a time investment needed that there isn't with many other sports.
My daughter has taken up football (as well as cricket). Maybe in a few years I will have changed my tune.
Incidentally I note you were unable to source your claims about vaccination rates.
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths
If it’s in Wikipedia it should have a source. If there is no source, perhaps it’s like the rest of Stuart’s output that is, made up.
If that's not good enough, you'll have to lay out the the ydoethur 12 factor verification threshold just so we know in advance.
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1601366980182781952?s=20&t=LeS3C6GZ14HSMwZuvpTsiw
Though really little change from the 50% 50% before anyway excluding undecideds
Soccer is different on so.many levels. 90 minutes plus a break turns out to be the right length for an entertainment. Think plays, movies, episodes of Inspector Morse, (whisper it) The Hundred. The rules are simpler. Best of all, it's generally low scoring enough that random events against the run of play can tip the final result.
I am puzzled however as to why it’s only available on the Twitter feed of a different organisation from the pollsters with no tables and nothing to say who commissioned it. Will be interesting to see that data which will presumably be coming through today.
Earliest sunset is Monday, I believe, although we’re basically there already at 4.01pm from here. In the morning we still have the rest of the month and another eleven minutes of morning daylight to lose…
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1600535616005017600?t=HClB8bCMJMuNls7pCFkPfw&s=19
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1600538178385051649?t=PI3mJYIytkHGccvaI0eB0w&s=19
"Harry and Meghan have a rare talent—pointing out things that reasonable people would agree with, but doing so in the most annoying way possible."
"as if taking on the Royal Family’s racism and the British press’s lack of scruples has become their mission. Us against the world. That is a noble intention, but it has the side effect of centering their entire lives on two institutions that they despise."
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/harry-meghan-netflix-show/672400/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share