TigerTedd

26 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

made up red dogs

You mean Forest fans aren’t really real. Next you’ll tell me the monsters under my bed are made up too. 

How did this end up as chat about Reading. Are the EFL planning to award them about 30 pts for the pitch invasion and make them our new promotion rivals?

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

The good news is that a full transition renewable power is now entirely within our capabilities.  If we, and especially our governments, were so inclined it could all be done in the not too distant future. 

https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/WWSBook/WWSBook.html

It will take a lot of effort to update and improve the infrastructure that's required, but it's completely feasible.  Maybe if we use the $7 trillion dollars a year we spend on fossil fuel subsidies (according to the International Monetary Fund) on renewables and their infrastructure instead then that would be a big help!!

Another promising factor is that solar and wind power and now the cheapest forms of energy on the planet. The transition can't happen overnight of course and fossil fuels will still have to used in ever decreasing amounts until the renewable capacity was complete, but the main obstacles to overcome now are mental and political ones. The technology already exists.

 

You’d think, at the very least, there would be some sort of public commitment to reduce cost on fossil fuels by like 10% a year for 10 years or something. At the minute there’s just no plan at all.

they say ‘no petrol card sold after 2030’. But with no actual wind down plan, so they end up having to kick the can down the road.

they just keep talking  and talking and no one actually does anything, or commits to anything.

its all so frustrating, when we can all see a pathway to a better future, but, as you say, it’s just politics, and a few rich people afraid to lose their power, getting in the way. 

A lot of blame to land on the EFLs doorstep here. What is the fit and proper persons test for if not to wrestle out owners with a past history of liquidating clubs. They’re supposed to be protecting clubs. 

the sooner clubs become protected heritage community assets, the better.

Why does everything take so long?

2 minutes ago, Archied said:

Sadly though fossil fuels ARE the lifeblood of the planet and lockdown was not even a slight indicator of stop the use of ALL fossil fuels and ALL they’re by products , even on the medical side let alone all the serfs running round making for and delivering to the better offs , no not even a tiny fraction of just STOP oil,

you do realise that tech wise we are a million miles from replacing oil at this point and the road we are being pushed down ( wow there big bucks big growth in it ) is based on finite materials and every bit as damaging as oil ,

call me a silly sentimental old fool but I’m still far more worried by take make throw away needlessly and what we put in our rivers , oceans , land fills and the rate we are doing it 🤷🏻‍♂️

And that is definitely worth being worried about. As finite as fossil fuels are, so are any number of resources that are used to make things that are thrown away. It’s all part of the big picture that adds to climate change. 

but then recycling another one. I do my bit, I recycle. But ultimately, it’s not me that’s going to make a difference. It’s institutional, organisational recycling on a massive scale. I find it crazy that it’s not in legislation yet to ban plastic packaging. If you’re a manufacturer, you should have to make a special application to use plastic packaging. Alternatives should be the default. Plastics only where necessary.

i can get behind the idea of just stop oil, but there should be a just stop plastic movement too. Just pull the plug and let the manufacturer’s deal with it. Some are taking it upon themselves, but it should be built into legislation and the choice taken away from companies. 

If fossil fuels are the life blood of the planet, that’s quite worrying, because they will run out one day, that is a fact.

We’ve experimented with having less human impact on a global scale. It was quite recently. It was called lockdown, you probably saw it in the news. It was shown that after month of global lockdown, the planet was already considerably better off. 

not that we should all go into permanent lock down, but I’m certainly all for the idea of instantly stopping any investment into oil, and investing that all into nuclear and renewable energy sources.

the only reason that won’t happen is because oil companies are too powerful. End of. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I’m not naive enough to believe that money doesn’t talk. They won’t be when the oil runs out. But by then it’s too late. 

the fact that we’re even considering making new coal mines and new coal powered power stations just boggles my mind.

put it this way, maybe we didn’t cause this, maybe it is all part of the earths cycle. But if you walk into a door and have a black eye, and it’s no one’s fault, it’s just the way things are, I wouldn’t make it better by punching you in the face repeatedly. I would make it better by ensuring that your face was protected and that nothing else could hit you in the eye, be that accidental doors, or on purpose punches. If I lived on your face, I would have a very vested interest in seeing that it’s protected. 

1 hour ago, Jourdan said:

I was on course to win £200 from a 75p accumulator and then I realised I had bet on Portsmouth! 😆

There’s a long way to go in the season and I am sure Portsmouth will bounce back, but I fully expect Bolton, Peterborough, Barnsley and ourselves to be the teams that finish strongly.

We were the strongest teams to not get promoted last season after all and Portsmouth and Oxford, despite being deservedly in the mix, set a surprising and unsustainable pace.

4 minutes ago, ram59 said:

'Pompy' have gone from running away with it to effectively being outside the autos with both Bolton and Pboro being ahead of them on a PPG basis.

P'boro are looking a bit like Ipswich from last season atm, I'm hoping that a fixture pile up will slow down Bolton, after this weekend they will have at least 4 more midweek games than we will and that's assuming that they lose their next 2 cup games.

Crazy to think, if (but if) everyone wins their games in hand, Portsmouth will be down to 4th (and we’ll be in autos if we can beat burton by 2).

and they’ll have Barnsley and Oxford just one point behind them. Stevenage 4 pts behind them. 

good thing is, Stevenage look like they’re getting cut adrift from the top 6 a little bit, so it seems likely the current top 6 will be the top 6 at the end. We’re forming a bit of a peloton. But if anyone’s going to drop out of the top 6, it could be Portsmouth at this rate. 

It’s happened. DCFC Fans has morphed into Spotted: Hilton (insert your own local Facebook page here). 

1 hour ago, Archied said:

Agree with some points , not others , 

my response was to a post claiming world hottest since records began which is clearly a claim far from beyond dispute 

Absolutely, but it all gets hotter, before it gets colder. I joke that I burn my fossil fuels and spray my cfcs, so why am I still freezing cold in January, Britain should be like the Caribbean now, and derby should have a sea view. We could be living in a tropical (if overcrowded) paradise. 

but that’s just a joke. That’s not how climate change works. Things will mostly get wetter and colder north of the tropics, and hotter and unliveable below the tropics.

but I genuinely think there’s no turning back now, this is life and we need to learn to deal with it. Find yourself a nice mountain top to build a house on. 

2 hours ago, Archied said:

Setting aside the issue of whether and how much climate CHANGE is driven by humans , are there any positives to temperature raising slightly as opposed to falling towards another ice age ( the previous apocalyptic prediction ) ?
cold kills far far more people worldwide than heat , as areas become less suitable to live in and grow food do others not become more suitable?

They changed the term global warming to climate change, because temperatures rising doesn’t necessarily mean the world gets hotter. The hotter parts get hotter, but the colder parts get colder. The ice caps melt, releasing more cold water into the oceans and reducing the temperature of the oceans, which screws up things like the Gulf Stream and other weather patterns. So our reasonably temperate weather will become more and more extreme, not to mention the rising sea levels making coastal regions uninhabitable.

So it’s not quite as simple as ‘people who live in the Sahara can go move to the north pole’. Basically only the tropics will become habitable. 

Local flooding is more a local council issue to deal with. But global climate change is the root cause, and needs to be dealt with by collaborating governments. Which basically means it’ll never be dealt with, so we have to rely on local councils to fight fires (and floods) as they arise, and they will get worse and worse.

But there’s a reasonable argument to say that’s not a bad approach  the time for global collaboration and nipping this in the bud has past, so maybe the right answer now is to deal with each problem locally, as it arises. Some will fair better than others, but it’s basically every man / community for himself at this point. Welcome to the dystopia. 

14 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

He was totally committed to the forest project. It was an exciting chance to rinse £££££££ and do some tiktok.

Maybe his TikTok shenanigans boosted their morale just enough to help them secure survival. Could’ve been a genius move by all concerned. 

Jesse Lingard’s career ending decision: 📸 https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/25075099/jesse-lingard-offers-newcastle-fulham-nottingham-forest/?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=sunfootballfacebook090124&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR2KChNPvdMcbnT2E0uNgd9-GNzA7IaFYJsV9RHd-QddvKQ2mLRg-2vJpiU_aem_ASxIhxAjdbBAiquUfrVDJa1dtLpvyerv64sWBlAb59J3ksqvpvu_risWCUCDynKF-c0#Echobox=1704730428

to summarise, he was offered two four year contracts from Newcastle and Fulham. He chose a one year contract at Forest. Which has effectively ended his career. 

Forest, where crap footballers go to get crapper. 

2 hours ago, YorkshireRam said:

I had a thought while commenting earlier: shouldn't coaches make better pundits than players? They understand the tactics better than players, have to analyse as part of the coaching gig, and also have to a certain level of communication skills. Arguably that set of skills lends itself better to punditry than that of a former player?

I want insight and analysis I can't infer myself from just watching the game. Hearing about 'double pivots' and 'inverted wingbacks' and technical terms you don't hear in the concourses at games or in day-to-day discussions.

One of the better pundits to emerge recently that weaves his own personal experience into what he says is Daniel Sturridge. But the fact he stands out for this is largely my point. If pundits can't weave their subjective experience into their commentary, then the only upside provided by being an ex-pro is lost, and they're likely not going to offer insight above what someone in the pub may be able to. Ashley Williams was a decent centre half in his day but I don't half find him dull to listen to, same with Jermaine Jenas- great presenter, boring pundit. 

Liam Rosenior was a good pundit. 

14 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

There were reports before Christmas that the Beeb are considering ditching Football Focus due to a huge drop in viewers - I wouldn't hazard to guess what have may prompted this sheedding of the traditional audience...

That’s probably got more to do with getting the highlights on you tube, with no punditry at all. I’m sure ratings are dropping left right and centre, to be fair, with people watching TV on demand instead. I haven’t watched normal TV in yonks, but that’s just me. 

I dare say people either like punditry or they don’t. I suspect most people have stronger thoughts about that, than who the pundits actually are. 

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Id say its just as likely that there are a large number of people with the same view as Barton but they are sensible and realise airing their view isn't worth the repercussions. 

Point still stands though, as long as the ratings are up, the producers are happy. And it certainly implies that the majority of the viewers are happy. Don’t like it, don’t watch it. 

Ultimately, the great decider is the ratings. If the ratings tank, then the producers will change the pundits and presenters. If the ratings continue, then they won’t. Maybe there’s just not enough men that are bothered enough to switch off, but lots of women are bothered enough to switch on, so the ratings go up. Joey Barton is a vocal minority. But maybe the majority don’t actually mind, or care. 

26 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

To be fair, I could offer my services to Barcelona and tweet about it.

 

Bet you’d be low cost with lots of experience too. 

1 hour ago, ram59 said:

Is this design flawed though? You say that the kids of today have been seeing white men on tv for generations, if they're kids they haven't been around for generations. If you tip the balance too far, you're likely to cause problems on the other side of the coin. White boys, the majority, seeing that you can only get anywhere in life by being black or female, will become disillusioned and will be become easy targets for recruitment by far right groups, which is similar to how the nazis come to power in Germany in the 1930s. If todays kids are subjected to a generation of positive discrimination, I fear that they will grow up into resentful adults. This could result in the complete opposite of what you're trying to achieve.

There's such a delicate balance to be addressed and I just hope that we end up going down the correct path, whatever that is.

There is no place in a proper society for the likes of Barton, but I fear that too much positive discrimination  only serves to give people like him an excuse to sprout his rubbish.

It is a delicate balance. But everyone that argues against this positive discrimination seems to think that it’s going to directly affect their kids’ prospects. In the grand scheme of things, Sol Campbell getting an interview for a managers job, or Eni Aluko on the tele is not going to make a difference to the average person’s job prospects either way.

i have sons and daughters. I don’t feel like my daughters having more opportunities specifically means my sons have less opportunities. I’m not worried about that at all. I’m just glad my daughters have more opportunities in a fairer society.

positive discrimination is not going to bring down society. It will bring more positivity than negativity, but the joey Barton’s of this world would have you believe it’s the end of the world.

the other problem is, people are too quick to say ‘I didn’t get that job, some black lady with one arm got it because they had to tick a box, I’m against positive discrimination.’ It doesn’t work like that. The black lady with one arm is just better at the job, but people are too willing to blame society for their own deficiencies.

joey Barton will miss out for a managerial role to a black manager, and he’ll blame society, not considering he might just be a shot manager (unless it’s Paul ince, then there’s something dodgy going on).  

7 minutes ago, Ram-Alf said:

Like lots of things in life things change then it becomes the norm, There's a radical way of fixing this...accept it or give it a swerve.

Jodie Turner Smith played Anne Boleyn on channel 5 a year or so ago, Doctor Who has a transgender actor in it, The media plays a pivotal role in our lives...good and bad...imo.

I wonder how things would sit if the next England Women's football match there were only male pundits...social media would implode 😁

As for the American slave owners after the Civil War...they eventually died ☺️, And Arlington National Cemetery in the USA was built on the front garden of General Robert E Lees estate where coloured soldiers were also buried who died fighting for the North 👍  

But then you still had Jim Crow, and the tulsa massacre. And Rosa Parks and segregation. Some people will never accept a change to status quo, when the status quo benefitted them. 

13 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

That’s some dodgy as f*** lawyering. Imagine being a lawyer claiming a mistrial because the beaten up lady won’t testify. I bet they sleep soundly on a pile of money. 

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

Id say its already worked, look at well paid jobs and prominent positions. 

Continuing to push the agenda too far, will be self defeating, and draw the sort of reactions that we are seeing from Barton, in my opinion.

You only need to look at social media reactions to see that he is saying what a lot of other people are thinking. 

 

That is a problem. Even if things were completely in proportion, there would be a lot of old white men, no longer the kings of the castle. As someone gains power and agency, someone else always loses it, and those people aren’t happy.

Slave owners in the American south weren’t too happy after the civil war. I’d say ‘but they got over it,’ but they didn’t really. It’s never fixed. Like I said, antibiotics, it might seem fixed, but follow doctors orders, complete the course of antibiotics, or the illness comes back with a vengeance.

id say the full course for this issue is like 20 years of people like yourself saying it’s already better. When discussions like this don’t even exist. Then we can probably stop taking the antibiotics. 

40 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Historically.

Currently my children have absolutely zero privilege over their peers based on sex or gender.

If anything their friends from ethnic minorities are probably growing up in better conditions and are more likely to end up with better jobs.

If people stopped pretending we are still living in the 1960s, 70s and 80s then there would be no need to try and push this agenda onto kids....

I think the over representation of ethnic minorities in the Premier League and the prominence the female game has now, is enough for kids to enable them to aspire to be anything they want to be.

So it’s working. Yet Joey Barton still exists. 

19 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Can you give me one example of an advantage my kids have over their minority classmates?

Of course ITV wanting mainly women or ethnic minorities in their studios affects my white male child, how can you say it doesnt?!?!

And where are the campaigns for representation down coal mines, for refuse collectors, for labourers? Have I missed them? Or do we just want representation in well paid jobs?

It’s weird, it’s like you’re arguing against me, but proving my point at the same time.

a white kid, or a white male kid from a happy family, is statistically more likely to find it easier to find well paid jobs and have a happy successful life.

have you never seen that exercise where they give kids a head start on a race if they meet certain criteria and there’s some poor kids still sat on the start line when some others get a 50m head start.

thats the advantage your kids have. I don’t know you or your kids, maybe there are other reasons that they are disadvantaged, but even if a white kid has dyslexia, for example, they’ll still find life easier than a black kid with dyslexia. There are just generally a lot less barriers in the way for white kids. Maybe it’s not about having an advantage, it’s about not having hurdles to jump over. So a better analogy is two people running 100m, but one has hurdles on his track. It’s no fault of the other person, but it’s clearly not fair.

yes, if your white male kid goes for a job as a football pundit, and they’re up against a black female candidate, and they’re equal in every way, but the company needs to tick a box, your kid might miss out. That’s just a fact of redressing the balance. As I explained with the scales, there has to be some disproportionate representation to enable minorities to catch up. As with many things, past generations have screwed it up for our kids. It’s not a perfect situation. But if you were a black family, or if one of your kids comes out as transgender in the future, wouldn’t you fight tooth and nail to allow them to have the same opportunities as anyone else?

There doesn’t need to be campaigns for representation down coal mines, the point is to enable kids to aspire to anything they want to be. Imagine if there was a campaign that said ‘if you work really hard, maybe you can aspire to be a dust man’ (no offence to dust men). Lower paid jobs and manual labour are already open to all, ahead of their time really. Probably over represented by minorities. That’s specifically the imbalance that needs to be redressed. 

2 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

My kids don't need to be flooded with the opposite sex or ethnic minorities, they see them every day at school and don't look at them any differently to how they look at people of the same race or gender.

The only people keeping race/sex as an issue are the ones who claim to be wanting to eradicate racism/sexism.

Putting people into jobs that they are not really qualified to do or are not competent at, just because of their sex/race, will not promote a positive image, it will lead to people pointing out their sex and race and is completely self defeating.

Of course we see people in the street, at work, at school of different minorities all the time these days. It’s about representing them in attainable positions.

Like it or not, your kids were born with an advantage over their minority class mates. And the fact that Ian Wright is a pundit with two women, doesn’t reduce that advantage. But it does let little black boys and girls see that there is hope for them, they can attain and have the same ambitions as anyone else.

As I said, I like to think I don’t see colour, I don’t care either way, and I’m positive my kids certainly don’t. And isn’t that great. But it’s like taking anti biotics even after you start feeling better. Or advertising for Pepsi (we all know what Pepsi is now, why do they spend so much on marketing). If this awareness raising just suddenly stopped then we’d quite quickly be back to square one. It’ll take a generation of effort before it can start to dial back.

and joey’s comments just help to set it back. 2 steps forward, 1 step back. So guess what, as long as there are people like joey Barton, and people liking and perpetuating his messages, the problem isn’t fixed, and there will be initiatives against it. And if one thing doesn’t work, they’ll try another.

Over representation of minorities might not be the answer. But they’ll keep trying things. And I’ll tell you what, things like doctor who, super girl, more representation of women in football etc. it has helped to normalise it in my head, and it has helped my kids to normalise it. So I genuinely think it does help.

If you watch super girl, you’d think that every second person in metropolis is somewhere in the rainbow spectrum. It’s clearly over represented. But before long, it’s not a thing anymore, they’re just characters. And that’s fine.

it was a bit weird when I heard my first female commentator. But now it genuinely doesn’t even register with me. They all know more than me, so it’s all good insight.

39 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

So ok, if we want to go down this route why were there 2 women and Ian Wright in the studio yesterday, why wasnt there a white man?

Silly, isn't it?

Who is deciding what is fair representation?

 

That’s the point. Representation isn’t proportional. It’s meant to skew the balance. That’s not a mistake, that’s part of the design. 

As I said, it’s about giving the under represented communities a chance to catch up. The kids of today don’t need to see white men on tv. There’s plenty of those. They’ve been seeing those for generations.

its not that if 10% of the population are black, we have 1 out of every 10 pundits is black. That’s not how it works. It’s about flooding our screens with positive images of black people, to try to make a dent in the generations of negative images we’ve seen so far.

Then, eventually, when people genuinely don’t see colour, gender etc. there won’t be a need for things like the Rooney rule and reverse racism and box ticking. But that will take a generation. 

meanwhile, lots of white men get butt hurt because they’re living in the era when they (we, as I am one) are being represented as a minority. And guess what, it’s not very nice, and we don’t like it much.

well I think we can put up with it for a generation to bring everything back into balance again.

oo, I just thought of an analogy. So if there are 1 in 10 of a certain minority, for 100 years we should have been seeing every 10th person on tv is of that minority. But that’s not been happening. So imagine a scale where we’ve been putting 10 white men in one side, every day for 100 years. How many of the minority do we have to put on the other side to bring those scales into balance? Not so it’s even, but just so that it’s all in the correct proportion. Just putting 1 in 10 on the minority side isn’t going to do it.