Alph

On 30/10/2022 at 15:13, BaaLocks said:

Jake Paul actually believes the hype doesn't he? He really thinks he is a half decent fighter?

Yes. Question is will he eventually talk himself into a fight with a boxer who's actually there to win

Fury lost the plot with True Geordie. Rattled from the start. I like Tyson but he's a loon. And he knows this Chisora fight is doing nothing 

Good on Danny Ric. 

Tsunoda will be happy for him! 

It's a shame Horner won't talk to Sky. I miss his sly digs and bitterness already. 

Mercedes had a real chance didn't they? I thought the talk on Friday and Saturday was that Hards would be too slow. Then half the field use Hards!! 

I just really want Lewis to beat George which he may need a good slip up from George. 

And Ferrari to come 3rd would be deserved! In the term "sleeping giants" you have to emphasise the word "sleeping".

Weekends like this wouldn't hurt so much if they didn't sabotage themselves every other race

Good good. Think he can win another Championship?? 

Even if he had a car that's 2nd best to what Max has? Could he do it? Or is Max just the top guy in the top car at this moment in time? 

Not seen Max under pressure for about a year

There's no way you're wearing them and have a full length mirror in your house. Do you take the bins out wearing them?

VHS. Just wasn't as simple as deleting your browsing history back then was it. 

I like House Of The Dragon. Very much actually. I think it slots in nicely with the early seasons of GoT. 

It's a lot better than the last couple of seasons of GoT which went all Tony Pulis and relied on set pieces. 

Red Bull may have gone over budget but when you consider they must have bought the entire Ferrari team it's actually good business. 

Ricciardo may as well sit out now. I'm convinced he's doing a Vettel and only interested when an opportunity presents itself. He's consistently bad now

I don't know how people can say it wasn't that bad. 

Derby couldn't string passes together. There was no possession in midfield. Very little possession in the final third. I can't remember any touches in Ipswich's penalty area. Every crossing opportunity was wasted. 

It was just possession along the back before dropping it behind their defence for someone to chase. And that ball was almost always a straight one that ran to their keeper. 

Maybe Warne will be good. Maybe Derby will win every game for the rest of the season. But that was definitely crap and if Ipswich had drawn it then they'd be heartbroken. They were pretty wasteful themselves and the only thing Derby did ok was defend their area 

A cobbled together team going to a top side in the league may well not be expected to win. But string a few passes together, chuck in a meaningful attack and put something in the area that looks hopeful isn't too much to ask. If you don't do that you should be fuming with your performance

Commentators reckon Hourihane is a cheat code in League 1

And pundits are impressed that as soon as Davies plays a through ball for them, Ipswich are on the front foot.

And it was a "great finish" with "still a lot to do" 

How the feck do you persevere with this sport? 

I'd be more worried that you can't figure out what Derby are trying to do more than anything else. 

Anybody hazard a guess at what the plan was? 

Ipswich should be gutted with that. To only win 1-0 against a side so utterly useless at the most basic tasks playing with no particular style or direction with zero focal point is going to disappoint them. 

Imagine having that donkey sanctuary in front of you and struggling to finish them off. 

My God. What a load of rubbish. How often do Derby train? Monthly?

On 20/10/2022 at 15:47, Andicis said:

Whilst Fury talks about Usyk, who knows if he will actually take that fight? With his and Warren's record, you can't be sure.

The excuses not to fight Joshua were nonsense. And trying to play it off as if it was Joshua and Hearn's side that broke talks down really doesn't work for me. They've shown a good track record of taking the big fights. 

Fury is just damaging his own legacy. He could be so much more.

I do believe Hearn (not Joshua) would rather not have the fight. I can see him playing awkward. 

But no deadlines were set on Chisora. I don't think either party wanted it really did they? 

Agree about Fury. I really like him and don't think he has to fear anyone. But he and Warren summarise boxing pretty well. They navigate through the politics. 

Imagine looking back on this era. Who was the greatest? AJ, Fury, Wilder, Usyk? 

Oh well they were all active together for years but we didn't see them mix it up much. 

Just now, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

Unlikely they would announce weakness without an agenda,that's not Putin's way.

Agree. 

But I think he's just making it appear that a nuclear strike is a possibility. 

And who dare call his bluff? 

27 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Complete waste of time. I hope nobody pays to watch this fight. Fury is almost certainly the best HW, but his resume continues to be pretty terrible. 

Yeah I'll stream it and this time not even care if it buffers. Not supporting Frank to put this kind of crap on 

Joyce said he can be ready for 17th if AJ is looking to fight then. So IFL said to Warren why not take Joyce on 17th as he's already signed to Warren and AJ won't be out on 17th.

Warren says Fury needs to get out, have Xmas break and be in camp for late Feb/early March for an Usyk fight

So.... He can't delay his fight by a couple of weeks because it will have a knock on effect to a fight that hasn't even been discussed?

Are they implying Usyk knows the exact date he wants to fight and he wouldn't possibly move it by a couple of week to suit Fury??

I somehow can't imagine Usyk saying no to an undisputed fight because Fury won't be ready by the date he's not even planned yet. 

Utter nonsense boxing promoters

3 hours ago, Reggie Greenwood said:

Fury v Chisora 111 . Surely a fight no one wants to watch ? 

Especially Chisora's friends and family. 

Frank Warren eh? What a guy

11 minutes ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

There seems little doubt that Russia's intention is to use a tactical nuclear weapon in Kherson,hence the evacuation of the region (when had Putin cared about civilian casualties) and the sudden proclamations that the situation in the region is dire and that they are struggling (creating a pretext amongst the domestic russian population to justify the use of a nuclear to device)

Aside from the horrendous short and long term destruction that this will cause,we also have the likely retaliation against Russian military assets by the west (whether by American or indeed the full nato group) that will inevitably follow as punishment for its use (strikes on the black sea fleet,destruction of equipment within Ukraine and disabling of  border anti air sites/runways,reducing Russia capabilities)

The problem is that Putin isn't in a remotely place and seems to be genuinely moving to a stance which will lead to direct conflict with the west.

Our only hope is that wiser and cooler heads in the Kremlin prevail...although I'm not particularly hopeful.

I'm hoping this is all Putin playing out a serious Nuclear threat rather than he's actually laying the groundwork. 

They have to think about the response too. Do America strike at them? And they certainly can't win that war. 

Or do America/NATO avoid WW3 but then they'll take steps to isolate Russia further? 

At least even now there's a way out for Russia. 

Declaring martial law... Isn't that the only law Russia has in East Ukraine anyway?

2 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

Wrong. As I just explained

Again - people more interested in getting the fleeting pleasure of pointing out a perceived hypocrisy because "i bet they trod on some grass on the way to the gallery - how can they love plants so much and do that? Idiots!"

When the food supply breaks down, you can rest easy knowing that you got one over on a lib because you knew that "wearing a polyester t-shirt means they secretly love oil. Idiots!" 

Keep going

See that's not the angle I'm coming from. I'm not that bothered what colour their hair is.

I just don't like their behaviour. I think some of the things you appear too see as acceptable are different to mine. 

I don't think it's ok for the Suffragettes to send parcel bombs. I don't think it's ok for Insulate Britain to block motorways, I don't think anything as historic as that painting should have anything thrown at it. That doesn't mean I don't care about the planet or any other cause. 

A few times in this thread you've implied that people aren't seeing the bigger picture and you're pointing to the current debate to prove it. 

But maybe some people do see the bigger picture. Maybe some don't. I'm not applauding farmers for emptying their s**** into a rivers. But I don't think it's acceptable for me to come and spray paint every car on your street. 

"When the food supply breaks down you can rest assured that you got one over on a lib..."

You said yourself earlier that you don't believe anybody actually wants to kill the planet. So nobody would rest assured at such a thing. 

I don't believe that these people should be painted as bigger villains than say the oil companies. I just don't believe going around vandalising and being anti social or worse is acceptable. 

You say they're creating conversations for you to make people think about the bigger picture. I can see that. Someone says to you "those idiots did this" and then that becomes about more than throwing soup. I get that. 

But I think those conversations are happening. I feel like people are trying to change. I'm not sure about Governments and water/companies and farmers etc. But pressure is being applied to them. We need more and fast. But imo it's happening. I actually think high profile celebs probably open up more conversations than throwing soup. I don't know. The thread has become draining. 

The insulate Britain blocking motorways is going to end with people getting hurt. It angers people. Maybe your social circle is the opposite of mine but I don't feel like it would lead to a wider conversation for the people I meet. It just really really pissed people off. Not just people who hate the world, like to see people with frostbite and leave their diesel vans running overnight. 

Can I ask though, how far would you think it could be acceptable to go? It's only soup. It's only a blocked motorway. At what point would it be too far? Or are all actions justified by the cause? 

50 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

 

 

As you both bring up this point, are you aware that Just Stop Oil  have been protesting on a daily basis outside Downing Street and the Houses Of Parliament for the past month? It's not all just soup throwing in art galleries

https://juststopoil.org/2022/10/12/just-stop-oil-supporters-target-downing-street-on-12th-day-of-disruption-in-london/

https://juststopoil.org/2022/10/04/just-stop-oil-supporters-block-parliament-square-on-fourth-day-of-action-to-demand-no-new-oil-and-gas/

 

Good. 

Much better than throwing soup around galleries. That would be stupid. 

I've actually tried to be a better human in some small changes. I do run a bigger diesel vehicle for work though. Which is something I will change when it becomes viable

But I do try to make changes. The most recent we've been talking about is the way we eat. I'm not ready to go full veggie. I don't really want to have to stick to something. But substitutes here and there for things that just help the tiniest fraction and cost me nothing. Brought on by all the information I read and watch. I just thought over the last couple of years how to be better human. 

Seeing David Attenborough explaining the damage we're doing to the planet on a nature program did more to make me stop, think and research what I can do. 

Milk pours/throwing soup/blocking motorways... I just think they're a********. I think some of them are actually more interested in being on a crusade than caring about the objective. But that's personal opinion. 

There's better ways. 

Just now, Stive Pesley said:

Unsurprisingly it's not the only way they are sending the message - there are whole movements engaging with government and trying to force change via more conventional channels

Essentially all the poo/milk/soup stunts are just publicity to get people talking about them and raise the profile of the issues. The old adage that there is no such thing as bad publicity still holds true. 

And it works - 17 pages here for a start. 

Hmm, 17 pages discussing the rights or wrongs of their action. Is it 17 pages of making people aware that they or such problems exist? I don't believe in the "no such thing as bad publicity". There definitely is. There's definitely harmful coverage of a person or organisation. And this is that imo. 

I'm all for their cause. And if this thread was "Extinction Rebellion activists arrested for protests outside Houses of Parliament" then I'd be on board with you. 

If it was "activists removed from Shell HQ after graffiti carnage" I could get on board. 

I do actually understand your point about bigger/smaller crimes. I was being a dick. But when it's vandalising cultural sites, heritage, pieces of history of story telling them I'm dead against it. When it's an attack on everyday folk or their way of life then I'm against it. And when the crime is borderline terrorism. 

It kinda crosses over into how to feel about the national strikes. On one hand people have the right. On the other you're hurting every day folk who aren't responsible. Apparently in Australia they didn't go on strike but let everyone use the rail for free in order to hit the major money grabbers. I don't know if that's true or not but apparently the same chap on Radio 2 was also saying it's "illegal" here. I dunno. Off topic anyway. I'm just against damage to history and making ordinary folk pay for the way the top few percent play.

18 minutes ago, Archied said:

The problem is we have people addicted to crisis after crisis spurred on by a media addicted to crisis which makes them money ,people whipped up into such a frenzy that they end up mentally and emotionally damaging themselves

Yeah true. 

We do need to take care of our planet though. The way we are going is so bad. You can see it clear with your own eyes how the world has changed. How the ice melts. And that is real. 

I just believe that your average person will care about that (if they aren't already aware of it). The people who don't care who are well aware of it won't change because of XR. What they'll be able to do is control the narrative that these people are loons. And it's easy because they're effecting lives of everyday folk in a negative way. 

Social media now is a weapon that the likes of the Suffragettes didn't have. I think it's easier now to be heard. I don't think you need to send the message in the way that some of these do. 

35 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I guarantee you that hardly anyone will have "thought about it" as a result of these pranks, but allot of people will be tut-tutting at the unnecessary waste and mess and feeling sorry for the person that has to clean it up.

I'm guessing the're opting for these 'shock' style protests because they don't have the numbers to make an impact with a straightforward demonstrations. I appreciate that they may be well-meaning, but I doubt they ever measure the impact of what they do, either positive or negative. I think it's the almost nauseating righteousness of so many such protesters that irritates the public.

 

The mistake you keep making is you're viewing from today's perspective. Bombs, arson, vandalism it's all ok if we get to the right outcome... 

Acting like a thug is fine so long as you're doing it on behalf of whatever crusade Stive is on. And if you disagree it's because you're a racist, homophobic, sexist fat football fan who doesn't support anything that might upset your privileged position. 

There's no way you can actually care about the planet and disapprove of vandalism, you fat football man. 

Like when they toppled down that statue in Bristol. They did it looking at it from today's perspec- 

Wait, bad example. But if you disapproved then you clearly didn't want equality. 

We could take this to the Ukraine War thread. Because all these bombed Ukrainian villages will be prosperous Russian cities one day. So just like the Suffragettes sending letter bombs and XR being vandals it's all for a better world and you just don't want that. 

You're no better than Millicent Fawcett who condemned violence in the name of women's rights. Bet she was a fat football fan too which from now on is the exact opposite of a blue haired unwashed student activist. (I have no idea why he was so triggered by whoever made that comment or why he then joins in by playing his own hand at stereotypes) 

2 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

The mistake you continue to mistake is that you're looking at it from the perspective of today. 

You would have hated the suffragettes - they were doing far worse to draw attention to their cause, and there were large active ant-suffrage movements that opposed them

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette_bombing_and_arson_campaign

But history has shown that they were right, and now they are taught in schools as a brilliant and inspiring example of how to force social change

Assuming that we do change course and the planet isn't a desolate wasteland in 100 years, these campaigners will be talked about in the same way.

The angry old fat blokes on football forums - not so much

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait, I would have hated the suffragettes because I would have disapproved of bombing and arson? 

Interesting take. 

Why do these people not match on Westminster? Or set up shop outside No.10? Genuinely curious

If they're not bothered about breaking the law and want to force change through controversy and a touch of chaos then why not go more direct? 

The coverage of that might even gain more support? Is there a reason why that's not an option?