Jump to content

chrisjpainter

Members
  • Posts

    5,558
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About chrisjpainter

  • Birthday 29/10/1985

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • From
    South Dorset
  • Interests
    Mountain climbing, reading, anything in the out doors!

Recent Profile Visitors

4,673 profile views
  1. Yeah, didn't you know? Giraffes under the door usually follow
  2. I wouldn't take anything off it. It might have been starved of light and growth, but it's also been protected from the elephants. Weakening it further by removing stuff could be fatal. I'd go with @ditchmanand give it nutrients at the base It will thicken over time and now the available light is from the other direction, should straighten out and give a more even canopy, which'll help with stability. Certainly worth a go at saving
  3. Only beaten by a war! Mad result
  4. Yeah and I take your point. It's just that there doesn't seem to be a better way to end it. You need a winner, so how do you get there? Cricket had a similar problem in the World Cup Final in 2019. England Vs New Zealand. The match ended in a tie. The super over, used to split teams after a tied match, ended in a tie. So it was all left to the mathematicians, who counted back through the match and England were declared the winners by virtue of hitting more boundaries in the game. The outcry afterwards was so great that they ditched it after it. They tried golden goal. It was rubbish. They tried silver goal. That was worse. Playing to a goal would be hated by managers and players as it's an injury-risk nightmare. Liverpool still have some massive matches coming up and wouldn't want to lose players to a never ending game.
  5. They tried it for a few years. Honestly, it was rubbish. That extra half an hour for extra time with the golden goal was just awful to watch. No one committed to win, just in case they over committed and lost.
  6. My dad thinks they're ridiculous and a stupid way to end a big tournament. But then he's also never come up with a solution that works. Playing until a goal is scored, no matter how many players actually die from exhaustion just doesn't seem like fun. I love them. The absolute tension, unbearable pressure and the boiling down of football to its basic element: can you kick a ball into the goal, or can you stop the ball going in? When the skills haven't split the teams, when the diving's failed and the cynical fouls have come to nothing, it all comes down to a game of bluff and bottle. Top one today and am pleased Liverpool won. Big save from Alisson to deny Mount
  7. Yup. Reading FC played three seasons in the Prem. Only on two occasions as a season ticket holder I sat and watched us completely outclassed. Once when we got beaten 4-0 by an Henry-led Arsenal and once where Ronaldo and Rooney took us to the cleaners on their own. We only lost 2-0 but seeing the absolute quality on display was amazing, even if it was whilst Reading were on the receiving end! Incredible. The whole stadium applauded Ronaldo and Henry when they were subbed. Just too good.
  8. But it's fine to call people who like football footytossers? That was an incredible game. In fact both legs were a treat.
  9. All sports have their downsides. It's unfortunate and winds me up no end, but beyond that, I find it a great sport to follow.
  10. You don't like football then? Stop commenting on a thread on it.
  11. Yeah, that's the theory, but it's already been put to the test and it's not been conclusive on VAR. Problems arise when you get players dressed like this: Ascertaining where the ball's hit with white on white is...tricky. It feels like a clarification that's not been terribly well thought through. Plus, below where Cinch is on Son's shirt, surely that's more arm than shoulder?
  12. That article's not that helpful! Really, the rules haven't changed particularly, just been...clarified! Essentially the nuts and bolts are the same: 1) A player is offside if any part of his or her playing body is beyond the second last opposing player when the ball is played. 2) A player can be offside if he or she is deemed to be in an active role and was beyond the second last opposing player. That's basically all it is. Part 1 is fine. It's got a bit more nerdy with VAR, because the gaps that VAR is analysing are tiny. At some point someone's going to be offside because of an errant shoelace. But basically it's all the same. Part 2 is where the fun really comes. You can still be onside if you're not involved. That works to stop offside breaking up the game when it's really not necessary. However. They have again clarified what it means to be involved. If your team gains advantage from something you did whilst being offside, you can be given as offside, even if you were nowhere near the ball. It happened to Virgil Van Dyke a few weeks back. He was up for a freekick and made his move to head the ball a fraction early and was beyond the second last opponent. But the ball doesn't even get to him; Diogo Jota was a couple of yards closer to the ball and headed it in to score. However, Van Dyke's run blocked off a defender. It wasn't a foul, but it did impede the defender and he did it from an offside position. He became active because his actions directly benefited his team from an offside position, so the goal was chalked off. Likewise, if you force a defender to jump and head the ball out of play for a corner because he was stopping you get it, but you were in and offside position, you'd be flagged, because your team's gained, even if you don't jump for the ball. It all stems from three things: technology and money - and cheating. The huge increase in tech power has shown up areas for potential errors and the impact they have on the game. And it now really REALLY matters, because of the huge sums of money hinging on it. It has to be fair. Players will do anything to get an edge, if they think they can get away with it! So suddenly all this has to be legislated for, so people can't cheat and get an advantage!
  13. I had an R10 Mk2. They're lovely guns when brought to their full potential, but it seems BSA are still unable to do that. The Mk1 was a shocker. The Mk2 was better, but still plagued with issues. The SE is again better, but still not there. The best way forward is to get a tuned one, especially if the reg's been ditched and replaced for a non BSA one. Buying new makes little sense because of this. I'd be more tempted to buy second hand and then get it tuned. You'd end up with a better gun than if you'd bought new anyway.
×
×
  • Create New...