Remove this ad

#261 [url]

Sep 12 16 9:46 AM

Not in Europe, but in CONCACAF, we had a similar one. In the 2015/16 Mexican second level, three former continental champions competed: Atlante (CONCACAF champions in 2008/09), Necaxa (1999) and Universidad de Guadalajara (1978).

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#263 [url]

Sep 16 16 11:26 PM

I miss Rick Moranis. I mean, he was terrible, but at least he was unpretentious. For some reason "Spaceballs" was ubiquitous on South East Asian hotel TV in the early 90s. I must have seen it over a dozen times.

Quote    Reply   

#264 [url]

Sep 17 16 1:05 PM

nfm24 wrote:
The dumbed down format of most football coverage on TV. Tempting to write my own personal gripes with it, but I defer to those of the Wise One, whose comments are just as relevant today:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=oqAZsoF-ghw
Amazing how the same problems with coverage were perceived even then, even though we'd look back at footage from those times and just assume it was all a lot classier...  although maybe that's just the lack of Robbie Savage.

So were you triggered by Sky Sports' new 'Friday Night Football' coverage, they've got decent enough presenters and a panel that's reasonably okay (maybe Jamie Carragher's just carrying the team there), but they've decided to go for some kind of 'pub banter' vibe which doesn't work at all, especially when they have an hour and a half of it before kick-off. And then they've gone and taken inspiration from some of their previous football coverage and/or Top Gear to put in a 'blokey studio audience' that cheers on cue...

Quote    Reply   

#265 [url]

Sep 17 16 7:34 PM

I was going more by MOTD, but to be honest I don't watch more than about once a month if that, and I don't watch any live games. I store all my football watching time to binge on the international windows, where you get the same but with the added pizzazz of passionate delusion and barely disguised xenophobia.

I will excuse Savage's ropey punditry but only on the grounds of his bravery in taking on Katie Hopkins on her own turf, after her comments on Alzheimers patients.

Quote    Reply   

#266 [url]

Sep 17 16 8:10 PM

nfm24 wrote:
I will excuse Savage's ropey punditry but only on the grounds of his bravery in taking on Katie Hopkins on her own turf, after her comments on Alzheimers patients.
Didn't know that, thanks, although he still shouldn't be anywhere near a pundit's sofa, especially when it comes to the highest level of games (although he also tends to find his way onto most of the lower-interest CL or FA Cup fixtures I'm interested in). Also, I never said his TV performances were an indication of being a good person or not, only one of those two is in the Arsehole Premier League (and doing quite well by the looks of things).

Also, don't take what I said as any indication that internationals aren't my favourite, I just took a couple of minutes' look at the 'Friday Night Football' coverage and realised I should just come back at kick-off... how they thought 90 minutes of that is high-quality coverage is beyond me, but I guess they have a huge number of 24-hour channels to fill...

Quote    Reply   

#267 [url]

Sep 17 16 8:56 PM

Yes Savage (more a buffoon than an arsehole) is sort of one level up from Steve Claridge in the low-rent pundit sense. Remember the look of bemused contempt on Alan Hansen's face when he had Claridge as co-pundit for a cup semi-final.

I think they should try going back to the pre-Jimmy Hill days and just do football with no pundits at all. Like the earliest MOTD with just Kenneth Wolstenholme announcing the show and nothing else. (and just one match).

Also, why can nobody pronounce the name Cazorla ?
Radio 5 commentator cycling and Olympic moonlight commentator Rob Hatch seems to be the best at getting foreign names correct (alneit by the underhand tactic of actual fluency in foreign languages), hopefully he will be promoted to a proper sport like football.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

TheRoonBa

Posts: 5,442 Site Admin

#268 [url]

Sep 19 16 1:37 PM

nfm24 wrote:
Also, why can nobody pronounce the name Cazorla ?

The letter "R" has become somewhat exotic in English (in England at least).  Trying to pronounce it after a vowel leads to all sorts of confusion and comedic overpronunciation.  I think eventually the "postvocalic R" will be lost in Scotland as well - for many years now, I have been overhearing certain youths with the posh "Edinburgh R", where the tongue is curled back.  This is the first stage on the road to losing the R completely.  Boo, I say, contemptuously.  I don't want "Ka" and "Car" to be homonyms.  I would rather drop buttered toast on the kitchen floor with the butter-side down.

Quote    Reply   

#269 [url]

Sep 19 16 7:44 PM

nfm24 wrote:
Remember the look of bemused contempt on Alan Hansen's face when he had Claridge as co-pundit for a cup semi-final.
I do not, although maybe I have the 'before my time' excuse. Can you remember the game, it might have been one of his many former clubs involved and therefore a 'justification' for his presence, like how Savage was offering his expert opinion for every Leicester game last season...

I do remember though a similar 'bemused contempt' look, from Alan "we don't know any of these Algerian players" Shearer when they let radio host Danny "actually been around sampling the atmosphere" Baker on for a few minutes of late-night World Cup punditry in 2010:



In hindsight most of his predictions are hilariously bad, but he offers something refreshing (and at the time a plausible analysis) and it's not as though Shearer offered much other than suggestions that Mr. Baker is intoxicated... Clarence Seedorf wins the award for clairvoyancy.

Quote    Reply   

#270 [url]

Sep 19 16 9:00 PM

I do always laugh at the regular pundits trying feebly to raise their game during internationals when the genuine class acts (e.g. Seedorf, Leonardo, Gullit, or previously Cruyff) show up and apply actual football intelligence, rather than the British stock "analysis" of "he'll be disappointed with that" or "the ref's had a shocker there". I actually quite like David Pleat as a pundit, Pat Nevin to some extent, and Martin O'Neill is always good value for entertainment at least (e.g. his brilliant reaction to Adrian Chiles mocking him alongside Vieira and Cannavaro).

I think the Claridge/Hansen mismatch was probably a League Cup semi maybe 5 years ago or so, possibly involving Liverpool (hence Hansen) vs a crap lower league team (hence Claridge), but I couldn't be more specific and that could be wrong anyway. Claridge's only real "talent" is to just know every low league club and their players, and so he is suitable only for lower division highlights packages which are basically endless sequences of slow defenders failing to deal with long aimless hoofs. Putting Claridge on the proper football is a bit like appointing as a restaurant critic the guy who has drunk the same cheap lager and eaten pie and beans in every pub in town.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#271 [url]

Sep 20 16 5:09 PM

nfm24 wrote:
I think the Claridge/Hansen mismatch was probably a League Cup semi maybe 5 years ago or so, possibly involving Liverpool (hence Hansen) vs a crap lower league team (hence Claridge), but I couldn't be more specific and that could be wrong anyway.
I know it's just an educated guess but you stepped in the wrong place with that one, Liverpool definitely didn't play any lower-league opposition in semi-finals in that timeframe, their LC semi 5 seasons ago was against Manchester City. Maybe it was that game (making Claridge an even more bizarre choice), or it could have just been one that involved a lower-league team, Hansen was basically their main pundit so he'd have been put on the sofa for anything, especially given how little live club football the BBC had till they got the FA Cup back.

And don't go suggesting Claridge is incapable of the task, we live in a post-expert society now, your pie & beans man for example is well within his rights to pass judgement on food he can't pronounce...

Quote    Reply   

#272 [url]

Sep 20 16 9:01 PM

People who go into a tube/train station and walk right up to the ticket barrier before it occurs to them to get their ticket out of their pocket/handbag, or to think about buying a ticket, as if they had no clue what the purpose of the barrier was despite watching hundreds of people in front of them demonstrating what is about to happen (this is basically a reprise of an airport / supermarket gripe from earlier). These people are no better than reluctant horses in showjumping, but without the moral high ground.

Families who do the same but have all the tickets in possession of (usually) the dad, and have to stop to hand them all out, tediously go through one by one, then gather them all in again. If you haven't been able to progenate sufficiently trustworthy/competent offspring to use a train ticket then parenting is not for you. Anyway with a large family taxis are probably cheaper.

People who do the above and then also, having got through the barrier, stand stationary on the other side while pondering where they might want to go, as if previously unaware that entering the barrier allowed the possibility of travel.

Instructions for public transport
1. decide where you want to go (you can do this at home)
2. plan the route (you can do this at home)
3. buy an appropriate ticket (you can do this at home, generally)
4. go smoothly on your way without dawdling


People who send you an email on a new topic but rather than compose a new message with an appropriate "subject", just reply to an old message you sent them with a completely different "subject" and don't bother changing it.

People who think education is only justifiable as a means to employability, and is unworthy of pursuit for its own sake.

Quote    Reply   

#275 [url]

Sep 21 16 1:12 PM

mattsanger92 wrote:
nfm24 wrote:
Remember the look of bemused contempt on Alan Hansen's face when he had Claridge as co-pundit for a cup semi-final.
I do not, although maybe I have the 'before my time' excuse. Can you remember the game, it might have been one of his many former clubs involved and therefore a 'justification' for his presence
Usually my research into football history involves exotic international matches from decades ago, rather than contemporary domestic piffle, but on this one occasion I will dig into the topsoil.

24-Jan-2012 Cardiff  vs Crystal Palace  (League Cup semi - at least that bit was correct)

Some independent comments (all posted during the match):
. Hansen just owned Claridge there
. Steve Claridge what a tool
. How can Steve Claridge have played so many games of football and seem to know so little about it? He is sport's version of an Escher drawing of some stairs.
. Am I the only one who thinks Claridge is making a bit of a **** of himself on the bbc alongside Hansen?
. Steve Claridge, an irredeemable ****. Why BBC, why?

. Claridge. :lol: You're not going to be able to join the Boys' Club if you're causing arguments with Hansen.
. Why Claridge ! What a Muppet
. that poor excuse for a pundit Claridge got right on my tits tonight
. Hansen clueless, Claridge = tw*t.
. (except for Claridge who just pisses me off by being there) I thought the Beeb were pretty fair


Just for balance (the only positive comment I could find)
Hansen is a bellend, Claridge actually talking sense.


Who would have thought that their secret love child would become a chess prodigy?

Quote    Reply   

#276 [url]

Sep 21 16 4:45 PM

nfm24 wrote:
Who would have thought that their secret love child
Speaking of, there's been a theory ever since he joined Liverpool that Alberto Moreno is the product of two vastly superior players, just to throw that out there. Also, I win the Clairvoyancy Award (or retrospective equivalent) for correctly predicting what the Claridge/Hansen game wasn't.

And to add on to your 'education' part, I'd say anti-intellectualism in general.

Quote    Reply   

#278 [url]

Sep 21 16 9:03 PM

mattsanger92 wrote:
Also, I win the Clairvoyancy Award (or retrospective equivalent)

Retrospective Clairvoyancy (apart from sounding like a Pink Floyd album) is what passes for football history in a lot of places, and is exactly the sort of thing I'm trying to counteract with actual research.

Quote    Reply   

#279 [url]

Sep 23 16 11:49 AM

I have just started a new position in which the computing/admin authorities have decreed a monthly printing allowance of £5 which cannot be topped up. Obviously one of the first things to do in any new position is background reading etc which involves a lot of papers. Of course, I would be happy to read papers on a computer monitor but my department has lacked the foresight to provide any in advance and efforts to get basic equipment internally are proving slow and tedious.

Given that many academic papers involve around 20+ pages of which maybe 4 or 5 involve colour [forcing the printer to define the whole file as "colour"], printing two papers wiped out my monthly allowance. I went to ask the admin staff about getting a top-up of some kind and there is apparently no way of doing this at all. The only way is to increase the allowance for the next month (which is no good if you don't want to wait until October). After some discussion about why anyone would want to print anything at all ever, and after assurances from me that I was only printing a few papers in the first month to start off the project, and it would not be a regular amount, and that my average printing would not exceed £5 per month anyway overall, she decided the easiest way to make me go away would be to just print from her own (apparently unlimited) account. To my amazement, she printed it single-sided....

Turns out that the restrictions on printing had absolutely nothing to do with reducing paper consumption (which I had naively assumed to be a key factor) and making the university seem "green". It was only to do with minimizing expenditure on ink/toner.

Quote    Reply   

#280 [url]

Sep 23 16 2:50 PM

I wrote this in a different context as a sort of parody of the emails we get forwarded with idiotic patronising "life tips" and such like.  It's not a particularly good or original joke, but it just amused me to write it.  However, it started a discussion in which some of the participants appeared to be engaging on a serious basis, not getting the joke.  This suggests the internet has now become so vacuous that it cannot be ridiculed.


Save money and improve weight loss with one easy life hack!
By Jamie Dodger, lifestyle guru.

Every day I bring a packet of biscuits to work, like everybody else.  Having opened the biscuits in the morning, I proceed to eat them at various stages during the day until they are all gone, which is, as we all know, the correct way of doing things.

However by accident I found a new, secret and unknown way of eating the biscuits which makes them last twice as long!!

One day I was working, eating biscuits as usual, when there was a fire alarm just after lunchtime.  The alarm went on for ages, and we were told to go home and come back the next day.  When I arrived the next morning I was amazed to find that there were some biscuits already on my desk

For the next few days I couldn't stop wondering about how the biscuits had appeared, so I tried setting the fire alarm off again at lunchtime.  This time the alarm went off quicker, but I went home anyway just to make sure things were the same as the first time  [this is how good science works].   When I got back the next morning, again there were biscuits already there!  

Then after a couple of months I worked out that I actually didn't need to set off the fire alarm every day to make the trick work.  It still works if you have no alarm, but instead you just imagine there was an alarm, and you stop eating biscuits after lunch and carry on with working without eating any biscuits (I never tried this before but in some countries it is commonplace apparently - weird!).  

I found that I saved money because I didn't have to buy new biscuits every day because the trick meant I had free biscuits!  This even works for jaffa cakes! 

And amazingly, I began to lose weight!  Which I couldn't understand because I was using less energy because I didn't have to carry so many biscuits around.  Somehow, the free biscuits must have been healthier than the new biscuits from the shop!  Probably they don't want you to know that or you won't keep buying new biscuits.  

Anyway, you just have to remember to stop eating biscuits after lunch and you will get free biscuits and lose weight!

I looked this up on Wikipedia and it turns out there's this thing called a "Half", which is sort of like if you had a new packet of biscuits but someone had already eaten some of them before you opened it (difficult to imagine but true!), but then you have to imagine that it was actually you who had eaten them yourself before you opened it yourself, the previous day - it's kind of complicated time-travel stuff, but you don't need to understand everything about biscuits to make the trick work.

The only problem is that the trick only works once.  If you try it two days in a row then you don't have any biscuits on the third day (just unlucky numbers I guess) and then you would have to work all day with no biscuits like during the war or something, so you still have to buy new biscuits on the third day to make the trick work again.  Then on the fourth day you would have free biscuits but on the fifth day you would have to buy them again.  There is probably some special biscuit rule for how this works but I just figured out to buy biscuits on Monday Wednesday and Friday mostly works great, except the next Monday I always had too many biscuits, so I still need to figure out exactly how to solve that.

Anyway you must remember not to keep bringing a new packet of biscuits every day otherwise the trick won't work because you will have too many biscuits every day, which sounds stupid but you will see what I mean if you forget.  


Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help