exiledwhite2

I've not disputed a single number! If I'm wrong that 10% plus of goals come from corners (I read it was 13% in the Mail), fair do's, would be genuinely interested to know what the number is. 1 in 8 goals scored, is a decent number (in my opinion, the Mail article said it was 'measly'), and well worth making sure your team is well drilled in attaching / defending them.

Is the whole raison d'etre not 'ever closer union'? Which is IMO simply incompatible with how the UK public feel about Europe. Tell you what though, the demographic shift we'll see with EU migration (i.e. Brits emigrating and Euros coming here), will make 'us' less euro sceptic as time passes.

Absolutely right this is a kickback, an adjustment to the main numbers. It's not what we pay overall.

Fuck me I've just read somewhere that 10%+ of goals come from corners. Can't be sure that's accurate, but that is a LOT of goals. Massive disparity between teams too. City scored 13 from corners in the league last year. That's a huge contribution. Edit to say there's an article on the Mail saying 'a measly' 13.3% of goals come from corners. That's not measly to me?

To be fair we're talking at cross purposes I think. Your point is that taking it short is as worthwhile as swinging it in I believe. Wouldn't know whether that's true or not. Doubt it. But a corner isn't 'worthless'. Do you know what % of goals come from corners? Also, it depends on the make up of your team, surely. And who you are playing. Barca and Chelsea are both top sides but I suspect they'd take a very different approach to corners if they played each other.

Aye, it's VERY amateur when I'm at centre back too. I'm a natural winger FFS As much as pro's practice, the fact the opposition can load up your area with all their biggest players, and their best set piece man can swing one in, that is not worthless and I don't give a monkeys what numbers get quoted. It's common sense that it's a dangerous situation. Garp what % of goals overall come from corners?

There is no definitive answer to the question, and never will be. Hard to think we'd be THAT much worse off out of it though

Of course they do. France pay twice as much I think. (I've heard this somewhere, wouldn't put my life on it). All that said, I'm anti-EU in it's current guise. It should be a trading block with no political angle to it beyond that IMO. Edit to say: latest figures I found on a quick google from 2011, us and the Dutch do worst in terms of net contribution (money paid in vs money given back).

I still somehow drag myself onto the pitch to play, occasionally as a centre half, and I bloody hate defending corners True, not many end up in the net, but I do think it adds up to pressure, which ends up with the defence cracking, at some point...

It does look good, I must say. I had a nosey on a sunny Sunday morning and it was very serene. Mother in law would love one of the poppies, I didn't know they were for sale, thought it was just a donation type affair.

I often wonder why so few teams do it. If you practice it, your at a huge advantage over the oppo, who won't have.

Thought it was a better, more interesting city centre in the 80s/early 90s before the bomb, and before retail became ultra professional It was unique, as were many towns and cities I guess. Used to get some cool clothes in the bargain bins of the big stores when I got a bit older. All sorts of stuff just shoved in big containers, not recycled off to TK Maxx or their ebay shop as they would now. You could buy banned videos in brown carrier bags, shoplift jacketfuls of computer games left right and centre (younger days), go mooching about Johnny Roadhouse and A1 music, and all for 20p return fare.

My Youngest (girl) is very resistant to pooing anywhere but home, she's 3 Visited my folks lately and she clung on for 3 days, asking when we were going home, squirming about, must have been touching cloth in the end She was On the throne within 2 minutes of getting back ! Me, I get annoyed if I need to go at home. It's one of many things I think should be done on paid time.

Thing is, lawrenson isn't even very well informed to back up his smugness

I like bellew and he's a good fighter, very good when he fights smart behind his jab, but he has to produce the biggest disparity between talk and action I've ever known.

Well im no mr universe admittedly but joshua looks very very heavily muscled to me. And Bruno was lighter at a similar age / level. He only weighed more than Joshua at the tail end of his career, as you'd expect, he put weight on as he matured. Joshua will too. It's been said earlier in the thread. It's FAR too early to judge Joshua. To unify the division he'll need to improve a lot, as is the case of any am turning over. It's not a foregone conclusion that he will do that, or that he has good intangibles like chin, recovery, stamina. I see no evidence at all that he can't be something special, he punches like a fucking truck, he seems game, he has the size you need these days. But there's so much you can't prove until you actually face half decent opposition.

Yawning definitely the best cure but it's hard work to yawn on demand, when pooing yourself on an aeroplane (not a great flier). I go as deaf as a post on the descent, shits me up every time.

It was. To be fair, Smith was a capable fighter, took prime Tyson to points, won the world title etc (after beating Bruno). But he wasn't meant to beat Frank! Unless Joshua is very, very well conditioned, that ridiculous physique could well suggest similar stamina issues to Bruno. It's very draining to carry all that muscle.

We'll know a lot more when he gets smacked on the chin. He does appear to have incredible potential though. And in the Olympics he showed he has heart and grit. It's really a question of how good his chin is, and his stamina.

Happy with this, his pedigree is way better than our standing right now He was commentating t'other day on a game and for me, he spoke perfect sense, down to earth stuff

Haha at last an honest answer. Mine use the iPad a fair bit. Watch cartoons, play games etc. Games for kids of that age tend to be educational. Genuinely can't see any problem with it. Obviously there needs to be restrictions in terms of time spent / not using it close to bedtime.

No disrespect but that's just not true IMO. We're a nation living in fear. Violent crime and especially murder per capita are lower now than in years gone by. Late 90s/early 00s was a high point for crime iirc. If times have changed, they've changed for the better. Yet people are far more afraid now. Maybe that fear translates to less people fighting, I don't know.

The busy nature of London pubs isn't down to more drinking, it's just the sheer number of people working in the city, who socialise in the city because they actually live 40 miles apart (so they don't meet locally) Go out to the suburbs and pubs are no more busy than up north I'd say there's moreregular night out lads aged 30+ in the north west than London/down south

Mine are only small but I can imagine this is awful and I hope I never have to deal with it. I think you have to tell the school really, if that fails speak to the parents involved, but kids being the little twats they are, any intervention may just make it worse. It's hard to say without knowing the finer details. I suppose the first step is that you tell your kid that it will pass, and in years to come they'll look back and wonder why they even gave a shit (as long as they aren't physically threatening/assaulting them). Easy to say I know.

Did this a fair few times for us, on the pitch anyway http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/sep/26/david-ngog-reims-missing-liverpool