Dr. Gonzo

The last time I saw Sabbath, which was on their third and final farewell tour (I caught them 2/3 times as they were saying farewell lol, which is great because never in my life did I think I'd see Sabbath twice), I thought it was very funny when Ozzy said: "We love you! God bless you all! …. This next one is GOD IS DEAD!"

Sadly, I do think you're underestimating how much TV has taken over and killed football. Compare Inter Milan or AC Milan's Serie A attendances from the 1990s to now... or not even now, just 10 years ago and it's pretty similar to now. You see an almost packed San Siro to a noticeably not packed San Siro. Having said that, I do think your plan of cheap tickets for people that live around the ground is a great idea. I'd maybe boost it to more than a mile, maybe include certain postcodes? But the local fans are the backbone of every club and it's shit to see how many local fans are priced out.

I wasn't sure if I was going to watch it before yesterday. Now I 100% am - you know the Poch to Mourinho switch is going to make for some good TV for sure.

https://www.givemesport.com/1523136-jose-mourinho-claimed-in-2015-that-he-would-never-take-the-tottenham-job I guess that's why you never say never

Robertson and Salah out of the Palace match.

If that doesn't explicitly break any election laws... it fucking should. A new low for Tories, astounding how far they'll go to prove they're the most morally reprehensible party around.

@Fairy In Boots - I'm not don't really want to touch the socialism shite, I don't think we'll ever really agree - especially as you want to be rid of the NHS in favour of a system more aligned to what they've got in the US, which is an absolute disaster if you're a perfectly healthy person (and allows for US drug prices to be absolutely ridiculous, compared to countries where the state's healthcare system negotiates with drug manufacturers for prices that aren't fucking unreasonable). I think there needs to be a healthy mix of social programs that actually benefit ordinary people, while still promoting capitalism. I think where we might both agree regarding social safety-nets (although maybe not, given you want us to follow in America's footsteps for healthcare) is the government shouldn't be giving handouts to industries & let the market decide if unhealthy businesses live or die. But let's put that aside for a second and talk about that internet plan. But regarding the internet... I'm not so sure Iran's example is the best example of the dangers of a nationalised broadband structure. Primarily because Iranian internet... isn't nationalised. People have had their internet shut off despite the fact they pay a monthly fee (granted, much lower than what we pay) to their ISP. That's more a danger of living under authoritarian rule. And if we want to talk about which party is more authoritarian regarding the internet... I do believe it was the Tories that wanted to ban porn? If we want to avoid a slide into authoritarian rule... we've got to make sure that our politicians can be held properly accountable when they do bad things. Right now, I'm not really convinced that's the case tbh. Broadband's only really viable as a private industry thanks to government subsidies. And all the providers are selling is access to Openreach - which, yeah, it's owned by BT... but the framework for Openreach was paid for by the taxpayer & continues to be paid for by the taxpayer in the form of government subsidies. And I'm pretty sure Openreach started out of a settlement because BT was throttling other providers access and giving them a shit connection so customers would feel compelled to switch to BT. So in my eyes, that's the best argument for government provided broadband. But I can think of many reasons to be wary of the internet being provided by the government: 1.) shitloads of people would likely lose jobs, 2.) chances are government tech support would be absolutely dogshit and private entities are better positioned to provide technical support to people who'll need it - which happens hundreds (if not thousands) of times per day across the country, 3.) given recent government positions on the internet... I'm not sure I trust them with internet regulation. Personally, I think the cons outweigh the pros here - especially with the Brexit uncertainty, this is no time to be floating policy ideas that might lead to massive layoffs in a particular sector in the UK. But I would not mind if the fact it's being floated as a political idea would put some pressure on ISPs to drop prices- because broadband providers really aren't doing much in the way of innovation or providing great services & need government assistance to be profitable.

Our first experience with a DOF was also a miserable failure as well - but he actually had experience in that role before. Then we had Rodgers, who refused to work under a DOF and was part of our famed "transfer committee" that actually signed good players when they weren't the players handpicked by Rodgers - just that Rodgers didn't have a clue on how to use the players he didn't pick (granted, he also wasn't that great with a number of the players he did pick). Third time was the charm with us... but it was with Michael Edwards, who didn't really have any experience in the role. He was just our head scout. Turns out he's more than good at identifying players, because he's proven himself to be one hell of a negotiator as well - especially with our outgoing transfers. It's probably something that differs by club, how well the DOF will actually operate. Because like you say, I don't think Walsh was necessarily in the best environment for him to thrive in the role - whereas Brands's bosses are probably going to be a bit more hands off unless things are absolutely going tits up on the pitch.

Iron Man 3

What’s wrong with making a scout Director of Football? We made our head scout director of football and he’s been brilliant in terms of judging players and assessing the value of them (and of our own squad). It actually makes a lot of sense to me that you’d promote a scout to be a DoF - it’s their job to assess and value players already, so that’s a big part of a DoF’s job. If it’s true Walsh identified top players at good prices for Everton and wasn’t backed - that’s really not his fault at all tbh. I wonder if these signings weren’t considered “ambitious” enough - as it’s a got more glamour when you buy from Ajax and Barca. Either way, no sense in dwelling on a relationship that didn’t work. If the board didn’t back him you’d hope they learn their lessons and back Brands.

I’m a bit worried about the protests in Iran over the petrol rationing and the petrol prices skyrocketing. The internet for the whole country has been cut since Saturday - nobody’s heard from my uncle in days.

Jesus fucking Christ!

We only have 2 fit CBs with this fixture congestion. And one of them is Dejan Lovren, perhaps the most injury prone defender in the league.

It’s from the group of people that first told us there wouldn’t be no deal and that we’d get a good deal from Europe, then they saw what kind of deal we’d be getting... then convinced themselves no deal was in our best interests. Then after that looked like it wasn’t a possibility, they convinced themselves “it’s fine, we just need any Brexit.” Self-deception is their specialty

Regarding the whole broadband thing - how exactly would it work? I assume the government would assume control of Openreach - which is currently owned all by BT right now. It’s a good idea in theory - but what’s the impact on the people who work for the businesses that’ll obviously be impacted? Granted, these businesses themselves are really not that innovative and is already reliant on government subsidies to be a viable industry. But I imagine a lot of people would lose their jobs as a result, which is pretty shit for them.

I know what a champagne socialist is but you might want to look up the definition of socialism. Fucking hell lol

I'm lazy, so I use a console for gaming mostly. But a lot of the time it's more convenient to game on PC - especially as you can upgrade the hardware, whereas with a console you can't (or it's very hard to and breaks warranties and whatnot). But it's also cheaper to just buy a console and you can use it for other shite like Netflix and whatnot (not like you can't use a computer for that though).

The reviews for it are really really good

Well you're to the left of right, therefore a socialist. And I'm assuming you've had champagne at least once in your life. Ergo, champagne socialist.

Streamers and high level players hate SBMM because they just want to crush n00bs - this is especially the case for streamers. And when you're really good at a game, you get matched against other people that are really good - which leads them to get killed more than they'd like and then there's the constant bitching. Every new COD that comes out too, social media goes insane regarding the SBMM... even though it's been in every COD since the third one. I never really got into Overwatch, a few of my friends play it... but they got really good before I ever got the game. So for me it was just a really frustrating experience - and I probably won't be playing the sequel.

One young player has reportedly lost his trust in the process: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7676259/Manchester-United-starlet-Tahith-Chong-decided-against-renewing-contract.html

That says could. Meaning it could be true or it could be bullshit. Given that every account I’ve seen of this says one person walked away while the other was aggressive, it begs the question why he’s have to be pulled away by his face? And taking the “golden generation’s” stance on this really doesn’t account for how we had great defenders, a great group of midfielders, and a Rooney yet did fuck all with it because they never had any team chemistry with them. Maybe if they’d been able to separate club football from the international side they’d have achieved something. And since this side has already looked like it might achieve more on the international stage we should maybe learn from the mistakes of before, rather than repeat them.

Also he should cut his fucking fingernails, long fingernails are disgusting.

The scratch did come from Sterling - have you seen it? You're not getting a scratch like that from being separated from a scrap. Also none of the stories I've read about that have said anything about him getting scratched while separated. Especially a scrap where the reports are he was just backing away and the only person that needed to be kept away was the aggressor. Seems like Mr. Anti-Racism But I Take Money From Slave Owners is alright with bullying younger members of the England squad if they've upset him in some way (like winning). And apparently that's okay if you're a world class player.

Tbh I don't know why it's being called a fight or a scrap. All the accounts of it online are that Gomez was minding his own business and Sterling grabs at him and tries to put him in a headlock, scratching him in the process. And rather than escalate, Gomez backs away two or 3 times as Sterling has to be physically held back from following Gomez. That's a not really a fight, because nobody is fighting back. It's just an important member of the England side lashing out at a younger player, that's trying to establish his international career, just because he was pissed off about what happened over the weekend in the league.