Inverted

Raw 8/10 Defs one of the more disturbing films I've seen, and I normally consider myself unbothered by films. But it's really well acted and put together, and all the little details like music and the look of the film really keep you captivated even when you really don't want to watch. The premise is an interesting idea too.

Just finished this, which I found really fun and easy to read, but it’s properly intense at moments: And amongst a few other books I’m kinda skimming, I’ve been really interested in something that I just picked up from the library last week: It’s called “Justice in Injustice” and it’s a legal history of Nazi Germany. It’s interesting, but it’s a bit of a struggle since it’s my first time reading more academic-style writing in German longer than a single essay.

I saw something on twitter saying "multiple assaults" which sounded like some kind of sustained domestic violence so I read the judgement and it meant multiple blows, including a kick, in the one morning. Doesnt seem like he has previous but for some reason they've got in a drunken argument and he's hit her.

Sounds weird to do considering it seems that he’d be gone in the summer no matter what.

It is funny that a man whose reputation was largely formed by one of the most OTT celebrations in CL history at Old Trafford has suddenly became the self-appointed voice of restraint. I can't be arsed with those who say that it's all game to distract attention. Im pretty sure most people are now quite sure that both his coaching is wank and he's also personally a flaming shitebag. It's not one or the other, even with people's shortened attentions spans these days.

Pointless, it's impossible to make the DUP look more ridiculous than they already do.

Tbh I find all the talk about "needing a natural striker" completely old fashioned, always have. Goals are goals. So long as you have people making the runs of a striker, who can score goals, like Salah and Mane whenever Firmino difts wide or deep, you're alright. Plus, Firmino isn't a bad finisher. And actually when you watch Liverpool, this new 4-4-1-1 shape basically has Salah playing as a striker most of the time.

I think that figure would account for roughly 4 years worth of our net contribution. The questions to ask are: after 4 years, how many billion of pounds of growth will we have potentially lost thanks to Brexit? How much less valuable will our pounds be than they otherwise would have been? Even dismissing all of that, and accepting that our budget will be greater in 4 years than it would have been if Brexit had never happened, what are the odds of the government at that time actually using it to improve the lives of regular British people? Even within the EU, there has been a lot that the Tories could have done, and instead they have actively strangled the NHS and fucked up welfare with Universal Credit in the name of an austerity policy which they have now admitted was basically pointless. How can anyone think that that potential gain in our budget, even if we were to accept that it will exist, is going to go to us? That's not how Britain works.

"Administrative task addons" sound innocuous enough, but delays and increased regulatory demands are two of the big increases in supply chain costs. To go backwards from a totally seamless border is a major adjustment, and it would hit the NI agricultural industry heavily - and that industry is, as far as I know, one of the few productive spots in the otherwise-grim Northern Irish economy these days. The EU is offering a way of minimising these obstacles, that requires basically no effort from NI, and so far the only justification anyone has found for blocking it is purely ideological.

I'd imagine there would be some interest. And in any case the existing arrangement with NI is proving increasingly unworkable, to the point where devolved gov has failed entirely and we're basically needing to govern them without Stormont. NI could do with a change, but the DUP are so ideologically stubborn that they would rather a massively increased economic blow on NI, than any sign of increasing cooperation with Dublin. Maybe the fact that economic shock of a hard border would be hardest felt by the generally non-DUP supporting areas in the south and west of Ulster, idk. I could imagine Foster being the type willing to hurt herself a little to hurt someone else a lot. And I can argue with their position, and I do call them crazy because I think blocking perfectly reasonable proposals, which would ease the hardships faced by both sides, on the grounds of nationalist paranoia, is not a sound position.

No, but if anyone is going to be pleased it's not going to be us. Ireland is naturally most vulnerable, being a small country trapped with us as their obvious main trading partner. The mere fact of us inflicting a major economic shock on ourselves is enough to hurt Ireland. A hard border would obviously do even more damage, but that simply won't happen. The EU are dead set on Ireland as a whole remaining aligned. Unless we break off in a no-deal situation, the EU just will not allow a hard border. And the leadership in England has also said that they don't want a hard border - Johnson even went so far as to say that if we broke off without an agreement on a border, we just wouldn't enforce it, and then it would the Irish's fault if they decided to police it (which is obviously a mental idea). In fact we would already have agreed to the EUs demands if not for 10 insane MPs who don't want any difference between NI and Britain unless it's on abortion or gays' rights. Ireland is economically hurting because they border one country, and that country is a major economy, and that country is hamstringing itself economically. The EU, in insisting on regulatory alignment between the North and the Republic, is at least working to minimise the damage to Ireland. Thats what the EU is: a small, isolated country like Ireland becomes the more powerful negotiating power vs a major power like the UK because it has the largest economic bloc in the world acting in its interest.

I've not seen anything that suggests that. Hard Brexit was absolutely not in the public's contemplation during the referendum - the public was sold a lie that the EU would be generous to us because we supposedly were indispensable to them. This is the reality. The EU holds all the cards, and if we insist on leaving we have to do so by their terms, or be an international pariah. Its already hard enough to establish new links to the rest of the world without the EU's existing connections and bureaucracy. It would be even harder if we just left the EU without settling our obligations. Our negotiating strength was weak to begin with, and the astounding incompetence and arrogance of the Tory party has seen us weaken it even further, and this is the result. We are dealing with an entity that economically dwarfs us, has international connections we can only dream of, is far more united and clear in its aim than we are, and is even dramatically more prepared than we are. They have put a lot more thought into this than the Tories have. Brexit, as a large part of the Leave vote understood it, was never a possibility. People did not understand how bad our chances of securing a good deal were - every concern was dismissed by the leave campaign, who constantly said it would be easy and amicable. And as regards this Northern Ireland malarkey, its an absolute joke. The Tories promised no border on the Irish Sea to the maniacs at the DUP, who are now the tiny, bigoted tail wagging the whole Tory dog. They also promised no hard border in Ireland to the EU, and we're also bound to that by the Good Friday Agreement. We're now being faced with a reality that Brexit means economically dividing our own country. And if it's a possibility for Scotland to do something similar and align ourselves economically and legally with the EU within the confines of the UK, we absolutely should. We voted Remain by an even wider margin than NI.

Yeah but it's the combination of his physique and his ability to win the ball and drive through midfield, plus his ability to thread and finish combinations around the box that could make him an unreal player. But the thing is that there's a fine line between doing all those things and being amazing, and also just dilly-dallying and getting in your own way.

It's hard to judge what Can's normal level actually is. He can go from stretches of being a game-winner and bossing huge matches to stretches of totally throwing the whole midfield out of rhythm. His talent is undeniable but he seems to lack the footballing maturity to piece it together on a regular basis.

It's one of those where Can might go to Juve and find his perfect role as well as some consistency, in which case he will turn out a great player and it will be easy to look back and say "they were stupid to let him go". But as it stands now, Liverpool need consistent performers and Can has never really been that. Not getting a fee is annoying but Juve don't throw silly money around, and it's not like Liverpool are short of cash.

Every system has a hump it needs to go over when the novelty factor wears off, and teams start spotting the weaknesses. It doesn’t mean it’s no use - every shape has a way of attacking it - it just means you’ve got to tinker with the details and try fresh personnel combinations.

Or, you know, his BVB team were just a lot better than this Liverpool side are. His tactics seemed to work pretty well with Goetze and Kagawa at their peaks feeding Robert Lewandowski, Gundogan or Sahin building play instead of Henderson, real ball-winners like Bender and Kehl, and world-class defenders like Hummels and Piszczek. I still think the biggest issue is his approach to recruitment - not his tactics, though they have been suspect at times. Admitting that he's not going to be able to build another world-class team without major signings would be a much more significant change than him changing his playing approach. He didn't "get away" with anything - he just achieved something rare and incredible. But acquiring and developing as many unbelievable talents as Dortmund did in a couple of years at so little cost is a once-in-a-career kind of achievement - lightning isn't going to strike twice and suddenly reveal the hidden magic of players like Lovren and Henderson, as much as he seems to believe that it will. Its like Ferguson bringing through the class of 92 - you can't take away credit for it just because it was impossible to repeat.

Curious to see how Foden does. If City keep blowing away teams there's plenty of scope for him to get a good amount of minutes off the bench.

As well as chicken, when I was living abroad and cooking regularly I always liked minced pork for an easy dinner. Any minced meat is insanely easy to cook, actually. Just cook a whole pack of it in a big pot with chopped onions, garlic, tomatoes and pepper, and a shit load of spices. Then I would just have it with wraps, or potatoes or whatever I liked, until I ran out. Cheap, easy and delicious af. I normally just did it with whatever meat I can could get on sale (ah student life), but minced pork was normally the cheapest.

If Klopp does decide to be ruthless with Lovren you probably would need a situation where the club tops-up his wages whilst he's on loan or signed for another club. And I also don't think the Balotelli argument is entirely transferable: it was seen as a long shot and everybody knew it probably wouldn't work. With Van Dijk, people knew he was the ideal choice, but some other imaginable targets like De Vrij were obviously quality players with a long record of solid performances. It's not like it was a choice between Van Dijk or a wild punt.

But every top side pushes the full backs on, except perhaps for United. Liverpool can't sit back and shield their defense, so it's clear the solution lies elsewhere. Van Dijk is far faster and more agile in one on ones, and is comfortable winning the ball back and then distributing under pressure. Those are both areas where Lovren struggles. It seems to me that Lovren likes static battles like he had with Lukaku. Besides better defenders, top sides can afford to push the full backs up because they know they're not going to give the ball away, except around the opposition box. Liverpool are so bad at progressing the ball safely up the pitch, and every time Henderson, Milner or Can screw up, the defense will be caught out.

Apparently she was also doing a lot of work on the Maltese mafia, so perhaps the motive is a bit less interesting.

Don't know much about the US constitution but I'm fairly sure that the Union is indissoluble. Even when the state legislature voted to secede in 1861 and then took part in the civil war, the Supreme Court ruled a few years after the war ended, that Texas had legally never left the union. It's all moot anyway since I sincerely doubt more than a tiny percentage actually want to leave the United States.

Did Everton learn nothing from Ronald's Christmas tree scandal?