Inverted

I honestly don't think Schmeichel or Forster would be such massive upgrades. Maybe a bit better, but to me they're all in that category of quite good but not top class.

Although I thought Karius was a step below Mignolet when he first arrived, I still felt he should be 1st-choice considering his potential. However, I really can't remember the last time Mignolet really blundered. He's still a bit weak aerially, but tbh I don't feel he's worth replacing unless a guaranteed top-class performer comes in. Rn, Mignolet until Karius can take over seems like a passable state of affairs.

Just finished The Mixer by Michael Cox, and I really enjoyed it. Once I got into it I found myself absolutely firing through it and losing all track of time. I especially enjoyed reading about the long stretch of the PL that I was too young to see. Now im about 100 pages into this: It's quite ambitious in that it's pretty much an attempt at a social and economic history of global Imperialism over a fairly active stretch of time, but so far I'm enjoying it, and even though it jumps from things like the increasing use of household appliances like telephones, to shipping trends, to politics, it seems to work.

Looks like Bürki hit it into Pisczcek, who hit it back into Bürki, and it deflected in.

Seems they've bundled it in. The trouble with Ancelotti's Bayern is that they seem so sluggish and aimless, that it's absolutely impossible to justify unless they get the result. When they're behind, it's very rare that you can say they deserve better.

Considering how the market is it's actually quite a good price as well. Its basically a choice between spending insane amounts on a proven top-level performer (Walker), spending insane amounts on a very raw talent with massive potential (Mendy), or making a modest move for a solid, quality player who could develop a bit further into a top-level PL full-back. Fans will always want the flashy move but I can't fault Liverpool here.

Holding out for Klopp to suddenly turn him into the next Schmelzer or Piszczek.

I'm a decent chunk into The Rights of Man and, embarrassingly, I genuinely laughed at how much Paine slags Edmund Burke's criticism of the French Revolution.

They do say that changing the topic entirely when clearly refuted is a sign of intelligence.

Very funny, Id suggest someone do a similar joke against the right, but it's already hard enough to get them to pick up a book. And calling for one instance of property appropriation in an emergency isn't Marxist. Jezza supports regulated capitalism. He believes you can have a fair society if you force bosses to pay their workers more and treat them well. Marx thought the workers needed to violently overthrow their boss and seize collective control of the workplace. A few nationalisations and some labour regulations is just capitalism-lite.

The right often complains about the ease with which words like "racist" or"fascist" are thrown around these days. But, when it comes to their approach to the left they're happy to throw around words like Marxist or communist. And the funny thing is, that Marx and Engels were pretty rare amongst thinkers in that they offered a one sentence summary of what they stood for: "In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property." Corbyn supports private property.

https://www.thecanary.co/2017/06/28/nigel-farage-seeing-red-after-advice-corbyn-supporters-spectacularly-backfires/ Farage should probably know better than to throw terms like "Marxist" around in an age when people can easily google basic information for themselves, and see through his bullshit. Corbyn is far from a Marxist, and in any case "Marxist" doesn't have the same Cold War ring to it anymore.

Red pencils are a subset of pencils. Schadenfreude is a subset of freude.

I distinctly remember Scotland fans feeling humiliated when we got a last-minute equaliser against Lithuania at home. We were clear favourites, and we ended up throwing the kitchen sink at a team of players that nobody has heard of and scraping a draw. And it was a gutting experience from beginning to end. That's how most fans react to their team drastically underperforming. The only exception is England, when they play Scotland, because no other footballing nation has a main historic rival who is so far behind them. Germany beat Algeria to get into a bloody World Cup quarter-final, and there was a media inquest because they needed extra-time and they didnt totally batter them. And don't say it's not fair to compare England to Germany, because Algeria are far better than Scotland. The only difference is this historical rivalry, which as I said, cultivates mediocrity on both sides.

If you can't see that this is the exact thing I'm talking about, then we're never going to get to the end of this. That sentence makes no sense. How did you rob us of a win? By drawing. You celebrated a draw. It's basically mathematical logic. So long as England fans can get a kick out of a result that shite, they'll always have something to fall back on that no other major country has. Meanwhile Scotland will always get unduly pumped-up for these kinds of matches and then blow it against other teams.

That's an accusation that's pretty hard for the weaker sides of most rivalries to refute. It's pretty standard that it's easier for the favourite side to say they aren't bothered by it.

When English fans are overjoyed by scraping a draw against us, it's very easy to mask it as just being glad to spite Scotland. But that's a difference without a distinction. Scotland offers a source of easy gratification that no other major nation has. Pleasure is pleasure. If Germany gets a late equaliser against Slovenia or whatever, they're embarrassed. And genuinely embarrassed - they can't lazily claim "oh its just funny to get one over the Slovenians" or whatever, whilst saying they don't really feel happy about it. This kind of spiteful happiness is a cheap source of satisfaction to cover up the fact that a team like England's should easily beat Scotland. If any other major nation played us, they wouldn't be happy unless they beat us by a couple of goals.

A big part of the culture of mediocrity in English football is to do with a perennial satisfaction with doing better than Scotland, a country a tenth the size with an even smaller fraction of the investment in football, very few decent academies, and an even more disastrously mis-managed FA. It's not healthy to think of a nation with every conceivable disadvantage against you as your main rival, but it offers a kind of weak gratification that can't be had from comparing yourselves to Germany, France, Italy or Spain. We invented international football together, and you've won a single major trophy more than us, think of it that way. Edit: the "rivalry" probably has a big part of the blame for our shiteness as well. Our "biggest" match is a fixture that we statistically should be expected to lose. Our whole psyche is based on making an underdog effort for a few key matches, rather than consistently performing against teams on or below our level.

I don't know what it is about Zouma but I think when a centreback has pace, I'm way more critical about them. It feels like a lot of young defenders rely on their speed to cover mistakes, and it hides positional weakness.

Never even tried it. My mum's a pretty heavy smoker, my grandfather also used to be one and then needed a heart transplant, after which he quit, and my father's parents both died of cancer before I was born. So you could imagine that I fucking hate it. I don't get preachy to people, but some of my friends smoke, mostly just when they drink, and it bugs the life out of me. I'm around 2nd-hand smoke normally at home, so I can't complain from that perspective. From a personal health perspective, I don't keep perfectly healthy to say the least, so I guess I need to let them have their personal poison.

I don't think he's actually a Catholic, but from what I've heard he is pretty much completely anti-abortion, except where the mother's life is at risk. But yeah, he seems to be a typical conservative - secures his own rights, and shuts the door after himself. So long as there's no racism or legalised homophobia, he's doesn't care about women not having control over their own bodies.

As far as I know, besides matters on gay rights, he tows the usual Catholic conservative line on abortion etc. One un-elected right-wing PM, who happens to be gay, doesn't get rid of Ireland's problem with religion and social backwardness.

Vor Frelsers Kirke in Christianshavn, in the south of Copenhagen. Me and some pals are trying to do some touristy stuff when we get time, since the semester's almost over. It's a beautiful view in all directions, it's worth the climb through some very narrow and steep passages inside the tower. Once is enough, though.

Wonder how long that fella had that photo in his library, obviously just waiting for the perfect banter opportunity.

Me after climbing up 90m of rickety as fuck 17th century church steps.