MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
The Importance of Sport (NEW CONCEPTS)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 353, 354, 355
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

This noble desire of NFL coaches to make to make young men "become the best darn versions of themselves", appears to be reducing the level of Line Backing serial killers, and Wide Receivers arsonists, even if players continue to get caught speeding, crashing, commiting domestic violence etc.

Latest example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzJH6DrCJoA

Keep up the good work.....
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

How to Lose Fifty Million Dollars

1. Be raised and educated in reduced circumstances.*
2. In your early twenties, use one of the millions to acquire a Lamborghini
3. and a celebrity sporting girlfriend.*
4. Wait.

* I'm using code here. I don't want to be banned from the AEL.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Cocklecarrot's World Cup

I need to draw my colleagues' attention to 'raking' -- when Player A brings the sole of his boot in a rapid motion onto and then down the calf of Player B. It is an automatic red card offence since serious injury is likely to result. The operative word here is 'brings'.

* Is it a deliberate act? Then it is a red card.
* Is it not a deliberate act, but a reckless one? Then it is a red card.
* Is it incidental to a lawful coming together of two players? Then it is not a red card.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Don't forget the Champions' League starts next week, Petrocub vs Egnatia Rrogozhinë.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Google wrote:
And then the kick-off time stayed as it was. England's seismic meeting against the co-hosts in Mexico City was suddenly shrouded in uncertainty. The match at the Azteca will now start, as originally planned, at 18:00 local time on Sunday - 01:00 BST on Monday.

As opposed to prime time (in Britain) Sunday evening. There are two competing theories as to what happened:

1. The official one: that Mexican meteorologists had forecast, three days ahead of time, that a storm would hit Mexico at 1800 hours and that therefore the kick-off should be moved forward by six hours (for, I would think, the first time in World Cup history). But later thought better of it.

2. My own (and presumably others): that British and FIFA pressure was put on the Mexicans to allow this plum draw to go out at a less ungodly hour, to which the Mexicans first acceded and then bowed to other countervailing pressures.

From a purely footballing perspective, there is the question of

1. Whether noon or 6 pm is better for English footballers at the Azteca
2. Whether playing in the noonday sun or an evening cloudburst is better for English footballers at the Azteca.

From a wider perspective, there is the question of

1. Will this give rise to conspiratorial waves over the e-waves
2. Will we ever learn the full truth?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

It does occur to me however that altering kick-off times might be a useful addition to standard World Cup practices. It would not greatly affect spectators since nobody is, as it were, travelling to the match in circumstances set in stone. It would affect TV schedules, though beneficially.

The World Cup, after all, is unique in having all the world time zones in play unpredictably in the knockout rounds. Though there is no reason why the group matches should not be varied to advantage. (Maybe they were.) It would lead to fierce controversies about which matches should be played when. Which is all to the good!
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

"You can tell both teams are totally exhausted in these conditions." American commentator, just before half-time.

Gulp. Where was this?
Kansas City.
Gulp. When was it?
8.30 in the evening.
Gulp. Who were these teams?
Colombia and Ghana.
Gulp.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The conditions in Mexico City are ideal for football, that is why the Mexico Cup in 1970 was one of the best ever (not as good as 66 of course....) and we made the quarter-final. The 1968 Olympics was one of the best ever, in terms of world records. Tommy Smith 200-meter world record of 19.83 seconds, Bob Beaman world record long jump and so on.

Tuchal has correctly picked young fast quick paced defenders rather than long distance plodders like Maguire.

Its really an ideal opportunity for the players to play their best football. Main danger is that the ball will fly quicker and we over hit our set pieces.

We will be fine......
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Thanks, Wiley, that's a load off my mind. We have been overhitting our crosses at sea-level, but that must be the new ball designed for each tournament. It always takes our lads time to acclimatise to that. It's why we take our own food with us (though not WAGS this time).

Also the surfaces have been a bit ropey. They don't seem to understand that Premiership-style football requires watered pitches. There shouldn't be drinks breaks, there should be watering breaks.

I'm not worried about Mexico and then Brazil. Or Argentina in the semis. 'Dey goes as dagoes,' is the battle cry here. The main thing is we keep away from France and Spain until the final and hope someone clogs their stars for us like they did in '66.

Talking of which, I'm not sure you're right about 1966. I've heard a lot of complaints from a lot of quarters over the years. Remember, an AE-ist has no country!
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Plot Thickens

FIFA considered rescheduling England’s World Cup round-of-16 game against Mexico at the Estadio Azteca primarily because of concerns raised around the safety of supporters, with weather an additional, but not key, driver of the talks, The Athletic can reveal.

FIFA sources initially pointed to concerns over possible weather disruption, including flooding. The Athletic’s weather expert Aaron Mentkowski reported earlier on Friday that the forecast appears to predict a typical summer day in Mexico City on Sunday.

The Athletic has since been told by sources with knowledge of the decision-making process, speaking anonymously to protect relationships, that it was in fact safety and security concerns for fans of both teams attending the game that were the primary drivers for the potential change.

That the discussions were held at all, despite the scale of the logistical challenge of rescheduling a game at such short notice, and the criticism that would have followed from many stakeholders, is indicative of just how seriously the risk of playing at the originally planned time was taken.

The game will go ahead as planned with the anticipated pushback from those directly involved on the performance side, including Mexico head coach Javier Aguirre — and inconvenienced fans — contributing to FIFA walking back a decision that had been all but made internally.

The BBC, which will broadcast the game in the UK at 1am local time, was forced to deny its own involvement in the talks after reports to the contrary in Mexico. “The BBC were not involved in these discussions,” it said in a statement.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 353, 354, 355

Jump to:  
Page 355 of 355

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group