Understood, just interested as to what people see in it. For me its the best cure for insomnia known to mankind.

(Oh and by the way I generally quite enjoy watching motorsports both on 2 and 4 wheels)

I’m confused by your point, to be honest.

But hey, you find F1 interesting so that doesn’t entirely shock me! 🙄

Whats the point of anything we do for entertainment

What I mean is, its a bit like the Premiership. When you get down to it a few races in theres a shrewd idea of the team and the driver who’ll win it, 80% of the participants have absolutely no chance, and the organisers are perpetually changing the rules in a desperate bid to try and make it more interesting, before the public ans sponsors ctton on to the fact that as a racing spectacle its crepe. In the meantime the cost of going is obscene, the participants are creaming it in and as ususal the paying public seem to be having the pee taken out of them in a fairly profound way.

Honestly people, tell me what is the point of F1? Its about as exciting as watching trees grow, and has little relevance nowadays unless you happen to be one of the lucky few creaming it in.

A global recession doesn’t explain why the pound has lost 30% of it’s value over the past year.

Pretty sure that if you track through the issues you find that it does, especially given that a very significant part of our (post Thatcher) economy is dependant on the Financial Institutions which appear to be right royally fecked by the global situation.

Soz Duplicates TJ’s post, with the exception of the bit about exports, where I’m not sure I agree, given that our manufacturing base has been so seriously eroded, (again possible hand of Thatcher involvement).

Cleaned it!

and with guessing like that I’m off to put the pay cheque on a horse

Why do people always blame Margaret Thatcher for everyone else’s mistakes?!?

Errr …… they don’t, only for hers, and there are plenty to choose from. Pretty much one to fit every occasion probably why those who are able to look at situations even handedly tend to continually point it out at a guess.

just as a matter of interest smogster, what would you like to fill the ensuing void with?

Its a government conspiracy to cover up the previous conspiracies to knock off Princess Di, up the anti against Muslims, Blunkett claiming for home and away Kennomeat for his mutt, and for GB being an Alien.

I have no doubt whatsoever that someone will be along shortly to expose it in detail……. well not very much detail to be fair.

(Personally I thought the use of Pigs was pure genius, as it has potential for all sorts of directions as we move along on the inevitable bandwagon)

ditto what TJ just said.

LOL at the Trekky post. Classic and spot on.

Re: Thatcher the event horizon will be when the insidious impact of her rather nasty policies ceases to effect the rest of us in a demonstrable way.

Mystery: To be fair I did make the point that it was politics apart.

What I actually said was that as a society we have at best accepted a situation where kids aren’t getting the proper messages from their folks about how to live healthy lives. Whilst there will always be a few who rise above that situation, most won’t so we have to bear some responsibility for what is a societal problem collectively.

The reason I asked the Royal Family question is that it’s the same argument in essence, i.e. that the Royals are believed to be special by reason of birth, and that therefore ipso facto if you believe that you will also believe it is not possible to impact upon a persons life style or status, as its something you are genetically programmed with from birth. (Also bol-locks IMHO).

I just happen to believe (along with most of academia, but not SFB apparently) that a great deal of what shapes a person happens in years one to five of their lives. If that is seriously flawed their life chances are IMHO likely to be severely impeded. For that reason, I’ll bring politics in, and the short termism that is a feature of our political system is a serious problem that we all need to wake up to and strive to change, (and yes this bit of it was down to Thatcherism, but its not an accolade that is unique to her).

The question “what’s wrong with society?” is essentially flawed. It should almost ALWAYS be “What’s wrong with these people?”.

I’m guessing here, but are you a royalist by any chance mystery? 🙄

*except for being a bit daily mail

😯 I’ve never been accused of that before !!

A pleasant change from soft liberal bedwetting commy, Joe, so thanks for that.

apocryphal. Everyone ignores their parents. You learn from your peers.

Actually the majority of learning is done between the time of birth and 5 years of age. What traditionally comes after and is as you rightly say hugely influenced by peers is a tiny fraction of what comes before. That is why since the 80’s “peer influence” has in fact become a substantial issue as we have changed to a society where those significant first years are often now spent in a form of care, as opposed to the traditional home environment. Whilst it is always possible to argue the specific against the general, the fact is that we are all aware of a general lowering of standards in most areas of society.

mysterymurdoch : Arguing against or agreeing with my point? Surely you are saying that your parental influences made you what you are. So why should that not then equally apply to someone else but in a negative context.

In fact how could you possibly get so high up on your high horse and not recognise how lucky you were in relation to those around you who weren’t given those chances by their parents.

By the time they leave school they should be capable of making adult choices

Wouldn’t disagree with that, except for the obvious fact that it very frequently doesn’t happen as in this case. Think about it people you can’t have it both ways. Either she is responsible for her actions, in which case she has learnt/developed that behaviour along the way, or shes not, in which case shes a victim.

My argument on that subject is that as a society we went through a seed change in the 80’s where the norm changed from two parents, one at work and one at home with the kids to one where two parents are at work and latterly one parent families substantially changed the dynamic of family life and we are now reaping the rewards, where what to me is abnormal behaviours are now the norm and vice versa.

mastiles_fanylion – Member
Society cannot be blamed for her behaviour. She is an adult and should be able to function as one.

Clearly no point sending anyone to school by that logic, given that its apparently not possible to influence someones behaviour by the inputs of education and example.

Not claiming expert status on the subject Mastiles, but I suspect that with no more than a moments thought you may possibly find that you are completely wrong.

I hate to say it, but in my mind much of what we are now seeing is a product of the eighties “loads of money” culture, where having holidays/cars/larger house etc was far more important than how you brought your kids up. Todays pond lives are the children of Thatchers generation, and without being political about it we (this society) taught them to be selfish self centered and in search of instant gratification. Thats going to take a lot of unteaching frankly. I reckon we will need a Uk version of Barack Obama before we even start on it.

Faints…….

Everybody gets to look in a mirror most mornings. Personally I’d prefer to like what I see….. well apart from the grey hair….. and the bags under the eyes…..oh and the hang dog expression….

Anyway, can’t see how its possible to do that when you are self evidently a selfish twunt. So yep I stop every time.

Boil her down along with all the other lardies, burn the fat and use it to run a power station. Unending fuel supply and I bet it would cut down on methane as well.

G

I can’t take any of the other bits seriously (not that it merits it anyway)

Ditto right back at yer. 8)

Rudey,

The thing you always overlook in your conspiracy theories is the simple fact that successive governments the world over are self evidently unable to organise a saddle sniff in a bike shed.

Just to support this, take a quick glance through the following highly unscientific and thoroughly inexhaustive list :-

Jacqui Smith: Bath plug porn
Bill Clinton : Smoking habits
Jonathan Aitkin : Being a Lying Arse
Jeffery Archer : Perverting the Course of Justice
Richard Nixon : Watergate
Derek Conway: Illicit funding of his kids at university (and for being shite in the Bill)
Neil Hamilton: Cash for Questions
David Blunkett: Mistaking another mans wife for someone who fancied him etc

There are two US presidents and two British Home Secretaries here, who simply couldn’t hide their own transgressions, let alone a huge illegal state conspiracy.

…………………….. Unless of course their undoing is all part of the greater conspiracy….. where in fact this lot were in fact heroes of the people and have been silenced before they could spill the beans on the big conspiracy………

Bugger…… hadn’t thought of that one !

Police saw the girl smashing a computer monitor with a keyboard and flinging the keyboard against a window, breaking it.

Mrs Crighton said: “She admits breaking through the police cordon and said she had done so to rescue some of her friends who had been contained in a police ‘kettle’.

“At the time she got caught up in the heat of the moment. She thought it would be a good idea to go into the [bank’s] foyer.

“When she got inside she thought it would be a better idea to smash up the computer.

“She said she changed her mind and tried to throw the computer through the window instead.

“She was seen picking up a keyboard and smashing a window,” Mrs Crighton said.

Obviously all an innocent mistake on her part then…….

Caught up in the heat of the moment my arse!

Basically the behaviour of twunts like this is why you get kettling and aggressive policing at demonstrations. In my view it totally diminishes everyone elses rights as a result.

I’ve got it, under the Art 47 (c) Geneva Convention if we treated them the same as indiginous troops they would be mercaneries right?? So we’re doing them a favour obviously…….

Frankly its a disgrace in my humble opinion.

Art 47. Mercenaries

1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.
2. A mercenary is any person who:
(a) is specially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;
(b) does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;
(c) is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;
(d) is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;
(e) is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and
(f) has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.

silly boy.

Why Terra??? Like to back that one up??

Ferguson did an exceptional job at Aberdeen

Nobody said he didn’t, just that the majority of his claim to fame came after the premiership was formed fundamentally by Dean, Edwards and Parry, pretty much to suit themselves, and for that reason the successes of those clubs can’t be judged against the achievements of managers who did it on a level playing field. Pre premiership the competition was far greater and far more even. You only have to look at the results of the various competitions played since to see the truth of that simple statement.

(Incidentally Aberdeen were one of the more successful clubs in a poor league dominated by the old firm well before Ferguson went there, not quite rags to riches to be fair.)

Sorry but Fergie will never get the recognition he might deserve from the majority of knowledgeable fans for those reasons.

I think we’re just going round in circles on this one. Ferguson proved his worth at a club with no money

Fair point, except that no he didn’t. The vast majority of his success as a manager came after the formation of the Premiership. The simple point I’m making is that his net worth as a manager cannot therefore be judged agaisnt the likes of Cloughie or for that matter David Moyse or Martin O’Neil. Simply because its a totally rigged competition, which has nothing whatsoever to do with relative capabilities as managers and everything to do with the siphoning off of the cash in the game to a very limited self selected few.

To go back to the original point, I have no doubt Fergie is a great fella and a wonderful manager, but we will never know how he would have done with a level playing field, (Ironic then that the absence of one of those, should upset him of all people!!)

In football management, cream rises to the top.

That point would be better phrased that in football the top cream off the cash and then take the rise by whining and putting out sub standard sides.

Whatever happened to the rule about fielding an understrength team?? I recall you used to get kicked out of competitions, fined and docked points for it. Guess that was another rule they ripped up to suit themselves eh?

the worlds best manager….. my Grandad.

Without doubt the most profound footballing post of the thread. Top man mt

the ultimate currency in the job of rebuilding what was a poor team….. time

Strangely much the same as for all of the managers I have listed. Albeit most of them are at their Aberdeens.

G

I seriously doubt there are significant numbers of managers with top-flight potential who struggle by day-by-day out of some sort of misty-eyer romanticism.

Sorry you lost me with that one.

Starting from the same position, with ongoing funding as he gets?

Martin O’Neil, David Moyes, Harry Redknapp, Roy Hodgson, Steve Bruce, all people in my opinion who have punched well above their finacial weight.

In the past I’d point you at the likes of Cloughie, Ramsay, and most especially Sir Bob, whose career saw him take teams to the very top in English, Spanish, Dutch and Portugese football alongside equitting himself extremely well at National level, only losing out on the big one ultimately to a blatant cheat.

I’d argue that the money is the same for everyone.

You can argue that if you like trail monkey, but you would be seriously wrong. All that Man C. Chelsea and Newcastle prove is that it is virtually impossible for any club to compete due to the financial disparity created by the Premier Leagues rules. Flip your argument over and think in terms of Abramovitch purportedly investing half a billion into Chelsea and it still not being enough to seriously compete with the trimuverate. Then look at the ever growing list of clubs bankrupted by a foray into the Premier world. At some point the regularity with which great old clubs like Ipswich, Leicester, Charlton, Leeds, Southampton, Derby etc etc etc are collasping like a deck of cards as a result, will wake you up to the fact that they can’t all have been run by complete twunts and there has to be something structurally wrong in the game.

Its farcical, the all party commons committee that looked into it actually recommended that they revert back to the old situation pre Premier league to enable the professional game to survive in the long term. Frankly, as a life long supporter of a so called “small” club it is sickening to see the Fergie/Wenger/Benitez/Hiddink fans wattling on about how fantastic these guys are. They aren’t. You try playing Fantasy football with your kids. Give them unlimited funding, and you start off having to sell your best players routinely and not be able to spend any money whatsoever, and then see how you do. I think you’ll find that in these circumstances the better managers are lower down the league.

There is no comparision between Fergie and those managers that came prior to the Premier league. Whilst there is no doubt that he is a great manager, Shankley, et al managed their achievements at a time when the self serving creators of the Premier LEague had yet to work their nasty spell, and the revenue from the game was fairly spread to create competition. Basically a high proportion of Fergies success is down to the machinations behind the scenes by the money boys and is diminished greatly as a result.

sootyandjim – Member
Fergie had nothing but contempt for Everton, that is why he fielded a weak team

No he didn’t, he showed contempt for 80,000 odd fans, plus innumerable others who watched it on TV. Having personally been a victim of paying full price to watch the Old Trafford reserves I can tell you its a disgrace worthy of a call to Trading Standards IMHO, and just before someone perks up with the old bullspoop justification, the answer to that one is, “thats why its difficult to win a lot of trophies you wally!”

I got myself thrown out of a previous Sizewell enquiry, by asking the following:

Given that in Suffolk we already out produce our electricity requirements by some distance, and given that the greatest inefficiency in the grid is transport to point of use by overhead power lines, and also given that all of the power lines from Sizewell head directly to London why is it being built here?

The answer was the lack of an appropriate site; apparently the unused Battersea site wasn’t suitable due to the likelihood of flooding. Yeah right! Which of course doesn’t apply to Sizewell which is on the fastest eroding coastline in Europe, (approximately 1 metre per annum), and as it happens one of the first that will be seriously adversely effected by Global warming ironically enough.

Can’t see the problem myself, just make the ticket relevant to a total weight including luggage, if you go over buy two, which seems totally fair to me. I weigh more than my Mrs, but she carries enough baggage to supply a branch of Marks and Sparks for a week, so it all balances out. If you’re a porker, buy sufficient room for your lardy arse and your oversized luggage, makes you life and mine more comfortable. Sorted!

Naive frankly!

Regarding my lack of awareness of the democratic situation in Hong Kong, to be honest it never occurred to me that anyone would be cock enough to start lecturing the Chinese on that subject from that political position. Understandably, the Chinese governement of the day found it somewhat bemusing as I still do.

Anyway if you wish to have a pop at me or my views on that subject start another thread, I’m not going to respond again on this one

Although I will admit that I haven’t bothered reading most of the stuff you’ve posted

Cheers for that, it places your comment in context.

Anyway, like I said happy to debate the point regarding Chinese human rights situation very fully, but not here, its not what this thread is about, and I’ve no intention of hijacking it. The only point I was seeking to make, is that pictures do not always convey the truth of a situation, and in fact can easily be manipulated.

There were a couple in particular that I saw regarding Tibet around the time of the Olympics which were particularly distasteful. One showing a Policeman in Blue DPM fatigues smacking the snot out of a demonstrator with a baton, over the caption Chinese Police stifle protest. The Chinese Police do not wear Blue DPM. In all probability it was a Nepalese Policeman, where they do and they do also fairly ruthlessly put down Pro Tibetan protests. The other being of a helmeted Policeman bent double running down the road dragging a bleeding man with him, over a similar caption. The same picture coincidentally was run in The China Daily, although it was the full picture and not the edited version used here, with the background of rioters throwing missiles and burning property. That one had the heading along the lines of Police save Han Chinese man from rioters. I make no comment on the veracity of either, other than to point out that only one interpretation can be correct.