Geordie Ahmed

Solid challenge that like

That defending was horrific 

2-2

Leeds pull one back, a bit of pinball there

5 minutes ago, WarrenBartonCentrePartin said:

 

Aye, realised that now. Didn't see all three occur so wasn't aware. Jammy fucks.

I mean, tbf they've had 3 injuries in the first half, a bit of a stretch to call them jammy 

I remember Arter doing a not too dissimilar challenge on Joselu I think, a few years back and I felt that should have been a red

It's a red for me, not even contentious imo

I've never been a fan of the tactical/cynical foul anyway but usually when it's done it's a lot of subtle and certainly not as dangerous as Allan

He goes in with such pace, ball long gone and at one stage he does have both feet off the ground and he also catches him on the ankle

44 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

They don't have to win on the bounce, Leeds and Everton need to win just two of their remaining 9/11 matches respectively to pass us in the circumstance you're talking about.

 

The difference is that we're got the most difficult run-in of any of the clubs down there and a terrible record against the top half. We could easily not win another match.

I get that but I'm just referring to them even getting past us and that is on the worst case scenario of us just losing our next set of games

Get a win from Spurs and the 3 home games that follow then those clubs need to do even more, a couple of wins and that's us safe

3 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

Everton, Leeds and Brentford are easily going to do enough to pass us if that happens, then it just needs to be one from Burnley and Watford. Burnley only need two more wins than us to make our match with them a relegation decider in that circumstance.

 

We have a really tough run-in and we're not out of danger yet.

That's my point the chances of 3 sides getting back to wins is low

I'm not factoring Brentford as they are only a point behind us but Leeds would need back to back wins to go ahead, Everton would need back to back wins just to draw level (ahead on GD) and Burnley back to back wins still has them 4 behind us, so they need 4 wins. The odd team doing that is possible but it would need 3 teams to do it and I'm not sure that's ever happened before. A glance at the form table shows from 14 downwards only 2 teams have done that (Us and Brentford)

We aren't safe yet but I see us similar to Brentford when people were saying they'll be dragged into it, just a win buys us so much breathing space, after Spurs we have 3 home games on the bounce, that's where we will hopefully be safe.

8 minutes ago, Danh1 said:

Still not 100% we will stay up.

 

Suppose that’s natural being an NUFC fan. Just hope the confidence we’ve played with doesn’t evaporate. Suppose this break and some warm weather team bonding etc will help with that.

 

 

I'm not at 100% either but that's normal

I try to look at it as objectively as I can and from this situation it would take something ridiculous for us to get relegated. Not only would we have to keep losing (possible) but at least 3 clubs would need to really string a number of wins on the bounce (unlikely)

Hopefully results go our way so by the time we play Spurs it's basically a free hit with no pressure

And on paper the results should go our way (although there is bound to be the odd surprise result)

The objective for Howe was to keep us up, which when he was appointed we know going to take some effort and even after the Watford game most of us thought we were done for.

The run we went on was amazing but I don't think the objective changes, yes the higher the finish the better but staying in the league was the priority and if we do that then it's a bloody job well done.

He was mostly backed in January and he has so far done his part. If he keeps us up then it's back to the owners to do their part and back him. If the plan is to really kick on then Wood can't be starting for us next season and our options on the wing need to be improved. 

Just now, The Prophet said:

 

They can't both win both games in hand as one of them is against each other, for what it's worth.

Even better 

Plus I guess the other teams will play each other too and take points off one another

After back to back defeats, especially late on I get why emotions would be running high but bigger picture we are sitting pretty (Assuming you see the objective as simply stay up, I've never bought in or cared too much for finishing top 10, that's for next season)

After Watford we were in a dire situation, 4 points from safety having played 2 games more and in terms of Everton we were 11 points behind them having played 2 games more

Fast forward to now and we are 9 points away from 18th, if we assume the worst and Everton/Burnley win both games in hand we are still 5 points from 18th position. So that is 2 wins that would be needed assuming we keep losing. 

But if we look at it logically you might get 1 team showing top 4 form but 3? It's extremely likely to the point it's almost impossible. Every single team below us would swap positions with us in a heartbeat so bigger picture is we are doing more than fine. 

11 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

 

It's still an absurd example in the first place, which is what I was getting at, not really whether it's more or less absurd.

 

I can understand why people would be for it, I know people who are for it.

 

Unfortunately the reason I understand why these people are for it is because they either don't know or don't care about its history, its deliberate misuse, or its ineffectiveness. They just want what they view as justice and pay no mind to the morality of it, let alone the innocent people who'll be executed along the way.

 

 

 

Capital punishment was the discussion, not the example

I used gambling as the example and then someone ludicrously brought in sex with children

Anyhow, I completely agree with the second line onwards, it was essentially my point from the start. You understand their point, then hopefully educate them on why it's not logical or sensible. 

3 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

 

Killing people as punishment for crimes isn't an absurd example in itself?

This conversation is going down a completely different angle to what I had intended but since it's been raised aye I do think sex with children is worse than capital punishment 

Again, I'm not in favour of capital punishment, just that I can understand why countries/people would in principle be for it. 

3 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

 

Have I? I think defending (often) extrajudicial state-sanctioned murder is no less absurd.

I disagree but this wasn't even the original point I was making 

I'm not here to defend capital punishment (more because the miscarriage of justice element), just that in principal I can see why others would be for it

1 minute ago, Dembacha said:

Absolutely, one which is right and the other which is by default wrong.

In your opinion, a number of countries disagree with you 

4 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

This is silly, you could make this vague "well there's arguments on both sides so let's all agree to disagree" about absolutely anything.

 

Some people like to have sex with children and think it should be legal. I disagree with them on that. Who's right? Nobody knows so let's all just get along and accept both sides make a marvellous case.

I'm not saying we agree to disagree, just that a complete lack of understanding that other people will have a different position on certain subjects is not always helpful

You've had to resort to an absolutely absurd example to highlight your point 

4 minutes ago, Dembacha said:

People who oppose the death penalty and who in my view are right to do so.

I have no issues with you having the view but this is about recognising not everyone will share that view

A far removed example being gambling, I don't gamble (for religious reasons) and I think it ruins lives and provides little to no benefit but there will be people that completely disagree with me on that. Who then decides who is right in that situation? 

So when it comes to Capital Punishment different countries clearly have different views on the subject. 

Paul Merson said with confidence that he still thinks it will be City which means Liverpool winning is nailed on 

The only game I can see Liverpool possibly dropping points is at the Etihad, whereas City I can see dropping points away to Wolves and West Ham plus the game at the Etihad

I think Liverpool will win at the Etihad and then stay ahead of City

2 minutes ago, HTT II said:

Good question, I just don’t think a government or state should have the RIGHT to basically murder someone, regardless of crime. Don’t get me wrong, I’d happily kill someone if they say harmed my family in some way which is wrong on every level, legally and in a human way, but that’s me on an animalistic basic level. Surely we have risen above that as a collective society today, though, in 2022? Or maybe not…

Don't get me wrong, I have no issue with your view, especially when you add in the very questionable judgement process (be that the US or Saudi) it's logical however for someone that thinks otherwise, they can easily excuse that. We have enough people in this country that constantly call for it. 

7 hours ago, Disco said:

Hopefully he takes Bristol up and stays or gets a move up a division or two or to the SPL. All he needs is regular football and if it’s playing in a team that keeps it on the deck then all the better. 

Yeah, although it seems he should be playing a level much higher and I think a stint in The Championship is something we should consider, however if Bristol Rovers do go up then letting him have at least 6 months could be more valuable as he will likely continue to get games and we know he's being utilised and developed.

1 minute ago, HTT II said:

On a human level, it’s hard to excuse a state killing anyone even if guilty of this that or another, I would rather Bin Laden rot in a jail for example than be wiped out. Again some people don’t deserve to live, but it’s not up to me or anyone else to decide that surely.  

I don't think it is hard, it's only hard if you are vehemently opposed to capital punishment, not everyone will share that view and those that don't will have the opinion that it's fine and it doesn't concern them. Who says their view is wrong whilst yours is right?

Paul Merson reckons nowt has changed and that City will win

Which means Liverpool are nailed on to win the league