Kid Icarus

It is a bit broken by today's standards. Neither of those designs fix the things that are broken. I dunno, I can't wrap my head around thinking that what he's done can be all that bad when it's so close to the original anyway.

Just my opinion and perhaps naïve, but the push back against the ESL suggests to me that the infinite growth model is either about to hit a brick wall and the bubble will burst, or they'll find a way to push through.

Businesses wouldn't be adopting it out of the goodness of their hearts if there wasn't a profit motive, so in that sense it's sophistry. However, the research is an aside from that. It's independent, peer reviewed, and has been going on for decades with the same findings. Companies citing or using that research to fill their pockets doesn't mean the research is wrong, they're not mutually exclusive. Soon enough renewable energy will be genuinely profitable and businesses will be claiming they're selling it to save the planet. Just because they'll be lying about their motivations that doesn't mean renewable energy isn't still a good thing.

I do it for a living, so I can explain a bit. The original design isn't really a clear example of something that's massively inaccessible tbh, but there are some issues that I can spot. - there's a lack of clarity on the seahorse's faces and especially the lion's face - the Newcastle United font is too small and has serifs (difficult to read for dyslexia) - the top banner edging makes it very busy In general though, examples of demographics that could be excluded with design choices are: - people who are blind* or have low vision - people with varying types of colour blindness - people with dyslexia - people with autism - people with physical or motor disabilities (not too relevant in this case) * the more complex a design the more difficult it is to explain in the 'image alternative text' that screen readers use to describe images It might seem a bit PC gone mad or whatever, but combined all of the demographics make up 20% of the population. So like 13 million people in the UK alone, not including people who may have temporary accessibility issues due to an injury or something, so it's a huge amount of people to be excluding. In 1992 no one really had their eyes on any of this and the internet wasn't really a popular thing then. I have no doubt that the driver for companies to adhere to all of this is their bottom line. Avoiding penalties, being able to simplify designs and reduce costs, more potential customers etc. The fact it's actually a net benefit for society is just a lucky byproduct.

Accessibility and readability are a fundamental part of good digital content design basically. If you create something that's either a visual mess or completely inaccessible or unreadable for any demographic then you're essentially excluding them from it. Personally I think he's done a fantastic job there and essentially just cleaned the badge up without compromising the original design. The only real big change is the rope (I forget its proper name) being arched.

Get this man on the case.

The Bonucci selfie with Maguire in the background was a bit more than celebrating tbh like. Doesn't bother me all that much tbh, but him doing that does make them failing to make the world cup funnier.

As much as I agree with your point like, I still think that ASM's lack of doing anything off the ball sticks out like a sore thumb compared to the likes of Ginola, Robert, or Ben Arfa. The game has changed loads in that time as well. I think I have a pretty high threshold for players who put most of their energy into attacking, but I do think ASM takes the piss at times.

Reminder that Messi had the most failed through balls for years in La Liga.

What!? I had no idea we were in for him. I loved Rui Costa like, he'd be dragging Wolves to 4th if he was playing today.

Beyond tired of all the talk about Pogba like. How to get the best out of him, his supposed attitude, who to pair him with, his strengths and weaknesses, his agent, his social media presence, his fucking haircuts. It's been going on for what feels like 10 years. He's 29, the jury's in, either pair him with midfielders that can accommodate him in a system so you can get the best out of him or don't and accept that he'll be hit and miss. That's been the right conclusion for years now surely? Yet you still hear the same endless chatter from pundits about how to unlock his ability and how his form is patchy like it's some great mystery, it's mental.

They're essentially one of the 'Too big to fail' banks

Only one there I don't have any problem with is the ridiculous money in football going largely to footballers. If it's going to go anywhere it should go to those doing the work and genuinely creating the wealth. I think footballers wages are a convenient scapegoat and diversion for people to fixate on instead of the real reasons why unrelated money isn't going where it's needed. Nurses and soldiers usually but also all of the problems in football too. You only have to look at the U.S to see how players get absolutely shafted financially is what the alternative would be.

I'd definitely put the tribalism and lack of fan empathy/solidarity down to capitalism. Mainly because of the lack of it everywhere else, the 'I'm alright Jack' individualism and social destruction that came about with neoliberalism in the '70s, and all of that having being driven by the result of having a capitalist system. Or what others might say is an unchecked capitalist system. It's only grown and grown since then really. The more I think about it the more I think football is a microcosm.

Can't stand diving but weirdly the two players I always see brought up, Grealish and Zaha, I don't think are that bad and do often get some pretty rough treatment. Or at least they seem no worse than everyone else, it's endemic now.

The same answer I have for most pastimes that reach a certain level of popularity - the way that capitalism has monetised it into ever increasing meaninglessness. More or less every problem I have with football (the one you mention being one of them) can be traced back to that being the source. At least with things like music, gaming, films, food etc you can find what you love and ignore all that, with football you're locked into who you support.

70-90 are when they were at their best I think. I'd go with 86. Quite like 30-38 as well in their own way.

That's a very specific metric tbh. It's not a criticism, it's his strength, but there aren't many other players who do things in the same way he does as exclusively as he does

As have all of the other England players in those matches. They've also performed consistently against the best teams in major tournaments. Scoring goals, defending well, making saves, and performing in shootouts. Maguire's a laughing stock at Man United and Pickford's been a liability in the past for Everton, but up until now they've been completely different players as soon as they put on an England shirt.

Henderson overrated? If we're now at the point where people rate him to the extent that he's actually seen as overrated, then he's done pretty well I reckon. I've rated him highly for about 10 years now, at least 5 of those years I only saw people maintain that he's shit. He brings so much more than just on the ball football ability. Even then I think his ability - particularly his first time balls forward - is underappreciated. Obviously he's a mackem but I'd love us to have a player like him in our midfield. Totally agree about Mikel btw, although tbf I think he was playing out of position at Chelsea. Pickford's much like Maguire for me, chalk and cheese depending on if they're playing for their club or for England.

It's mad how quickly the England team has gone from being a bunch of post-golden generation players who aren't up to scratch, to suddenly being so good that Southgate should be winning tournaments with them. It's been mad to see it happen and I can only think that it's happened because Southgate's set a rod for his own back by being much more successful than any England manager over the past 20 to 30 years. Even if you believe that Southgate's not getting the most out of the players he has, the idea that they should win things is still a bit daft. You could say the same about a handful of teams every time a tournament comes around. That's including teams with more talent than England, which is why there are no teams that should win anything.

Newcastle-Online. est 2004 'confundens hyperbolen pro malis et non legendi recte' Stick it on the badge.

And FWIW I think Roberto Carlos is a fair shout. Fantastic going forward at the time but not a patch on Maldini's overall game for me. I still see him ranking very highly in all time lists when for me there have been better players since as well: Cole, Lahm, Marcelo. I was thinking that Cafu is possibly slightly overrated in my lifetime as well, but no, I think that's much more a case of Dani Alves still being criminally underrated. He's definitely the best RB I've seen.

In hindsight I feel like all of the players that were involved in the GOAT conversation from Maradona to Messi were probably a bit overrated. It makes more sense now that people I knew who'd seen Pele, Maradona, Cruyff, and Best weren't bothered about players like Owen, Figo, Nedved, Davids, Beckham when they were talked about as being the best players in the world around 2001. Or when Zidane or Ronaldinho were talked about as being two of the best players ever in the mid-2000s. In my lifetime the first player that comes to mind is Raul. The amount of hype around him far surpassed anything I ever saw from him.

Fucking dying here like