Jump to content
stuart.

Quick Question Thread

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, ICTJohnboy said:

 

They're great if you've got the bed to yourself. Not so good if you enjoy the odd change of partner. That really confuses the memory and brings forth comments like "Who the f**k's been sleeping in here"..?

A right big fatty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Get a water bed. Best sleep you'll ever have and you can blame it if you have an embarrassing leak after too many Buds

i.e., one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Florentine_Pogen said:

We have a child and also guest rooms at Pogen Towers, you peasant......emoji56.png

 

I thought you were just a mad shagger. 🤫

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ludo*1 said:

I'd definitely recommend some form of memory foam bed, much prefer that to spring style designs.

It's for Throb's w**k chariot remember? There are some memories even foam shouldn't be exposed to.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasnt really sure where to put this, but as I just read the spiel on BBC ablut Wolves disallowed goal there.... Seemingly the new rule is that any goal scored or created with use of an arm, whether accidental or not, will be disallowed.

 

Fancy way of saying if it hits your arm it is a foul end of story.

 

Thats all well and good but unless I am behind here, thats not the rule for the defending team is it? So are we not in IMO the utterly ridiculous position of defining a foul differently based purely on whether you are the attacking or defending team?

 

What is it about handball that turns football authorities into absolute incompetents?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Shandon Par said:

hqdefault.jpg

Chez throbber. 

But which one is his missus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bairnardo said:

Wasnt really sure where to put this, but as I just read the spiel on BBC ablut Wolves disallowed goal there.... Seemingly the new rule is that any goal scored or created with use of an arm, whether accidental or not, will be disallowed.

 

Fancy way of saying if it hits your arm it is a foul end of story.

 

Thats all well and good but unless I am behind here, thats not the rule for the defending team is it? So are we not in IMO the utterly ridiculous position of defining a foul differently based purely on whether you are the attacking or defending team?

 

What is it about handball that turns football authorities into absolute incompetents?

 

 

What if you defend a cross and its hits your arm as you jump which starts the attack, is it a deffensive handball because you clear the ball or is it an attacking handball because you start a counter attack. Its a total farce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Adam101 said:

What if you defend a cross and its hits your arm as you jump which starts the attack, is it a deffensive handball because you clear the ball or is it an attacking handball because you start a counter attack. Its a total farce

You've just made me annoyed now remembering that cup final where Bobo Balde, playing for the perennially hard done-by local team,  punched a clearance upfield to set up Larsson for the equaliser. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do punters at festivals (& other large public events) think it's a hilarious must do to get a picture taken with a copper? Especially if they can get a 'shot' of their hat?

It's not like seeing a police officer is an unusual occurrence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do punters at festivals (& other large public events) think it's a hilarious must do to get a picture taken with a copper? Especially if they can get a 'shot' of their hat?
It's not like seeing a police officer is an unusual occurrence.
Especially when its widely known that All Cops are b*****ds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bairnardo said:

Wasnt really sure where to put this, but as I just read the spiel on BBC ablut Wolves disallowed goal there.... Seemingly the new rule is that any goal scored or created with use of an arm, whether accidental or not, will be disallowed.

 

Fancy way of saying if it hits your arm it is a foul end of story.

 

Thats all well and good but unless I am behind here, thats not the rule for the defending team is it? So are we not in IMO the utterly ridiculous position of defining a foul differently based purely on whether you are the attacking or defending team?

 

What is it about handball that turns football authorities into absolute incompetents?

 

 

I must really be missing something here. If an attacker handles the ball, accidental or not, and it goes in the net then the goal is disallowed. I don't see anything wrong with that.

If a defender handles the ball, accidental or not, and it goes in the net then it's a goal, unless the ref has already blown for a penalty.

Where's the difficulty in that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is that "smell" in every fucking Marks and Spencers you go into?  Its been the same for years.

And im not talking about the pishy old person smell either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, GordonD said:

I must really be missing something here. If an attacker handles the ball, accidental or not, and it goes in the net then the goal is disallowed. I don't see anything wrong with that.

If a defender handles the ball, accidental or not, and it goes in the net then it's a goal, unless the ref has already blown for a penalty.

Where's the difficulty in that?

No... If an attacker benefits from handball regardless of intention and with zero interpretation, then a goal is disallowed. 

 

If a defender benefits from a handball, all sorts of interpretations including intention are applied to see if theres a foul. 

 

Pretty clear discrepancy no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bairnardo said:

No... If an attacker benefits from handball regardless of intention and with zero interpretation, then a goal is disallowed. 

 

If a defender benefits from a handball, all sorts of interpretations including intention are applied to see if theres a foul. 

 

Pretty clear discrepancy no?

Okay, I get it now. I wasn't aware the ref could still use his judgement where a defender's handball was concerned.

(Other than the usual "Is the defender wearing a Celtic top? Yes? Play on!")

Edited by GordonD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm assuming they can. There was all that silhouette pish talk during the summer. Its not straight up if it hits arm its a penalty afaik

Okay, I get it now. I wasn't aware the ref could still use his judgement where a defender's handball was concerned.
(Other than the usual "Is the defender wearing a Celtic top? Yes? Play on!")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mrs just contacted me to say she has lost her phone and could I try and locate it via “find my phone”?

QQ therefore is.. has she been pumping a sailor?

 

AEF03AB4-6E29-411C-BB98-88D91A46293D.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...