Parklife
-
Posts
10,744 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
19
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Tartan Army Message Board News
Media Demo
Posts posted by Parklife
-
-
22 minutes ago, Rolling hIlls said:
Not posted on the football bit for a while.
Gee, I wonder why that could be...
-
On 10/11/2020 at 5:35 PM, Toepoke said:
Has there ever been a player with such an advantage on a single surface? 65% of his slams won on clay!
Yet he's also an Aussie open away from being the only man (Open era) to win them all twice.
-
15 minutes ago, Rolling hIlls said:
You given up on football?
No. Why would I have?
-
5 minutes ago, phart said:
I've also been using nate silver and his site for information, they seem to be pretty neutral.
It's mad how many folk have voted already. Texas in particular by county has already had more than 120% of the votes as last time. Some activists tried to get 130,000 votes chucked out in Harris county but the republican appointed judges were having none of it.
Yeah wanting to stop counting at midnight in Pennsylvania with the assumption that the mail ballots won't be processed and counted and they are majority Democrat so Trump would win isn't democracy. I guess the campaign is worried. Like the boxer that starts fouling or hitting after the bell etc.
Yeah, I've been listening to the 538 podcasts the last week or so too. Very informative and, as you say, pretty neutral. With the exception of how scathing they've been on the Trump campaign's anti-democratic tactics.
Theres been a lot of talk of the under-weighting of education in polls last time around (which led to an underplaying of the Trump vote) and how this has now been corrected. We'll see if the pollsters' deeds are as good as their words in around 24 hours time.
-
FiveThirtyEight giving Biden a 90% chance of winning as we enter Election Day.
Key states appear to be, in particular, Pennsylvania (Biden polling somewhere around 5% ahead) and Florida (neck and neck). If one candidate can take both these States, it's unlikely the won't win.
Trump's campaign are already talking of declaring victory if they're ahead on the early count, in an attempt to delegitimise remaining postal votes that haven't yet been counted. A quote shameful tactic which completely betrays the democratic ideals that the USA claims to stand for.
Whatever happens, the fall out over the next few months will not be pretty. Trump won't go quietly and, if he wins again, I can see both he and the lunatics in his support becoming emboldened in their rhetoric and their actions.
-
41 minutes ago, phart said:handsy/ˈhan(d)zi/adjectiveinformaladjective: handsy
-
tending to touch other people, typically in a way that is inappropriate or unwanted.
Not sure you guys are miles away from each other if you just isolate this one point. On the whole subject a different matter.
Aaid's comment, to me at least, suggested a pattern of behaviour. Not one single inappropriate incident (when both parties had been drinking), for which an apology had been issued and accepted.
To try and imply someone has a problem with their conduct and character in general based on that one incident is outrageous IMO.
-
-
1 hour ago, aaid said:
I'm actually quite surprised that you're defending Salmond here. I'd have thought given your previous posts on the subject of men "overstepping the mark" with women, you'd be the first to condemn him.
I'm not defending anyone. I'm saying that given the many clearly fabricated accusations that were slung at him, saying what you said is outlandish.
An inappropriate cuddle is pretty much the sum total of what he's done wrong, yet was on trial for fucking rape and has had his whole reputation and character destroyed.
-
4 minutes ago, aaid said:
Turns out he was also a bit "handsy" but no-one knew that at the time.
Wow. After all that's come out, that's quite an outlandish thing to be saying.
4 minutes ago, aaid said:
That there was - and is - a problem with anti-semitism in the Labour party shouldn't be ignored and he failed to deal with that.Under his stewardship the toughest anti-racism rules that exist within any political party were brought in.
He didn't "fail to deal with that". He dealt with it completely proportionately. Other people not acting proportionately reflects on them, not Corbyn.
My apologies, You've typed reams and I've no interest in getting involved in a discussion in such depth. Which is why I just singled out two parts of what you said.
-
Just logged on, saw this thread in the first page, hoped Delboy had been on the cans again.
Disappointing.
-
On 10/30/2020 at 8:04 PM, Dave78 said:
Galling what they did to Corbyn.
Excellent.
22 hours ago, TDYER63 said:He doesnt like titles but he accepted the knighthood? 🤔
‘’ But Starmer had already chosen to abandon the title during his political career, and had decided not to use it in day-to-day-life prior to election as Labour leader.
He told the Hampstead & Highgate Express, a local newspaper in his north London constituency, that "I've never liked titles.
"When I was DPP, everyone called me director and I said, 'Please don't call me director, call me Keir Starmer.' It's a very similar battle now."
Yeah. "Don't call me 'sir' please". We'll hand back the fucking knighthood and condemn the whole continued existence of an antiquated honours system.
22 hours ago, aaid said:Of course it completely possible that Jeremy Corbyn was subjected to concerted attacks from inside and outwith the Labour Party from the moment he was elected *and* that he was completely useless as a leader, achieved nothing and set things back.
Both these can be - and IMHO are - true.They can both be true. It can also be true that he was continually undermined by those in his party and the media, who set the news agenda, and that made leading the party to election success nigh-on impossible.
I cannot remember your posting but were you critical/angered by the near complete media opposition to independence? I doubt many Yes people complaining about that were also "yeah but salmond was completely useless too".
21 hours ago, King Of Paisley said:The Salmond affair will be a mere sideshow in comparison to the maelstrom that will engulf Liebour over this.
The sooner the Labour Party in its current form, bother up here and UK wide, dies the all the better. Hopefully in a post Indy Scotland there will be a traditional Labour Party that goes back to its roots and uphold the values Maxton and Keir Hardie held dear.
Amen.
-
4 hours ago, shunkyboy and the fluffer said:
I actually thought Starmer was doing a pretty decent job till yesterday.
"Sir" Kier Starmer is a man who should be nowhere near the leadership of the Labour Party. A man who legitimises and supports an unequal society through his acceptance of such a title. A society which is titled against the working class, the people he is there to stand up for, in so many different ways.
The endless smearing of Corbyn from those in his own party and those in the press has been for many years an utter scandal. Jeremy Corbyn has a track record going back decades of standing up to all forms of racism and under his stewardship labour brought in the toughest anti-racism rules that exist in any UK political party.
Fuck Kier Starmer and fuck the Labour Party.
-
38 minutes ago, Morrisandmoo said:
Find it very weird that folk want to put McKenna in ahead of cooper or Gallagher. He has to be behind both of them.
Really? He's much better than both.
-
If we had 3 Andy Considine's there'd be no issue. A giant among men.
-
Definite improvements being made.
I thought we were pretty good last night. Given we were without some key men, I don't think we can have much to criticise. We looked relatively solid at the back (Considine ❤️) and played some decent football going forward. We're still struggling to create chances but I'm hopeful that'll improve. Particularly with Christie to come back in and (hopefully) Griffiths returning too.
-
11?
in TA specific
I'd be starting McBurnie. Dykes isn't an international class player & McBurnie should be champing at the bit to prove himself.
-
23 minutes ago, Mox said:
In many ways you're right, premiership teams have spent ridiculous amount of money on average defenders for years and if McKenna can even half a decent 6 months then he might get a move to a premiership side but it is a huge might.
I'm not convinced he's a good defender by any stretch, i've seen plenty of games where he has looked horrendous and his distribution, for an international defender is absolutely atrocious. He's decent, his level is probably the middle of the championship and i hope Aberdeen take Forest for every single slither of cash they can, they and every other team should be doing the same.
Everyone has bad games sometimes though. I've seen Peter Pawlett on multiple occasions rip the cunt out of Virgil van Dijk and he's went for £75 million.
McKenna is still relatively young and improving. I agree on his distribution though, it's very poor and will have to improve.
-
24 minutes ago, sbcmfc said:
I really rate Gallagher, I think on form he should be in the Scotland squad ahead of McKenna.
McKenna has been outstanding this season. Gallagher should be in the squad along with McKenna, I'd agree with that.
24 minutes ago, sbcmfc said:To be fair, I see Gallagher week in week out and only really see McKenna up against better teams either old firm or Europe on tv, international or against Motherwell. 😜
Gallagher is also in his 30th year and is at his current career peak. He's clearly not got the same value as McKenna.
24 minutes ago, sbcmfc said:
You’ll undoubtedly have the opposite perspective and opinion to me.I do agree about the attributes he has. Look at Kipre now in the EPL and Bevis Mugabe could well get a decent gig down south too, if not quite at that level.
Good luck to Aberdeen if they get £3 million for McKenna and well done to them on holding our fir what they think he’s worth.
I think he's worth more. If the additional £2 million of add ons are reasonably achievable, a final fee of around £5 million is more realistic. The fees in English football are obscene. He'll move on from Forest for more money in future IMO.
-
19 hours ago, Malcolm said:
Might be in league one next year at Forrest
Calm down. They've got just the 44 league games left to play 😂
-
14 hours ago, sbcmfc said:
Who the duck is buying McKenna?
i don’t get the hype. Declan Gallagher has been a better player over the last 18 months, Motherwell finished above Aberdeen last season, dealt with them in 20 minutes today.... 😜
There's no "hype". He's a good young centre half. He's strong and quick (essential attributes for English football) and, when asked to defend, can do so very well.
I don't quite get the anti-McKenna chat that's so prevalent amongst fans of other sides tbh. It's a bit bizarre. I think it stems from Aberdeen having the audacity to seek a proper fee for him, which is entirely the right thing to have done.
Be interesting to see what the add on clauses are for, as I can very much see him doing well in England. Dumplings like Ben Mee transfer for £10 million + down there, so there's no reason McKenna won't.
I assume the Declan Gallagher comment is a joke too. -
7 hours ago, scotlad said:
I actually think any of those players would have been better in a back three than McTominay - at least they're actual defenders. He was at fault for the Czech goal and it reminded me a little of the goal Kazakhstan scored where Graeme Shinnie was playing left-back - they both allowed attackers to run in behind them simply because they are not used to defending those positions.
As for Clarke, yeah, we could get rid but we've been here before, haven't we? Changing the manager - again - doesn't address the more fundamental issues, namely the dearth of talent in goals, defence and attack. However, a display as listless as the two we've just seen against opposition even slightly better and it could get very messy indeed.
So much better that we managed a grand total of 8 goals in 14 games - and one of them was an OG.
Burley took over a team that did attack opponents and score goals but in a remarkably short space of time undid almost all of the good work put in by his predecessors. He was a dreadful Scotland manager, arguably only eclipsed in that respect by the person who replaced him.
No one argues that Burley was a good Scotland manager. So not really sure what the point of your post was.
-
10 hours ago, Squirrelhumper said:
Sadly I don't think he is!
No issues with Aberdeen and RC having the trial games.
Makes perfect sense given the number of cases and restrictions in the central belt.
Also makes sense for AFC to be one of the teams given the had a UEFA delegate at their home match in the europa league who was looking at their systems and protocols. He then gave AFC a strong commendation.
-
15 hours ago, Orraloon said:
Reward the club that broke the lockdown rules. Ridiculous decision. They should be the last club to be allowed fans back in.
I assume you're at the wind-up?
-
24 minutes ago, SWMM82 said:
Never said he was anything special, I just don’t rate McKenna. Porteous has played every minute of the season so far for a Hibs side that have started the season well and been solid at the back. Scotland u21s don’t concede many goals either and his leadership at the back is a major factor in that.
I don’t think it’s bonkers to say he should be considered.... especially when we are so lacklustre at centre half.
His team got beat off McKenna's last game out too. Fluking a win vs st Johnstone thanks to an awful offside call and beating a few likely bottom 6 teams isn't that much to shout about.
I have no issue with him being considered. He may improve and I'll be wrong. Claiming he's a superior centre back to McKenna at this stage however, is bonkers to me.
Hes 21 years old (just two years younger than McKenna) and has barely played any football. He's a huge amount to prove. If he manages more than 20 games this season between red cards and injuries, maybe he'll do that.
-
36 minutes ago, SWMM82 said:
Porteous can be rash yes.... but he’s no more of a liability than McKenna. For me, Porteous is more mobile and better on the ball and he’s a leader. McKenna showed promise a couple of years ago but hasn’t kicked on, hence why we’re even debating his inclusion. He should’ve nailed that position by now.
He's none of those things IMO. He's also a total liability. Doubt he'll progress beyond Hibs tbh. I've never quite understood why a few folk think he's something special.
Scotty and Parklife
in Football related - Discussion of non TA football
Posted
Personally, I've no interest when the standard of debate is as exhibited in the first post above.