richwwtk

I suspect you are spot on in your assessment of Qatar, and it is a good thing to call them out on it every chance you get. However, if this is indeed a job in Qatar (which doesn't exactly seem clear) then his sexuality will have had no bearing on that whatsoever. It just seems quite often that if a person is anything other than heterosexual then it is brought up in all sorts of situations where it really doesn't need to be.

Is that Bailey Wright playing for Australia? Must have made a recent return to the team if so, maybe a little like Weimann and Austria

I'm no fan of Downsy, can't stand the bloke, but it's sad to see some of the usual suspects bringing his sexuality into it for no reason whatsoever. Grow up FFS.

If there was a way of finding out would love to know the split in that crowd between football fans and the type that think OK magazine is a valuable source of news

I've only ever used it for local purchases where I go and make the transaction in person. Yes, you are buying directly from the seller and therefore have none of the protections etc that come from ebay. Just be very careful, check the seller out best as you can and if you're not spending loads then I guess it's a low risk transaction.

Nah, IF we were to go up, I would prefer to do it in a playoff final with a last minute winner at Wembley in front of 30,000+ City fans Obviously would prefer auto to losing a playoff final though.

Wearing next seasons City kit too!

I get exactly what you are saying and agree entirely about the difference between a supporter and viewer, but I'm not sure how many people are stopped from becoming supporters just because it is possible to watch City without being there. Firstly, I don't imagine anyone such as yourself who has got the bug, time and finances to be able to do 40+ games a season is going to stop just because they could watch it on their laptop at home. And even if you did so occasionally due to circumstances you wouldn't ever lose the drive to go to as many games as you could. I would also imagine that a vast majority of City fans are people that mainly go to Ashton Gate routinely and away games occasionally, but would love to go to more if circumstances allowed. For these people it is a bonus to be able to watch City when life doesn't allow you to be there in person, and also brings a little more into the club coffers. As for 'armchair' fans, then I don't see anyone becoming a City fan in the first place just because Robins TV exists when there is so much higher quality football on TV to attract them in the first place. Basically, if you're already a fan then I don't see that the Robins TV option is going to make many people think '**** it, can't be arsed to go' when they normally would. The only people I really see watching online are people who wouldn't otherwise go to the match. I haven't got to many away games for the last few years due to having a young family growing up. But my son is now old enough to really be into it and is planning on starting to go to away matches this season, hopefully with me in tow, but if not with his mate who we seem to have converted on the last day of the season (he was going to get a Taunton Town ST but has changed to City now!). Robins TV has made no difference to their level of support whatsoever.

I liked it, still not entirely sure though

I so wish I had an 'Is @Agard Days Nightbeing sarcastic or not?' Filter. For some reason I expect everything you say to be sarcastic, but am completely unable to tell if you are.

I'm British and don't want to play this game, but maybe a Norwegian would

I'm coming from it as someone from Weston-super-Mare so never really saw people I already knew at Ashton Gate, though over the years there are obviously people there that I consider friends and see regularly. I'm just proud to be a City fan and, rather than despise people who follow the big clubs, feel a little bit sorry for them that they were never afforded the same opportunity as I was to become a small part of the City supporting community.

Is it only me that doesn't get that bothered by 'plastics'? (using the term plastics here for someone supporting a club they have no geographical or family connection to) I think it would be fair to say that, in football, once you are saddled with a club you are pretty much with that club for life. Most people tend to make their club connections as they first become really 'aware' of football, and without outside influences I would suggest that comes around 10-11. It's only natural at that age to be aware of the teams that get the media coverage, or through your peers. In most cases this will be the bigger, more successful clubs of the day. It's why there seems to be hundreds of Leeds fans amongst people my sort of age (mid fifties) for no apparent reason than they were good in the early/mid seventies. The only way out of you becoming a lifelong supporter of these clubs is for someone to have an effect on you. It may be that you are lucky enough to be taken to Ashton Gate by already City supporting family members in which case the big clubs never took hold or, in my case, I had to wait until I was 15 and old enough to go on my own and went to Ashton Gate with my already City supporting cousin who had in turn been taken by his schoolfriends dad from age 11 or so, thus avoiding the lure of the big clubs. Previous to this I had split my time between being a Man Utd fan (1977 FA Cup) or QPR (League runners up in 1978). For a lot of people with no influence to turn them towards Ashton Gate, they just remain a supporter of the club they 'chose' at an early age and it becomes part of them. Most will go to no more than a couple of games a season, if at all, in person but it is their club and I do not despise them for it. I consider myself lucky to have become a City fan, it makes up a part of my identity more than being a big club fan ever would, but I also consider myself lucky to have been set on that course, and I know a lot of people won't have had that chance. If you are a City fan through family connections etc., then consider yourself very lucky indeed, but remember that other people didn't get that chance. I also think that this is beginning to change, you see more and more City shirts on kids these days, the club is getting better at marketing itself and I really do feel that in another 20 years or so the proportion of City fans to 'plastics' in the area will have shifted a fair way in our favour. Having said all that, people that actively turn their backs on City in order to just follow the successful clubs, or change their allegiances each season according to who won the league the year before are the true plastics, and really do deserve all they get.

Never really 'got' the Killers. Personally surprised that the Manics have to support them rather than the other way round!

19 for me I think

Even if it is made to work with common sense it still detracts from the game. One of the joys of the sport, as everybody knows, is the celebration when you score. These days in the big matches you almost have to wait until you are informed if it is going to VAR or not, that thought is already in fans minds at the top level and will only grow over time. To my mind it spoils it completely. Also, football historically has thrived on bad decisions. It's part of the history and folklore of the game. At the highest level a lovely example is the 'Hand of God'. I know it went against England, but that is irrelevant. It is one of the biggest moments in our history, it is also the match that probably cemented Maradona as one of the all time greats. In the next World Cup it would be disallowed, maybe a sending off for Maradona and would be forgotten in a couple of years. Where's the fun in that? You would also have never had the Freddie Sears Ghost Goal, a great moment from our recentish history. I am all for a lot of things in modern football. The decline in hooliganism, the changes to the game to allow talent to flourish ahead of the cloggers, the improved facilities around stadiums etc., but I will always be against video refereeing. It takes half the joy out of it for me.

I very much doubt that referees themselves have got worse, if anything they will be a lot better given improved fitness etc. I would agree that the constant media scrutiny has made their job much harder and more likely to show up errors of judgement etc. I also agree about the instructions they are given, but still think it's the media coverage that is the main factor at play. And VAR is just a joke in it's current form. Not convinced it will ever work particularly well for Football. It's great for tennis and cricket but Football is a very different beast and does not have the natural breaks in play, or the clear cut out/in type decisions for video replays to improve matters (crossing the goal line decisions aside).

It was Orr's injury that cost us the game, and gave them the goal (in a way). There's a very good OSIB interview wirh Bradley Orr where he talks about it. At the time the goal went in he was badly injured and should have been subbed already. If you watch the goal back (painful I know), you can see him try and block it and uninjured he probably would have but he was seeing treble at the time and tried to head the wrong ball! Probably just as well, as the doctors told him afterwards that, had he made contact, it may well have killed him.

It's not a ripoff though. The bookies are in it to make a profit, they're not a charity. By saying to the customer "you can cash out for a little under market value if you're not so confident on your remaining bets" then they are merely providing an option that, in the long run, would work out best for them but may also be appreciated by the customer in an individual situation. It's no more of a ripoff than the fact that they would never offer you evens on a 50/50 bet. The odds are always stacked in the bookies favour.

Make players pay their agents, rather than the clubs.

To be fair it's clear at the start of the clip that he was indeed pushed. I'm not sure he can claim to have been trying to step over him, but it's not particularly clear whether he actually does land a stamp on him or just misses. Also, somebody earlier was claiming it would be particularly nasty as he would have had football boots on. He was injured for this match and would have been just wearing trainers in all probability. I don't think anything will come of it as it's really not as obvious as some seem to think it is.

Minor error there, but a really good point otherwise

It's a shame that it isn't a single poster. Somebody did exactly the same thing over in the politics forum during a discussion about transgender people using changing rooms. The difference was over there people leapt to his defence when I called him out on it!

If it's a subject you are keen to discuss then, yes, starting a new thread would have been the thing to do. Somehow I don't see you as the type to be particularly interested in doing that though, going by some previous behaviours. You would much rather just try to be contrary when you are not particularly comfortable with a topic. You judged this one wrong though.