Search results

9/18. Sigh. Still, that’s an A* these days, so I should be pleased I guess. *lobs grenade; retires gracefully*

Ha! A few friends have suggested it, yes. Thanks for the direct link to the charity…

Sorry to hear your news, Tony. Book ordered. Looking forward to reading it.

I read that as ‘felching’, and immediately thought of a DULLARD. Can’t imagine why. Mind you, that’d bring an entirely innovative meaning to your caption.

Booo

That’s a mathematical analysis, but takes no account of the relative strength of the opposition played so far by each team. For that, you need to look at @Giraffe’s peerless tracker thread.

My favourite Veltman moment was when he clearly blocked the SEGW from running onto the ball making him tumble over. SEGW looks plaintively to the ref for the foul; Veltman wanders off towards the corner flag whistling, without a care in the world. Nothing to see here. Top shithousery.

If that should happen; they will be.

True. The Brighton manager is operating at a bit higher level than the Chelsea one too. Had a bit less time with his squad too.

That set of results WAS our poor run. 🤞

You've only gone and done it, haven't you? There's you, thinking that you're being all clever with your sarcasm when all you've done is guaranteed relegation. Thanks a lot. But yes, we should remain humble and respectful of the knobbers and the tier 4 cannon fodder.

😂 with Kasparov at 2851 (tournament ranking), 1192 is indeed just shy.

A quick look at Chess.com reveals the mean ELO rating for the club is 1192, with a range of 710-1750, using the ‘Daily’ format to judge.

Mea culpa

They claim that they’ve had a 26% real terms decrease since 2008; 35% puts them back to 2008 in real terms. However, they’ve used RPI to calculate the 26%. The ONS uses CPI, which gives 17%. Also, 2008 just so happens to be the year you’d choose if you wanted to maximise the real terms...

All good here thanks; hope all well with you. I’d agree with all of that with the possible exception of limiting the impartiality wrt political parties solely to those working in news. My reservation isn’t philosophical; it’s practical. You now place a burden on the organisation to ensure that...

See my post 1141. Entirely wrong to be selective, I agree.

I cover exactly these points in an earlier post. I'll see if I can find it. TL;DR? I agree 100% with the emboldened bit.

ok mate