Search results

Fair point. That would even things up a little.

Yes, the longer it drags on the more impetus there will be to do something along the lines of your suggestion, otherwise we are going to have a lot of people at the extremes. I think if they knew it was going to last that long then they'd do that from the outset. In the short and medium term...

You are not the only one. I don't want the app. I think there are too many people in government who view the pandemic as an opportunity to circumvent the usual procedures and checks for their own political or financial gain. Maybe my distrust is unwarranted but I am uneasy about using it.

I assumed they will have to open all areas of the stadium. If they shut parts of the stadium then the total seats they can sell will be proportionally reduced I'd imagine.

Yeah, I am sure they have analysed it. Given that we don't know how long restrictions will be in place and the capacity is highly likely to be variable for this period, I think the random approach is fair enough for now. Complicating it could be a big admin burden. They must be juggling a...

Yes sorry. But it was overturned on appeal.

Yes. A lot of unknowns. Plus it's impossible to know how many people will opt out for each ballot. This obviously boosts your chances. I was a bit surprised how spread out the distribution is though. This didn't match my gut feeling.

35% success rate: 40% success rate:

Arrgh. Yes I was.Goddamit! I will recalculate for a different success %. FFS.

Out of curiosity I looked at the distribution for every possible outcome, 0 - 19 successes. If it was in place ballot was in place for the whole season at the same 30% rate, and every STH applied for every match, they'd be about 1000 unlucky people who were only successful for 2 or fewer...

I am not convinced that is great advice, even if it does avoid a PCN. No matter how careful you are aren't you increasing the chances of causing an accident with the traffic coming across the other way?

My understanding is the use of should/must has significance. If you transgress any part of the highway code where "must" or "must not" is used then you are guilty of an offence. If you transgress any part where should/should not is used then this could be used to establish liability, so you may...

Yes. Exactly. It would then be the law rather than advice.

Proposed new text is: "At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning." So the differences are you'd have to stop for pedestrians when exiting a junction too, and also give way to any pedestrians waiting to cross...

It IS the same when turning right. The highway code makes no mention of whether you are turning left or right: 3. Road junctions (170 to 183) 170 Take extra care at junctions. You should watch out for cyclists, motorcyclists, powered wheelchairs/mobility scooters and pedestrians as they are...

Most tweets on the subject by LUFC fans seem to be tongue in cheek, but it's the small number of apparently earnest nonsense tweets that tickle me.

One months notice and he's theirs for nothing!:

Brexit to the rescue! Not sure Mike here has fully thought through the ramifications of his made up BS: You are hurting his feelings you sh*ts: Hand in a transfer request you coward!:

Why don't they just sign a bang average centre back for a lot less money and let Bielsa work his magic? Genuinely confused.

Damn right!