Chindie

Carbon dating. Piss simple concept.

I hadn't been to Snobs in too long. Good night, and I don't even know why. Hangover's a bitch though.

Green Day - When I Come Around. One of the few songs I like by them.

I learnt the sequence (thus far, I'm trying to do the Reye's Rebels outift), on the third one of four. I have the sequence ground into my brain. But it isn't enough. You do it too slowly, you fail. you do it too quickly, you fail. You try and do it rhythmically, you fail because the time runs out. **** it right off.

Five Finger Fillet can go **** itself with a rake.

Never found much use for the sniper rifle. The Henry Rifle is bloody good now I think about it, more or less 1 hit kill, only failing is could do with just a bit more range. Working on outfits now, did the US Marshall outfit earlier, should finish the Bollard Twins outfit shortly.

Yeah...use the post results jubilation and book a flight somewhere. (outside England!) Nope, don't know him. Surprisingly given how big Aber is. As for celebrating overseas... haha. No money for that. I amgoing to Snobs tonight however, which is nearly as good.

Waaaah, people have different values from me, waaah Thats really, really pathetic from you especially Levi. Seriously, this is where you cross the line to batshit crazy. And this. I'll not bother again.

I played John as a straight up moral guy as well. I made the most use of the semi-auto shotgun, buffalo rifle, bolt action rifle and Schofield revolver. The shotgun was my peacemaker for wolves and cougars .

Cheers. I'm not really that hyped about getting them because I knew I'd got the 2.1 barring a miracle or total failure months ago, I was just more interested in what I got for the dissertation, I was hoping it'd be the highest mark of 3 years, which it's not. Oh well. Could be worse.

Degree results in, got the 2.1 I already knew I had. 67 in the diss which I'm mildly disappointed about but still, could be worse.

They don't bother me either. I'm fine, my doc referred me last week for a blood test for a problem that I've finally decided I've had enough of, secretly I think she wanted the blood test done anyway because she's convinced I'm anaemic. I'm not entirely sure what they were planning on finding with a blood test since I'm not sure what that has to do with the problem I've got, but never mind. The time before I was fine as well. My brother wasn't so happy, they spent 5 minutes poking around in his arm for a vein, he was a mess afterwards.

Nah, last time they were looking for a single gene. This time they took 3 vials (and I've no idea what for >_>)and it took a minute, last time took about 5 mins and the vial was enormous. I hate those drip ones as well, only had it once and it was not nice, and thats speaking as someone who is alright with needles.

But these aren't the only decisions that deriously change the game? Your idea is fatally flawed from this very point on. That player could be miles away from the incident, all while play goes on. The system, because of the nature of the game and it's flow, has to allow an appeal, if you must have such an idiotic system, to be done practically instantly, there isn't time universally to have the captain be informed and then get to the ref. You've basically suggested a system that only works when plays already stopped, which doesn't solve the problem, which we already know because of point 1 but nevermind, lets humour ourselves. So again, you've not solved a thing... and made a pointless sop to a)ruining the game and b)appeasing the mob desiring this who clearly haven't thought it through at all. So you've not solved the problem and opened a new tactical problem, that potentially punishes teams for trying to do right. What if it was wrong and the team who were in the right were already in an advantageous position? Disagree wholeheartedly. No, you haven't solved it at all. I don't consider it sound. I would require a higher standard of referees, better training, more monitoring of performance and much more harsh 'punishment' for failure, and make it a requirement the ref justifies his decision making post game in a publically available report. And keep technology to the games that suit it.

It fosters a feeling of unacceptance of poor decisions though, which would seep into other aspects of the game. It would not stop at the goal line. And as has been argued a number of times, other decisions lead to goals as well and change games - why would you not want those corrected as well, now that we have accepted that a wrong decision isn't allowable. Once the taboo is broken, it's only a matter of time. And unsurprisingly, I believe that those injustices that colour the game add to the interest and to the nature of it.

Bad decisions are bad decisions, you either accept them or not, so I can and will say 'What if theres more than 1 bad decision'. And I won't be alone saying it.

What about other infractions? They all affect the game, potentially, adversly. What if the captain isn't in the position to see, but another team member (GK for example) was? They wouldn't be able to appeal quickly would they? What if there is more than 1 poor decision a half? All the while the games stopped... What if it is a really close decision, and a perfectly justified challenge? Seems unfair. And the game restarts how, in either scenario? That's 12 minutes stoppage added on top of any other stoppage a half, at least. ...which means you've not really solved the problem have you?

Just about managed to catch that myself. He's right, although I'm unsure how much he's right with the opening gambit. It would undermine his position just by effectively replacing him. Or placing far more pressure on him to use it, effectively reducing his own worth to the game. But otherwise, in the nature of the game, he's bang on.

Football isn't just about the players. It's about the players, the officials, the managers, the rules, the game itself, and the fans, the culture. And if you introduce any form of tech, you will undermine vital aspects of that structure that makes the game what it is.

Because as an opinion its just so patently wrong. That's all. You spawned it. Can we just let it die because it wasn't funny to start with and it's really, really tiresome.

Yes, it does. It adds to the emotion of the game, to the culture of it. The fact we're having this debate is an example of that right now. It is part of the fun. It's screaming at your mate over a pint that 'THAT WAS IN!'. Or '**** off mate, thats a foul in an under 9s game!'. It's maddening, it's frustrating, it's horrendous, it's glorious. I'm vaguely disturbed so few seem to get this. EDIT - and it certainly isn't easy to solve, as you've failed thus far to do so.

Well then, your proposal is impotently flawed. And solves nothing, going only to degrade the game. Leave it alone.

...And that solves nothing, and opens up reams of other problems. The frustration is an aspect of this game. It's horrific when it happens but glorious when you get it go for you. And theres an enjoyment at wrongness of the decision - it's part of the fun. I'm growing frustrated, in a bad way, myself that so many don't get this at all.

No, it's all about game changing decisions, not every decision. Any decision can be game changing. The ref wrongly didn't give a foul, and they scored. The ref wrongly awarded a throw, they scored from it. The ref gives a yellow wrongly early in a match, the defender then is sent off late on for another yellow, his team lose. And on and on it goes.