Search results

So then the question is, Ricoh a white elephant, or will City change their new stadium plan and go back to the Ricoh? To me (even though I am biased), it seems daft to have a purpose built , empty stadium just sitting there, while we go off and build another purpose built stadium.

Yeah, I'm the same with 69.

45 mins

Though everyone now does know his name and his photo is on his Facebook page

This was on the Forest forum when they had just equalised to make it 1-1 Re: Matchday 46 - Nottingham Forest v Stoke City - Official Matchday Thread For the hard of thinking, as it stands now, Swansea need a five goal swing in half an hour. This forum would be in complete and total meltdown...

We would be absolutely the same, if not worse. It needed a combination of a Forest defeat AND a Swansea win AND a 5 goal swing, for Swansea to pip Forest Unbelievable. When you only need a draw at home on the final day of the season, or a narrow loss, you really shouldn't be losing 4-1.

Yes. Normal cooking temperature at first, But then blitz them on full power and constantly turn them, again and again, like every 5 mins

Why won't I? I had a ST for St. Andrews and had earmarked some games, but was unable to attend. It was only Sixfields I wouldn't go to. Are you mixing me up with someone else?

I am indeed skeptical it will ever get built at all, but also too in terms of , if it ever were to be go ahead, it will be a cheap, botch job, with far too many corners cut and it will be yet another thing for us to moan about. So many people used to moan like hell about HR and it being cold...

Why do we think this would be less of a soulless bowl than the Ricoh, should it ever happen? Quite likely to be yet another, I should think.

Yup. Can't say I am at all excited. I will believe it when I see it.

Brentford only need to draw today to overtake the Baggies. Superior goal difference. If they don't lose today, they are dead certs to go up.

I can definitely see a tool.

Don't you mean nylons?

Captain America

Yup. We should thank God for the gift of bringing them into our lives. Maybe even have a Mickle mass.

Surely no lawyer defending any client in any legal case, is ever in a position to guarantee their client's future behaviour are they.

Exactly that. It is not accurate for the things they are trying to use it for, but the system wasn't supposed to be used for those things in the first place. It's a madness.

So, like I say, it is the implementation of the system. VAR CAN be used for whatever they wish to use it for. It is how they have applied the rules to the system that is wrong, not the system itself. That one last night should have taken one single look, too close to call, go with the onfield...

Which is why I have always said, if they cannot see an obvious error within 20 seconds, it goes back to the onfield decision. VAR is fine if they implement it properly. It's supposed to be for obvious errors, not for someone's toenail sticking out