ron obvious

Just had my house buildings renewal quote. Gone up from £240 to £588 Nothing has changed regarding risk or claims. I'm not happy.

Awful performance. Totally inept. I'm afraid Wagner's got to admit that Ida just isn't any good. He has no footballing instincts whatsoever. I keep wanting him to come good but it just isn't there. I don't know what he can do till Sarge returns but he'll have to come up with something. I think Adam's woefulness is not helping team morale. And ditto for Gibson's terminal blunders, which outweigh any quality he might have. Time for a rethink.

What we never seem to do is show the utter determination to score in the way that Swansea did for their 2nd goal. They piled 7 or 8 players in & around the box & basically forced the ball home by hook or by crook. We just don't have the character. As a team, as a club, we simply don't care enough. I'm afraid it's been one of the defining properties of the club over the past 20 or so years I've been watching them. I don't what it used to be like, but I can't imagine it changing any time soon.

I am also convinced that there is an anthropogenic element to the climate, however I am not at all sure how large it is & even what it's long term effect might be. Scientific method is the means by which we determine the best predictive models. It works brilliantly in hard science - nobody has ever provided an instance of Ohm's Law, for example, not working; even then it only really works in laboratory conditions (STP & so forth) but the behaviour of conductors in different conditions can be accurately predicted by more sophisticated modelling without dumping the basic concept. Any scientific theory has first to be tested backwards (do previous data confirm the model or not) before observing predicted outcomes. The more complex the situation the more difficult forming viable models becomes & the more statistically imperfect results (less than 100% predictive accuracy) are considered successful & taken to be accurate enough to be useful. Unfortunately it doesn't get much more complex than climate, & many of the factors influencing it since the planet's creation are but imperfectly understood. I'm afraid my experience of scientists is not that good; as an undergraduate I couldn't understand why so many of my peers obtained decent results using the same derelict apparatus as myself until I discovered that many of them were simply making results up. My experience of fellow electronics engineers was similarly mixed - although of course many were motivated by a love of science & engineering there was usually an element of prevarication when it came to funding. Scientists are human, as prone to frailties as we all are, & have to live in the human world. I sometimes wonder if much of the most significant science was performed by those disinterested, eccentric, gentlemen scientists of yore who didn't have to worry about budgets or committees but just followed their passionate interest in the natural world. So I'm sceptical as to how accurate any of the models are - 'Since Records Began' is really a miniscule time period. And it seems to me that it's part of the governmental tool kit to keep us permanently terrified & therefore malleable (not to mention wonderful raw material for the news industry). Having said all that, the interviewer clearly had an agenda, but I ignored his leading questions & listened to Dr. Curry, who I found to be very sensible & not easily led. Overall my position is that we should be prudent regarding energy sources, but not to the point where it wrecks people's lives on the grounds of some highly speculative disaster scenario. Of which I have seen many throughout my life (cue the human race being wiped out by a disease transmitted by unsanitized telephones ...)

I strongly suggest you watch this:

SAINZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It just reinforces my feeling that it's attitude not ability that's our problem. Our players need to take teams like Plymouth as seriously as they do Fulham.

FFS he's hardly played. He definitely has a touch of class about him. He may well not 'fit' with us, but I'm going to give him some time first.

No pace, urgency, desire, nada, nothing. Rien. Zilch. It's the old story of thinking we're better than we are. If you don't fight, don't put the effort in, you're toast.

I think I've located the source of my confusion. There seem to be 2 contradictory statements about being offside. From wiki: "It is a common misconception that the ball must be played forward for an offside offence to be committed. This is incorrect however, as an offside offence is related to the position of the player in relation to the last two opponents, the ball and the opponent's goal line rather than the direction the ball is played. If the player is closer to the opponent's goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent when it is played by a team mate, she or he is in an offside position." However "If the player is behind the ball when it is played, he or she cannot be offside." So I suppose that is the reason for the decision. Just seems very odd - I think it's just a very rare situation.

i still don't understand. He's miles offside at every moment from 1.40 onwards

Having seen the Sky highlights I obviously don't understand the offside rule. The goal scorer was several feet in front of our 2 central players when the pass was made in front of them. I couldn't see any other Norwich players between the goal scorer & the goal. Can someone please explain why that is not a blatant offside?

It'll be interesting to see the highlights. My first reaction was astonishment - he looked absolutely miles offside to me.

Just watched the Soton v. Foxes highlights; appalling defending - from both sides. I would hope we're a bit more organised than those two, but it's obviously going to be difficult to stop the array of attacking talent from Leicester. Tactics & organisation will determine if we get anything out of the game, but if we get it right & get a result it'll be a huge confidence boost.

Official Norwich version found a bit more ...

They're not questions they're statements of your opinions.

All my best Kathy & good luck in the future.

Still say this is his dad

The OP doesn't even know the name of our manager. Very odd. Yet he comes on & mouths off about one of our very inexperienced players. if I were the suspicious type ...

Well I've just watched the highlights of the England vs. Australia match, on the grounds that it's come on in 'leaps & bounds' It was slightly improved over what I've seen before; I suppose they might give a team of 15 year old boys a bit of a game. I'd still back any half decent boys team though. Since the gap between 15 year old boys football & NCFC's level contains a myriad of better leagues then I can't see why I'd want to watch the lowest level. It just doesn't make any sense to me. All the things that make football exciting are missing. Women just aren't very good at football on any comparative level of speed, strength or skill when under pressure. To assert otherwise flies in the face of observation. But that seems to be the way the world is at the moment.

Hmm. Same for me. Not seen that before. Try copy & pasting this: twitch.tv/andygw5x

All things are relative. But the gap between the top level men's game & the Championship is vastly less than from there to women's football. And the Champs can be pretty dire at times - at others it comes pretty close to the best.