Jump to content

Davo

Members
  • Content Count

    7,569
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    33

 Content Type 

Profiles

Store

News Articles

Western Sydney Wanderers Youth Match Reports

Western Sydney Wanderers Match Database

Western Sydney Wanderers Women Match Reports

Western Sydney Wanderers Player Database

Western Sydney Wanderers NPL

Forums

Calendar

Everything posted by Davo

  1. That Brighton vs United game is going to boil some piss.
  2. Davo

    Danijel Nizic

    To be fair, a couple of the goals in that game were absolute bangers.
  3. Davo

    Mitchell Duke

    They way things have been going lately he's probably more likely to get paid in the A-League than at Bolton.
  4. That Xanthi side is just going to be A-League cast offs and Popa's kids.
  5. Davo

    Mitchell Duke

    Bandaged up and with blood running down his face he beats his marker (who's also bandaged up so it looks like it's been a running battle) and scores a header for an 85th minute winner in the Champions League. Please come back you magnificent bastard.
  6. Asian Champions League: Al Hilal kicked out after naming 11-man squad
  7. I bet he can comfortably reconcile that when he's a devout Mormon and the front runner for the supreme court seat is an anti-abortion judge who has gone on the record saying the bible takes precedent over the constitution and that "judges should be bound by their religious faith, not the law".
  8. The papers really got stuck into the personal attacks on judges back then.
  9. That's Romney out. He wasn't a senator in 2016 as he ran for President so as far as I can tell he didn't take a side on the Merrick Garland issue, which protects him a little from the accusations of hypocrisy.
  10. From those decisions I posted above, here is the Ref Watch article on Sky Sports. On the Spurs one: Uses a few weasel words like "uncomfortable" and "unlucky" but it sounds like he's saying that the decision is wrong. On the Burnley one: Describes the blatant push as "used a lot of strength" and says "it certainly doesn't come off his arm". Not sure how to argue with this as it's so far from the reality of what the replays show that it seems pointless, which is probably what he was going for. Maybe there's some interpretation of the law I'm not aware of where his arms count as legs when it's the first half, you're in the opposition box and your name is Wood.
  11. From this article in the terror: So they massively overpaid in July 2018 and some time between July 2018 and June 2019 received $58k in donations from the seller.
  12. I know I'm banging on about the handball rule but the Premier League games overnight did my head in with some decisions. Here are the highlights from the Southampton vs Spurs game. At 2:53 a handball is given after the Saints player tries to play a pass along the ground, it hits a defenders foot a metre away, flicks up and hits the outstretched arm of another defender which is in contact with the opponent. The arm is extended but below the shoulder, a fraction of a second passes from kick to deflection to arm and his arm is nowhere near the original path of the ball. Handball given. Here are the highlights from the Leicester vs Burnley game. At 0:08 the ball is crossed in to the back post, comes off the defender and hits the strikers outstretched arm which is in contact with the opponent (this is a handball rant so we'll ignore that the outstretched hand was a blatant push). The arm is extended but below the shoulder. Ball comes off the strikers arm, drops perfectly to his feet for him to score. No handball, goal given. In both cases the offending player has an arm out touching an opponent (arguably those actions are fouls in themselves, particularly the Burnley one). In both cases the arm is below the shoulder. In both cases the ball deflects off another player within touching distance. The Burnley player gets a huge advantage from the contact as it sets him up to score. The Spurs player arguably doesn't gain an advantage as the pass had already been blocked by his team mate and wasn't going anywhere dangerous. I can't figure out how both of those VAR reviewed decisions are correct.
  13. The other issue with the Republicans leaving a vote until the lame duck period is the Arizona senate vote. After John McCain’s death the seat has been held on an interim basis, so this is a special election. The winner doesn’t get sworn in with the rest of congress in January, and based on Arizona’s laws could be sworn in by late November. The Republican incumbent is behind in the polls so within a month of the election the senate could go from 53-47 to 52-48.
  14. The media needs to make them clarify what that means. If they won’t vote to confirm a new justice that doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll vote no, they could just abstain. Lisa Murkowski is one of the four in that article and during the Kavanaugh confirmation she didn’t vote either way, she just got marked as present. If two of the four abstain and two vote no that means the vote is 49-49. Ties in the senate are broken by the Vice President and we know how Pence will vote. Need at least three Republicans to not only not vote yes but actually vote no. Also I wouldn’t trust Lindsay Graham as the quote they used for him was in 2018. He’s one of Trumps biggest supporters but was one of his biggest critics during the primaries. He’ll say whatever he needs to say at the time. Romney is an interesting one. He voted for Trumps removal from office after the impeachment so it’s possible, but he’s also extremely religious. If Trump dangles a staunch anti-abortion nominee I wouldn’t be surprised if he supported it and it wouldn’t cost him any votes in Mormon heavy Utah. Trump said overnight that he expects to make his nomination in a week. One issue Trump has is that he isn’t polling as well as he should with Christians outside of the hardcore evangelicals, probably because he doesn’t exactly exude Christian values. If his nomination is a Christian pushing family values who hints at being anti-abortion without making it a key issue to energise the pro choice crowd, and the Republican senators say the only way to get them in is to vote for Trump that could give him a bump in the polls.
  15. It’ll be interesting to see how the Republicans play this. The R controlled senate refused to confirm Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland in 2016 because it was as election year and “the people should decide”. I fully expect them to be hypocrites and claim things are somehow different this time but the timing of their move is important. If they rush through a justice before the election then they’ll need pretty much all of the Republican senators to tow the line. That exposes a bunch who are at risk of losing their seats. Susan Collins copped a lot when she voted to confirm Boofin’ Brett Kavanaugh and this could be the tipping point for a few more in a senate that’s looking more and more likely to turn blue. If they go down this path it’s pretty much guaranteed Trump is bringing in someone to back up his election shithousery. My guess is they’ll wait until after the election but before the next Congress is sworn in. That way they shield the senate from having to publicly back someone. Mitch McConnell can even play the good guy and say they’ll honour what they did four years ago and hold off until after the election. If they win he can claim the high ground and if they lose he’ll tell some story about how the Democrats cheated and he needs to confirm a justice to protect America or some similar bullshit. The only risk is whether they can get someone through quick enough to mess with the election fight which will inevitably end up in the Supreme Court.
  16. Davo

    Macarthur FC

    Yeah I'd move our border a bit south, particularly near Liverpool, but I'd also move the northern border between us and the smurfs slightly to the west. I know a few Hills types who don't identify as from Western Sydney. I'd also argue that the smurfs territory doesn't go that far north on the coast as there would be Mariners fans up there who could get to Gosford faster than Moore Park.
  17. Thanks, I think that might be it. I couldn't find a deposit to WSW but if it went to the group leader then that makes more sense.
  18. Interesting. It crossed my mind that it was something like that although I had a look through my bank transaction history and can only find the one payment. Also I did some googling and found the terms and conditions for last year's memberships here. It says "The Upfront Yearly Payment Plan payment will be deducted in one instalment in June each year via a nominated VISA, MasterCard or American Express card." Mine went out June 20th for the exact amount on the invoice. I wonder whether there was a foundation member discount last year that they've removed for this year.
  19. The cost to renew my membership looked a bit high in the email they sent, particularly as it says "this season you will receive a 10% DISCOUNT on last season's membership price". So I logged into the membership website and checked my invoice for last season. The renewal price they sent me, which presumably includes the 10% discount, is $5 more than I paid last year. If that price is 10% off then the pre-discount price went up by $35. I've sent them an email so we'll see what they say.
  20. See all that just tells me it’s a poorly written law. If your arms are below your shoulders it’s not handball, except when it is. If you’re sliding and it hits one of your arms it’s not handball but if it hits the other arm it is handball (can’t wait for the VAR call where they roll back and forward frame by frame to see whether their hand is touching the ground when the ball hits it so it’s not handball, or it’s a millimetre above the ground and is handball). It’s so excessively complicated that there’s no way your average park football player is going to understand it and no way park football referees are going to be able to apply it consistently. They’ve got a hard enough job as it is without having to be a California lawyer and figure out whether there’s an r in the month or a retrograde moon for it to be handball. If there’s so many terms and conditions you’re never going to convince a player that the decision is correct.
  21. Maybe the plan is to wait for the level of football to drop down to ours and beat them with experience.
  22. Even the Mariners have kept paying the players in full, although if they are at the cap floor and don't have marquees you could argue that they've been paying 50% all season.
×
×
  • Create New...