The Fish

Aye, I don't remember being that excited about Bellamy. He hadn't exactly ripped up the goal scoring charts previously. But by christ he was rapid and a pest, good technical ability too. Missed his first league goal because I was having a piss. In the derby I loved the arguments that exploded around us whenever we had a freekick around the area. "It's right side, Robert should have it", "Nah Nobby'll lay it off for Shearer" , "Stick it in the box for Speed man!"

Aye, the 01/02 season. That Christmas was when a journo said to Bobby "If you beat Arsenal you could be top at Christmas." "If I had wings I could fly to the moon." "Sure, Bobby, but would you like to be there?" "What, the moon?" Wasn't that our "comeback kings" season as well? We never seemed to accept we were beaten under Sir Bob.

Do large magnets tear small magnets apart? I didn't mention Earth being a North and South pole magnet at all. You massive lying liar. You sit on a throne of lies. All your lies lie on a liars lap. You play lies on your liars lyre. This rambling response proves (yes proof, who'd have thought) that you cannot follow simple lines of thought without veering off into the hinterland of wild theories and improbable, unprovable conjecture. You also throw in a lovely bit suggesting we're all blindly following without question, and you're the rare inquisitive mind. Where in fact I'd suggest the vast majority (if not all) of those who post regularly on here questioned things they were told throughout their life, I'm fairly sure the majority are atheist despite growing up in theist households for example. The difference, Wolfy, is that they've understood what they've been told about gravity, orbits, force and so on. You haven't understood it, and so you've filled in the gaps of knowledge with cod science and arrogance.

IT'S A PADDYOFF!!

Nope, genuinely didn't. Tried to pay for my coffee this morning with my Oyster card. Which you can't do. It has no money on it anyway. Because I live in Manchester. And have done for about 9 months.

Class that, and confirms what we thought about Dalglish and Gullit's style.

I did not know he's older than Shelvey, I thought they were roughly the same age, with Mooy being the younger. fwiw, £10m isn't a huge sum for a creative player in this market and while there are other positions that I think need addressing more urgently, I wouldn't oppose this bit of business.

That's a fair point. Fuck me it's going to be a long day.

Aye, but you can get a boozey boat down the Thames, have a pint in the Bricklayers' garden, stroll up to Craven Cottage and watch the lads get beat, then more beers in Clapham What's not to like?

I quite like Mooy and £10m for him is reasonable outlay. I think he's got the potential to surpass Shelvey and he's already nearly as good, imo. Also, we were far far weaker without Shelvey as we had no replacement, Mooy can do that.

For those not wanting the full-on in-depth version, just play "FM Classic". It's stripped back, buy players, choose team, pick tactics, go.

You must have been already going a fair lick to get flashed. Don't the cameras have a +/- of about 10%?

It has been proven, countless times in countless ways. It's just a small proportion of the population are so arrogant in their delusion they don't think that's good enough. You believe in magnetism, right? I've no idea if there is one out there, but it seems reasonable to me that were someone to fashion a spherical magnet, with 1 pole towards the centre and the other towards the surface, then dip it in ferrous liquid, the liquid would surround the sphere, much as water is pulled to the surface of the globe. Edit- Hey, whaddya know, they did. And it does. in addition, were someone to pass another magnet near to the ferrous-liquid dipped sphere, some of that ferrous-liquid would be attracted to the new magnet. Just as the moon affects the planet's bodies of water to create tides.

Lads, I'm trying to run the following query, but it's taking ages. Any idea how I can summarise it to speed it up any? Select Td.Branch, Td.Cust_Code, td.prod_dept, td.supplier_code,s.supplier_name, REPLACE(CONVERT(VARCHAR,CONVERT(MONEY,cast(sum(case when record_type in (7,16) and *****.dbo.ftnGetGoLocalTopScheme(td.branch,td.cust_code) like 'g%' then total_value *-1 when record_type not in (7,16) and *****.dbo.ftnGetGoLocalTopScheme(td.branch,td.cust_code) like 'g%' then total_value else 0.00 end)as decimal(10,2))),1),'.00','.00') as [GL Spend] From Transaction_Details as Td left outer join dbo.supplier as s on td.supplier_code=s.supplier_code Where Td.Branch >0 and Td.Date_Transaction Between '2015-06-24' AND '2016-04-29 23:59' Group By Td.Branch, Td.Cust_Code, td.prod_dept, td.supplier_code, s.supplier_name Cheers

Cool, cool, cool, but you shoulder the burden of proof. You're the one making a claim, you need to prove it.

It's often disappointing when real teams sign FM legends. Kim Kallstrom was an anticlimax

Cool cool cool, but you shoulder the burden of proof.

You dismissing proof isn't the same as proof not existing. You. Shoulder. The. Burden. Of. Proof.

Oh aye, I forgot he believes there are people paid to pretend to be grieving victims. Abhorrent bh.

You shoulder the burden of proof. Far greater minds than I have proven beyond reasonable doubt that gravity exists, that the moon exists, that the Sun exists, that the stars exist that satellites exist, and so on. I know the ISS exists because I've seen it with my own eyes. You don't "know" anything that your theories propose exist. Not one thing, yet you put it forward as an alternative to scientific status quo, even going so far as to mock the conventional wisdom. You then ask people to prove you wrong. For goodness sake, you asked people to prove satellites existed without using empirical or anecdotal evidence.

So, regardless of whichever person sits you down and takes you, step by step, through your theory, explaining it's flaws and providing evidence that the scientific status quo is reliable... regardless of which poor schmuck actually does this, you won't accept it because you don't believe they know the "truth"? Wolfy man, can't you see how circular your logic is?

Well, that sentence deserves scrutiny. Not by a physicist, just a GCSE English Grammar student. I think you're saying that you won't accept any testing that uses the current scientific status quo as a base? If that's the case, what you're asking is for someone to use your "logic" to disprove your own theory. If not, then I've misunderstood what that sentence is trying to say.

Ridiculous how nervous I get when this thread is bumped.

Aye, but they're all (bar Sels) all right. Not a priority, is all I'm saying. CB, LB, LW, #10, CF are more of an issue imo

don't throw a tantrum Wolfy. I'm honestly saying that if your mind went straight to calling yourself those things, then there's shit going on that maybe you should talk to someone about. fwiw, you're demanding I disprove your theory? Well, two things, 1) Parky is doing that better than I could, 2) I don't see an end point, it's your theory that you refuse to provide evidence for, or even show your working out. Without evidence or process to interrogate, how can I refute it? As it stands it's all in your head (or written upon the internet). And, perhaps most importantly, you wouldn't accept any scrutiny of it. Were I to fly you to the edge of the atmosphere you'd claim the curvature of the Earth is an optical illusion, should you go further you would dismiss the sudden apparent weightlessness as the work of inverted denpressure within our tin can, were you to set foot on the moon you'd dismiss it as an island within the dome.