luckyluke

Has he escaped? Is he running a line anytime soon?

I watched about five seconds of the England game.

Indeed. You sort of feel that the FA won't change it's ways until forced to, for example by the courts, as was murmured about here. Maybe one day there will be a landmark case that triggers this. But most importantly I'm glad that Hadeira is okay.

BMI is simply a ratio of your height to your weight calculated to give an easily understandable scale, effectively saying if you are Xcm tall you should be about Ykg heavy. The 'about' bit is the key. As it's such a simple calculation it is inevitably not going to tell you everything about a person's body, but it gives you an idea, and crucially, perspective. I saw an article today in one of those women's scandal mags about Kelly Brook putting on weight, having a 'belly' (complete with a photo of her in a bikini, sitting and leaning over, fully accentuating her supposed belly in the way the Mens Health covers do the opposite). Often held up as an example of a "curvier woman of a fuller weight, who eats what she wants" etc, even with the extra weight (if the article is correct) she still only has a BMI of 23. (doubtless Dan will decry her as a fat bitch who needs to make friends with Annie etc ) There is nothing wrong with people wanting to do a bit better than being approximately the right weight for their height (I do too tbh) but it you are then you're doing okay and shouldn't be made to feel like you're some sort of failure. Making Kelly Brook out to be fat (or even at the heavier end of normal) is the sort of thing that pushes people towards eating disorders, some of whom starve themselves down to BMIs of single figures. Likewise, dismissing it as a load of bollocks or advising people to ignore it if you're overweight can lead to those with in the late twenties into thirties of the scale being falsely reassured, carrying on with their unhealthy lifestyles and dropping dead of a heart attack in their late forties.

You are coming from a different point to the likes of CT though. He is (by his own admission) overweight. His methods are a bit scatty as we well know but he is using the right targets. Getting the callipers out is for different people with different goals. The idea that you're trying to sell that body weight is irrelevant and it's all about composition is wrong.

No it isn't, but that's not what it's designed for.

It's a useful clinical tool when used appropriately. People weight lifting/exercising etc then getting a strop on because they're just the wrong side of a BMI of 25 isn't one if these uses. Like most screening tools it is less useful around the edges of its normal range.

Good luck to him (and to TS for getting his big money move )

It's perfectly possible for him to be unfit to play yet able to attend matches...OUR matches that is, he's the club captain ffs.

I know what you mean but there's plenty of people who want more gun control over there. And you can hardly blame the kids who were gunned down for living there.

It was on the front of one of the rags the other day but I didn't investigate any further.

Fingers crossed, poor lad.

There are some times when the words FUCKING CUNTS just aren't enough.

What an absolute joke, if true, of a corrupt, incompetent sporting body with more interest in protecting itself than the players or the sport it supposedly governs.

I was making the distinction between on the field and in the aftermath. If a tackle is dangerous by either accident (e.g a knee high reckless double footed lunge that was aiming for the ball) or design (Ben Thatcher vs Pendro Mendez) then it should get a red card. Where intent matters is in the punishment afterwards. So the clumsy, reckless lunge gets three matches but the deliberate attempt to injure should get longer. If I kill someone due to a mistake I make at work, I could be suspended, struck off or possibly face criminal action, even prison for gross negligence. But I won't do as long as if I'd knifed someone in the street. And I'm not saying that at all. I said deliberate attempts to injure people (i.e. assault), not "every tackle with a bad outcome" should POTENTIALLY face action. this would be quite difficult to prove in many cases obviously, but if a player stamped on another's ankle whilst they lay prone they shouldn't have to just answer to the FA.

Things that rile me in football #1347: The concept of intent. It should not matter one jot to the referee whether he was going for the ball or the man. It it's that dangerous then it's a red card. Like how killing someone when drunk at the wheel gets you prison - you were so irrespponsible that regardless of whether you meant it or not, you face punishment. Where it does matter is in the aftermath. If players make clear, deliberate attempts to seriously injure opponents they should be facing six month/year long/life time bans or arguably criminal charges.

Undoubtably, although I could certainly do without the cliched, tired inverse superiority complex that appears to be drummed into every student nurse from day one.

Organ?

Did the words "genuine question" not give it away? I could see what you were thinking about the gi. We do do some grappling but most of what we do is throws and locks from attacks like punches, weapons (lots of knifework) kicks and grabs with a strong emphasis on self defence - and of course, relying on grabbing a durable purpose built training suit is not very helpful if the guy trying to mug you is wearing a wife beater. BJJ and judo do a lot more competitive grappling (almost exclusively) hence the need for better gi. I wasn't trying to belittle your job, I was merely stating facts. I can and do take a lot of jokes about what I do but I've got limits. I'm sure what you do is very important, although from what you say not as directly relevent to my practice as you're trying to imply -I read something in a journal about a pulse oximter app which sounds jolly useful though, anything to done with you? I am far more reliant on my knowledge and judgement than machines. I am course glad there are people that make the machines and the drugs!

It was a genuine question as I said. Fair enough. How long will they last you? Nope never spent that much money on a gi for the simple reason it won't make my Jitsu any better. It's more relevant for people who regularly compete in grappling competitions to give them an edge. I've got three gis (they simply take too long to wash and dry if you're training >2 times a week, let alone 4-6 as I do frequently). Only had to chuck one out in nearly a decade. My black belt cost me a fiver btw. It's what you do in it, rather than what you do it in that counts. You're welcome to have a cheap laugh at a job you know almost nothing about, but one of us is works in a profession that virtually all other doctors are in awe of and regularly saves lives (I really do btw) and one of us works in IT.

Just take it to PM you dirty bastards.

Is spending 100 quid on boots for five a side normal or is just the sort of thing an utter dullard like you does? Genuine question.

... Or it could have been the surgeon dangling his balls in your mouth whilst you were asleep. They do that sometimes. No worries.

You could at least look a bit further afield, you lazy bastard.

Yeah I'm going to bring that in a month or so, more bothered about fitness atm.