Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Didn't Liverpool still have a shot at a top 4 CL spot and the £'s that acCompany it?

Only just. They needed to win twice and Tottenham, Villa and Man City to lose twice. But I'm not letting any technicalities get in the way of a good scandal.

I've had plenty of "WTF?" moments with goalies inexplicably missing do-able saves. But ya sound like a bit of a tin-foil-hat wearing blow hard if ya pipe up about it in a lounge room full of soccer fans, so I always keep it to myself.

Bruce Grobbelaar was helping fix matches for years. I hung around with a mad MAD Liverpool supporter Scouse buddy in the 1980s and 1990s. He had a "ah ha!" moment when Grobbelaar finally got rumbled.

"I always thought Bruce was a bit crazy, used to have brain snaps and do the stupidest of things. This explains it all."

The way Higgins explains it - "It's easy. Its easy." and "You don't even have to make a mistake." - makes it sound like snooker could be even riper for plucking than soccer.

What will happen now is that every one watching snooker will have cheatery in the back of their minds whenever someone misses a shot.

Pro sport has become a race to the bottom of the barrel.

Pro sport has become a race to the bottom of the barrel.

Amen. I've stopped barracking for teams [up to a point]. Stopped competing in any tipping comps, fantasy leagues etc.

I've adopted the Roy and HG point of view. It's all just a big joke, 99% of pro sportsmen are bogan idiots who deserved to be mocked – which is cleverly disguised [or not so cleverly?] by Roy and HG as fandom. I still love to watch sport, but I treat it purely as a soap opera.

......Just like politics, actually. Except politics directly affects all our standards of living so it's not really a joke – and all cheating, lying politicians should be lined up against the wall.

Woah! Ease up, Turbo.

Viva the revolution, eh?

Speaking of the roundball sport, this is as good a time as any to put up my world cup prognostications for the Socceroos.
I predict this will be a very bad World Cup for Australia. The Italians claimed last time that we would receive match benefits this time after they knocked us out in an undignified fashion -- but I can't see it.
Not only will Australia not win a match, I predict they will not score a goal. A 0-0 draw is a possibility, but that's as good as it gets. New Zealand will do better than Australia in terms of results and goals.
Does anyone else have any thoughts on this matter?

We'll need a lot of luck and i'd say goals from Cahill to advance. Possibly we could jag a win against Ghana (hopefuly with Essien out), draw against the Serbs and lose to Germany and hope results go our way (Germany thrashing the other two while they draw). But I agree with your prognosis, we don't have the goals in us.

I just saw the Aussie world champ for the first time.

He immediately appeared as a blip on my gaydar – something in the way he played with his face as he talked. Also, he reminded of someone. Who could it be?

*sound of brain working, gears grinding*

That’s right, I remember now. This bloke.

Blip becomes larger, louder.

But then he had his hawt girlfriend in the crowd. He even blew her a camp kiss when he had it in the bag.

Blip disappears from gaydar.

But then I find out his hawt girlfriend is his mum.

*beep! beep! beep!*

[obligatory: NTTAWWT]

I think we'll desperately miss Viduka's ability to hold the ball up long enough to bring the midfield into play. The defence will be solid, but constantly under pressure, and the forward(s) won't see enough ball.

But we are talking about Australia... we'll play above ourselves against Germany, steal a goal before make a goalkeeping/defensive error that gifts the Germans an equaliser... we'll play like rubbish and lose to Ghana, conceding two goals on the break trying to press for a winner... needing a win to progress, we'll play okay but without imagination (or an injured Kewell and Cahill) against Serbia, but fail to break down their defense and either lose or draw without scoring.

WARNING! World Cup Spoiler Alert


Russ, a nice analysis, but you missed out on the fact that in the Serbian game, we got the worst linesmen and referees -- they give 3 red cards to a Serbian player, but fail to send him off -- then rule an Australian goal offside and send off the scorer for arguing. The game breaks down (like the game against Chile in 1974), and should be re-played. Instead, Serbia is awarded the match, and the referees are given the World Cup final as a reward for their efforts.
Please, can someone get Mark Schwarzer to assert himself around the goals? In spite of his heroic acts during penalties, he was a weak link last time, because of his inability to control the area -- or am I too harsh?

Aaaaaaand I just found out he has a girlfriend. So much for my gaydar.

And seeing this is becoming a grab bag thread, I found this on Twitter:

I hope Catherine Deveny gets laid tonight. 16 minutes ago from TweetDeck

I've never used Twitter before. Tried to search for her feed but all I got was lots of tweets about her. What am I doing wrong?

Christ, having said that I just found her feed, thanks to checking out Monsieur Patard's comment, followed by a lot of head scratching about what hell he was talking about, and then clicking around. Talk about a coincidence.

Her latest tweet:

What a day! Boned.

There has been a very real sense of expectation that because we made it past the group stage in 2006, we are monties to make it out of the group stage in 2010. Balls. We will be lucky to take a point. London to a brick we are bumped after three matches.

"We will be lucky to take a point. London to a brick we are bumped after three matches."

I'll bet pounds to peanuts your right there Tone.

I'll bet Brisbane to an old black billy.

"London to a brick we are bumped after three matches."
I know you are saying ‘certainty’, but you left out the ‘ON’ in “London to a brick on”. Almost everyone does. By not appending with ‘ON’, then implicitly the default is ‘AGAINST’.
e.g. 100-1 - a hundred to one (against), 1-100 - a hundred to one on.
So, in the AFL currently,(sorry, tiger fans)
Richmond are London to a brick on to miss the eight.
and conversley -
Richmond are London to a brick to make the the eight. (Logically sound but rarely used in a longshot context)


I reckon you are spot on, because the proof (and coin) is in the pudding.

The comments to this entry are closed.