I certainly agree there. Not sure what 'point proved' refers to though.No but he stood in well when Bong was out and has kept Bong up to the mark and we have benefitted from strength in depth.
I certainly agree there. Not sure what 'point proved' refers to though.No but he stood in well when Bong was out and has kept Bong up to the mark and we have benefitted from strength in depth.
Oh, don't worry - he's back with a vengeance!Conspicuous by his absence. Hope all is ok.
Many thanks glad to say wife is having her chemo and having another scan in 13 days to see if all the cancer has gone.
I was thinking that the other day. Good poster, wasn't he a mod at one time?On a slightly separate note whatever happened to [MENTION=3788]Barrel of Fun[/MENTION]? Not seen him post in months
Many thanks glad to say wife is having her chemo and having another scan in 13 days to see if all the cancer has gone.
Many thanks glad to say wife is having her chemo and having another scan in 13 days to see if all the cancer has gone.
NSC is a duller place without BG. The Father of The House. His posts are an amusing distraction from the treadmill of existence. A beloved and benign companion.
Happy New Year, old boy.
I am not sure if i am allowed to say this but say this i will,i agree with much he posts...not all..much.
NSC is a duller place without BG. The Father of The House. His posts are an amusing distraction from the treadmill of existence. A beloved and benign companion.
Happy New Year, old boy.
New Years's Resolution: Must try to write more uninformed crap - clearly the way to get noticed on NSC.
New Years's Resolution: Must try to write more uninformed crap - clearly the way to get noticed on NSC.
Noticed, perhaps. I don't agree with much of what BG writes but he's a character. There's no charm without such folk. I'd say that those who start nauseous 'look at me' threads are the annoyance. I don't see BG in that category.
Not intentionally perhaps but it ends up as 'look at me' because so much is uninformed bull. Anyone who can write on a forum clearly has the knowhow to google 'rules for registration of players' to use the latest example. Yesterday, we had that refs cannot abandon a game after a certain (unspecified) time, which is also untrue. It doesn't take much to check this before posting. But certainly it is harmless compared to some of the invective we see on on here.
New Years's Resolution: Must try to write more uninformed crap - clearly the way to get noticed on NSC.
This time scale was based on my experience on Surrey FA when if a game was abandoned before the 67th minute (being the 3/4 of the match point) the game was ALWAYS ordered to be replayed. If after that point the score stood. I assumed that it was an FA direction, which it may have been in 1980s and have never read anything to contradict that assumption or of any rules change to cover it.
1980 we didnt have google to check things out so have never had reaon in the past to require me to do so now.
This is a bit of a classic. I googled rules for abandoning football games and got a very useful summary on http://www.footballsite.co.uk/Statistics/Articles/DidYouKnow01.htm within a few seconds. So it appears that there is no rule as such, it is up to the Football League or whoever depending on the circumstances. The fact that there was no internet in 1915 didnt mean we cant find out what happened in Middlesbrough v Oldham for example. The internet does include history.
This is a bit of a classic. I googled rules for abandoning football games and got a very useful summary on http://www.footballsite.co.uk/Statistics/Articles/DidYouKnow01.htm within a few seconds. So it appears that there is no rule as such, it is up to the Football League or whoever depending on the circumstances. The fact that there was no internet in 1915 didnt mean we cant find out what happened in Middlesbrough v Oldham for example. The internet does include history.