Spudulike

My favourite games are: 1. The 'Close Combat' tactical wargames series. The games are old now (the first one was out in about 1995, at a guess) but the gameplay is addictive. You have a one dimensional, top down, view of a battlefield and have to use your company - composed of mixed units such as armour, engineers, infantry, etc to control victory locations. The units are not tactical icons but little blokes, tanks, etc.There are three main games, based around WW2 - Arnhem, Russia and D-Day. The games can still be found online, via a company called Matrix Games; 2.Stronghold and Stronghold Crusader (the sequal games lost the plot but the first two are v good) I've lost weeks of my life building and defending castles; 3. Silent Hunter 3, with 'Grey Wolves' mod package. You command a U-boat and can play a Captain's career or try real missions like Prien at Scapa Flow; 4. Medieval Total War 2 - I'm on a self-imposed break from this after, two months ago, playing from 8pm until 5am, on a work day, without realising what time it was. I was in campaign mode and thought that the bird noises were sound effects, when they were really outside...

Lewy - you seem ok, fair play to you. Bearing that in mind, I think you should clear this issue and apologise to Bluegraham. You called him a c*** so it's the right thing to do. At the moment, it's like you're trying to wind him up. Although I haven't been on The Shed End for long, this isn't that sort of forum (aside from the Mikel & Torres threads... :-) Just a thought.

Being realistic, I'm sure that a lot of Liverpool fans agree that Suarez did wrong, and also with the ban. That said, the idiot fans are being far more vocal than others, and a lot of what is being said is properly unpleasant. On RAWK, yesterday, LFC fans who condemned Suarez were being called c**** by other forum members, or there were posts saying 'your Mum is a c***'; it was awful stuff. LFC seems to be in its own Silo, and increasingly to think that others are against it. It looks (to me) that the club is introverted and resentful and like it isn't really accepting/realistic about its current level/performance/wealth. There's anti-scouse banter, and some genuine dislike, from other clubs towards LFC. The massively OTT reaction by some Scousers to the FA's decision is confirming a lot of the preconceptions about LFC. I've thought about how I'd feel if, for example, Defoe had been banned for biting and genuinely think that I'd understand why the ban had been imposed. I wouldn't be happy but I'd know why.

Bloody hell! It rang a bell as it sounded like something Mr Kidd and Mr Wint might say.

A quiz - cool. 'Diamonds are Forever' ? Bit of a random guess.

I tried to dress it up a bit, but gotta admit that was what I meant...:-)

Errrrrr (pause to think of excuses). In the second leg, our team was weakened, plus a sending off. That said, we should have gone through. I think that, at least in the first leg, despite pre-game research, we were not prepared for the directness and pace of play of Basle. Gutted we didn't go through. Good news that an English team doing well, however.

Tempeth ye not faith. Seriously mate, for verily bad luck shall assail thee.

Blimey - good comeback. Don't sit on a lead next time - too risky and generally don't work. Well done Chels (odd saying that, but what the hell).

I hope Chelsea win but Basle looking very capable, as we know from going out in the last round. They are good on the break and i hope defence keep their wits about them. JT and Lamps defo making a positive difference. RB concentrating on the cups, for sure.

He is. Waiting for him to claim that the ten match ban is a racist attack on a Uruguyan immigrant, by the FA. Mark my words!

There was a photo in one of this week's papers of a lady wanted by the police, for making rascist comments. Everyday, people are beaten up, etc and there is CCTV of the incident, but no appeals in the national press. It seems that words are thought to be more harmful than real violence. There's a wider issue, which is people increasingly being told what they can or can't say. Much of a person's right to expression is now tied up in law. As to JT's alleged comments, the law's appraoch to 'rascist' abuse is so out of proportion that the police will direct more resources at a case involving 'hate' language than at someone being beaten to a pulp, in a non 'hate' crime. Lastly, I tend to think of JT as something of a peer for someone of my age and background. Fair play to him for sticking up for himself, in the face of s*** from the Ferdinands of this world. I agree with the posters who wish that Suarez had tried to bite Terry...

Posts: 4,558justice for the 96 Re: Suarez Banned For Ten Matches « Reply #1037 on: Today at 05:44:36 PM »10 games f**king hell that is harsh,yeah he bit someone(sucked more like) From RAWK (above). Apparently, Suarez 'sucked' rather than 'bit'. Not a very pleasant mental image...

Just noticed that one of the RAWK posters, above, is named 'Save us Kenny'. Living in the past...they WERE a great club when I were a lad but that's long, long, long gone.

Three thoughts: 1. Good; 2. Ha ha ha ha (repeat forever); 3. The appeal puts all this 'no one's bigger than the club' and 'club of integrity stuff into true context. No class at all from the Scousers.

This is a Chelsea forum - it's debateable whether we should be here. If other members tolerate the presence of fans of other teams, we should respect them. I try and follow one rule which is to try not to be directly critical of CFC, the players or the fans. I therefore think it's grossly rude to call another member of the forum (and remember, it's a forum for HIS club) a c***. It's his site. We should be grateful that other members aren't telling us (as they've a right to) to eff off. You may be a scouser, but that's no excuse for poor manners (well, it is a bit, but you know what I mean).

It's been hedged and cautious. There's been a lack of willingness to clearly, without applying caveats, condemn Suarez and his actions, and to apply a meaningful sanction. I've thought about this and my view would be the same, I hope, if this had been done by a Spurs player. Fact is, Suarez is too important a player for Liverpool and the club doesn't want to risk his loss.

Can't argue there. That said, am relieved that the FA has done something as, this season, they've made some bad calls. Hopefully he'll get a ban that runs into next season. This episode has reaffirmed my anti-'pool views. The club's conduct has been v poor, post incident. Also sad to hear Gordon Taylor's stance this am - not a completely clear condemnation and this rubbish about anger management when Suarez's actions seemed controlled.

FA statement: The FA has charged Liverpool forward Luis Suarez with violent conduct.The charge follows an incident with Chelsea’s Branislav Ivanovic in yesterday’s fixture at Anfield [21 April 2013].The incident was not seen by the match officials and has therefore been retrospectively reviewed – click here for a video explanation of ‘not seen incidents’.It is alleged that the conduct of Suarez constitutes violent conduct and it is The FA’s contention that the standard punishment of three matches that would otherwise apply is clearly insufficient in these circumstances.Suarez has until 6pm on Tuesday 23 April to respond to the charge, thereafter an Independent Regulatory Commission will be convened this Wednesday, 24 April.Read more at http://www.thefa.com/News/governance/2013/apr/luis-suarez-charge-liverpool-chelsea-ivanovic.aspx#4iTWKELjFpHccw5Z.99 FA statement:

FA statement says that usual three match ban would be clearly insufficient. Suarez has until tomorrow evening to admit or contest charge and FA will meet on Wed to decide sanction (according to Radio 5).

A fine? What's money to someone of Suarez's wealth? Joke.

That was him. He was saying 'check his arm, if there are teeth marks, Suarez is guilty...' Dull as anything. I turned off then as they were trying to be 'balanced' by giving airtime to Suarez defenders and, tbh, from the pictures/tv it's an open and shut case.

There was a Liverpool fan on 606 saying: 'it was a bite, but was it a bite with intent?' !! Some Scousers are never going to accept that ol' buck teeth did anything wrong. When he leaves in the summer, they'll say he was hounded out. Not the truth that he wants more money and knows Liverpool aren't going to win s****.

I don't know. It's too tight to call and I'm wary of second-guessing results. I'm glad we came through today. I admire Avb and the players for the comeback - it seemed to come from nowhere. City just lost it, when we scored our equalizer. Pretty shocked about your game - seven extra minutes and a blind ref again. It's mainly Rafa that's p***** me off - it is like he can see himself managing the Scousers in the future and doesn't want to upset anyone up there. Sad, gutless person.

I've been neutral about Rafa cos it's a Chelsea issue. Tonight takes the biscuit though - at least offer an opinion, at least take the chance to see the incident re-played. Gutless. Suarez - dirty and uncivilised.