joekicker

So it's okay then. I just wanted to check with the experts. Looked like a professional foul to me, and well rewarded too. But as stipulated, I don't know much about soccer. Don't want to, really. .

We shall see (in about three hours). However, before that match starts I have HUGE doubts anything could be more exciting than the last five minutes (actual time, not ref's time) of the Ghana-Uruguay match. The other thing that occurred to me in the past 20 minutes reading the forum - that game was decided on a hand ball by Uruguay. Why none of that Maradona-Henry language in the forum about the hand ball that sent Ghana out? Doesn't anyone think that Uruguay were rewarded for breaking the rules... no, for breaking the cardinal rule everyone keeps dumping on gridiron football for, that football is played with feet? The Hand of Luis: .

You can leave off "some". Pretty well all of them do. That's because football is a very big sport in Canada, even though it's 12 men and three backfielders can be in motion TOWARD THE LINE before the snap. Long before there was a Super Bowl, there was a Grey Cup, and Americans back then could only salivate. The Grey Cup was donated to Canada by the Fourth Earl Grey, because frankly English people admire North American sports like hockey (the Stanley Cup) and football better than English sports once they're exposed to them. So it seems, anyhow, by available evidence. That said, in my experience, English people of the provincial sort get really upset and cannot keep quiet at two things -- not specifically that Americans call it soccer, but rather the mirror, that they call the American/Canadian sport loved by Earl Grey football. (They can't tell the difference between Americans and Canadians, the English; they're not good at accents at all). And the other thing is the World Series, Englishmen are totally incapable of silence on the World Series (just wait for proof of that). Everyone needs an obsession or two. The Englishers have gridiron-football and the World Series. Other than that, a fine nation. .

Heh. Last year I seem to recall it was a Thursday afternoon? .

Andy didnt' come back so far, but I THINK you misunderstood him, and he'll slap me virtually if I'm wrong here but: I THINK Andy was saying to keep the pics small and fast and lean -- as we all have been saying -- and don't worry about having big beautiful ones of the size that you'd need for making beautiful prints -- because we here are only going to ogle them as part of your report, not save them and print them out. I'm sure Andy like all of us wants you to keep ALL the pix AND words coming, both, and no you don't have too many of either at all. At the mo, the first two pages of your report, with the resized pix, couldn't be better - loads fast, looks excellent. Whatever you did, keep doing that. And Sam, yes: VSO and Faststone let you do them all at once, on your computer, then upload them in their new size. .

Yep, I'd always advise 800 on the longer side, and I'd cut the quality to about 75, 80 per cent as well. It's fine for webwork with Jpegs, and you can often be under 50KB on an average pic that way. .

You should resize. It helps people reading the reports, a lot. But it REALLY helps you, since you are "charged" much less every time someone downloads them and uses your bandwidth. .

This is why I always get such a kick out of people criticising Thais and Asians over losing face. Blather and his feet-kissers are AFRAID of losing face when a call is reversed. Crazy! .

Very nice find indeed. Merci very big. .

And a silent "R". Like sprite. .

The story is right here. Daily Mail. You can check the date of the story, it's a couple of months ago. .

This is true and her name is correctly spelt in English - "Janie". But her NICKname is Janie. But then I'm listening to analyst Steve McManaman just now on ESPN, which has hired him to edjukate Americans about sock-her, and he keeps talking about the World Cup players kicking around what he calls a "boo-all". And I'm thinking how confused a lot of Americans are going to be, after thinking that the sport involves an item with one vowel, one syllable. And by the way, shouldn't that actually be spelt McMahonaman? .

Thanks for explaining it, then, because I sure didn't. Seems one of us is cantankerous, all right. .

Members here are encouraged to post in English so all members can understand. .

I think Germany were the better team without a shred of doubt. Okay, that out of the way. The disallowed goal forced England's tactics. At 2-2, they hang around, look for opportunity. At 1-2, they play 9 men forward. They get a free kick near the Germany area. Lampard takes the kick and it bounces straight off the wall into mid-field, where THREE Germans pounce on it and head down the field against the one England defender - and of course score an easy goal. And now it's 1-3 because of a lucky bounce after a risible ref's ruling. The referee in effect forced England to change its game and its play and effectively caused a goal that England would not have conceded in a 3-on-1 break had the score been 2-2 instead of 2-1. Inferior teams beat superior ones all the time. That's why they play the game. When a ref's decision influences actual play and tactics, the ref changes the game itself. I don't know if England could have won from a 2-2 score. Neither does anyone else, because it was never 2-2 although it was supposed to be. If the dreadful Sepp Blather and his odious, unaccountable multi-billion-dollar abusive multinational corporatation refuse to put cameras on the goal line now, there's something dreadfully wrong with the whole sport. .

As do Germany - the pass to a teammate on what looked a pretty certain goal, so that HE could score, being a case in point. England have assembled all the best players, and haven't a manger who can handle them -- the talents, egos, weaknesses, personal problems and all. Actually, I've been saying for many years that the chief job of the chief coach/manager is to HANDLE the players, and put all tactics and most if not all strategy in the hands of the assistants. I don't know all the specifics of all these soccer teams, but the fact is England haven't played like a team for a long time, the US and Germany (and Brazil and others) have done so at the WC at least. I *do* put that down to the manager. A good manager/head coach will make the sum greater than the parts. .

First couple of hours, not very. The Guardian advises to just move on to cricket. EDIT. Nuts. I didn't know you couldn't put pix here. I was going to show the Guardian web page, with the English loss reported like it was some traffic accident, and right below it the CLICK HERE FOR ENGLAND CRICKET LIVE!!!! box. Here's the Sun: SORRY England tumbled out of the World Cup as bungling match officials shamefully failed to spot a Frank Lampard equaliser. Uruguayan referee Jorge Larrionda and his assistants were blind to an effort from the midfielder that CROSSED THE LINE — and would have made it 2-2 at half time. Instead the Germans, with strikes from Miroslav Klose, Lukas Podolski and two-goal Thomas Muller, completely outclassed Fabio Capello's team and now progress to the quarter-finals. England could not have got off to a worse start, with hapless defending seeing them 2-0 down after 32 minutes.... and so on

Taking photos is never against the law, any more than suicide is againt the law. If no one knows about them, they're not illegal. They can be illegal according to how they are used. Good example going on right now in Indonesia where some dumbell showbiz celebrities sex-taped themselves. NOW the pix have hit the public circuits, so now they are in deep trouble for porn. IF someone complains about your photos, you COULD get a tap on the shoulder, yes. You COULD be prosecuted under Thai law, yes. IF there is a complaint made. .

I met a guy recently from Hawaii. He will not eat Kikkoman soy sauce, true story, and because of the war. I'm always curious what you people think we should do about stuff that happened before 99 per cent of people on Earth were even born, let alone influenced, but I'm always too busy to ask. Frankly I think you should try to learn from history, not carry it around on your back. .

Good. Could be better. Change to ... about half the world ... Also, I suggest dropping "with a passion" completely, it's subjective and transferance. It's also just going to lead to equally questionable arguments which never can be solved about how much the other half might HATE it "with a passion". .

I'm sure they were taking exercise and touring the sights during the many hours between the end of the match and arrival "in the early hours" of the day. Sorry, couldn't resist it. South Africa is a very nasty place at times, we knew this going in. In a way, I'm a little surprised there hasn't been more of what these poor victims got and thankful (and hopeful) there hasn't been. .

No refereeing to blame, that's for sure. I was especially impressed with the non-call of the clear penalty on the USA on the second Ghana goal - the ref gave it a play-on and it turned into a goal. Very excellent no-call in my opinion. A lot of refs would have called that obvious penalty, but no-call was spot on. Good officiating all the way. THAT was a match where you really didn't notice the ref, he did not intrude in any manner. .

Something in hard plastic and rounded corners, so it won't break when he drops it. Poor guy. But he's a late addition on a very long list through the decades. My favourite (no surprise) is one William Buckner, a better first baseman than Green is a goalie, actually, but who will also be remembered for one non-achievement only. .

What have you baited it with? .