Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
English Football 2015-16 - Leicester City won the league English Football 2015-16 - Leicester City won the league

01-03-2016 , 05:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JudgeHoldem
Plop draw with west brom, hell even they took a bow after that classic
lold
01-03-2016 , 05:14 PM
Check out the new movie: The Big Short 8.5/10
01-03-2016 , 05:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
Apart from the obvious super AIDS of watching my own team, think this is a solid season.

Have a lot more investment in watching non top 4 sides, they have on the whole more interesting players than normal and are getting more interesting results.

This season is pretty refreshing imo.
+1

The only deterioration in quality this season has been TSO bus parking and LOLvg's luck box.

Arsenal and Citeh are still rated 6/7th best team in Europe and a few of the mid premier league clubs have strengthen and at the same time said FO to the bigger clubs who wanted their players.
01-03-2016 , 05:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZAIDS
When Filipe Luis returns from his seemingly lifetime long term injury then that's a start.
You'll be glad to know he played yesterday and kept a clean sheet....
01-03-2016 , 05:22 PM
Lol wut @ ZAIDS?
01-03-2016 , 05:38 PM
I got bad news for you zaids
01-03-2016 , 05:39 PM
yupp, you already crushed the transfer market regarding the lb area
01-03-2016 , 05:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by StormBorn
You'll be glad to know he played yesterday and kept a clean sheet....
Thanks. I don't usually watch the reserves. Maybe he'll get a run in the cup game next week.
01-03-2016 , 05:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JudgeHoldem
Plop draw with west brom, hell even they took a bow after that classic
HOF
01-03-2016 , 05:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZAIDS
Thanks. I don't usually watch the reserves.
think they should promote this greaseman fella, have been hearing good things

could be a nice alternative to an out of form & gimpy Hazard
01-03-2016 , 05:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Human Halo
Check out the new movie: The Big Short 8.5/10
12minutes in and already wondering how will Steve Carell work in this movie...maybe they'll prove me wrong

ok...Margot Robbie in a bathtub 10/10
01-03-2016 , 06:14 PM
That's some run good for Spurs, seeing as we play Leicester twice in the next fortnight

Jamie Vardy: Leicester City striker to have minor groin surgery
01-03-2016 , 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DemonOfTheFall
Can anyone think of any classic matches from this season? Comfortably the lowest quality Premier League I've seen.

Two-horse races better than tallest pony races.
pretty weird view

with the avg quality of teams being much much higher the average match is far far more competitive/fun

arsenal only won 4 games with 3 goals
a fun 2-5 vs leiceister
0-3 watford which was 0-0 until the 60min mark
0-3 swansea which was 0-0 until 50min mark
3-0 hammering of lolutd
01-03-2016 , 07:02 PM
Quality of play of some big sides is lower than investment level. Man City around 45% to win league and reported everywhere they want a new manager which suggests the people at club think they're underperforming. Two horse races are no good but it's not a choice between that and tallest pony. It can be inbetween - great that avg quality of teams is higher; would be better if that plus improvement of higher budget teams.
01-03-2016 , 07:27 PM
Is the quality actually lower? I doubt it is much at all, if any. It is a lot easier to play liquid football against a bunch of scrubs. The mid table teams can be a lot closer to the top teams even if the quality of the top teams doesn't decrease.
01-03-2016 , 07:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mw828
Is the quality actually lower? I doubt it is much at all, if any. It is a lot easier to play liquid football against a bunch of scrubs. The mid table teams can be a lot closer to the top teams even if the quality of the top teams doesn't decrease.
jep this
01-03-2016 , 07:42 PM
Epl: Mid table sides won't sell defenders for 40m.

Bundasliga: get world class striker for free from 2ND best team in league.
01-03-2016 , 07:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MindFckr
12minutes in and already wondering how will Steve Carell work in this movie...maybe they'll prove me wrong

ok...Margot Robbie in a bathtub 10/10
I take it back, he was excellent. The movie as well!

Thanks for the recommendation HH
01-03-2016 , 08:15 PM
HH, in your recent movie review you awarded The Big Short 8.5/10 and I'm curious as to why.

If you're setting the parameters yourself, and you decide that 10 is the maximum score, it seems like it ought to automatically follow that for the very first movie you review there will be a maximum of 11 possible scores (integers 0-10). If you wanted more room for manoeuvre (as in this specific case, where you clearly feel a 9 is too high but an 8 is not enough), then surely you ought to have set a wider range. It would be understandable to resort to decimals if you'd already rated other movies (The Big Short may be better than the last movie you awarded an 8, but not as good as a recent 9, in which case 8.5 would make sense), but going straight for the decimals from the outset just suggests either indecision or FPS.

In this case, a scoring range of 0-20 would have sufficed as you apparently feel that the movie deserves a 17, but if you're planning to rate a number of movies over a period of time might I suggest a more straightforward percentage system. This would have the added advantages of being both more relatable to a wide audience, and allowing even greater discretion when awarding scores (perhaps the next movie you review will be almost exactly as good as this one but with one tiny distinguishing feature, in which case you could award it either an 84 or an 86, for example).

Anyway I look forward to your next movie review!
01-03-2016 , 08:32 PM
This is an exciting new level of pedanticalness
01-03-2016 , 08:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostOstrich
HH, in your recent movie review you awarded The Big Short 8.5/10 and I'm curious as to why.

If you're setting the parameters yourself, and you decide that 10 is the maximum score, it seems like it ought to automatically follow that for the very first movie you review there will be a maximum of 11 possible scores (integers 0-10). If you wanted more room for manoeuvre (as in this specific case, where you clearly feel a 9 is too high but an 8 is not enough), then surely you ought to have set a wider range. It would be understandable to resort to decimals if you'd already rated other movies (The Big Short may be better than the last movie you awarded an 8, but not as good as a recent 9, in which case 8.5 would make sense), but going straight for the decimals from the outset just suggests either indecision or FPS.

In this case, a scoring range of 0-20 would have sufficed as you apparently feel that the movie deserves a 17, but if you're planning to rate a number of movies over a period of time might I suggest a more straightforward percentage system. This would have the added advantages of being both more relatable to a wide audience, and allowing even greater discretion when awarding scores (perhaps the next movie you review will be almost exactly as good as this one but with one tiny distinguishing feature, in which case you could award it either an 84 or an 86, for example).

Anyway I look forward to your next movie review!
I give this post a 1

Scale to be determined
01-03-2016 , 09:12 PM
Just watched Interstellar for the 3rd time.

Confirmed master piece 10/10 or 99.9%

Rotten Tomatoes:

Quote:
Critics Consensus: Interstellar represents more of the thrilling, thought-provoking, and visually resplendent filmmaking moviegoers have come to expect from writer-director Christopher Nolan, even if its intellectual reach somewhat exceeds its grasp.
Bold is a "u wot m8?" from me. Theoretical physics, bitch.
01-03-2016 , 09:13 PM
its quite clear. the movie scores in the 8th integer
01-03-2016 , 09:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BAIDS
its quite clear. the movie scores in the 8th integer
Spoiler:
01-03-2016 , 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Human Halo
Just watched Interstellar for the 3rd time.

Confirmed master piece 10/10 or 99.9%

Rotten Tomatoes:



Bold is a "u wot m8?" from me. Theoretical physics, bitch.

Too many plotholes in Interstellar for me to take it too seriously, not the physics stuff, I just refuse to believe it took her that long to go back to the room with the crazy stuff happening.

It's great entertainment though and I enjoyed watching it.

No country for old men, There will be blood and Unforgiven. Probably my best 3 all time, I know you were all dying to know

      
m