manc-mag

Is that a chain restaurant?

Is this the guy who came from a country which didnt even have a municipal pool for him to train in? (or summat along those lines) He was quality.

bit hypocritical, like. Not really as the point I was clearly making was about him being desperate to be proved right and having the last word. Significantly, you'll note that I'm not arguing anymore, merely pointing and having a (admittedly cheap) laugh. Fop on the other hand is still frantically arguing and (rather sadly imo) literally pleading for people to acknowledge he is right "Surely now you must admit i was right" etc etc ad infinitum. I rather suspect that you knew all that anyway btw, but thought that this offered a slightly better opportunity to have a pop at me than my response in the USA thread the other day. Manc slips one in at the end there. Tbh I was accused of arrogance by one of the most self-satisfied posters on here. It was just unaccaptable. He's not really like that deep down. I find his metier quite amusing. Well I can happily accept that it is only my opinion. And no matter how firm that opinion is, I can happily accept that it is not fact and does not make me either right or wrong. I say no more than that.

bit hypocritical, like. Not really as the point I was clearly making was about him being desperate to be proved right and having the last word. Significantly, you'll note that I'm not arguing anymore, merely pointing and having a (admittedly cheap) laugh. Fop on the other hand is still frantically arguing and (rather sadly imo) literally pleading for people to acknowledge he is right "Surely now you must admit i was right" etc etc ad infinitum. I rather suspect that you knew all that anyway btw, but thought that this offered a slightly better opportunity to have a pop at me than my response in the USA thread the other day. Manc slips one in at the end there. Tbh I was accused of arrogance by one of the most self-satisfied posters on here. It was just unaccaptable.

I'm not saying the rule is applied to the absolute letter, but on the construction that I highlighted, it does prohibit bringing the ball down in front of you before releasing-which was your original question. No it doesnt. . . pedants withstanding It does though. For instance if you didnt read the first bolded bit in conjunction with the bit about having both feet on the floor then arguably you wouldnt be able to take a brief run up. Obviously you can do that. The point is the rules are drafted to chrystalize on the point of delivery (release) of the ball.

bit hypocritical, like. Not really as the point I was clearly making was about him being desperate to be proved right and having the last word. Significantly, you'll note that I'm not arguing anymore, merely pointing and having a (admittedly cheap) laugh. Fop on the other hand is still frantically arguing and (rather sadly imo) literally pleading for people to acknowledge he is right "Surely now you must admit i was right" etc etc ad infinitum. I rather suspect that you knew all that anyway btw, but thought that this offered a slightly better opportunity to have a pop at me than my response in the USA thread the other day.

What match is that btw? I know it's SJP with Leazes Terrace in the background before anyone points that out. Intercity Fairs cup final. Ah right. Looks older than that like. Aye it does - to be Fairs.

Basic grasp of physics notwithstanding There is that too.

I'm not saying the rule is applied to the absolute letter, but on the construction that I highlighted, it does prohibit bringing the ball down in front of you before releasing-which was your original question.

What match is that btw? I know it's SJP with Leazes Terrace in the background before anyone points that out. Dunno but I think it's John Anderson just in shot on the left.

Captain Hook 2 - Smeeagain

obsessed!

[Jeremy] "Stop going on about the Euro; we're in it now, and there's nothing you can do about it" /[Jeremy]

Got any hedgehog? Interestingly, a barbecued hedgehog would provide tougher opposition than 95% of the teams in the Oceania confederation. Best way is to put the hedgehog in clay, bake it and then (when it's done) crack open the clay surround. The spines will come away with the clay overcoat. Since when was baking part of the barbecue chefs remit. If I wanted my hedgehog baked i'd fucking well bake it. I suppose people do baked potatoes on barbecues sometimes. For values of "people" including "pasty-faced non-meat-eaters". You're obsessed with me. no Mancy, I was saying that it's not Barbecuing but baking which is the best way to cook a hedgehog. What sort of animal would put a hedgehog in clay? It's barbaric.

Got any hedgehog? Interestingly, a barbecued hedgehog would provide tougher opposition than 95% of the teams in the Oceania confederation. Best way is to put the hedgehog in clay, bake it and then (when it's done) crack open the clay surround. The spines will come away with the clay overcoat. Since when was baking part of the barbecue chefs remit. If I wanted my hedgehog baked i'd fucking well bake it. I suppose people do baked potatoes on barbecues sometimes. For values of "people" including "pasty-faced non-meat-eaters". ??? wtf sort of gay barbecues do you go to? Don't answer that btw.

Got any hedgehog? Interestingly, a barbecued hedgehog would provide tougher opposition than 95% of the teams in the Oceania confederation. Best way is to put the hedgehog in clay, bake it and then (when it's done) crack open the clay surround. The spines will come away with the clay overcoat. Since when was baking part of the barbecue chefs remit. If I wanted my hedgehog baked i'd fucking well bake it.

Got any hedgehog?

FA Rule 15 At the moment of delivering the ball, the thrower: faces the field of play has part of each foot either on the touch line or on the ground outside the touch line uses both hands delivers the ball from behind and over his head If you read the first bolded bit in conjunction with the second bolded bit , the rule does indeed prohibit throwing the ball down at your feet/the ground. At the moment of delivery = release. So release needs to co-incide with the ball being both technically 'from behind' and 'over' the head. If the ball has still not been released when it is being brought down on the other side of the head, 'at the moment of delivery' it is no longer 'from behind'. I find against J69. Case dismissed. Costs awarded against the Appellant. I claim the assist! Alex to me on the wing, dribble down the line, 90 degree turn along the byline to square the ball for a 2 yard tap in. You may have added a bit of flair and back heeled it, but I did the hard work. I should add, the rule is not completely foolproof. For instance J69 could be a hunchback and win the case on appeal.

FA Rule 15 At the moment of delivering the ball, the thrower: faces the field of play has part of each foot either on the touch line or on the ground outside the touch line uses both hands delivers the ball from behind and over his head If you read the first bolded bit in conjunction with the second bolded bit , the rule does indeed prohibit throwing the ball down at your feet/the ground. At the moment of delivery = release. So release needs to co-incide with the ball being both technically 'from behind' and 'over' the head. If the ball has still not been released when it is being brought down on the other side of the head, 'at the moment of delivery' it is no longer 'from behind'. I find against J69. Case dismissed. Costs awarded against the Appellant.

Fop, I imagine there are one of two explanations for the existence of this thread and the fact of people posting in it. Firstly, people literally are actually obsessed with you, because you are some sort of 'villain' or secondly, there is a general consensus that you are a bit of a cockwipe and so people have become mildly irritated with you. Obviously I know which one you'd rather believe it to be.

Ignoring the obsession it takes to even contemplate making a thread like this. (which is a LOT ) Without a "villain" (or several - as I've seen in my time here, people love them, or love to hate them.... but need them either way) things quickly become like this: P1: "I'm having an apple for lunch" P2: "Wow an apple I wish I had and apple" P3: "I agree" P4: "It's nice to have an apple for lunch" P1: "Yes it is" Fish: "Can I have an apple?" etc. etc. Although I see you're keenly avoiding answering my question, but even you must admit how right I am now, surely? This sentence literally has everything.

and kebabs.