BigFatCoward

I've been quite clear I only think that rules should govern high end sports. Olympics/world championships etc. Nobody needs to tell a 14 year old they can't play hockey with their mates.

I go about 2/3 mayi, 1/3 lemon juice. And it's impossible to have too much black pepper with tuna.

I never said governments. Sporting bodies make the rules. But the problem with that is different sports have very different rules, some degree of consistency would be better for everyone imo.

Sad news, Laurence Fox loses libel trial and has to pay 180 grand in damages.

I've been offered a vasectomy on my son's birthday, which is ironic as he's the reason i want one.

add sweetcorn.

'Googles hot pocket, runs to toilet to be sick immediately'.

Still a good job though. OKC looked pretty good in what I've managed to watch this morning. I can't believe they have this good a team, while everyone is young, and still have about a billion 1st round picks over the coming years.

typo, i'm hungover as shit.

The repeated success they had with the 'boot room' in 70s and 80s makes me wonder why more clubs don't follow this structure. Shankly>Paisley>Fagin>Dalgleish was a pretty good run.

Could you imagine having him as your manager, the success he's had with the resources he's had, thinking you know better than the best manager in the world and complaining about him. Madness. I'd give Liverpool Howe, Isak and Bruno for a 5 year Klopp contract. Imagine what he could do with Saudi money, Pep would be shitting himself.

Shit, I've got to stop drunk posting, I'm not changing my position, but my spelling and grammar has taken me ages to correct this morning and I'm not even half finished. I've got a meeting in 10 mins so if you find anymore gibberish and/or gobbledegook i need to correct, please PM me.

Still a good job keeping Boston 30 points below their season average.

Nobody here. And those people are fucking idiots.

The difference in performance in darts and chess are almost certainly environmental, with cue sports there could be a very very small advantage (size and cue power), not enough for me to think it should be legislated against. Nobody has said they can't play sports for the joy as far as I can tell.

Very surprised to wake up to a celtics defeat where the heat were without Butler.

Labour pledge to re nationalise 'most' railways within first term. I don't see how they could do worse. Tory being tory and not being aware that under there current government we are already facing the worst tax burden in a million years Rail Minister Huw Merriman said the plans were "pointless" and "unfunded". "They don't have a plan to pay for the bill attached to their rail nationalisation," he said. "Without a plan to pay for this, it means one thing: taxes will rise on hard working people."

Whether they are currently is irrelevant, you make rules now before there are issues so people know where they stand. Emily Bridges would be one example though. Her performance trajectory very much would have had her winning Olympic medals this cycle. She was an outstanding cyclist pre transition and her performance held up very well post transition. And this is why trans only events is also problematic, 2 people who were performing at the same level before transition could be miles apart afterwards, like i've said many times, there are no easy answers here. You can't begin to have the conversations when someone has dictated years of their lives to competing at the highest level then pull the rung from under them. That would be extremely unfair on the athletes.

Surely if anything I'm being misogynistic rather than transphobic here. There is video (EDIT there isn't i was sure there was but its actually a different proffesional team playing a bunch of 15 year olds), you can see that technically the women were better, physically they aren't in the same league. Do you think women that were so dedicated that they are the best in the world voluntary rolled over and let a bunch if 15 year old beat them? You are just as guilty of making assumptions to support your argument here as I am. You should refrain from that label, because it would be bullshit. There are very legitimate scientific arguments as to why trans women should not compete with cis women if fairness is the most important factor (and if you think inclusivity is more important more power to you, i won't argue against that position, i will argue against people who say there isn't an advantage though), far far far more science says this than the opposite. You might say that science is biased based on who is carrying it out and that's a fair position in some cases, but not all. And certainly not enough to discredit the wealth of data that's out there. You might not agree with them, and if you value inclusively more than fairness that's fine, but the kneejerk leap to 'trans phobia' every time someone make any argument against trans inclusivity in top level sports, is boring and weak as fuck.

That's 2 separate issues. Yes, they are. On a whole other planet of better. Ask the most dominant female athlete of all time (Serena). Whether we need to legislate is a whole other issue.

A bunch of children beat the best female adult team in the world, comprehensively. And they weren't even remotely the best under 15 male team in the world. I doubt they were in the top 500, maybe not even in the top 5000. It highlights the insane difference between men and women in certain sports.

You know you might be the new spurs?

We beat spurs 4-0 with 27% possession.

Soft southern shite.

I think we can all agree that the ban on trans women competing in women's World chess champs is utter horseshit though.