Bournemouth (H) | PL | Post Match Thread

[Bluesince1979]

Guinness should room temperature and not too cold.

3-8 degrees it should be served at

 

[levets]

Did Ronny Owen and Cassy play? Wasn't Simon Mack in net? All top lads. Cassy and Ron good City fans.

Ronnie played, Matty, Cassy, Swiggy, Pete Ward. Gary Hitchens was in nets. (Former Swinton RL Hooker)

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Platt lane was empty but for a few bournemouth fans

Yes I know but the rest of the ground was full. I think capacity was about 45,000 in those days so without the platt Lane maybe 38,000.

 

[Bluesince1979]

Yes I know but the rest of the ground was full. I think capacity was about 45,000 in those days so without the platt Lane maybe 38,000.

Were we not still at 52,000 by then or had safety issues curtailed that?
47,000 rings a bell in those days?

Platt lane held 9,000?

 

[eastmanc]

Ronnie played, Matty, Cassy, Swiggy, Pete Ward. Gary Hitchens was in nets. (Former Swindon RL Hooker)

Ronnie played, Matty, Cassy, Swiggy, Pete Ward. Gary Hitchens was in nets. (Former Swindon RL Hooker)

Played football with Ronnie's brother Mike at Abbey Hey. I also remember Ronnie breaking his leg, playing for the football team and missing all the cricket season due to it.

 

[chesterbells]

I prefer it cold

Agreed. Cold but not Extra Cold.

 

[levets]

Yes I know but the rest of the ground was full. I think capacity was about 45,000 in those days so without the platt Lane maybe 38,000.

30,564 I just looked it up. Thought it was more

 

[dennishasdoneit]

Cooks a ****, always has been, never forgiven him for doing a City player in the corner of Etihad a few years back (Aguero?), no intention of playing the ball, ref let him off with not even a chat.

In that case I take back my compliment!

 

[moomba]

Cooks a ****, always has been, never forgiven him for doing a City player in the corner of Etihad a few years back (Aguero?), no intention of playing the ball, ref let him off with not even a chat.

Wasn't it him that crocked Haaland a few months back?

Specialises in flying into a tackle and if it goes wrong too bad for the other guy.

 

[the blue panther]

Wasn't it him that crocked Haaland a few months back?

Specialises in flying into a tackle and if it goes wrong too bad for the other guy.

N. De Jong likes this post.

 

[Bluekiwi]

His mistake aside he played really well i thought. If he can cut out the horrendous mistakes which always seem to lead to a goal, he'd be a very good player.

He has improved a hell of a lot since the rags cock-up. At least his mistaken pass didn't lead to a teammate getting a red card.

 

[TCM]

Speaking of clowns, your own English comprehension and inability to understand what I said are, to say the least, ironic.

What appears to you to be a smack down about his lack of English (which was plain to see, because what he wrote was barely intelligible) was, by my use of language, switched by using the word “football” not “English.” If ANY language was being discussed, it was the language of football, not English! So, well done, clown.

And, I’m someone who helped out a non-English speaker by explaining a word was actually different than the two different words he put together thinking they meant what they didn’t. I made no negative characterization of his lack of English language ability said nothing derogatory about it.

Again, i only made a comment about his lack of his understanding of FOOTBALL.

And, speaking of unintelligible, what is a “first language speaker”??? That’s rhetorical, because I know what you meant, but it’s not what you tried to say! Ironic, again, clown.

And there it is. Thanks for confirming. Night night, Bozo.

 

[crazyadi]

Speaking of clowns, your own English comprehension and inability to understand what I said are, to say the least, ironic.

What appears to you to be a smack down about his lack of English (which was plain to see, because what he wrote was barely intelligible) was, by my use of language, switched by using the word “football” not “English.” If ANY language was being discussed, it was the language of football, not English! So, well done, clown.

And, I’m someone who helped out a non-English speaker by explaining a word was actually different than the two different words he put together thinking they meant what they didn’t. I made no negative characterization of his lack of English language ability said nothing derogatory about it.

Again, i only made a comment about his lack of his understanding of FOOTBALL.

And, speaking of unintelligible, what is a “first language speaker”??? That’s rhetorical, because I know what you meant, but it’s not what you tried to say! Ironic, again, clown.

Come on!

You should know by now, that it isn't ok to correct someone on their English. Its offensive, feels a little judgemental and has a sprinkle of racism (??) thrown in.

The correct response is to say nothing and accept everything, if you don't want weird people pulling you up for pulling someone up. (the irony)

Get with the program!

 

[JGL07]

Wasn't GCE grade AB or C and it was CSE that was grade 1234 or 5 ?

True but 'O Levels', that preceded GCEs, were 1-6 (pass grades) and 7-9 (fails).

 

[Yue Wollongong]

Why don't you just fuck off, you clown. Who the fuck are you to be picking up someone who is clearly not a first language speaker.

Speaking of clowns, your own English comprehension and inability to understand what I said are, to say the least, ironic.

What appears to you to be a smack down about his lack of English (which was plain to see, because what he wrote was barely intelligible) was, by my use of language, switched by using the word “football” not “English.” If ANY language was being discussed, it was the language of football, not English! So, well done, clown.

And, I’m someone who helped out a non-English speaker by explaining a word was actually different than the two different words he put together thinking they meant what they didn’t. I made no negative characterization of his lack of English language ability said nothing derogatory about it.

Again, i only made a comment about his lack of his understanding of FOOTBALL.

And, speaking of unintelligible, what is a “first language speaker”??? That’s rhetorical, because I know what you meant, but it’s not what you tried to say! Ironic, again, clown.

Come on!

You should know by now, that it isn't ok to correct someone on their English. Its offensive, feels a little judgemental and has a sprinkle of racism (??) thrown in.

The correct response is to say nothing and accept everything, if you don't want weird people pulling you up for pulling someone up. (the irony)

Get with the program!

I didn't follow this thread after the last exchange of words with ChicagoBlue so missed the heated conversation later on. I was not comfortable with ChicagoBlue's words for sure. but I don't take offence for being corrected for English usage and should have checked before sending. I was in a rush in shopping mall with my wife when posting on my phone. I'm not very ok when a post mixes the language knowledge with football/soccer knowledge. they are two things and mix them together (to get the high ground or just appear like that) would only backfire on oneself. I don't feel bullied though as it is quite clear to whoever read it. The charm of this forums is that it is very open. Everyone are free to express opinions and a lesson would be learnt quickly if you are on the wrong. overall, no hard feeling toward anybody but thanks guys.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

I didn't follow this thread after the last exchange of words with ChicagoBlue so missed the heated conversation later on. I was not comfortable with ChicagoBlue's words for sure. but I don't take offence for being corrected for English usage and should have checked before sending. I was in a rush in shopping mall with my wife when posting on my phone. I'm not very ok when a post mixes the language knowledge with football/soccer knowledge. they are two things and mix them together (to get the high ground or just appear like that) would only backfire on oneself. I don't feel bullied though as it is quite clear to whoever read it. The charm of this forums is that it is very open. Everyone are free to express opinions and a lesson would be learnt quickly if you are on the wrong. overall, no hard feeling toward anybody but thanks guys.

It’s clear English is not your first language, which is why, rather than tell you I couldn’t really understand what you were saying because you were not speaking perfect English, I tried to be amusing by focusing the matter on football not being your first language, because I disagreed with the football matter under discussion.

Clearly, for some people, that was too close to being derogatory about your grasp of English (which is far better than my grasp of any foreign language!) and some reacted slightly hysterically. It’s the nature of communication, especially when no visual cues are present.

You post whatever you want, whenever you want, and I’ll feel free to discuss the football aspects of it…as I hope you will with everyone else’s posts on here.

The only good thing about snowflakes is they melt under small amounts of heat!

Be well.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

True but 'O Levels', that preceded GCEs, were 1-6 (pass grades) and 7-9 (fails).

Are you sure?

I thought O Level passing grades (at least in 1979-80 when I took them) were A thru E, with an F for Fail. Same for A Levels, too, I believe.

Universities would turn these into numbers to give you a target point score for their offer, but there wasn’t a number grade.

For instance, to study Maths, you might be given a 12 point target, where 4 points had to be in Maths, but the other 8 points could be any grade in any subject, as long as they combined to make 8 points.

It’s loooong time ago, but that’s my recollection, from back when A++ was unheard of and the grades were on a National Bell Curve, I think.

 

[Yue Wollongong]

It’s clear English is not your first language, which is why, rather than tell you I couldn’t really understand what you were saying because you were not speaking perfect English, I tried to be amusing by focusing the matter on football not being your first language, because I disagreed with the football matter under discussion.

Clearly, for some people, that was too close to being derogatory about your grasp of English (which is far better than my grasp of any foreign language!) and some reacted slightly hysterically. It’s the nature of communication, especially when no visual cues are present.

You post whatever you want, whenever you want, and I’ll feel free to discuss the football aspects of it…as I hope you will with everyone else’s posts on here.

The only good thing about snowflakes is they melt under small amounts of heat!

Be well.

all good. the only disagreement now is that I still believe that the game would be more likely than not to get to 2:2 or worse if that break-away run was allowed but this is at all a rather minor topic. if everyone think the same the forum will die.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

all good. the only disagreement now is that I still believe that the game would be more likely than not to get to 2:2 or worse if that break-away run was allowed but this is at all a rather minor topic. if everyone think the same the forum will die.

I’ll agree to disagree, because it would have still been 11 v 11 and we were quite comfortable in the game.

However, a goal for them shortly after going to 10 v 11 might have created squeaky bum time, but now we are just extrapolating extrapolations.

 

[Newman Noggs]

Are you sure?

I thought O Level passing grades (at least in 1979-80 when I took them) were A thru E, with an F for Fail. Same for A Levels, too, I believe.

They were. Except I got a U (unclassified) in Chemistry not an F.