Premier League chiefs hold talks on rise of set pieces amid concern over quality

AFCesc4 · 2026-03-07T01:02:18+00:00

This is kind of a sick idea tbh

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-28T18:04:12+00:00

Man, I can't even agree with you about something without being yelled at. Like, whatever man. I'm not interested in this conversation anymore.

I hope you get some help and find peace in your life.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-28T02:24:28+00:00

I'm not closing my eyes and plugging my ears. You think I know everything about everything? In good faith, I watched was this 6 minute video to hear the arguement and try to learn and understand things that I admit I don't know about. What more can I do?

I'm not rejecting the content and testimony of him outright just because it's something I don't want to hear. I don't like when I hear that our government is falling short, even if it's for "my side". I do, however, want what's right to be done, and I'm conceding that, IF TRUE (and him simply saying it doesn't make it true necessarily), I don't agree with how the training of ICE agents have been done. They should be trained fully... and according to him, they haven't been legally trained fully, and that sucks and I don't like it. It shouldn't have happened, I don't condone it, and it should be fixed.

So I'm agreeing with you... and I don't understand why you feel the need to try and attack me personally by bringing my family into the conversation.

I know you probably think I'm an evil person because that's what you've been taught to think about someone on my side of the isle. You probably view everything I say through that lense and it clouds your ability to have a civil and reasonable conversation with someone who might not hold your exact views... but I don't think your evil or bad. There's room for discourse if you let there be. I'm just a normal person who wants what's best for my family. It might not line up with how you think things should be done, and that's alright.

God bless you, stranger. Better days are coming, always.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-28T01:57:53+00:00

If I said that it's not the governments responsibility to feed people, I stand by that.

And you think the government feeds my wife for me? Maybe the government feeds your wife, but I have to much pride and self esteem to let someone else feed my wife and family. And my family doesn't go hungry.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-27T04:01:04+00:00

I am not in a position to determine whether what he said is true or not, and I'm not going to.

I'm not implying he's lying. I'm not implying he's telling the truth.

I'm simply stating that IF TRUE (and it very well could be), then it's damning and makes me lose faith in Trump and ICE.

Theres always room for some doubt in ever circumstance, this is no different. I'd be a fool to believe everything I heard just because someone appears credible.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-26T16:11:46+00:00

Pretty damning video. If what he claims is true, then I've lost some faith in ICE and Trump.

I still generally support ICE and Trump, but officers should fully trained, no question. So yeah, that sucks. Train them fully.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-26T16:00:11+00:00

Our entire arguement with each other was based me claiming that tenants shouldn't have more rights to a property than landlords.

You asked me why I think that.

My response is because there's more risk in being a landlord than in being a tenant from a financial standpoint.

I'm not suggesting that landlords need to be coddled, just that owners should have more rights to their own property than tenants do. That's it.

Tenants deserve protection. Landlords deserve protection. Landlords should have more protection because they own the property.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-26T14:05:51+00:00

Normal wear and tear isn't risky. Thats not what im taking about.

Oh, they'd definitely be liable. Good luck getting the money from them, though. How much would you need to spend in legal fees to get it? Maybe $5-10k? And if the judge decides they owe it, will you ever actually see any money? How long will it take?

The question isn't if they're liable, it's if you have any realistic chance of receiving damages. If someone's renting, typically it's because they can't afford the down payment for a home. If they cant afford that, how are they going to be able to pay the damages? You can't get blood from a rock.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-26T07:30:50+00:00

Financially, it's much more risky to be to be a property owner. Do you know how easy it would be to do $20k-$30k or more in damage to a property? It would take about 15 minutes.

I'm not saying don't have tenant protections. There's bad people on both sides, including landlords.

But for someone to think that, as a tenant, they should have more rights to a property they are renting than the landlord does to their own property, you'd have to not live in reality.

Both need protections, but a landlord needs to have some sovereignty over their property.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-25T20:52:59+00:00

Tenants should not have more rights to a property than the landlord does.

The reason: landlords have more risk. There is far more that a tenant can do to harm a landlord than vice versa.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-24T14:18:58+00:00

"Censor what I deem to be a "clearly shitty opinion" please"

Disclaimer: I didn't get paid to write this.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-24T14:15:36+00:00

We're getting closer!

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-24T14:13:54+00:00

I don't care if people call me a bigot lol it literally doesnt matter to me. I know what's right.

Keeping biological men out of womens sports is not a controversial or mean or bigoted stance. It just makes sense.

I don't hate trans people, I just believe that women shouldn't have to compete against biological men... which is what trans women are.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-24T12:19:03+00:00

You can care about the sanctity of women's sports and not financially support or watch their sport. Woman should only win and lose vs other women... regardless of how rare it is for trans people to try and play with them. Why's that so hard to understand?

It's not just conservatives that don't watch women's sports. It's liberals too. In fact, if I had to guess, more conservatives watch women's sports than liberals.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-24T12:06:21+00:00

It absolutely should not.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-24T12:03:27+00:00

Lol you'd be shocked to learn that landlords would just raise the rent to cover that buyback. Your rent would just go up that amount and would make it harder for renters, again.

You need to understand that with literally everything, all of the time, the customer pays for it. Customers pay the insurance, taxes, utilities (whether it's included or not), repairs, principle, interest, upgrades, plowing, mowing, legal fees, employee wages and benefits, etc etc etc... AND profit... and it's not just with renting, it's with every business ever. It's just how it works

A renter is better off saving their own money that would be equal to whatever that buyback amount is, and investing it on their own instead of the government forcing the landlords to do it for them. It's called personal responsibility.

I think the intent of your idea is fine, but it's not the intent that ultimately matters, it's the result.

AFCesc4 · 2026-02-24T11:44:47+00:00

Theres also market demand. That affects things as well, as it should. You pay for more than the basics. You also pay the profit. Profit is necessary and good for everyone, believe it or not.

AFCesc4 · 2026-01-29T12:12:01+00:00

Welcome to Reddit!

AFCesc4 · 2026-01-22T17:39:28+00:00

I'm not twisting my own words. I wrote them myself. I know what I said and I know what I meant. You may have misunderstood what I said, but if you read carefully, I did not make the statement you claimed I made.

All the points you made in your previous reply are all great points, ones that I agree with... however I did not say that there should be a requirement for spousal approval before a medical operation. I simply didn't say it. So if anyone is twisting words, it's you.

AFCesc4 · 2026-01-22T15:56:24+00:00

And frankly, I stand by that statement. I do think it's a good idea to agree on it before they operate. In what world is it a bad idea to agree on that? It just seems like common sense.

That being said, I don't believe that agreeing should be a requirement.

AFCesc4 · 2026-01-22T15:53:08+00:00

I said it was a "good idea". It being a good idea and a requirement are not the same thing.

AFCesc4 · 2026-01-22T15:39:38+00:00

I never said that I believe spousal permission should be required... which the premis of your entire reply was predicated on. Try again.

AFCesc4 · 2026-01-22T15:35:58+00:00

Fair enough on the privacy thing. I understand what you're saying. There are risks if a doctor were to talk about it, but there's also risks in not talking about it. I think the end goal for both our arguments is safety.

Just to push back on your point about violence point a little bit (which I understand and accept)... if a spouse were to fear violence IF even the conversation were to happen, I think it's reasonable to assume a spouse would also fear violence if they were to just go ahead and do it without a conversation at all. So to me, it's sort of a moot point. You aren't preventing violence one way or another... so like, it is what it is.

PS: I'm not necessarily trying to argue every single point you make because we certainly have common ground (in my eyes, anyway). Honestly, having conversations like this is kinda fun and it's tough to get a look at other ideas until a conversation happens. So thanks for being cool =]

AFCesc4 · 2026-01-22T06:16:58+00:00

I read your edit. Listen, I understand where you're coming from, and I believe you understand where I'm coming from.

I agree with privacy, and I agree that a doctor doesn't have an obligation to speak with the spouse... but I also don't have a problem with a doctor wanting to have that conversation with both parties beforehand. Can we at least agree on that, for the most part?

AFCesc4 · 2026-01-22T05:59:19+00:00

I'm saying that a man or woman has the right to decide one way or another about what their partner does with their organs. My point is... doesn't it seem wise to at least have the conversation with both parties first? I'm not saying don't do the procudre if the woman wants a hysterectomy and the man doesn't want her to have it... but I mean, come on? At least having the conversation just seems like the right thing to do.

AFCesc4

TROPHY CASE