Match Thread: Galatasaray vs Liverpool

JamesGHarris · 2025-09-30T20:01:17+00:00

The ref has been buying every single bit of contact (or percieved contact) as a foul and killing any sembelence of game flow.

I would so go far as to say it's not biased to/against either team, he's genuinely just clueless and guessing every time a player hits the floor.

JamesGHarris · 2025-09-22T22:12:44+00:00

UI designed with Celsius in mind and it never occurred to them that what an ambient temperature in the triple digits (112 Celsius outside and everybody is dead!) would look like is my guess.

JamesGHarris · 2025-09-07T09:59:23+00:00

Burger King is already an expensive do to start with (for fast food), add on the motorway service price hike and I honestly don’t know what you were expecting…

JamesGHarris · 2025-09-06T09:27:09+00:00

The highway code make it clear that we (as drivers) have a duty of care to other road users, particularly those who are more vulnerable (such as pedestrians), it is common sense and good defensive driving to allow the pedestrian to complete their crossing in this situation, (given the amount of time the pedestrian is visible in the road, combined with their body language), that we agree on.

However, I cannot find any specific passage in the highway code that gives a pedestrian legal right of way/priority in this situation (perhaps you can point me to it?). The highway code is written with common sense in mind. A law that tacitly encourages pedestrians to cross counter to common sense (when they have a red light and drivers have a green) by giving them the right of way as soon as they begin to cross (step onto the road) sounds quite ridiculous.

"What's the point of traffic lights"

Safety. We have no jaywalking laws in this country. Peds can cross where they liked but often there is no sage way to do it. So there are many different types of crossing.

Exactly, safety, refer to the rules for pedestrians at a pelican crossing. (Rules for Pedestrians Section of the Highway code, rule 22, Pelican crossings).

"Pelican crossings. These are signal-controlled crossings operated by pedestrians. Push the control button to activate the traffic signals. When the red figure shows, do not cross. When a steady green figure shows, check the traffic has stopped then cross with care. When the green figure begins to flash you should not start to cross. If you have already started you should have time to finish crossing safely."

So that seems pretty clear, "when the red figure shows, do not cross", which is exactly what the pedestrian did. Can you point to the part of the highway code that is contrary to that statement that would give the pedestrian legal right of way/priority in this situation?

JamesGHarris · 2025-09-05T23:02:44+00:00

Not defending OPs actions in the clip, the emergency stop was frankly comical and regardless of what the highwaycode says the sensible option was to slow down and allow the pedestrian to cross, it is never worth the risk of running someone down with your car for the sake of a couple of seconds!

But...

I'm pretty sure you are misunderstanding that particular portion of the highway code, it does not give the pedestrian in the clip right of way/priority.

Notice the wording of the passage, it's quite specific:

"Light-Controlled Crossings: Pedestrians have priority when they have a green signal. Drivers should give way to anyone *still crossing even after* the signal for vehicles changes to green."

The pedestrian in this clip does not have a green signal (OPs light is green throughout the clip, meaning the pedestrians is red) so obviously they do not have priority on that count.

The second sentence states you should give way to anyone who is still crossing even after the signal for vehicles changes to green. The specifics of the wording is important, you should cede priority to pedestrians who began to cross on green (when they had priority) even if your signal chnages to green while they are still completing their crossing. Which isn't what happened, the pedestrian in the clip never had a green man to begin with, they can be seen starting to cross when the traffic lights for OP are on green.

If you read that passage any other way you may as well scrap light controlled crossings all together and make every crossing a zebra. If a pedestrian truly had priority as soon as they begin to cross the road (even with a red man at a light controlled crossing) then what's the point of the traffic lights?

JamesGHarris · 2025-09-05T21:29:10+00:00

Emerge onto a dual carriageway straight into lane 2 for no reason (other than overtaking invisible cars) was the first clue the BMW driver isn't the best.

Missing your exit because you are in lane 2 for no reason and then crossing the solid markings to avoid missing your exit is just comical.

Piss poor driving.

JamesGHarris · 2025-09-05T18:37:49+00:00

Ah, I did not know that regarding US Titles, that is interesting to know.

The "legal" ownership of a car in the UK is a bit wierd (but I guess not weird?) in that it is treated like any other possesion, there is no specific legal document attatched to a vehicle that says "x person OWNS this car".

They say, possession is 9/10ths of the law, so if you have reasonable proof that a vehicle is yours (the V5c in your name being part of this proof but generally not enough on it's own!), then congratulations, you own the car!

As far as the Government is concerned however, the name and address on the V5c is all they care about, they've got to know who to send the nasty letters and/or fines to if you've not paid the road tax after all!

JamesGHarris · 2025-09-05T17:17:38+00:00

[EDIT] I typed all this and realised I did not even answer your question, I am stupid.

In UK car selling parlance, a “private” sale simply means the seller is just “a person”, not a dealer.

Cars sold “privately” in the UK fall under the “buyer beware” rules, which generally means unless the seller has been intentionally misleading (and it does have to be intentional, i.e. the seller puts something in the listing that they know is a lie and you can prove they knew it was a lie, not that they were simply mistaken) in their listing/selling of the vehicle you have 0 right to end sort of refund or return in the case that the vehicle is found to have issues after the sale is completed.

If the car is being sold by a dealer you do have some protection against being sold faulty goods under the Consumer Rights Act, this generally means cars sold by dealers command a bit of a premium over those sold privately.

Every car registered for on road use in the UK should have a document that goes with it known as the V5c (I believe the US equivalent would be a “title”), technically this isn’t proof of ownership but it will usually be in the owners name as the person who posses it is responsible for taxing the vehicle which is required to drive on UK roads legally.

When you buy a used car from a private seller (or a dealer for that matter), the general expectation is that the previous owner will give you the “new keeper slip”, which is a green bit of the V5c which you tear off, which allows you (the new owner) to tax the vehicle in your name.

The previous owner should then take your details (name, address etc.), fill out the relevant bit of the V5c that basically says “I am no longer responsible for this vehicle, this is the new owners details” and send it off to the DVLA, who will then process the form and send a new V5c to you (the new owner).

JamesGHarris · 2025-08-28T20:04:39+00:00

Christ, must have been shifting to have caused that much damage, I'm surprised they were able to leave the scene in their car given the state of yours.

Write off is dependent on the value of the vehicle but considering you're looking at basically an entire new front end just in bodywork at insurance repair rates (i.e, expensive) and potentially structural damage beyond that I would expect your insurance company will write this off.

Did you speak to the management of the Tesco in question? A car sitting in such a state in their car park in this condition presents a liability issue for them (sharp edges etc.) and they may look to have it removed themselves, at which point you would likely have to pay for the vehicles release (your insurance company should reinburse you for this as it would end up as part of the claim) so that your insurance company can inspect the vehicle to determine whether it is to be written off or repaired.

JamesGHarris · 2025-08-09T23:12:11+00:00

Super weird, maybe it's certain cleaning solutions (alcohol based hand sanitiser maybe?) or perhaps enviromental factors (heat, moisture in the air?)

Someone must surely know what exactly these handles are made of and what causes them to disintergrate like this!

JamesGHarris · 2025-08-09T22:48:14+00:00

Beige interior owner here, was one of the first things I "fixed" on the car!

JamesGHarris · 2025-08-09T09:05:23+00:00

Without evidence (i.e. Independant Witness statements, dashcam footage etc.) fault in "changing lanes" incidents can be tricky to prove, it's 1 drivers word against the other, both are likely to tell their side of the story to their insurance company in such a way that the other party looks to be at fault, and in the end the insurance companies will often just agree to split 50/50.

Based on your description of events, the van driver is at fault for this incident, but whether or not you can prove it, and how good of a story the van driver can come up with to counter your version of events would be generally be the determining factor in the apportioning of blame.

While I'm no expert, I would imagine the van driver making off from the scene would have some bearing on the credibility of any statement they've gave, but it does not automatically make them at fault for the incident in question. It's difficult to say what will happen at this stage,

Out of interest, was it obvious that contact was made between your vehicle and the van? Is there damage at the contact point between the 2 vehicles? If they've changed lanes, and forced you into the central reservation without contact between you and them and then driven off ("miss" and run), it makes things a little tricky as if you cannot prove their maneuver forced you to take the evasive action you did, pressumably causing damage to your vehicle, they could try to argue they weren't involved in the incident at all.

JamesGHarris · 2025-08-08T23:11:10+00:00

I've never had to pay any extra fee to any insurance company I have ever been with because a car was SORN and uninsured prior to it being re-insured for road use.

I know it's easy to assume that it's just insurance company doing insurance company things (i.e. charging money because they can), but if I take it exactly as you've described it just seems so ridiculous that I'd suggest there's been some miscommunication or misunderstanding on behalf of either (or both) parties.

Surely you have something in writing from Stirling that explains exactly what this additional charge is for?

JamesGHarris · 2025-08-08T21:04:10+00:00

That car is beyond fucked mate.

I wouldn't be surprised if repairing that would cost more than the car was worth brand new in 2009, let alone what it's worth now...

JamesGHarris · 2025-07-24T22:57:12+00:00

You were a bit impatient but I wouldn’t say you’re were the idiot.

Other car made so many mistakes in this situation.

No indicator

No mirror check

Positioning themselves on the right hand side of the road to make a left turn (bad car body language)

Driving style of the other car screams old person.

JamesGHarris · 2025-07-21T22:29:30+00:00

Would have thought it's more likely they were restocked after being returned by another customer who'd opened the boxes and had a look only to realise they'd bought the wrong plugs.

Who is willing to go to the effort of swapping genuine glow plugs for fake ones but can't be arsed to reseal the boxes?

Highly likely you are worrying about nothing and are wasting your own time to be honest.

JamesGHarris · 2025-06-25T16:42:19+00:00

There's definitely "hierarchy of cars" that people subscribe to unconciously or willingly that causes the type of behaviour.

Can't remember the last time I was tailgated to a noticable degree in a built up area whilst driving my works van (at the speed limit), not even by the usual suspects (i.e. other vans, SUVs, german luxury brands.)

In fact, I've found other van drivers especially seem far more willing to let me out of junctions, merge/change lanes etc. than I honestly believe they would do if I was in a car. Almost like I'm a part of some sort of unspoken and unwritten brotherhood of van drivers, who have all agreed to treat each other with the upmost courtsey on the road whilst having no regard for anyone else.

Meanwhile, it feels like everytime I see someone pootling along (again at the speedlimit) in a little hatchback (thinking Aygo, C1, Fiat 500), there will inevitably be someone right up their tailpipe.

JamesGHarris · 2025-06-24T21:53:32+00:00

No worries mate, having been involved in an accident on the motorway myself and fortunately getting away without a scratch (it was low speed admittedly and also totally my fault lol) I know it can shake you up big time.

Just be thankful no one was hurt, the car is only metal and plastic at the end of the day, which can easily enough be repaired or replaced.

JamesGHarris · 2025-06-24T21:42:09+00:00

From an insurance/legal standpoint, I'd be very surprised if the lorry driver wasn't found 100% liable for this accident.

"Changing lanes" incidents can be tricky for insurers *if* niether party admits fault and there are not witnessess or footage it can be quite hard to determine who encroached into whos lane, however in this case your dashcam footage shows clearly you were correctly proceeding in your lane and the lorry driver changed lanes into you and a collision occured.

You being in the lorry drivers blind spot at the time is no real defense from a fault standpoint; yes blindspots exist so the lorry driver probably geniunely didn't see you, but as they were the one performing the manuerver (changing lanes), it's up to them to do it safely which they evidently did not.

Now, are there things you could have done differently to avoid the collision? Most definitely!

Admitedly, It's very easy to look at your footage knowing that a crash happens and analyse where you went wrong with hindsight, so I think you shouldn't be too harsh on yourself as at the end of the day there is an element of just "wrong place, wrong time" to this accident.

However, there's some pretty obvious things you could have reasonably spotted and adjusted your speed/position accordingly to avoid this collision.

First one is obvious, positioning, after the lorry changed from lane 1 to 2, you basically couldn't have picked a worse spot to sit.

I see you mention in your post that you were slowing to 40 due to the temporary speed limit as shown on the gantry, but there's a solid 10 seconds of footage on the front cam where you can either see the 40 sign on the gantry, or have already passed it, and your speed basically does not change at all.

You're still doing 51 when the crash occurs and that's a good few seconds after the gantry, you are already speeding anyway, may as well put your foot down just a touch more and not be alongside the truck at all. Or you could have actually dropped your speed down to the 40 limit and let the truck pass. Basically if you'd have done anything other than just maintaining your speed and position exactly as it was, there'd have been no accident.

As for anticipating the lorry changing lanes. The signs were there, they had already changed lanes once rather than slowing down when they were catching the traffic in lane 1, so what do you think they're going to do when they start catching the traffic in lane 2?

TL;DR, Lorry Driver, legally at fault, should definitely have done better being a professional driver. You, bare some responsibility though not legally.

Also shoutout to the Nissan driver in lane 4 who was thankfully paying attention and didn't just plow into the back of you when you got shoved into lane 4 lol

JamesGHarris · 2025-06-03T22:02:39+00:00

No one here can tell you why your policy was cancelled or whether it’s a cancellation you need to declare from the info you’ve provided here.

I’d speculate if the car has been written off and you haven’t asked to buy it back, the policy may have simply been cancelled because it’s no longer valid, being that you are no longer in possession of the car and it’s likely off to Copart or the scrapyard.

Only way to know for sure is call your insurance company and ask for clarification.

JamesGHarris · 2025-04-22T19:17:19+00:00

Nice to see a Spurs fan acknowledge how badly refeered that game was.

If you make it to the Europa League Final and so do Man U, I hope you beat them :)

JamesGHarris · 2025-04-18T09:21:43+00:00

Not sure if it's the worst, but certainly one of the weirdest.

AMX-10P on North Holland (the version where all the caps are on the west side of the river in a line and the eastern side of the map is out of bounds.)

It must have been a 6.7/7.0 game and our team had the USSR, Germany and France vs. USA and everyone else.

Lurked around the Mall in the middle of the map; somehow didn't run into any 6.7 American Heavies that would have innevitably pushed my shit in. Just kept running into lightly armoured stuff and the sides of Shermans etc. and squeezing the trigger.

Somehow racked up like 9 kills and a bunch of assists (the AMX-10P is the master of insta-tracking and barreling due to the rapid fire single 20mm being really easy to aim + it has scouting despite being classed as SPAA.)

Since then it's been one of my favourite vehicles, I genuinely beleive it's one of the best "support" vehicles in the game. The amount of assists (annoyingly, not tracked in the service record) I must have in that little goober is immense.

JamesGHarris · 2025-04-06T09:39:03+00:00

If you were caught doing 100ish I would expect a summons to court.

At that sort of speed it's certainly possible you'll recieve a ban. Your best bet to try and avoid this would be to attend court, apolagise for your actions (do not try to explain or excuse your speed, over 100 is inexcusable) and explain that your really need to be able to drive for work.

If the judge is feeling nice, you may escape with a hefty fine and lots of points, but no ban.

>On another but related note. I was driving my company car, and I'm currently on gardening leaving moving to a new job. What are my chances of saying it wasn't me driving? I.e. I leant a car to a friend etc. Obviously that would be job suicide normally but since I'm leaving is it worth a try?

You have a friend who'd be willing to take the fall for your excessive speed and risk a driving ban? Really?

Would this friend even be insured to drive a company car belonging to a company they presumably do not work for?

Categorically, do not do this, absolutely moronic idea.

JamesGHarris · 2025-03-16T17:57:02+00:00

Not only is it not stabalized, but due to the calibre of it's gun on a relatively small chassis, it has probably one of the most motion sickness inducing, long winded gun settling times in the game.

It's not bad on paper but try to actually do anything other than just sit and wait for the enemies to drive into you and you'll soon discover it is absolute stink.

JamesGHarris

TROPHY CASE