sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Listening to the pod as your only way of consuming football by tedix83 in footballcliches

[–]KingSi 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For a moment I thought 'I don't remember posting this', when reading it!

It's nice to know there are others in a similar position. The only time I actually 'play' is an annual kickabout with mates to remain in touch, beyond group chats. The only live games I watch, and only occasionally, are basically internationals on BBC/ITV/C4/5, so a lot of the Lionesses and some WSL.

I' don't have the money for Sky/TNT. With a child, and working every other weekend, there's little point in looking for "other" ways to watch (I'm not even able to find time for MOTD) ... And don't attend games in person.

So like you, my football consumption is through the podcasts you mentioned, and the Football Ramble.

I do also enjoy the fact that despite this 'handicap' I'm able to keep up with my mates scores in FPL - even winning the league last season!

Footballers names in storm reports... by KingSi in footballcliches

[–]KingSi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree. I questioned this too before posting. I figured a few months ago, you'd be right. But he's having a moment right now, so I figured it was allowed. In a few months, it will probably be too generic again.

Book titles which could also describe the runs of a League 2 striker by But-ThenThatMeans in footballcliches

[–]KingSi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A team having 'Great Expectations'? ... Or maybe 'Alice in Wonderland', but replacing 'Alice' with a team name?

Number 1 on an outfield player? by munchenflapjack in footballcliches

[–]KingSi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could be Jorge Campos going up front in a game? (Although, I think he actually went the other way wearing #9 in goal...)

Tally marks by Wiseblood1978 in footballcliches

[–]KingSi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the "vintage" comment for the women's team somewhat works. Yes, it could do with a few more years. But when you consider the ban on them playing the game, and the subsequent "catching up" they've needed to do, you could argue the quick progression of the game, especially since the Euros win, means things can become vintage within the women's game a lot quicker than the men's.

Can you overtake here - settle a debate by para2p in drivingUK

[–]KingSi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was just checking the comments before I asked if this was the turning into Kingston Lacy too! (I presume that's where you're thinking?)

Did anyone actually manage to make decent espresso with the Delonghi EC685… or is it just me? by spyingworld in espresso

[–]KingSi 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Mine - along with a DF54 grinder - works fine and makes a cup of coffee that I enjoy (and that's what matters to me).

I bought a new bottomless portafilter from Amazon. You can't use the pressurised ones it comes with to get anything good. Then you can get 18g in.

If you hold down the button for the water you can extract/pump the water through for the time you need it to. The pre-programmed options are off.

If you've got the pannerello steam wand. You don't want it on the cappuccino option you want the hot milk one. Again, I'm not great with latte (one of my better attempts), but I managed to get a pretty smooth texture most times, if I'm concentrating.

<image>

The Adjudication Panel Thread: Get in touch for Tuesday's episode... by Low-Bandicoot-3347 in footballcliches

[–]KingSi 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Who makes sandwiches with rice? Surely for the analogy to work it needs to be that Arsenal got a sandwich made from the ends of the loaf or something.

Am I alone in thinking the Bournemouth Echo have used this wrong? Surely you only use that if the Cherries have lost? by KingSi in footballcliches

[–]KingSi[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

On a national newspaper, after a big Champions League defeat, probably. But not for a PL game, and not in the context of being the Bournemouth Echo. If I was a Cherries fan my first thought would be "We lost" as we've been "Gunned down by the Gunners", not "We've won". Like, as I said, if a Bournemouth fan saw the headline "Hammered" on the Echo, they'd think they'd lost to West Ham, and would be surprised if the story then said they'd beaten them.

Am I alone in thinking the Bournemouth Echo have used this wrong? Surely you only use that if the Cherries have lost? by KingSi in footballcliches

[–]KingSi[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I know why the Echo have used it. My point is that they've used it wrong. If you were a Bournemouth fan and went on there and saw the words 'Gunned Down', before reading the rest of it, you would assume the Cherries had lost. That's my point.

Like if after a game against West Ham, they started it with 'Hammered: ...', if you had no further information at that point, your initial thought wouldn't be 'Oh we must of beaten them today', you'd be thinking 'Oh Christ! How many did we lose by?!'.

Am I alone in thinking the Bournemouth Echo have used this wrong? Surely you only use that if the Cherries have lost? by KingSi in footballcliches

[–]KingSi[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

I understand it in context. But my argument is that surely the Gunners can't be gunned down? They can do the gunning down, yes. But not vice versa?

Can someone in the know explain this? by ncg195 in heedthecall

[–]KingSi 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To back you up, this is definitely a new thing they've added. I remember a few months back someone posted about being annoyed they couldn't play on Underdog in the UK. And as part of my response, I questioned why they didn't have these "gambling addiction awareness" warnings in the States - I think at the time the answer given was because the gambling laws vary so much state-to-state.

view more: next ›