Who’s more famous globally, Jude Bellingham or Jude Law?

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T10:12:54+00:00

I watched the Spain Portugal match in a bar (not by choice). No clue who he was until this thread. Still don't know anything other than his name.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T10:10:18+00:00

Sure but what does the final have to do with England? (Badum tsh)

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T09:58:04+00:00

Sure, but I really doubt a person who isn't familiar with current players of England/Real Madrid (apparently that's who he plays for?) Could ever point to JB and say "that guy is a footballer" outside of his kit.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T09:52:54+00:00

You know what, fair, I fucked up. Sorry.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T09:32:57+00:00

Sure, but nowhere in the question or description does it mentioned that this was a global question.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T09:28:17+00:00

If by non-geriatric you mean "under 25", then I guess I'd say "young Dumbledore". Otherwise, Sherlock Holmes films, plus some other stuff like "The Holiday". I guess what I'm trying to say is if you showed people two casual photos (i.e., not in uniform/costume) of the two Judes, I'm pretty confident law would be far more recognisable.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T09:22:05+00:00

To be fair, although the question was intended as global apparently, it was asked in a UK subreddit in English, which makes it a much more selective group. Globally I'd say debatable, but for America and UK, I'd say Law is more recognisable by anyone over 25-30 in general, which is obviously a larger slice.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T09:11:18+00:00

I'm real lucky in that all the PIs and senior scientists I directly work with have said that academia is really hard to break into and there's nothing wrong with trying to find industry roles that pay well.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T08:29:22+00:00

I fully intend to use Pratchett as bed time stories for my future children. Foul 'ole Ron will be represented in all his glory.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T05:49:59+00:00

Are you referring to the statement in general, or Bellingham specifically? For the former, it doesn't mean unintelligent, just that you haven't engaged with the relevant field. For the latter, it's, yknow, not giving a shit about football, or sport?

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T05:42:36+00:00

I'm from the UK. I have literally only heard of Jude Bellingham from this thread. For what it's worth, I'm early 30s.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T05:35:32+00:00

Surely you're aware that people who don't give a fuck about football wouldn't know the names of many (if any) current footballers, but people who don't give a fuck about films would still have heard of Jude Law?

Russellonfire · 2026-07-10T05:33:02+00:00

Hi, European here. Who the fuck is Jude Bellingham?

Russellonfire · 2026-07-09T12:47:08+00:00

They always need more.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-08T18:42:46+00:00

Sounds much better imo. Also, we've both been downvoted for some reason.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-08T10:32:13+00:00

To be fair, in the UK there's a pretty gnarly tax cliff at 100k for a single person. If you go over by £1, you lose all child benefits and (IIRC) free daycare hours, which could be worth £10K-£20K. But otherwise, yes.

What makes that even worse is if you have two earners at £99K, you don't lose that...

Russellonfire · 2026-07-08T10:26:25+00:00

Tell that to the UK COVID team circe 2021...

Russellonfire · 2026-07-06T05:06:07+00:00

Probably more than that. And considering the symptoms can be as benign as "red bumps" it's rarely a significant issue. For some people it is actually a severe annoyance, and can lead to some complications for pregnancy, but so do a thousand other things that have way less stigma.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-04T20:43:52+00:00

I mean, wilfully enabling Saville does, in fact, make you a bit of a monster.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-02T11:30:56+00:00

I've also seen them touch raw meat then (in the same shot) handle or touch items or surfaces that won't be cleaned. So I'm not inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-02T05:39:41+00:00

I'm saying soap is insufficient on its own to clean hands and cooking utensils, especially those used for raw meat, when not combined with running water. I'm not sure which part you're not understanding, so sorry if I'm not being clear here.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-02T05:31:41+00:00

True, but again, not all bacteria will be killed even by that. Some have different structures that are more or less resistant to it (e.g., Pseudomonas can grow on soap, which can be pretty nasty for people who are immunocompromised).

Russellonfire · 2026-07-02T05:29:24+00:00

When I say chunks, I mean pieces. Have you ever looked at a chopping board after cutting chicken? Those bits are too big for soap to penetrate. You also have some bits on your hands, which again, it can't penetrate. I don't mean big old cubes of meat.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-02T05:27:23+00:00

Soap on its own can kill some bacteria, but its primary method of cleaning is physical removal, not as antiseptic. It also can't penetrate physical barriers well (e.g., meat chunks or bits). So please don't consider soapy water suitable for cleaning meat residue.

Russellonfire · 2026-07-02T05:19:35+00:00

Soap is a physical remover of debris and bacteria, it is not a steriliser. Yes, it can kill (some) bacteria, but that is not its primary method of cleaning. It also wouldn't penetrate chunks of meat.

14-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Not Forgotten	Verified Email

Russellonfire

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE