Jarquis

done.and thanks for the reminder!

Mate I think its your turn by the way.

Oh right. Yeah its a good suggestion. Added it to the rules that only scorecards from post 1900 can be posted. Will also stick with the 10 test idea though. Someone who has played less than 10 is not acceptable IMO.

Which suggestion mate? Joe has suggested a fair number of things now its hard to keep track :P

Didn't realise you were back on it

Ping me when you're up and I'll talk

There's a bit more to it
I'll explain on FB or something tomorrow

There made a change that should give us some sort of chance at picking those players plus it gives us a bit of space to get out of a tight spot if needed.

Yeah there are some pretty awesome players that come under that category. I'm seriously tempted to change it now lol. Think its too late?

Agree that we're missing out on the likes of Trumper and one or two others. It avoids a few contentious picks which leave very few options for the next guy. There are some good players who have just played 2 or 3 years in the 1900's. These players have pretty much the same team in those years and play the same opponent as well so one scorecard might just cover most of the options. We'd be in a slight fix if someone has almost no picks at all and there is that possibility. Lets try it out without the old timers and see how it plays out for now lol.

No one's trying to brush aside anything. The best way to handle this sort of an issue is by reporting it to the mods, not by hurling alegations against each other on the forum. If you keep attacking each other, threads will continue to be derailed and nothing constructive will be achieved from it. Just keep reporting the posts and let the mod team handle it.

What are the bookies paying on him not seeing out his contract? As good a time as there'll ever be to make an investment. Should've done it when he signed th eextension though.

Thought he signed on to 2014? Would've shown him the door a couple of seasons ago as you might already know. This is what he did to Monaco all over again. It's alarming.

Cesc is irreplaceable, Nasri I'm less fussed about, the guy has played well for about 3-4 months in three seasons and now acts the **** with the club? He can **** off. I think Clichy will be harder to replace than most fans think, he is actually a good left back who gets exposed by the role he's asked to play and the players in front of him. Gibbs, Traore and Botelho (heh) are no where near ready or reliable enough to step up.

Problem is, even if we can magically supplement the team to replace those guys we still have the same issues with the squad we had last season while City and Liverpool are investing heavily in their team. This season won't be pretty, I don't think Arsene has the bottle to go out and spend enough money on the players he needs and I'm ot sure Kroenke will sanction that type of spending either.

The real shame is a lot of people saw this coming years ago but the club were content to coast. Ugly, ugly times coming up.

Not really fussed anymore. We're dropping out of the top 4 this season. Losing Cesc ends this "era" so to speak.

We're not getting rid of him or Bendtner or Arshavin or Diaby. Who would've thought giving players huge long term deals before they've achieved anything would backfire?

Jealous. The set looked amazing, did you see it?

Ahaha. Well take comfort in the fact that I'll become a cranky old man who stubbornly insists that he knows best about everything on account of his age about three years sooner than you will.

How can you say that Hawkeye's unquestionably better than the human eye if the degree of accuracy of their projections is under question. It is entirely possible that they're off the mark enough times for an umpire watching slo-mo replays to be more accurate. Fair enough if they can show that their technology is superior to Virtualeye's, which enables them to be as accurate as they claim, but has that been done? I don't think its merely a co-incidence that Virtualeye has been trying their hardest to get the BCCI on board, considering the former admit that the predictive element is unreliable, a stance shared by the BCCI.

"You're either with us or without us".

Considering that there are examples of Hawkeye getting it wrong, and even more importantly - the fact that Virtualeye admits that they can't make accurate projections of the delivery beyond a point, it isn't as clear cut as saying that Hawkeye is unquestionable. What makes Hawkeye better than Virtualeye given that they have no qualms making projections beyond points Virtualeye refuse to do so? Is there any documentation to support their claim?

Mate, you’re getting a bit aggressive with your posting in reference to the UDRS discussion. I understand this can be a deeply frustrating topic, but please try to stay level-headed when responding to those you disagree with.