/* */

fork handles

1-3/8" diameter, 7/16" bore. With ferrules and caps. Will fit all makes.

Sunday, February 07, 2010


Danny Boy

If you don't already, I urge you to listen to the Danny Baker show on Five Live. Obviously 9-11 on a Saturday morning might not be amenable to most people, but the podcast doesn't half light up a grey drizzly February commute. Currently loving the Roman numeral footballers feature (VIDIC!) and of course the ever present 'Sausage Sandwich Game'. A couple of hours of irreverent fun of a vaguely sporting nature, all held together with Danny's infectious enthusiasm for the absurd. Worth checking out.

Labels: , , , ,

0 Comments:

Add comment

<< Home

Tuesday, April 08, 2008


I Have Nothing To Say...

...that wouldn't be termed 'partisan', 'biased' or' sour-grapes' by many people who have not set foot on the left wing of a snowy pitch on a Sunday morning in February against a fat pub team of middle-aged cloggers from the arse-end of Tadcaster. I have, however, so I shall say what I like :)

Whilst tonight was one of the most entertaining games of football I have witnessed for a long time, the decision of the referee to award a penalty for the alleged 'tug' on Babel was an utter disgrace. I ask anyone who may have stumbled across this corner of the internet to look at the first leg and the Hleb incident on 65 mins (no penalty given) and then examine tonight's Babel incident on 85 mins (penalty given) and explain to me in no uncertain terms what the rubbery fuck was the difference? Eh? Nothing. Oh, apart from the referee. Either it is or it isn't a penalty. Yes or no. Black or white. Pinky or Perky. Cheech or Chong. Randall or Hopkirk (Deceased), etc...

For most of the game it was impossible to split the teams. I was discussing this at length with some Liverpool fans in the pub when the penalty as awarded; even they had the good grace to be embarrassed. The Guardian MBM commentary described it as "not entirely clear-cut". That should be in the dictionary under L (for Liberal). I know I'll almost certainly have calmed down by tomorrow but for now the result has a nasty aftertaste. Admittedly, us taking the lead on 13 minutes forced Benitez into a reluctant attacking formation. Perhaps we would have been better off scoring in the 89th minute. Now, for the purist, an almost certainly dour Liverpool-Chelsea semi-final does not fill the heart with glee. Oh well. Penalties, anyone?

Anyway, I keep reminding myself that Arsene told us in August that this team was "not ready". Having been top of the league and in with a shout of the semi-finals of Europe's 'super-league', all us Gooners begged to differ. Maybe he was right. Bring on 2008-09?And Theo...

Labels: , , ,

5 Comments:

At April 09, 2008 7:05 AM, Blogger Alex Andronov said:

I don't know about everything else (I'm sure you're right of course) but by-the-by it sounds like that Theo is a bit good.

 
At April 09, 2008 8:03 AM, Blogger fourstar said:

His jinking run reminded me of Owen against Argentina in the 1998 World Cup. So why, oh why did he start with Eboué again?

On reflection this morning, I still think it was a brilliant match. Liverpool took their chances better (the Torres strike was excellent) and on balance probably would have won even without the penalty decision. But it gives us Gooners something to hang our disappointment on, I suppose :)

Oh well.

 
At April 09, 2008 6:32 PM, Blogger Chris said:

I thought we played pretty well after senderos' blunder, broke up your midfield (never thought you'd miss flamini that much!) and created a fair bit, albeit sporadically. mostly, (aside the obvious joy) i'm pissed off a controversial decision has marred a brilliant game. any contact from behind in the penalty area is always going to get european refs worked up, but it was no way clear cut enough. worse, over the knockout stages i'm not sure we really deserve to be in the semis. the sendings off vs inter and the blatant penalty denied at the emirates leave a sour taste. not helping us shift the luckypool tag certainly. we're still well behind the other prem top 3 but we can always turn it on in big games. anyway roll on another semi of terrifying, edge of the seat, dullness...

 
At April 18, 2008 2:26 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said:

"...the decision of the referee to award a penalty for the alleged 'tug' on Babel was an utter disgrace. I ask anyone who may have stumbled across this corner of the internet to look at the first leg and the Hleb incident on 65 mins (no penalty given) and then examine tonight's Babel incident on 85 mins (penalty given) and explain to me in no uncertain terms what the rubbery fuck was the difference?...

Great point.

If only your teams manager felt the same way. He spent a whole week complaining that the Hleb incident was a penalty then another week complaining the Babel incident wasn't.

Perhaps rather than asking for 'consistency' from referees, he could employ a degree of objectivity to their decisions?

Now, according to your manager, your season has collapsed "because of the decisions of officials since March".

Indeed, Wenger may have reminded you in August that the team 'wasn't ready'

However, his actions across the season do contradict this somewhat. Why not come out after the second champions league tie and reiterate how the team had overachieved?

Why not strengthen the squad in January?

Why say he only needs to add one player to the current squad in the summer?

The arrogance of his actions does not indicate to me the humility you attach to the man!

Arrogance and complacency lead to Liverpool falling from a position of strength to perennial strugglers for third/fourth place in the space of two decades. In different circumstances the arrogance and complacency of your manager could lead you down the same road.

 
At April 18, 2008 2:54 PM, Blogger fourstar said:

@Anonymous

"Perhaps rather than asking for 'consistency' from referees, he could employ a degree of objectivity to their decisions?"

I'm not sure what your point is - mine was that both of those decisions went against us, in diametrically opposed ways. So it wasn't as if he was being blind (of which he is guilty as charged on occasion) but was, er, objectively assessing them and asking why they were not treated in the same way both times.

"Why say he only needs to add one player to the current squad in the summer?"

Er, so that every agent in Europe doesn't start banging at his door with a price-inflated left-winger? If you notice, the moment Chelsea say they are up for a new right-back, the price of right-backs doubles overnight. He may well buy more, but why should he tell the players, agents and media that at this stage? That would be dumb as rocks.

(I have more to put to you, but I'm tired, having just been at the birth of my second child...)

 

Add comment

<< Home

Monday, February 25, 2008


Happy 25th Birthday, Eduardo

Arsenal striker Eduardo Alves da Silva is 25 today.

Rather a shame that his leg was shattered in two places on Saturday by an utterly disgraceful high tackle in the third minute from Birmingham City fuckwit* Martin Taylor**, isn't it?


If it was malicious, and he intended it, ban him for life. If it wasn't, and he is just clumsy, he shouldn't be playing in the Premier League. Most Sunday morning pub teams (and I have played for a few) wouldn't accept tackles like that from their defenders; shin high, studs up, sliding in at speed.

Contrary to many, I am placing the blame firmly at the door of Alex McLeish, Birmingham City's manager. It is almost certain that, in the dressing room before the game, he fired his payers up with the instruction to "go and let them know they've been in a game", "get yourselves in their faces early doors" and "the way to beat Arsenal is to kick them up in the air". Unfortunately, if you do that with players of obviously limited ability, people get hurt. If that is indicative of how English club managers tell their teams to play against Arsenal, maybe that European Super League isn't such a bad idea. At least the swan-diving, shirt-pulling, face-spitting Italians play decent football :)

Seriously, though, I am livid. I don't buy any of this 'freak accident' bleating from certain sections of the media (and Garth Crooks can just fuck right off, while we're here). The studs-up challenge was banned for a reason. With the number of 'potentially career ending challenges' analysed on Match Of The Day each week, you'd think the authorities might have reviewed the punishment for such atrocities and forced both clubs and players to address the idea that this is unacceptable and remove it from the game. But no, as it stands, Martin Taylor will serve the same ban as Jeremy Aliadiere got for bitch-slapping a Liverpool player that same afternoon. Thank you, the FA, the Premier League and all you bloated paté-munching FIFA/UEFA suits - I hope you're happy.

Get well, Eduardo. Soon, if possible, but fully at least.

UPDATE: Patrick Barclay in the Daily Telegraph says similar

* you will know that I rarely swear on my blog but I cannot bring myself to describe him as a 'footballer'.
** whose nickname is 'Tiny', I assume referring to his brain.

Labels: , , ,

12 Comments:

At February 25, 2008 9:42 AM, Blogger Rowan said:

the video doesn't work anymore. I've seen pictures of the break, and the point at which Taylor's foot connects with Eduardo's leg, which is quite enough, thank you.

just a point for thought; if Eduardo had ended up with merely a bruised ankle, would you still be calling for Taylor to strung up? probably not, just calling him various names and being happy with his punishment. and the majority of studs-in tackles don't result in a break, they are v v rare.

I'm of the opinion that someone shouldn't be punished more than another player because his tackle resulted in a break rather than bruising. IMO, its the intent and the application of the tackle that is punishable, not the result - rather like a professional foul, if you will.

 
At February 25, 2008 11:23 AM, Blogger fourstar said:

Thanks, I'll sort the link (or get rid of it, nasty...)

It's not that I'm calling for him to be strung up, I think we need to eradicate the studs-in tackle from the game altogether, from bruising to compound fractures.

So yes, I therefore agree with your last point, in that the punishment should be consistent, but I think it should be much, much heavier for this kind of foul. It might take a bit of time, seeing as it is so ingrained into the English game, but if players were going to be missing for weeks rather than days, managers might think twice before condoning it.

 
At February 25, 2008 11:54 AM, Blogger Rowan said:

don't they have the ability to make a ban last longer than the usual 3 games? maybe all dangerous tackles should be submitted to the FA disciplinary committee as a matter of course.

anyway, a v bad result of a dangerous tackle whatever.

 
At February 25, 2008 11:57 AM, Blogger fourstar said:

That is a good question; where does a red card foul stop and dangerous play (a la Ben Thatcher on Pedro Mendes) begin. If the referee has been seen to deal with it at the time, does the panel have any say over length of ban? I'm sure this will be clarified in the media over the coming days...

 
At February 26, 2008 2:53 PM, Blogger Chris said:

if i may just play devil's advocate here for a moment (me? what a surprise!). whilst it was obviously a horrible, dangerous tackle, the idea that the player should be banned for life, or that it this incident is due to the frequently wenger-espoused theory that other teams can't compete with arsenal so they kick them, is, i think, a bit over the top.

such incidents are a regrettable part of football. the rules exist to try and prevent them, but ultimately, in the heat of the moment, terrible misjudgements are made. as you are no doubt aware, there have been 3 or 4 such incidents since the "orginal" david busst 12 years ago. Alan Smith and Cisse being the highest profile (and incidentally both are still playing at a high level - your opinion on newcastle notwithstanding). There doesn't seem to be a anything to suggest that this happens to arsenal more often than anybody else and in fact arsenal players are just as guilty of dangerous play - take Flamini's petulant 15 ft lunge at Nani in the FA cup, arguably a worse tackle due to the obvious intent and one of your "potentially career ending challenges" analysed on MOTD. or any of eboue's rasher moments. the point is that whilst players often decide to try a "strong" challenge, i would argue there are probably no cases where a player sets out to cause such a horrific injury. they are a sad fact of footballing life and as ever, mr "rent-a-quote" wenger has done a good deal of stirring which in this case is totally inappropriate. making the same comments in 4 different interviews is not "in the heat of the moment" and if you have to "retract" what you say, that means you know you should be apologising and don't have the balls. hope eduardo recovers as quickly as Cisse did and i hope referees start applying the laws more consistantly so players know they have no chance of getting away with even trying that sort of challenge. but when they do - witch hunts help no one and arsene making press mileage out of it is, to me, almost as distasteful as the incident itself.

 
At February 26, 2008 10:26 PM, Blogger fourstar said:

I'm sorry (no, I'm not really) and yes, I know you're playing devil's advocate, but I completely disagree with your "regrettable part of football" idea. There is no need for that kind of tackle; end of story. It simply cannot be a "terrible misjudgement" to go in studs up, shin high. So, by increasing the level of punishment, both players and managers will have to take a good look at their tactics and decide whether it is worth losing a key member of your squad for a long part of the season. Yes, of course I include Arsenal in that; Flamini, Eboué and the rest would all have to abide by the rules. I want it out of the game, not just out of our opponents armoury.

Also, surely the three you mention were genuine freak accidents; David Busst collided with Irwin in the 6-yard box, Alan Smith was caught off the ground (unwisely) blocking a Riise free kick and Cissé got his studs caught in the pitch. I think I would be right in saying that in none of those cases was anyone sent off. That, to me, seems rather important here.

Putting aside the "banned for life" bit, which was heat of the moment, whatever you may think, I think it does take balls to retract a comment, especially in the partisan world of top level football. Today's news is tomorrow's chip-paper; you can wait for it to blow over if you fancy, and it generally will. I don't think it is a witch hunt at all, certainly not against Martin Taylor (who, to his credit, has asked to be able to visit Eduardo when the latter feels it is appropriate) but it very much now falls to the FA to listen to the less hysterical parts of the media (James Lawton in the Independent springs to mind) and decide whether the future of the game would be better served without this kind of dangerous, unsportsmanlike challenge.

Fair?

 
At February 27, 2008 10:14 AM, Blogger fourstar said:

Goodplaya also speaks some sense on this issue.

Sense + FA = DOES NOT COMPUTE!

 
At February 27, 2008 1:35 PM, Blogger Chris said:

> Fair?

oh absolutely. and i don't mean to imply that just because they are a "part of football" that we shouldn't make every effort to minimise such tackles or that there shouldn't be appropriate penaties for reckless tackles. what i mean is there will always be the possibility of such an occurance no matter what the rules or particular intention of a player.

and you're right, the injuries i mentioned were not as a result of dangerous tackles, but in a way that's also my point (and i'm dangerously close to agreeing with Rowan here): you see a lot of tackles like the one that taylor made, but injuries like this are very rare, and when they do happen, it's just as likely to be a freakish accident.

anyway - it was only really St Wenger the Blind that wound me up as i happened to catch all 4 different versions of his now rightly retracted comments.

 
At February 27, 2008 2:13 PM, Blogger fourstar said:

> there will always be the possibility of such an occurance

And the chance of such an injury would be lessened if people didn't make dangerous tackles. Out of the four we mentioned, one was a dangerous tackle, so removing that possibility would reduce the chances of such an injury by 25%.

Yeah, I know that's not how the math(s) works in real life, but hey! this is the internet :)

 
At February 27, 2008 2:40 PM, Blogger Alex Andronov said:

The ref creates a really odd situation in football because if he decides something then the FA can't wade in afterwards (or not easily).

As an impartial observer I often hear the two sides arguing along the lines of "ban him" and "the FA can't do anything because it would undermine the ref".

Fine it stops rash judgements and "banned for life" situations. But somehow it always seems to stop anything changing too.

Why can't the FA say, "we aren't going to ban Martin Taylor because the the rules weren't clear. But not this tragedy has happened we want to make it clear from here forward that you'll get automatically banned for a season if you tackle somebody and your foot causes their bones to no longer be inside their legs".

Or perhaps you could ban the player for the same length of time as recovery takes?

 
At February 27, 2008 8:25 PM, Blogger fourstar said:

That last idea is a great one - until you realise that unscrupulous teams would have even more reason to feign injury and get a man sent off, thus banning him until the 'injured' player deems himself fit to play again. Sling on your worst centre back with 5 mins to go, go down in a heap, Ronaldo/Fabregas/Gerrard/Lampard sent off for nothing, misses...oooh...the rest of the season, if they fancy.

OK, so the FA could appoint doctors to check on the health of the....it gets a bit complicated, don't it :)

But I did like it at first!

 
At February 27, 2008 8:28 PM, Blogger fourstar said:

Martin Samuel also talking sense in The Times.

 

Add comment

<< Home

Sunday, February 17, 2008


I Knew It!

The first time I post about how well Arsenal are playing in nearly three months and THIS happens!

We were utterly, utterly woeful. That'll teach me. Sorry, Arsene...

Labels: , , ,

3 Comments:

At February 18, 2008 6:49 AM, Blogger Alex Andronov said:

I wonder what work will be like today?

Adrian sobbing inconsolably into his cornflakes no doubt.

Oh dear.

 
At February 18, 2008 7:40 AM, Blogger fourstar said:

Golden Grahams, but yes.

 
At February 25, 2008 9:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said:

World Of Warcraft gold for cheap
wow power leveling,
wow gold,
wow gold,
wow power leveling,
wow power leveling,
world of warcraft power leveling,
wow power leveling,
cheap wow gold,
cheap wow gold,
maternity clothes,
wedding dresses,
jewelry store,
wow gold,
world of warcraft power leveling
World Of Warcraft gold,
ffxi gil,
wow account,
world of warcraft power leveling,
buy wow gold,
wow gold,
Cheap WoW Gold,
wow gold,
Cheap WoW Gold,
wow power leveling
world of warcraft gold,
wow gold,
evening gowns,
wedding gowns,
prom gowns,
bridal gowns,
oil purifier,
wedding dresses,
World Of Warcraft gold
wow gold,
wow gold,
wow gold,
wow gold,
wow power level,
wow power level,
wow power level,
wow power level,
wow gold,
wow gold,
wow gold,
wow po,
wow or,
wow po,
world of warcraft gold,
cheap world of warcraft gold,
warcraft gold,
world of warcraft gold,
cheap world of warcraft gold,
warcraft gold,buy cheap World Of Warcraft gold
Maple Story mesos,
MapleStory mesos,
ms mesos,
mesos,
SilkRoad Gold,
SRO Gold,
SilkRoad Online Gold,
eq2 plat,
eq2 gold,
eq2 Platinum,
EverQuest 2 Platinum,
EverQuest 2 gold,
EverQuest 2 plat,
lotro gold,
lotr gold,
Lord of the Rings online Gold,
wow powerleveling,
wow powerleveling,
wow powerleveling,
wow powerleveling,world of warcraft power leveling
ffxi gil,ffxi gil,ffxi gil,ffxi gil,final fantasy xi gil,final fantasy xi gil,final fantasy xi gil,final fantasy xi gil,world of warcraft gold,cheap world of warcraft gold,warcraft gold,world of warcraft gold,cheap world of warcraft gold,warcraft gold,guildwars gold,guildwars gold,guild wars gold,guild wars gold,lotro gold,lotro gold,lotr gold,lotr gold,maplestory mesos,maplestory mesos,maplestory mesos,maplestory mesos, maple story mesos,maple story mesos,maple story mesos,maple story mesos,
b3k6i7fi

 

Add comment

<< Home

Saturday, October 06, 2007


Swing Low

I am not the world's biggest rugby fan.

This possibly may have something to do with having sustained two broken ribs playing in my first ever game. Aged 13 and new to the school, I was placed at hooker by the games master who suggested that my 'excellent football skills' meant I would be 'useful with my feet' in the scrum. Well he was not wrong. At one of the early scrums, I adeptly hooked the ball back to our Number 8 against the head*. In the ensuing melée, I suddenly received a sharp blow to the chest area from the boot and/or fist and/or elbow of a rather annoyed (and much larger than me) member of the opposition front row. Unable to breathe, I collapsed in a heap and was carted off to the Sanitorium (yes, it was quite a posh school...) where I was tended to by the matronly, er, Matron and subsequently packed off to York General Hospital for X-rays.

Broken ribs are horrible. You can't laugh, cough or breathe properly**. They just 'need time to heal'. So that got me off games for about 6 weeks, during which time I started to learn the saxophone and decided to form a band.

But that's another story. The main reason for this post is the scoreline England 12-10 Australia in the quarter-finals of the Rugby World Cup this afternoon; a bit of an upset, if truth be told, given that the Wallabies were clear favourites for the tournament. So jolly well done, chaps. Splendid result. No reason why you can't go on and repeat the heroics of 2003...

...just don't, in your desperation for non-injured, even half-fit, partly-English players, ask me to come in at hooker :)

* winning the ball on the opposition put-in at a scrum, in case you were wondering.

** oh, I forgot sneezing; that's the worst. 'Atchooooooooooooooofuckthathurts'.

Labels: , ,

0 Comments:

Add comment

<< Home

Saturday, June 09, 2007


A (Fairly) Recent Conversation On IRC

[14:18] (fourstar) so i went to Lillywhites yesterday and i was truly saddened
[14:18] (fourstar) it's just a f*cking 'Sports World' in a wonderfully famous & historic London building
[14:18] (greatbiglizard) tbh, it's been pretty ropey the last couple of years
[14:19] (fourstar) yeah, i didn't know - it is clearly the fifth circle of hell, staffed by incontinent meandering baboons, stocking only ill-fitting highly-flammable nylon sportswear, available in size (a) big-boned b*stard offspring of Giant Haystacks or (b) amoeba
[14:20] (fourstar) and now the aforementioned baboons have walkie-talkies
[14:21] (fourstar) so they spend all their time shouting random shoe sizes at the stockroom, the occupants of which are plainly out of their minds on ridiculously strong skunk (or busy contemplating the physical influence of supercoiling DNA-modifying enzymes and calculating the chemical energy of nucleoside triphosphates required to unwind the DNA double helix into single strands)
[14:21] (fourstar) but i reckon the former...
[14:22] (fourstar) anyway, they only ever have anything in a size 6 or in pink/yellow stripes
[14:24] (fourstar) w*nkers

Labels: , , , ,

0 Comments:

Add comment

<< Home

Tuesday, May 08, 2007


Run Forrest (Hill) Run

In a weak moment, I managed to somehow agree to sign up for the Arbuthnot Securities team to enter the 5km (3.5 mile) JPMorgan Chase Corporate Challenge. So, eight weeks to get up to optimum fitness (although more pressing might be to purchase some suitable running shoes...) Anyway, one of my team members pointed me at Gmaps Pedometer, a Google Maps mashup which allows you to put in a route with various marker points and it calculates the distance run/walked/staggered. And this is my training route:

Wish me luck...

Labels: , , ,

0 Comments:

Add comment

<< Home

Thursday, May 03, 2007


Keep Off The Grass/Clay/Grass/Clay/Grass/Clay (etc)

So the two top world tennis players, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, are playing an exhibition match on a half-clay, half-grass court in Spain*.

Interesting. I wonder if the Premiership might like to look into this idea. Arsenal could play Bolton on a pitch that is half perfectly-manicured bowling green, half sloping Sunday-league war-zone covered in molehills and dog turds with only one net and assorted WAGs lighting up the regulation B&H for half-time :)

* It doesn't say if they will be swapping ends within each set in the usual way; I am assuming not but feel free to prove me wrong?

Labels: ,

2 Comments:

At May 03, 2007 10:39 PM, Blogger fourstar said:

Having read this back, surely it's a wind-up?

 
At May 04, 2007 6:39 AM, Blogger Alex Andronov said:

Oh no it really was true and did happen. They changed sides as well and Nadal won!

Here's the story: Here

 

Add comment

<< Home

Tuesday, March 27, 2007


Topgun Simmons

So I discovered the Kissing Suzy Kolber blog when it lost Best Sports Blog to Arseblog in the 2007 Bloggies awards*. Anyway, they're pretty funny, for merkins, so I bookmarked it. And now, their excellent, if somewhat near-the-knuckle, predictions for:

100 Future NFL Player Names

Particular highlights for me? Wutang Clanton, Scooter Cooter and Megatron Vampira (presumably a cross-dressing hard-running bomb-throwing base-stealing-oh-no-that's-the-other-ball-game quarterback). Pick your favourite.

* hmm, rather a lot of 'blog' in that sentence, I fear...

Labels: , , ,

1 Comments:

At March 28, 2007 8:55 AM, Blogger fourstar said:

I've turned comments on now :)

 

Add comment

<< Home