Quantcast
Sugar Ape's Content - The Liverpool Way Jump to content

Sugar Ape

Season Ticket Holder
  • Content count

    22,510
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    126

Posts posted by Sugar Ape


  1. New Pacino show out on Amazon today with him hunting down Nazis in the 70s in New York. 
     

    Just watched the first episode (90 fucking minutes long!) and loved it. Opens with a great scene and really sets the show up by the end. Some obvious parallels with Inglourious Basterds. 
     

    Reviews seem a bit mixed so I read quite a few of them before, most of the positive ones focus on the acting, production values, storyline etc... and the negative ones barely mention any of that but moan about things like Pacino getting cast ‘over any number of equally qualified big-name Jewish actors’ and a flashback scene to a concentration camp including an atrocity that didn’t happen in real life and was invented just for the programme.
     

    The reviewer after spending ‘as much research as time and emotional resources will allow’ establishing this fact comes to the conclusion that this is not ok. No surprise that’s the Guardian:

    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/feb/21/hunters-review-al-pacino-nazis-amazon-jordan-peele?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    • Upvote 1

  2. 4 hours ago, Lee909 said:

    The best beer is the one thrown away and replaced by whisky or bourbon 


    I love Whisky and, especially, Bourbon but you just can’t trust a man who doesn’t like beer. 
     

    It’s an established fact that only eccentric deviants don’t like beer.  


  3. No, I’m not looking for a list of beer brands you like but, based on this tweet, what are the greatest beers to have and the most overrated?

     

     

    I’m going to go with the straight the pub after work beer as the greatest. Especially when you’re not in work the next day. 
     

    Most overrated is the airport beer in the early hours. Every time I go away with my mates they’re dead excited about their first pint at 4.30am but it always tastes fucking horrible to me. 

    • Upvote 1


  4. https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2020/02/16/nadia-king-florida-baker-act/

     

    The body-camera footage starts after police officers had already located their suspect, and she fit the description: hazel eyes, about four feet tall and really concerned about finding candy.

     

    In the footage, Nadia King, 6, emerges from Love Grove Elementary School on Feb. 4, holding the hand of a Jacksonville sheriff’s deputy. The officers were told Nadia was “a threat to herself and others” and was “out of control,” a police incident report later recounted, and it would lead to her committal in a mental health facility.

     

    But one of the officers was perplexed. The little girl in the back seat of her squad car, inquiring about snacks and stopping for sweets, was calm and bright-eyed despite her worry she was going to jail.

     

    “She is fine. There is nothing wrong with her,” the officer tells her partner, video first obtained by the Florida Times-Union shows. “She’s been actually very pleasant.”

     

    Her partner agrees. “I think it’s more of them just not knowing how to deal with it,” he says, appearing to describe the school.

     

    Nadia moved through the system — from the school to the police to the mental institution, all without her mother’s consent — under a controversial Florida law known as the Baker Act. It allows law enforcement officers, school counselors and medical personnel to petition for someone who is perceived as being a danger to themselves or others to be institutionalized for 72 hours.

     

    The recently released footage of Nadia has heightened the debate about the Baker Act and whether the law is allowing cases of overstepping that do more harm than good.

     

    Nadia’s mother, Martina Falk, said she wasn’t notified about the incident until a third-party crisis intervention organization called her. The next 48 hours was a frightening ordeal for her special needs daughter, who found herself in a mental hospital sedated and confused. Now Nadia finds it hard to be around her doctors, Falk said.

     

    “She used to trust our pediatrician, and now she doesn’t want to set foot in there,” Falk, 31, told The Washington Post on Sunday.

     

    Reganel J. Reeves, an attorney for the family, said he plans to file lawsuits to learn more about how the state executes the law and how policies at Duval County Public Schools unfolded, saying it’s possible the application can be unconstitutional, especially for children.

     

    Nadia has been diagnosed with ADHD and global developmental delay, which stalls cognitive and physical development, Falk said. She chose the school because of its special needs teaching, she said, along with an education plan that documented Nadia’s conditions.

     

    The school itself did not decide to send Nadia to the hospital, Duval County Public Schools spokeswoman Laureen Ricks said in a statement. The school, fearing that Nadia was putting herself and others at risk, called a crisis hotline. A third party nonprofit, Child Guidance Center, dispatched a mental health professional, Ricks said.

     

    That clinician from Child Guidance Center decided to send Nadia to the hospital under the Baker Act provision.

     

    But it was not clear whether school officials considered other ways to resolve the incident, including calling Nadia’s mother or her physicians instead. Ricks declined to describe de-escalation tactics used with Nadia or whether her diagnoses were disclosed during an assessment by the clinical social worker from Child Guidance Center, citing privacy laws.

     

    Ricks also declined to describe the specifics of Nadia’s alleged behavior. The police report uses secondhand information about “attacking staff,” relayed to the deputies by the social worker.

     

    Falk disputed the urgency of the characterization and said the school had not relayed that information to her in their initial calls.

     

    She also said Nadia plainly shows when she is as agitated as the school described — her daughter’s nose and eyes become red and welted. “But when the police were there, she was fine,” she said. What made Nadia truly upset, Falk said, was when she learned her mother wouldn’t be taking her home.

     

    Child Guidance Center declined to describe its involvement, citing privacy laws, but Theresa Rulien, the chief executive and president, said in a statement the center has the ability to send someone only for an involuntary examination. The receiving facility determines the length of stay, she said.

     

    The Baker Act has existed for nearly five decades, but it has been used more frequently in recent years, including 7,500 times with children since 2012, the Tampa Bay Times reported last year. There is little oversight by lawmakers, the Times investigation found, amid public outcry that the system speeds children into hospitals as guardians watch powerlessly from afar.

     

    The law was meant to allow intervention in cases of imminent danger, said Mark Cavitt, the director of Pediatric Psychiatry Services at Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital in St. Petersburg.

     

    But generally in the state, Cavitt told The Post, the law has become an increasingly common tool because of inadequate training or resources for mental health inside the school system.

     

    “It always mystifies me when it’s used for disruptive behavior,” Cavitt said of the Baker Act.

     

    It can also be used by schools to offload their liability for a student to a third party, Cavitt said. But it can also cut the other way, illuminating unevenness in the application; the Parkland gunman was not detained under the law despite concerns from school officials a year before the 2018 massacre, The Post previously reported.

     

    Nadia has been moved to a temporary school for children with autism, said Falk, who was left shaken watching her daughter in the body camera footage.

     

    At one point in the video, the officer tries to put a bright spin on where they are headed. It’s a field trip, the officer tells Nadia.

     

    “We’re going on a field trip?” Nadia asks, excited about the prospect.


  5. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/feb/17/manchester-city-backers-are-not-the-sort-to-take-punishment-lying-down?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

     

    Manchester City backers are not the sort to take punishment lying down

     

    There is resentment among City fans about their treatment and word is that Abu Dhabi will be fighting back against Uefa

     

     

    In 2011 Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the emir of Abu Dhabi and president of the United Arab Emirates, received a letter. It came from a group of Emirati intellectuals inspired by the recent wave of pro-democracy protests sweeping through the Middle East and north Africa, and requested a range of modest reforms, including an extension of the voting franchise which at the time encompassed just 2% of the country’s population.

     

    No marching on the streets. No popular unrest. Certainly no disorder of any kind. Just a letter. Nonetheless, with a regime petrified to the point of paranoia by the spectre of political Islamism, the reprisals would be swift and merciless.

     

    Within weeks the arrests had begun, rounding up most of the 160 letter’s signatories, who were designated as “terrorists” plotting to overthrow the regime. Citizenships were revoked. Hefty prison sentences were dished out. In 2014, Abu Dhabi enacted Terrorism Law No 7, reclassifying peaceful opposition as a terrorist act punishable by death, and criminalising a whole range of hazily-defined acts, from “antagonising the state” or “stirring panic among a group of people” to “carrying explosive crackers for a terrorist purpose”.

     

    Now: does this strike you as a group of people that is going to be intimidated by the fine print of Article 56, section (a) of the 2018 edition of Uefa’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations?

     

    Does a regime serially defying a United Nations arms embargo in Libya – according to the UN’s own reports – strike you as the sort that places a high premium on bureaucratic process? Does the family that bought itself the world’s largest super-yacht – a $600m behemoth two-thirds the size of the Titanic and reportedly equipped with its own missile defence system – strike you as the sort to take a swingeing punishment with humility and good grace?

     

    These are just some of the ways of understanding Manchester City’s current dispute with Uefa, one that for all its clear footballing repercussions carries far more sinister overtones. Trawl the City messageboards in the wake of Uefa’s decision to ban the club from the Champions League for two seasons, and it won’t take you long to stumble across the rhetoric of scorched earth: of traitors and revolutionaries, violence and purgation, shady cartels and subhuman scum.

     

    This is the language of existential threat, the register of total warfare, and it is fed by the incendiary invective coming out of the club. One little snippet to emerge is the fact City’s appeals to the court of arbitration for sport have been dubbed “Cas One” and “Cas Two”, as if they were military campaigns, rather than ringbinders being delivered to a courtroom by clerks in TM Lewin suits. Witness, too, the assertion of the club’s lawyer Simon Cliff in the Der Spiegel leaks of 2018 that “Uefa doesn’t respond to anything other than aggression”, that a lawsuit against their auditor could “destroy the entire organisation within weeks”. City talk about their footballing enemies the way Abu Dhabi talks about its real ones.

     

    This, perhaps, was the most persuasive argument against allowing cherished footballing institutions to fall under the control of entire states. It wasn’t the lack of transparency or the potential for financial distortion, grave as those are. But in hindsight it was perhaps inevitable over time clubs would come to resemble state actors in their own right, that sporting problems would impel geopolitical solutions, that the cut and thrust of footballing sabre-rattling would increasingly take on the character of the real thing.

     

    There has always been a slight misconception about the concept popularly known as “sportswashing”, the attempt by autocratic regimes to embed their soft power through sport. It is never purely a PR exercise: there are PR firms for that, and they tend not to go to the trouble of spending £1.5bn on footballers or rebuilding large parts of east Manchester.
     

    Rather, it helps to think of the sportswash as some vast, pointless infrastructure project: a man-made glacier, a giant bridge to nowhere, a Nando’s visible from space. The objective is to create something so iridescently perfect that it generates its own innate shock and awe, a timeless monument to beauty, wealth and the power to do whatever the hell you want.

     

    And so there is a rich double irony at work here. Firstly, for all the eye-watering sums lavished on the brilliant Guardiola sides, it is instead the years of faltering ascent, the 2012-16 era, for which City are being punished: not the years of £50m full-backs, but your Mangalas and Rodwells and Wilfried Bonys. Secondly, that one of the world’s most meticulously-crafted sporting projects could be undone by simple naivety: an apparent belief the rule of law could be subverted by force of will alone, a failure to build any sort of political or diplomatic contingency against it. While the Qataris at Paris Saint-Germain made it a priority to infiltrate the corridors of power, City find themselves adrift: friendless and alone, with only their money and their hubris to protect them.
     

    It may yet be enough. The word is City are stockpiling a cache of inflammatory evidence against other clubs, in anticipation of an epic fight. Perhaps, armed with a battery of lawyers and accountants, they will get their ban overturned. Perhaps, as some of the more bellicose voices insist, they will even destroy the apparatus of football as we know it, which definitely feels like a proportionate response to not being allowed to sign Stevan Jovetic. Either way, you sense for City the ends will always justify the means. After all football, like geopolitics, is very much a results business.

    • Upvote 3

  6. 1 hour ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

    That’s a tough set of questions she was asked. She answered a specific question with a generic answer to try to avoid the specific, then the tweet listed it as specific. Fair to do so? Maybe, as her general comment would cover the case of this rapist. It’s very difficult for a politician to get the answer right, if right is defined as winning votes or pleasing people. I think in these cases it needs to be less about the  rights of the rapist to self identify and more about the safety and security of others. Putting a biological male rapist of women in a women’s prison seems like a very poor idea. Just as, sometimes, putting a very violent prisoner in areas where they can be a threat to other prisoners is a poor idea. To me, at least. 
     

     


    A Labour trans group was recently set up, I’m not sure if it is an official affiliated group or who set it up, and has come up with some pledges which Nandy and RLB signed straight away and all of the female deputy contenders have signed up to the same thing. I don’t think Starmer or the two males left in the deputy race, Burgon and Ian Murray have signed it yet.  
     

    This seems to have caused a bit of a split with questions being asked about it at every hustings and from what I see on Twitter a lot of women complaining that it designates some groups they are members of as hate groups which would see them expelled from the party if they are found to be members and others saying they will be glad to see them leave as they are transphobic. 
     

    This is the group and the pledges:

     

    https://twitter.com/Labour_Trans

     

     

    6BAF8BCB-00CD-4876-BA60-68F1A6439E3E.jpeg


  7. Full Ornstein quotes:

     

    Liverpool want £30m Cantwell

     

    They may be reigning European champions and hurtling towards the Premier League title but Liverpool are already formulating plans to improve next season and The Athletic has learnt that the Anfield club have intensified their interest in signing Norwich midfielder Todd Cantwell.

     

    Cantwell caught the eye on his Premier League debut at Anfield in August and Liverpool were among a host of teams to express admiration for the 21-year-old in the subsequent months.

     

    Manchester City, Tottenham and Manchester United are also keen, but once the January transfer window closed Liverpool stepped up their pursuit and can now be considered front-runners.

     

    Jurgen Klopp’s side were able to view Cantwell up close again during Saturday’s meeting at Carrow Road and it is thought he impressed members of the playing and coaching staff.

     

    Regardless of whether they are relegated from the top flight, Norwich would likely seek around £30 million for the England Under-21 international, who has six goals and two assists in 27 games. 


  8. 2 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

     

    I have FM 2020 Mobile on my tablet. I could have got Touch instead, but Mobile is cheaper and simpler, and that's all I was looking for, something to pass the time on the train etc.

     

    And it really is a very basic version of FM, so if you'd miss the complexities of the full game, it may not be for you. But if you want something you can pick up and play for 20 minutes here and there which you can rattle through it quickly, it's good.


    Yeah that’s pretty much exactly what I want. I haven’t got the time to spend ages wading through all the intricacies of the full game, a streamlined version sounds ideal. 


  9. 57 minutes ago, Captain Turdseye said:


    Yeah, what do you wanna know? I’ve had a couple of versions in the past and sunk a good few hours into them. I drunkenly bought this year’s one a few weeks ago but I’ve barely touched it. There’s no great difference between the ‘20 one and the ‘17 one that I’ve still got on my phone. Disappointing. 


    Just if it’s worth getting or not. I’ve had loads of them for my PC in the past but never got one for my mobile before. 
     

    Actually haven’t bought one at all for about 3/4 years thinking about it. 


  10. 1 hour ago, Stickman said:

    Can't see the rest of the article as I'm not subscribed but they're not gonna like the headline in The Times 

     

    FOOTBALL | DAVID WALSH

     

    Toughest punishment for Manchester City will not be exile from Champions League but knowing that, like Saracens and Team Sky, their triumphs are forever tainted

     

    Have you ever wondered how many Twitter followers Oscar Wilde would have had if he had been born into this generation? All those exquisite one-liners, razor-sharp put-downs, witty assassinations of the bumptious and the bluffers. I thought of something Wilde said when news of Manchester City’s two-year ban from European competition broke on Friday. It came with a warning not to feel too much sympathy for City.

     

    In 1889 Wilde wrote an essay called The Decay of Lying: An Observation. It is a conversation between two characters, Vivian and Cyril. At one point, Vivian addresses the central issue. “After all, what is a fine lie? Simply that which is its own evidence. If a man is sufficiently unimaginative to produce evidence in support of a lie, he might just as well speak the truth at once.”

     

    In November 2018 the German magazine Der Spiegel, using stolen documents, wrote a series of articles about how Manchester City and Paris Saint-Germain circumvented Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules. As Der Spiegelhad in its possession a multitude of internal emails from Manchester City, its four-part story on the English club offered damning evidence that they had broken the rules.

     

    The response from the club was the perfect epitome of Wilde’s “fine lie”. City did not argue that the incriminatory emails were fake but that they had been stolen. Neither did the response address the principal allegation that the owner, Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, was secretly funnelling hundreds of millions into the club, in contravention of FFP regulations.

     

    City just battened down the hatches. “The attempt to damage the club’s reputation is organised and clear,” it said in a statement. Without evidence to support its lie, City would indeed have been better off telling the truth from the beginning.

     

    Perhaps it was because the case against the club, written in its own emails, was irrefutable. Like confetti, the examples were scattered among Der Spiegel’s four pieces. Chief executive Ferran Soriano returning from a meeting of the European Club Association where it had become clear FFP rules were becoming important: “We will need to fight this and do it in a way that is not visible, or we will be pointed out as the global enemies of football.”

     

    The challenge for City was to increase revenue and this was achieved through lucrative sponsorship deals with Abu Dhabi-based companies: the airline Etihad, the investment company Aabar, the telecoms business Etisalat and the Abu Dhabi Tourism Authority. The deals, though, weren’t what they seemed.

     

    The annual £15 million from Aabar was just £3 million from the sponsor. Simon Pearce, a board member, explained in an internal communication where the rest came from: “£12 million coming from alternative sources provided by His Highness.” In another email Pearce, responding to a question from the chief financial officer Jorge Chumillas about whether the club could change the date of payments made by sponsors, wrote, “Of course, we can do what we want.”

     

    Perhaps emboldened by the brilliance of the team and encouraged by the weak, softly-softly approach taken by Uefa’s general secretary, Gianni Infantino, the club seemed to believe it should be beyond reproach. It threatened Uefa with lawsuits and there is one email that club lawyer Simon Cliff will deeply regret. “1 down, 6 to go,” he wrote to a colleague about the sudden death of former Belgian prime minister Jean-Luc Dehaene, who was leading the investigation into FFR irregularities.

     

    Most lovers of fine football never wanted to see this day. “They do play beautiful football, for that you could forgive them everything,” commented a Sunday Times reader in 2018. That may be how we feel in the moment of Kevin De Bruyne’s incisive dribble and pinpoint pass or when Sergio Agüero rifles the ball into the net. In the cold light of the following day, it is not so easy to ignore the lengths to which City went to disguise and misrepresent the sources of their revenue.

     

    Justice is not always evenly dispensed. In this case it certainly hasn’t been.

     

    Uefa’s Investigatory Chamber considered what went on at PSG , especially around the time the club paid €180 million (about £149 million) for Kylian Mbappé and then, a year later, €222 million (about £184m) for Neymar. Yves Leterme, another former Belgian prime minister, concluded that PSG had not broken FFP rules. Leterme’s report was released on June 18, 2018, four days after the start of the World Cup.

     

    Uefa’s adjudicatory committee chairman, Jose Narciso da Cunha Rodrigues, was astonished by Leterme’s exoneration of PSG and tried, unsuccessfully, to initiate a new investigation. “The decision to close the case was manifestly erroneous,” Da Cunha Rodrigues said. It may not have hurt PSG’s case that its president, Nasser al-Khelaifa, is on Uefa’s executive board and is chairman of the beIN Media Group, a major player when it comes to the sale of Uefa’s TV rights.

     

    The City story is another version of Saracens in rugby and Team Sky’s rise in cycling. At the beginning there is optimism and idealism, a desire to create an empire that will be successful and admirable. City have done much that is right and made a significant contribution to the regeneration of their part of east Manchester. From the beginning the team set out to play entertaining football and since the coming of Pep Guardiola they have been a joy to watch. So, too, Saracens played great rugby in becoming three-time European champions and they have also done much for the community around them. City under Guardiola, Saracens under Mark McCall and Team Sky under Dave Brailsford created cultures that were the envy of their rivals.
     

    Alas, when the time came for proper scrutiny all three cultures were less than they purported to be. The cost of that will not be counted in the millions City will lose from being excluded from the Champions League or in Saracens’ relegation. The true punishment comes in how their victories are remembered. City’s championships, Saracens’ titles, Team Sky’s success at the 2012 Tour de France; they all remain on the books but with asterisks alongside their names.

    • Upvote 7

  11. This reminds me in some respects of how we dealt with the Suarez/Evra situation. I’m not talking about whether Suarez actually did it as that has been done to death, rather the respective responses from the clubs. 
     

    At the time I was all for taking the FA to court and slagging everyone off in the press, but I’m just a fan and we always want that. In reality cooler heads should prevail at the club and deal it with quietly and professionally.  
     

    In retrospect it would have been much better just releasing a statement saying we wouldn’t comment while investigations were ongoing and then going on the offensive behind closed doors. All the stuff with the players wearing the T-shirts in support etc... just poisoned the atmosphere around it all even more. 
     

    Since then we’ve learnt to do our business quietly and influence things behind the scenes like the Mancs did under Ferguson. 

     

    City are making the same mistakes being so belligerent about the whole thing and doing stuff like complaining about Uefa leaking to the press while they leak things to the press themselves, similarly the statement they released was ridiculous and I doubt it’ll impress people at the CAS, it would have been much better for them releasing a less combative statement and saving their arguments for the appeal. 
     

    As it is stands now they look deranged blaming Uefa for being judge, jury and executioner. I mean, who else was meant to enforce the Uefa rules and bring charges if they had evidence of wrongdoing?

     

    I’m not bothered if they get the ban reduced to one year, the symbolism of having the guilty verdict upheld and permanently tarring their reputation as the cheating cunts they are is all important. 

    • Upvote 11
×