Morpheus

Not too many of those around at the moment with the confession thread.

Not quite so young Wainy316, but the rest is accurate, yes. However, I could never replace Baselayers. Hmm, she's had a rubbish time with men as well and I think she's about my age. Maybe we should just get together - probably would be easier than trying to find a decent man (no offence to you lovely people, of course). Would you be an auntie by any chance?

Not too much has made me laugh over the last few days but this did, really loudly.

Given the circumstances who could do better? Any manager in charge is going to be accused of failing, it really does not matter until real funding is produced. That is working on the premise that anyone replacing Lambert wouldn't improve upon what has gone on before and lets face it, to date it wouldn't be out of the realms of possibility that someone could improve us considering Lambert's record with us.

Having stayed away from the site over the past couple of days after being involved in a particularly heated debate concerning Neknomination it has given me the time to deliberate whether I had been too dismissive of alternative opinion? To answer this question I have decided to concentrate on what I believe to be the definitive questions in relation to the debate. 1. What actually defines a game? 2. Is there a point whereby any game can lose it's definition? The only way I could hope to obtain a balanced and impartial answer to those questions was to partake in research and during that research I discovered an article by Raph Koster. Raph Koster, who comments regularly on the gaming industry but has also expanded those theories to games in general states 'playing a game is the act of solving statistically varied challenge situations presented by an opponent who may or may not be algorithmic within a framework that is a defined systemic model.' Koster further explains that theory by stating 'I use it precisely because it is inclusive. It admits of me turning a toy into a game by imposing my own challenge on it (such as a ball being a toy, but trying to catch it after bouncing it against the wall becoming a game with simple rules that I myself define). It admits of sports. It admits of those who turn interpersonal relationships or the stock market, or anything else into a game.' I have underlined and bolded parts of Koster's theory because it is clearly stating that the definition of a game is completely up to the individual participating in it. Indeed you could say that Koster's theory not only answers my first question but encompasses the second as well due to the Necknomination phenomenon becoming a morality issue for the individual to decide whether the game has lost it's definition and if losing it's definition, is participation actually condoning the deaths of two adolescents? The alternative view to mine is that and i'll quote one of Stevo's recent posts 'But like I said before you can't ban stuff that isn't dangerous, because a tiny minority have made it dangerous for them.' Its those three words underlined and in bold which defines the alternative argument and is where I feel that argument ultimately falls down. The game is no longer isolated to 'necking one pint' and there is widespread evidence of this throughout the majority of social networks so it cannot be denied. The identity of the original game has been changed by the individual and has escalated through peer pressure for the nominee to better the previously nominated into simply, who can consume more. This increase in alcohol consumption has led to two deaths! It is therefore my personal decision to refrain from participating in Neknomination. That non participation isn't due to widespread condemnation of Necknomination by the general public, politicians or a judge and it isn't even due to alcohol being an addictive drug. It is however due to two young people dying, without any safeguards put in place by the majority of social networking sites to stop it happening again and it is my choice not to promote or to condone that.

Only if you are putting forward a skewed, biased, prejudiced and indeed partisan view of the debate.

No point in Albrighton staying if Lambert isn't going to use more width in our play.

Been saying it for some time now that Lambert should have focused more on the players he had at the club and then intergrated those players into a suitable system before going for wholesale changes. We had and have again target men at the club who thrive on crosses yet we are set up to play more through the middle with no playmaker. We didn't need Bowery and Helenius because they are no better than Fonz and if Lambert had signed another winger to play on the other side of Albrighton with two holding midfielders then I am in no doubt that we would be seeing a more balanced team playing better football. I'm not using hindsight either as I've advocated this approach since Lambert first came to the club.

VT, inside a beautiful women and the sunsets in Amadores.

If we have Vlaar back and Lambert is tactically correct then we shouldn't lose but those are two big ifs at the moment.

Didn't score against us earlier in the season. Confident of the 3 points. Cardiff are a distinctly poor side. No doubt, but they now have players who can hurt us and we are also 'a distinctly poor side.'

It should be babe because you've worked for it and deserve it.

Like it.

No, that would be a bit creepy. Someone who posts on VT, has just become an Olympic medalist and you think celebrating that with a photo of her is creepy?

Would be awesome if we all had Jen as our avatars for a few days?

No, just Fergie.

I said i'd wait until just after the January window closing to review my opinion on Lambert and unfortunately it still hasn't changed. Apart from some good performances this season which you could easily count on one hand we are still playing some God awful football under him and we must not pick up another defeat against Cardiff or we will have to start circling the wagons again.

Nice to see you posting again AVFCLaura. Laura posting again and now Jenny an Olympic medalist. We are indeed blessed to have both on VT and a massive well done to Jenny for a superb achievement. Our own very special photo of Jen and the medal please when you're ready of course.

Yep, you've certainly proven something. And what would that be D1 in your opinion or are you going to keep us all in suspense?

I actually watched this last night and noted not only the audience's reaction but Nolan himself to the bottom pic. Said it all for me.

You can only judge Lambert on how the team has performed under his stewardship so far and it has generally been poor.

I'm not dragging it back up again (and this is unrelated), but this made me laugh. I'm not allowed to use a commonly used colloquialism on an internet forum because I'm a teacher? I don't understand why you feel the need to constantly take a pop at what I do. It's utterly bizarre. Emmm, yes you are dragging it up again Stefan in an indirect way and no i'm not going to bite having already proven my point.

Great news indeed but as we've seen with Benteke we shouldn't rush him back too soon.

I heard her name being mentioned on BBC1s breakfast news this morning.