Jump to content
Just visiting?

regular_john

Established Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,251

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by regular_john

  1. regular_john
    Yes and no. The body can make use of glucose, obviously, but as I said - the body is perfectly capable of making enough glucose to meet its own needs. Sugar isn't just glucose though, it's also part fructose, which the body cannot use in any meaningful way. Small amounts of sugar are obviously not harmful per se but there's so bloody much of the stuff in the modern diet. Just by having cereals for breakfast, a sandwich for lunch, and pasta/rice for dinner, you can easily end up having 20+ tsp per day without ever eating anything 'sweet'
  2. regular_john
    Incorrect. You do not need to consume any dietary glucose or sugar at all. The required amount is literally 0. The liver is perfectly capable of producing all of the glucose you need (hepatic gluconeogenesis). Sugar has no nutritional value at all.
  3. regular_john
    Why have we reverted back to two tens? It doesn't bloody work! Ings on, Buendia off please
  4. regular_john
    We owe this lot an absolute battering. Please let it be tonight!
  5. regular_john
    Still not sure Gerrard is the guy but fair play to him, two good results, some good tactical nous, no complaints from me at all. Long may it continue.
  6. regular_john
    As above, we have been close several times before. Unfortunately, I can only see this crisis ending in one of two ways - a coup that overthrows Putin or escalation into a wider conflict, which would probably be WW3. There's no other possible outcome as far as I can work out. Ukraine definitely can't win a military conflict even with lots of munitions and support from the West. Diplomacy is a non-starter as neither side will compromise. Russia will not stop until Ukraine is conquered. Let's pretend that Putin will be satisfied with taking Ukraine only. When Russia do conquer Ukraine, they're going to face a massive challenge to maintain control. Their only option is to terrorise the population into compliance, probably with mass executions, concentration camps/gulags for opponents etc. The situation would quickly become such a humanitarian nightmare that other nations would have to intervene. Eventually, this drags us into WW3. Far more likely, Putin will want to advance into other surrounding nations after conquering Ukraine. He'll end up invading either a NATO country or a NATO ally, which will drag us into WW3. Maybe I'm wrong, and I hope to Jehovah I am, but I don't think there are any other realistic outcomes.
  7. regular_john
    Not sure I'm convinced. There is essentially zero chance that the residents of occupied territories would tolerate Russian oppressors. There would either be constant rebellion, uprising, guerilla warfare etc or the Russians will have to completely subjugate the population through tyrrany, which will likely require mass executions, concentration camps etc.
  8. regular_john
    How do we see this conflict ending then? Perhaps I'm being pessimistic but I can only see this ending in WW3. I can't see Putin giving up regardless of sanctions and economic pressure. There's no way Ukraine can beat Russia in a conflict, even with Western arms support. I also can't see Putin being satisfied with conquering Ukraine. If he takes Ukraine, which he will, I suspect he'll quickly get to work on some of the other former Soviet states. The only way out I can think of is if the Russian people/elites get so pressured by sanctions that they stage a coup. Anyone else have an answer?
  9. regular_john
    24/02/2022 A day that will live in infamy.
  10. regular_john
    Nail. On. Head. 1 trophy in 9 in the SPL - is that really good enough to qualify for a big Premier League job??
  11. regular_john
    I reckon (hope) it'll more like Cold War 2 than WW3
  12. regular_john
    Like wingers, almost?
  13. regular_john
    We've got a good first 11. I think a minor tweak in the midfield would get the best out of them. Sack off this whole 'two number 10s' idea, it's too narrow. Let Coutinho and Buendia a bit wider, free up the full backs to do some defending, McGinn and Luiz to prioritise defensive support until results start to get back on track. Don't see a better alternative at the minute.
  14. regular_john
    Nope, wrong move from day one. Deano had more than enough credit in the bank to be given the time to turn it around. If he were to be replaced, it should have been with someone more experienced, even if it was on a temporary basis to get us through to the summer. Now we're stuck with a guy who is on a massive contact and, at present, looks way out of his depth. Don't get me wrong, I really hope he turns it around but it's not looking good at the moment.
  15. regular_john
    He's a young manager who needs to learn his trade. He should be given the time to do so at an appropriate club i.e. league one/championship level. He's just not ready for a job of this magnitude and it shows week in and week out.
  16. regular_john
    Agreed! Gerrard may very well be an exceptional manager in five years time but I haven't seen anything to suggest he is at present. Perhaps he could have done with another few years of learning his trade at L1/championship level before making the jump to a big prem side
  17. regular_john
    Short term thinking, IMO. He had earned more time and had more than enough credit in the bank. You don't become a bad manager overnight. He was a good manager, still is, hence the turnaround at Norwich since he joined.
  18. regular_john
    We had a bad run at the end, no doubt, but he was still an excellent manager for us, properly excellent. It's easy to say now as we'll never know but I have every confidence he would have turned it around.
  19. regular_john
    Which bit? Smith was the best manager we've had since O'Neill. Gerrard is inexperienced as a manager. He achieved a lot less in Scotland than other managers who went on to do near enough naff all at this level.
  20. regular_john
    Only the Villa would sack the best manager we've had for a decade and replace him with someone so inexperienced and out of his depth. Gerrard was a great player, no doubt, but he hasn't shown anything as a manager to suggest he's going to be successful. SPL experience is basically irrelevant as an Premier League manager because it's such a weak, joke league. There have been plenty of managers who have done much better in the SPL than Gerrard and still couldn't hack it in the Premier League. McLeish, O'Neill, Strachan, Rodgers - all managers who achieved much more in Scotland and did very little when they came south of the border.
  21. regular_john
    My 2 year old has had raging D&V all week and still hasn't produced as much shit as the Villa did over the past 90 minutes. Absolutely awful to a man. Took me an age to pick a MOTM because I couldn't think of anyone who wasn't terrible. I wasn't particularly enthused by the Gerrard appointment and am getting less so by the week. We don't look in any way coached. All over the place at the back, no plan going forward, players can't string two passes together, just shit all over.
  22. regular_john
    ?
  23. regular_john
    How many times is this guy going to get caught drunk and/or drugged up? He's throwing his career away. He'll be the modern Lee Hendrie if he's not careful
  24. regular_john
    **** hell, mate. My heart breaks for you. My love and best wishes to you and yours
  25. regular_john
    I like Everton, got a lot of time for them. Hoping they stay up but it would be interesting to see them relegated
×
×
  • Create New...
Â