Kiwivillan

We really need a defensive midfielder. I can see alot of opponents walking through our midfield with ease.

Of course! Because Petrov is shit and NRC was the most consistent player we had last season, but if people on here want to big up Petrov till the cows come home because it floats their boat while we continue to lose matches and AVFC want to let a player like NRC go to Bolton as a free agent and not replace him because they think Petrov is an awesome dude and can totally do a job of breaking up play then what the **** can I do about it other than bitch and moan every game it happens and hear people bullshit on about how awesome a player Petrov is.

Lol that sig made me chuckle Kiwvillan

Cheers bro but all credit to il_serpente. When I saw it I could'nt resist.

Holy shit right there. When Fonz had the ball just shows you how shit Gabby is as a lead man. Just standing there with his finger up his bum. Not even thinking about making a run, practically huggung the defender.

I missed about 3 of those Ireland chances at footie today but then I don't get paid +50k a week

Given amazing. Our stupid line up deserves to be behind. Sorry lads but I think were going to get a rude awakening in the league and I'd rather it happened now.

Gabby alone up front (facepalm)

When is the match kicking off? Like 25mins from now? It's 1207AM here

-Delph looked really good. A totally different style than Makoun of getting the ball forward when under a little pressure: He can carry it out himself. This is something Villa have been missing and will be a great asset. it would be great if Delph and Makoun could be on the pitch together, but don't know that they can keep hold of the ball with an opponent riding them

:shock:

On another note, it was brilliant to watch a game in 'prime time' (8pm) rather than 2am.

True that! 10PM here few colds ones. Nice

Some nice interchanges between him and Bannan. I think they both realise like a lot of us that if you pass to Petrov he will pass it back to Dunne or Collins and we have to build from the back again or it will get hoofed.

Bannan - 5 - Bad day at the office? Didn't seem to get all that involved.

Petrov - 7 - Better than average performance, hopefully more like this

Gabby - 7 - Made some nice runs/dribbles, worked hard.

Subs:

Delfouneso - 4 - Lazy!! Going to have to pull socks up!!

WTF?

Bannan was the centre of every thing we created in attack in the first half and put in a pinpoint cross for Bent's goal.

Petrov had a mare. Always passing backwards and slowing up play to our detriment. Made one decent long pass through the middel and fired straight into the keepers bread basket when it would have been easier to score.

Gabby ran around alot like a headless chicken. Failed to anticipate passes ahead of him often and got disposed every time he tried to run at defence.

Delfouneso did stepovers and got past his man into the box and should of shot but passed back but next time ran it defence let loose a powerful shot that the keeper had to parry and should of been converted in the follow up. He got a shot on target in the 30 mins he was on, 1 more than Gabby in 90 IIRC. Give me lazy that shoots than dumb that runs around liek headless chicken and achieves nothing.

There has been a large amount of worldwide traffic visiting this thread from IPs of paedos known to Police and other agencies...

Has it Bin Dunne? Anyway I heart Charlie Brooker

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/24/charlie-brooker-norway-mass-killings

I went to bed in a terrible world and awoke inside a worse one. At the time of writing, details of the Norwegian atrocity are still emerging, although the identity of the perpetrator has now been confirmed and his motivation seems increasingly clear: a far-right anti-Muslim extremist who despised the ruling party.

Presumably he wanted to make a name for himself, which is why I won't identify him. His name deserves to be forgotten. Discarded. Deleted. Labels like "madman", "monster", or "maniac" won't do, either. There's a perverse glorification in terms like that. If the media's going to call him anything, it should call him pathetic; a nothing.

On Friday night's news, they were calling him something else. He was a suspected terror cell with probable links to al-Qaida. Countless security experts queued up to tell me so. This has all the hallmarks of an al-Qaida attack, they said. Watching at home, my gut feeling was that that didn't add up. Why Norway? And why was it aimed so specifically at one political party? But hey, they're the experts. They're sitting there behind a caption with the word "EXPERT" on it. Every few minutes the anchor would ask, "What kind of picture is emerging?" or "What sense are you getting of who might be responsible?" and every few minutes they explained this was "almost certainly" the work of a highly-organised Islamist cell.

In the aftermath of the initial bombing, they proceeded to wrestle with the one key question: why do Muslims hate Norway? Luckily, the experts were on hand to expertly share their expert solutions to plug this apparent plot hole in the ongoing news narrative.

Why do Muslims hate Norway? There had to be a reason.

Norway was targeted because of its role in Afghanistan. Norway was targeted because Norwegian authorities had recently charged an extremist Muslim cleric. Norway was targeted because one of its newspapers had reprinted the controversial Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.

Norway was targeted because, compared to the US and UK, it is a "soft target" – in other words, they targeted it because no one expected them to.

When it became apparent that a shooting was under way on Utoya island, the security experts upgraded their appraisal. This was no longer a Bali-style al-Qaida bombing, but a Mumbai-style al-Qaida massacre. On and on went the conjecture, on television, and in online newspapers, including this one. Meanwhile, on Twitter, word was quickly spreading that, according to eyewitnesses, the shooter on the island was a blond man who spoke Norwegian. At this point I decided my initial gut reservations about al-Qaida had probably been well founded. But who was I to contradict the security experts? A blond Norwegian gunman doesn't fit the traditional profile, they said, so maybe we'll need to reassess . . . but let's not forget that al-Qaida have been making efforts to actively recruit "native" extremists: white folk who don't arouse suspicion. So it's probably still the Muslims.

Soon, the front page of Saturday's Sun was rolling off the presses. "Al-Qaeda" Massacre: NORWAY'S 9/11 – the weasel quotes around the phrase "Al Qaeda" deemed sufficient to protect the paper from charges of jumping to conclusions.

By the time I went to bed, it had become clear to anyone within glancing distance of the internet that this had more in common with the 1995 Oklahoma bombing or the 1999 London nail-bombing campaign than the more recent horrors of al-Qaida.

While I slept, the bodycount continued to rise, reaching catastrophic proportions by the morning. The next morning I switched on the news and the al-Qaida talk had been largely dispensed with, and the pundits were now experts on far-right extremism, as though they'd been on a course and qualified for a diploma overnight.

Some remained scarily defiant in the face of the new unfolding reality. On Saturday morning I saw a Fox News anchor tell former US diplomat John Bolton that Norwegian police were saying this appeared to be an Oklahoma-style attack, then ask him how that squared with his earlier assessment that al-Qaida were involved. He was sceptical. It was still too early to leap to conclusions, he said. We should wait for all the facts before rushing to judgment. In other words: assume it's the Muslims until it starts to look like it isn't – at which point, continue to assume it's them anyway.

If anyone reading this runs a news channel, please, don't clog the airwaves with fact-free conjecture unless you're going to replace the word "expert" with "guesser" and the word "speculate" with "guess", so it'll be absolutely clear that when the anchor asks the expert to speculate, they're actually just asking a guesser to guess. Also, choose better guessers. Your guessers were terrible, like toddlers hypothesising how a helicopter works. I don't know anything about international terrorism, but even I outguessed them.

As more information regarding the identity of the terrorist responsible for the massacre comes to light, articles attempting to explain his motives are starting to appear online. And beneath them are comments from readers, largely expressing outrage and horror. But there are a disturbing number that start, "What this lunatic did was awful, but . . ."

These "but" commenters then go on to discuss immigration, often with reference to a shaky Muslim-baiting story they've half-remembered from the press. So despite this being a story about an anti-Muslim extremist killing Norwegians who weren't Muslim, they've managed to find a way to keep the finger of blame pointing at the Muslims, thereby following a narrative lead they've been fed for years, from the overall depiction of terrorism as an almost exclusively Islamic pursuit, outlined by "security experts" quick to see al-Qaida tentacles everywhere, to the fabricated tabloid fairytales about "Muslim-only loos" or local councils "banning Christmas".

We're in a frightening place. Guesswork won't lead us to safety.

13 Assassins. 45min Samurai sword-fighting goodness. The funny clownish character was slightly annoying but I was it was ok film since my main goal was trying to get in the pants of a cute Japanese girl.

just watched the warriors, i love that film, surprised no ones ever made a rubbish remake of it

Tony Scott is rebooting it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0423512/

Reading collection of Lovecraft stories at the moment.

Downfall - (Der Untergang) Traudl Junge, the final secretary for Adolf Hitler, tells of the Nazi dictator's final days in his Berlin bunker at the end of WWII.

I wonder is that the most viewed film in part based on all the lame subtitle edits of the war room scene?

Anyways, mentioned it before but just got round to finishing it and Korean film, I Saw The Devil, is awesome.

Watched the brilliant Kalifornia last night.

Even David Duchovny is pretty good in it, Brad pitt steals the show though.

Classic!

Juliette Lewis is ace too!

Brilliant film, love it.

Juliette Lewis is fantastic in every way.

Juliette Lewis does my head in. Always has.

I still want an elaboration on this:

it also has alot of shit in it.

I mean, I'll grant you Daniel (annoying little human shit), Wheelie (annoying little robot shit) and at a push that bizarre dancing Junkion number (though who doesn't love a bit of Weird Al every now and then?), but everything else is solid gold!

WHAT!?!? You mean Wreck-Gar? He was awesome, and voiced by Eric Idle.

"Yes, friends, act now! Destroy Unicron! Kill the Grand Poobah! Eliminate even the toughest stains!"

Only Transformers movie worth watching

I think AM will give him a clean sheet, surely Ireland will embrace this second chance in a professional manner and with renewed enthusiasm...

Don't you mean 4th chance.

There's more chance of Osama Bin Laden rising from the dead and beconing US president than Stephen Ireland resureecting his playing career at Villa.

4chan trolls a Texan right wing radio station. Too funny I had to pause after 5 mins too many lulz. "Stop playn det stoopid song"

Prepared

If McLeish is appointed it will be our Hans getting frozen in carbonite moment.

On the plus side that means we'll have the destruction of the second death star, the ewoks, and the defeat of the empire to look forward to.

The board asked Sir Alex for advice?

Since when did Sir Alex become a Villa man/care about Villa?

:|

Think about it!

When SAF wants to sign Albrighton and Clark next season he needs to have one of his men at Villa to make the deal go through easier.