The_Rev

Ok, is this a "best console?" question, or a "what console do you own?" question? No doubt the PS2 will win the poll, because of its larger userbase.

For me, it has to be the Xbox. Ive owned all three, and also use a PC for gaming, so i feel im qualified to talk. Xbox live is the best way to play games online. Its miles better than the PC online games.

Also, Xbox is better graphically, and is the only console that can transmit true 5.1 surround sound. Ok, some games are now made in Dolby Pro Logic II these days, which really adds to a game. I think graphically, games are getting to the point where all developers can add is spit and polish. Sound design is the next big thing, particularly with the rise in popularity of home cinema encouraging decent surround tracks into games. Games like FPS and stealth games really need to be played in surround to get the most out of them. The Xbox does this better than any other. The Xbox has a hard drive, which i think should be essential for all consoles from now on in. You cant beat custom soundtracks in games, and the ability to download things.

I also think the Xbox has the best exclusive games. Nintendo made games are always going to be quality. PS2 games tend to be largely sequels of shit that we have all played to death (particularly the bollocks that EA continue to release!) or converted to all other formats, where the Xbox version (and Gamecube and PC versions) will be better. This is largely because Sony tried some experement with parallel processing, which really hasnt worked. The machine is a bitch to program for, and get the best out of. Despite this, Sony seem to be going with parallel processing for the PS3. Microsoft have decided to go with an uber-PC in a box. Which will be the best will be interesting to look out for.

The original Playstation was the best console of its era. Sony got everything right. Now they just cant be arsed, because they know that the average gamer will buy any old shite, therefore the PS2 has suffered. A shame.

I sometimes buy it, sometimes i dont.

It depends on whether there is a Villa story on the back or not.

I cant see myself changing that habit.

Whats the bet he ends up and Bolton, and turns out to be brilliant for them?

from that list, Zola.

Played football in the way it is meant to be played.

A call for Savo?

He was a half decent player, but very frustrating.

Also, spitting at the Villa Fans at Ewood Park wasnt the most crowd endering thing a player has ever done..

Mr Taylor.

McGrath was our best player, but Taylor was a Holte Ender who lived the dream* so it has to be him.

*yep, he could pause live TV.

Its got to be Wenger.

All Arsenal's cash he has generated himself through the transfer market.

His real big money signings (Henry, Wiltord, Reyes) didnt even cost as much as he got for the likes of Anelka and Overmars.

Also, Arsenal, for large parts of 2004 were the best team ive ever seen.

I dont mean in an "efficient" way like Chelsea seem to be this season either. I mean they played some uttery breathtaking football.

Any scholar of the beautiful game should be applauded.

3. Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west (which seems logical). This works out to 822.6 visits per second. This is to say that for each Christian household with good children, Santa has 1/1000th of a second to:

* park,

* hop out of the sleigh,

* jump down the chimney,

* fill the stockings,

* distribute the remaining presents under the tree,

* eat whatever snacks have been left,

* get back up the chimney,

* get back into the sleigh and move on to the next house.

Assuming that each of these 91.8 million stops are evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false but for the purposes of our calculations we will accept), we are now talking about .78 miles per household, a total trip of 75-1/2 million miles, not counting stops to do what most of us must do at least once every 31 hours, plus feeding and etc.

Yeah, but Santa doesnt **** about. He is surprisingly quick for a fat fella.

you think laughing at people with MS and Cancer was a bit much?

maybe you have a point...

did anyone see the twisted as **** "Nighty Night" when it was on?

I think Pat covered it all in the original thread, but for me, the answer has to be The Mighty Boosh.

Its a work of utter, utter genius. Im disgusted that BBC2 have put it on at such a crappy time. Its funnier than The Smoking Room, and Little Britain (which while amusing, is just an extention on the "wait for the catchphrase" humour of The Fast Show, and it can get boring after a while) The Boosh deserved better than what the BBC did to it.

Peep Show

Just very, very funny, and a very original twist on a classic odd couple comedy situation. Fantastic stuff.

Shameless

As has already been mentioned, its not really a comedy, but more of a light hearted drama, like Auf Wiedersehen pet was, but it is beautifully written and charmingly funny. It also conains one of the great TV characters, Frank Gallagher.

Cant wait for the new episodes.

seems we have loads of self appointed executioners on these here boards, so i was wondering, perhaps we could ask the club to release any player who has an iffy game for Villa to us.

Question is, what should be do to a player who makes a bad pass, misses a chance, gets caught offside or gets caught out of position?

Obviously, the first thing to do is to forget that we are in the top six, but after that what should we do?

no picture of izzy muzzet but heres a nice piccie of emule landing flat on his arse(no surprises there)

If you look closely enough, printed on Heskeys boots is the number of minutes per game that Emile spends on his arse...

Pablo.

He is supoib.

Im saying Owen.

He is a big game player, and his goals record at international level is phenomenal (if you find a goals to minutes on the pitch ratio, its totally top drawer) He has got a lot to prove at the moment, and this game is set up for him.

As for the Midfield thing, Sven isnt going to drop Beckham, so why not move him into the middle alongside Lampard? Lilly Savage isnt playing there, so we dont really need a player like Butt to combat that. Beckham plays very well for Real Madrid in the middle, and of course, it opens the door to Wright Phillips to grab a regular spot in the England starting XI.

Nah. Macca was a footballing genius.

Paul Mcgrath was the finest player i have ever seen in a Villa shirt. He wins by a mile.

No disrespect to Ollie, who is a top drawer centre half, but Macca was one of those once-in-a-lifetime players. He still remains the only Premiership defender to win the PFA Player of the year award. Now to win that, you need to be a bit special. To stop a striker/attacking midfielder winning it, you need to be a legend. Macca scored more goals than Ollie too.

even the bit with the Villa shirt?

Or just the best thing since the last bast thing ever?

clicky

So Rev, in that case you couldn't form an opinion on the best decade in the history of our great football club, because you were either not born or unable to choose because there are many great moments?

people will always have an opinion on what they would class as the 'best moments' which can be an hour, a decade or one hundred years.

Periods in time that we look upon as a time when things were greater or better than they are now.

right?

Id have to disagree.

Football has seasons. It fits neatly into a timetable. Even if there is a slight overlap at either end of a decade, its still easy to plop dates and eras onto things. Music is totally different. Firstly there are so many scenes going on, and each draw from different influences, and last different amounts of time. There isnt a music genre called "80's" or "90's" thats just a term used by local radio stations who only play 'oldies' to get people who are in their advertisers target audiences to listen to them. Era's dont end when calender years do. Football seasons do (of sorts)

Its gotten even crazier since the dawn of satillite and digital TV, and high speed internet connections. In years gone by, getting your music out there than it ever was when TV, Radio and even printed publicity were scarce. You just cant pin music down. To compare it to football is ludicrous.

Can i plug this thread again then?

It really is worth checking out. Its been the soundtrack of my day today.

I bet you're a fun bloke to have at a dinner party Rev! "I don't believe in the artificial categorisation of music, actually!"

Ive never been to a dinner party in my life. Ive never been invited to one, i dont particularly want to be invited to one (id rater go to a gig) and as most of my mates have pretty good taste in music, that conversation would probably never happen. :wink:

Anyway I voted for the 90's. Too young to really remember the 70's, and I grew up in the 80's so that was a close second (particulalrly as it's the decade of The Smiths)

And does this comment support my point?

Im going to abstain. For two reasons.

1] "what decade was best for music" is usually interpreted as "what decade did you grow up in" So, its a question that most people will answer with their age in mind.

2] To suggest that a new musical era starts on Jan 1st of a new decade is bollocks. Every musical scene has its own timetable. i mean, what is "90's music" ? Grunge? Britpop? Plastic Spice Girls Pop? The Britpop Era only really ran from Definately Maybe and Parklife in 94 through to Urban Hymns in 97. And you could argue that they all drew from what the Mondays, The Roses, My Bloody Valentine et al were doing at the arse end of the 80's.

The best music is timeless.