Messages

Bump on this thread - been a while 

Ive purchased a new house in the 6 counties - home internet is still in the stone age - near dial up!

Looking at getting mobile broadband - some people say its great - plug a router in and put a sim in - can anyone advise? no phone line required

Have you looked into the Rural Broadband FTTP scheme. A friend works for a Utility and he was saying they are going round loads of rural locations installing fibre direct to the house. However I dont know if

1 The home owner has to apply
2  If the instal is free/full cost/subsidised
3  If you are tied into getting a contract from the installer (Fibrus I think)


Sorry, more questions than answers but someone on here might know the answers to the above.

[In my opinion someone who has worked and paid into the system should receive more than someone who has never worked]

Some countries have a benefit system where the benefits for not working have a set time period. Be interesting to see how many would find work when the benefits stop. In my opinion someone who has worked and paid into the system should receive more than someone who has never worked

What about carers who look after a severely disabled or mentally ill child/parent/spouse? What about someone who has had to give up working due to illness/injury? Are they less deserving of healthcare costs, school dinners, free dental etc? Are they less deserving of a pension when they reach retirement age?

But who is saying those people arent deserving of a helping hand? Anyone here has only said people who could work but chose to lie on their arse don't deserve benefits.

It was just the general tone I didn't like. nobody knows what somebody's situation is. They might seem fit and able, but many issues aren't so clear cut.

Also, if you like your job, and all that it entails, then that's great, you're lucky. And if you're financially  better off because of it, and can provide for your family, buy nice things, even better. If people chose not to or aren't able to work, their lives are likely to be less enhanced with material goods, expendable income , eating poorer quality food, good car etc. So, why castigate them?

Just to reiterate, I do not think anyone on here has said that there should not be a benefit system in place for people who genuinely need it. And I fully appreciate that many people who are deemed "scroungers" or "loafers" have problems that the general public dont see. And for the record, I would have no issue with the benefit system being such that these genuine claimants do enjoy a standard of life comparable to a "normal" standard of living. Most of them would love to be able to go out and earn a living but cant because of their situation (be it care responsibilities, disabilities etc). They absolutely should be supported.

However I have absolutely no issue with castigating someone who chooses to  do nothing and expect things to be handed to them. They are the using resources that mean the genuine cases above cant get the support they should as there is a finite pot of money available for all claimants.

Yis are bonkers if ya think City wouldn't be in trouble without the Arab money.....

Define trouble?

Of course if the Arabs walked away there would be a fire sale as they could nt afford the wages etc. As far as I understand it there is no debt on the club so all the sales would generate profit and while they would not be able to compete at the level they are at now, they would resettle after a period as a mid/lower table premier league team like Crystal Palace/Brighton etc and would just have to live within their means.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-58100957.amp

That's a pretty disturbing article about the cost of healthy food versus processed crap and unfortunately the reality of life if you are low income.  I would see it when I do the groceries,  half of the weekly spend is in the fruit and veg department. We are lucky in that both the wife and I  have decent jobs and the price of food isnt the primary consideration so we try to buy healthy for the kids (for very little thanks!) but it cant be easy when you are looking at 20 bags of crisps costing the same as 6 apples.

The major issue I have with some of the people on benefits is the fact they have so much disposable income. As was mentioned above, flash cars, holidays etc. While I know that in certain cases some of that income may not be "legitimate", what if benefits was in some way controlled so that you can only spend it for necessities (so no alcohol, cigarettes, dining out, pub drinks, Sky payments etc)  I know its not practical in reality and you would need to work out how you dont penalise the genuine claimants but I wonder would you see a different number if it was not landing in their accounts as cash.

[Hence Man City are in less danger of folding if the Arabs walked away.]

Are the PL not looking into City's finances now with the expectation there will be some punishment coming from their investigation?

Answer the PL to look at those club owners who've leveraged their debt onto the club rather than fresh money coming in with no strings attached.

This would not affect City. Ironically they are so loaded they do not have to leverage the club.

Hence Man City are in less danger of folding if the Arabs walked away.

Leeds back in the day were on the verge due to spending money they didn't have and financial rules are indeed needed.

I'd have my concerns about how Farhad Moshiri is "funding" Everton. Wonder if he's stumping up the cash himself or just borrowing cheap money on the never never!

Exactly. While this means that the "Club" is more secure as there are no 3rd parties with charges over the assets, it creates the problem that we are seeing now in that noone can go up against them financially. If money does not matter then how can other clubs compete.

Never mind Leeds, I dont think many fans understand just how close Liverpool were to the brink under Hicks/Gillette. If they had a "yes man" chairman  rather than Martin Broughton back then I have no doubt they would have been in serious difficulty, potentially into administration territory.

Are the PL not looking into City's finances now with the expectation there will be some punishment coming from their investigation?

Answer the PL to look at those club owners who've leveraged their debt onto the club rather than fresh money coming in with no strings attached.

This would not affect City. Ironically they are so loaded they do not have to leverage the club.

[some punishment coming from their investigation]

Are the PL not looking into City's finances now with the expectation there will be some punishment coming from their investigation?

What punishment though? The FA has no interest in getting into a legal spat with a club with City's resources so it will probably be  a "record" fine that would not be a weeks salary bill for city plus
some sort of a suspended points deduction that will never take effect.

Bottom line is City pay the fine and move on

[Sport needs to be competitive to be fun.Which is why FFP was put in place.]

Grealish has the attributes of someone who is about to burst into life like Gazza in the early 90s. He has exceptional talent and drive, and the physical attributes are locking into place.

But City no more need him than they need an FFP inspection. They're stacked in left midfield. They're stacked in playmakers. He'd need to go up in production by 50% to make them 10% better.

——

Re Kane.

Football is  fucked. Clean fucked. That so many pundits and "general interest" fans are adamant Kane needs to win things so much, that he has to sign for the club who buys everything, is a dreadful reflection on the sport.

They seem to want city to win 5-0 each week, just to watch this "amazing" football.

Sport needs to be competitive to be fun.

Which is why FFP was put in place.

But right now it seems thats not what the people really want. Admiring  collective greatness seems to be more enjoyable than watching competitive matches.

The EPL has to eat itself soon.

Agree with the first sentence, but not the second. FFP was put place to reduce competitiveness. It was driven by the teams who happened to be at the top of the food chain at the time, and wanted to make sure they stayed there.
If they wanted to increase competition then they would have put in the same spending cap for every single team. But instead they said the team at the top can spend more than the teams chasing them.

I would be a big advocate of the use of salary caps, trades and drafts to create a level playing field. It seems to work in AFL/NFL in terms of increasing competitiveness and making sure all teams have their day. Unfortunately I think it only works in a situation where there is no international market for the top players so unlikely to work in soccer.

[Marty Clarke is the best of the bbc bunch.]

I think RTE need Joe back. The analysis each week is stale, sterile and dull. I would also suggest that it appears to be very scripted.
I agree that Joe has become a parody of himself but he most certainly gives a reason to tune in a HT, knows the game and is entertaining. At the moment I go put the kettle on and wait for the 2nd half to start.

Cora Staunton and Ciaran Whelan deliver zero additional insight and are a bore fest. PC gone mad.

100% agree.
I think Joanne Cantwell is awful too. She may be knowledgable, but god she'd bore you to tears.
Cooper and O'Se I think are good when they are on.
But there's no comparison to Brolly/Spillane/O'Rourke. You'd tune in just to hear them.

Marty Clarke is the best of the bbc bunch. I don't like McConnville/McHugh/Harte. Though in saying that, I'd listen to Harte more to get an idea of how he thinks about the game in general terms rather than in game analysis.

As long as he is not talking about hawkeye...

Tyrone still haven't sorted out their free taking either, Morgan shouldn't be near them nor should McCurry. Two easy ones missed right before half time.

Mattie missed a handy one as well. As good as he was I thought he was going to have the half from hell at one point. He missed that easy free, then a similar one from play and then that chance at the end when Beggan got back when a point would have been the right option. If Tyrone had lost I'm sure that would have been raised but then 10 minutes later he's picking up the man of the match award.

I thought the Tyrone man markers did well today. I know Monaghan's FF aren't the quickest around but they got a fist in more often than not on the one on one balls in which is unusual enough in today's game.

Beaten 4-3 by Hertha Berlin tonight.

Lucky to finish above the Ev at this rate.


Nice to see big Virg and Joe back on the pitch

Great to see the two guys back. Matip/Konate likely to be the starting partnership at Nrwich but a decent problem for Klopp to have. Expect Phillips and Williams (x2) to leave in the nexy couple of weeks now.

From reading some of the training camp reports Konate, Elliott and Minamino have been stand outs so far!

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/covid-19-1-189-new-cases-confirmed-in-state-with-23-patients-in-icu-1.4627625
1378 cases
96 in hospital
23 ICU
The five-day moving average of cases has increased from 300 to 1,189 cases per day over one month

Donegal has 725 per 100,000; Louth is 474 per 100,000; Dublin is at 307 per 100,000; Limerick stands at 258 per 100,000; and Galway has 257 per 100,000
Tánaiste Leo Varadkar said earlier on Wednesday that he expects the fourth wave of Covid-19, driven by the Delta variant, to peak at 3,000 to 4,000 cases per day but with very low hospitalisation and death numbers.

Obviously these new variants are going to have less deaths.

Is there a big difference in the mortality rates on the new variants? i.e. is Delta more deadly than the beta etc. i know death rates are lower now because of the vaccine as a) if you are vaccinated the likelihood is you will not be as sick, b) treatments have improved significantly and c) a greater proportion of the people catching covid now are now more likely to be younger so are naturally less likely to be seriously ill.

You don't stay in the engine room of a top team for 12/13 years by being good. Fantastic player was Scholes, a decent shout for best English player in the Premier League era.

Would agree with that. Scholes was unreal in his prime. HIs tackling on the other hand.....

[When times up, it's up !]

You could even see Coldrick motioning with his hands after he blew, almost laughing, basically saying, "how much time do you expect me to give yez, lads?".

Once it went back out to the middle to start over again, he was always going to blow.

On his overall performance, I didn't see him as being harsh on either team. He missed the penalty shout, but McMenamin pulled the shirt and put the arm around his neck for a split second each, so its not hard to see how Coldrick missed it in real time.

I'd agree re the time given. We knew he'd eventually blow once the ball was being passed backwards, which is fair enough I suppose. I think Rogers was the only player who could maybe have let one fly.

Completely disagree re the penalty shout though. Coldrick was standing looking at it, the arm / hand around the neck was in full view of the ref... It was poor not to award a penalty imo.

Ref'd a game recently, point in it with injury time nearly up, free from out on the wing I said to the player that he'll need to either score or I'll allow one play from the break ball. Ball dropped short and they proceeded to try and engineer a score, eventually I blew and the abuse was desperate..

I was the reason why Antrim football is so bad, was the pick!
You can't blow when the team is attacking! That's a new one

When times up, it's up !

This. Drives me mad (even more so in soccer ball) when refs play a few extra seconds to give the attacking team a chance. If time is up the ref should blow it up irrespective of were the ball is on the field. I know that might cause a riot in certain situations but that's the rules. If we want to see teams get "one more chance" then by all means change the rules  like rugby where the ball had to be out of play for time to be up. (The GAA trialled this about ten years ago I think?). I actually think it was a decent change in that it takes a degree of subjectivity out of it but in the modern game it  might go too far the other way. Those Derry lads might still be passing it along the 45 if that rule was in place. 

[Once Pogba started dancing]

Mbappe is what he is. An ok luxury player in a piss poor league. Never does it on the big stage. He needs a move to a better league and a better team. He is nowhere near as good as people think he is and I think he is lucky to get a place in that France team.

The Swiss deserved their victory. Once Pogba started dancing they upped their game and were the better team for most of the match.

Was glad to see the French go out just for that. Wonderful goal but no need for the "look at me" afterwards