Loz

Bit like one of the posters in LD's link - "all these cyclists are in this HGV's blind spot'. Damned stupid place to stop, then.

IHT is a middle class tax. Poor people don't pay it and rich people have good enough tax advisers so they can avoid it.

No Miley Cyrus?

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Brendan, hope life is treating you well. > > Loz... W13... how could you? Sorry, but the missus moved jobs and the ED commute was hell for her. Then we decided to escape the rat race for a while and become ski instructors for a couple of years. Soon, back to reality though. Ew. It's a very nice part of W13. Sort of the East Dulwich of the West. Except it has a tube station.

Me. I left ED about two years ago - first to West London, then Austria, then travelling. Am now back in Austria and will be back in West London in a few months. Have a small plan to try and replicate the success of the EDF in W13 when I return.

david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I thought exactly the same! And lo, he was from > Cheltenham. My first thought was Prior saying, "Well, you think you've got problems..."

A few years ago on one of the Top Gear 'challenges', Clarkson claimed he had bought his car for a quid. He said that it was better for dealers to sell some cars like this, as it cost them more to dispose of them under EC rules. Does anyone know if this is true, and where they can be found?

Though we bucked the trend a bit last year with "human poo".

I always his the 'Report This Message' for spam. I figure multiple reports are better than none.

Add my vote to 'pay down the mortgage', unless you do want to go down the upsizing route.

david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz - for your AN Other spots I would suggest: > > Sam Robson opening Except he has not shown his hand yet as to whether he wants to play for England or Australia. CA is making serious attempts to keep him. > Although you only seem to have three bowlers. > Stokes can help cover I suppose? Three seamers and Monty enough? Stokes' bowling has been good enough to play as a third seamer, IMHO. I've been rather impressed by him and I think he's been your best bowler in the series so far. But I just don't think his batting is good enough to be in the top 6. But with him and Butler and Broad, that would give you batting down to 9.

I think that England were a great outfit a couple of years ago, but even then it was rather obvious that, though the bowling cupboard was rather heaving with talent, the batting cupboard was rather bare, save for five of the batsman that were in the team. It was only the amazing ability of those five to rarely get injured or miss tests that covered this obvious problem. The other issue was the results were becoming completely erratic - beating India at home (an amazing achievement in itself) was followed by a disaster in the UAE against Pakistan and some indifferent results with the Kiwis. Going into the England ashes series, the question was: which England would show up? It turned out to the bad one, but with Australia in disarray and a load of internal infighting pretty much caused by Mickey Arthur's management style, combined with Ian Bell's fantastic batting meant that England grabbed a 3-0 series win. But the difference in the teams was never that wide. Fast forward to the Australian series and Boof had already managed to get the Aussies back as a team, generally by writing the first Ashes series off and a plan to win the Aussie leg. When that came around, a rather timely injection of Mitch J X-factor and the Gabba test win meant the Aussies had a massive injection of self belief. At about this point Trott departed, Joe Root was badly mishandled and Ian Bell returned to being human. This showed up the complete lack of batting coming through as there was no one to step up. And, I think the bowling talent has been hugely mishandled - why bring a bunch of quicks if you don't pick them and thus destroy their confidence? And why the hell wasn't Onions in the squad as the third best seamer in the land at the time? England need to bite the bullet, prepare to lose a lot ove the next couple of years and identify some solid young talent, rebuilding the batting around Cook, Bell and KP. Carberry is not the answer (whereas Rogers, with his huge experience, was a great temporary filler pick for Australia). Stokes is a great number 7, not six. Bairstow is not an international keeper. Monty is the best spinner at the moment. So, I think England should be looking at: Cook, AN Other, Bell, KP, Root, AN Other, Stokes, A New Keeper, Broad, Anderson, Monty Spend a couple of years rebuilding around that template and find the new talent. Look to replace Monty when s useful young spinner comes up. And make sure there are some good reserves available, as KP and Anderson only have a couple of years left in them.

Slightly off topic, but if you are a beginner, then Switzerland is a waste of money anyway. You could try somewhere small and cheap in, say, Bulgaria which may be more in line with your budget.

Apparently the level of talent of the pool of young cricketers coming into the England team is so poor, the ECB is considering lodging an official complaint to the South African cricket authorities.

I really don't think I can ever watch the first 10 mins of 'Up' again. The only time I watched it was on a plane and I can't deny I was in absolute tears. Fortunately it was in business class and the seat next to me was vacant so no one noticed.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ever heard of GOOGLE I hadn't. So I googled 'google' and now I know.

Tr? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm not on FB or Twitter, but can I ask why you > look at (or have a feed from) someone who you > clearly have no respect for? There is a pretty major difference between being a bit tired of a stream of baby pictures and 'clearly having no respect for' someone. Well, at least it is in my world. I'm guessing you are a reasonably recent parent, so you probably have absolutely no idea that people aren't as enamoured with your kids as you want them to be. But, trust me, they're not.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The usefulness of Facebook has an inverse correlation to the number of your friends with > babies less than four years old. No, your baby sleeping is not news, even on Facebook's low > scale. A new one today - a posting of a child's pic with the caption '22 months old today'. Which begs the question... when do parents cease 'celebrating' monthly birthdays? I would have hoped somewhere in the 6 to 12 month old period, but it seems not.

Some British Heart Foundation shops will take electrical goods, including TVs. I think the one on Old Kent Road does and they will pick stuff up, too.

NewWave Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Breast Cancer-Its one of the most common cancers > and affects both men and women of all ages. It also has the most money thrown at it.

Ahhh, good spot, Foxy. Missed that one. That's a big spot, because you can reconstruct the data on the mag stripe of a card with most of the info that is on the card itself - it only holds 80 characters. Not usable in the UK (as you mist have a chip), but could be used overseas in a country that does not mandate chips (like the USA).

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > BrandNewGuy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Do you think teachers who support the BNP should be sacked? > > If it's reflected in the things they are teaching the kids, then yes. But that was never the question, was it? It was, "should we sack teachers who support the BNP". And that is a dangerous line to tread. Should we sack all teachers who support communist or socialist parties? Should we sack all teachers are sexist/radical feminist? Should we sack all teachers who strike? Should we sack all teachers who disagree with my or your world views?

The usefulness of Facebook has an inverse correlation to the number of your friends with babies less than four years old. No, your baby sleeping is not news, even on Facebook's low scale.

To be pedantic, they didn't actually ask to come back again...

A stupid tweet. But an unbelievably stupid tweet from someone in corporate communications at the company that owns 'BlackPeopleMeet.com, a dating site for African-Americans'.