@BaronSamedi Cool man. What's your stance on Akira Ioane?

@victor-meldrew said in Springboks v England - Test #2:

You have to seriously feel for the decent Pom rugby supporter

Yep - I know the guy, and I do feel sorry for him.

@tim The TSF Mod-Team ?

Sweet.
Level 2 is my favourite of the levels.
People need to stay the fuck away from me, respect my 2m personal space.
Pubs are open - with the bonus of table-service.
The only drawback - is no live music gigs.

@mackerzzzz said in Rugby Commentators:

I'll tell you a real good way of fixing nz commentators. Sack every one we have at the moment and bring in acc and leigh hart

Fuck. Off.
Ever tried running backwards through a field of dicks?
Or chowing down on a bowl of cold flaccid dicks?
Fuck.
Leigh Hart couldn't commentate an order at the pub. Christ, he can hardly speak.
And the ACC - are typically of mild amusement for approximately 5 minutes. After that... well, it's just the first 5 minutes on a repeat loop anyway, with rapidly diminishing returns with each re-hashed lame joke.
Fuck. Leigh Hart and the ACC. Off.

So - 2019 London - Beijing
In general...

• A group "expedition" - organised by a company called GlobeBusters. For the last decade or so, every 2nd year they do a London-Beijing trip, and every other year - Trans-Americas (Alaska-Patagonia).
  I would recommend them - they did a great job of organising, support, etc. One thing to note - it was rather pricey, and that would mostly be down to using very high-quality hotels (where possible)... my ideal would have been a cheaper trip, with cheaper hotels, and maybe a nice 4-star once every week or two, whenever stopping for 2 nights - to get a good break/laundry-done.

• Started off from London's Ace Cafe with 20 bikes (mostly BMW GS, 3 Triumphs, 1 Ducati, 1 Honda CB500) and 2 support vehicles - a pimped-out Hilux, and a Mercedes van big enough to take a bike (or two at a pinch). The group was larger than I'd expected/hoped... and it did slow things down at borders or when choices of petrol stations was... limited.
  But - it gradually shrank over time...
  2 bikes had opted to only go as far as Almaty, another 2 only as far as Lhasa, and 1 guy came off with about 10 days to go - breaking half-a-dozen ribs, mangling his front-forks into a shape they definitely shouldn't be, and choosing to fly back to the UK rather than "be a tourist" by riding in either support vehicle or catching a train to Beijing.

• Ace Cafe at each end gave us a decent send-off/welcome.... London shouted us fish'n'chips the night before departure, and then breakfast the next day - with speeches and such bollocks
  Beijing welcomed us with bottles of cheap bubbly to spray all over the place, sweet cold beers, a decent spread, all sorts of "merch"... and speeches and such bollocks

Western-ish Europe...
From London to Turkey is a vague memory, but...

• UK, France, Germany, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-and-Herzegovina, Albania, Montenegro, Greece
• Most of it was just getting the miles under the belt, trying to get out of Western Europe ASAP... quite well planned though, to keep the interest up... typically being a couple-hundred miles of motorway, and then an hour or so of some sweet twisties or country-roads, or something else a little more interesting - before reaching the hotel. So each evening, the recent/residual memory was the "fun bit"

Turkey...

• 3 nights in Istanbul - the first time we'd stopped for more than a single night. I'd never been before, so ticked off the major touristy things
• Safranbolu - nice enough old town, with an absolutely shite museum
• Cappadocia, Mount Nemrut & Ani

Georgia-Azerbaijan...

• Tbilisi - rather cool city, very unexpected. Very "bohemian", or "hip", or something... without (much) wankiness that typically comes with those words. Reminded me of a less self-aware Melbourne. Plenty of the old-world stuff (ancient statues, cobblestone streets, bathhouses), and then craft-beer pubs, weird-modern architecture, wine-bars.
  Oh - and look up the 1907 Tiflis Bank Robbery
• Azerbaijan - the sign from Georgia announcing that you're approaching the Azerbaijan border also proclaims at the bottom "Good Luck!". An excellent little dig at one's neighbour
• Caspian Sea - we caught the "ferry" from Baku to Turkmenbashi - a 13 hour crossing

The 'Stans

• Turkmenistan - interesting. Probably most people's choice as "least favourite country of the trip" - but it would be a contender for my Top-3... solely as it was interesting. This is a country where it's essentially still a totalitarian rule... by a nutter.
  Roads - mostly pretty shit, extended periods where they seemed to have laid black glass instead of tarmac. Not cool in the rain - we had one GS go down at reasonably high speed, no major damage to rider or bike
• Uzbekistan - stopped at several classic Silk Road towns - Khiva, Bukhara, Samarkand
• Tajikistan - Probably my favourite country...
  The Tunnel of DEATH! - which was an interesting experience, but not one I'd want on my daily commute
  The adherence to Islam was very much waning this far east, and some of the ladies certainly had that "adultery-isn't-really-that-bad-of-a-sin" sparkle in their eyes
  The (bike) riding once we hit the Wakhan Valley/Pamir Highway... awesome. Riding along the Afghanistan border, unmaintained dirt roads along hill-sides, following rivers... so much fun... videos to come
• Kyrgyzstan - the first peek at high-altitude passes, and fermented horse-milk. Some reasonably fun rural dirt roads, absolutely crazy drivers, and corrupt traffic-police armed with speed-radar-guns.
• Kazakhstan - pretty much just a few days in Almaty, resting

China...

• Border Crossing, at high altitude - a full day to just get physically across the border. Then 2 days stuck in Kashgar, getting the bikes' paperwork sorted.
• Xinjiang province - oppressive. Police checkpoints everywhere, a very very police-state feel about the whole place. I probably shouldn't write too much about it, sitting here in a Beijing hotel not using VPN, but... look it up. Xinjiang, and the "Uighur problem".
• Tibet - the story goes that Tibet is now essentially "pacified" - and the guy that managed that, has been moved on to Xinjiang.
  There were certainly far less police checkpoints, etc - but still some
  But anyway - Tibet... awesome. Altitude, obviously. Snow-riding - not fun, when I'd swapped the visor out for goggles during the previous dirt road sections.
  Mount Everest - I've already posted about that... just awesome. The mountain itself - just being there - literally brought tears to several bikers' eyes. And the road to get up to Base Camp... motorcycle heaven. So many switchbacks... and chinese road rules - so safe overtaking is very much optional.
  And then - the Tibet-Sichuan highway - the G318 - some sections, contenders as being even better than the Everest Base Camp road. On a bike, dodging chinese fuckknuckles in Land-Cruiser-Prados - just great fun.
• Sichuan - some decent scenery, but the roads were already becoming rather "tame" compared to the previous month or two... so just ticking off tourist boxes on the way up to Beijing... Chengdu - pandas, check.
• Shaanxi - Xi'an - great city, with a couple of days off to rest/relax/drink, and more of the touristy stuff... Terracotta Warriors - I'd seen about 15 years ago - not a single bit of more excavation has been done since then, but there are shiny new restaurants/souvenir-shop complexes.
• Shanxi - at this point, we're just trying to get to Beijing, on roads absolutely rammed full of the infamous "red trucks" - what are presumably state-owned trucks, shipping coal from mines to power stations. Hundreds of them... thousands. I've got a video where I passed about 200 of them all queued up. So - lots of trucks, lots of coal-dust... doesn't make for traditionally enjoyable riding. Does, however, make for some very inventive interpretation of road rules at times... I was swerving up onto pavement to get around trucks, nipping back from the wrong side of the road into the middle of a police checkpoint, taking shortcuts through building sites, rice-fields, whatever.
• And finally Beijing - made it, 16,500 miles, I think I remember my GPS unit claimed.
  Beers were had.

@KiwiMurph said in Sunwolves v Blues:

@rotated I don't think there's anything sinister at all. He was sick last week (which if you look at his rugby and travel schedule the past two months it's not hard to see why).

I don't see any benefit at all in flying him to Japan this week. Just let him R&R. Player welfare of your young stars is important.

You don't see anything sinister in a Lions fan being in his kitchen, and then shortly after - a mysterious illness?

Papalii a better winger than Bridge.

@Siam said in Coronavirus - Overall:

@Kruse said in Coronavirus - Overall:

@pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

Good article. Also some Ferners caught playing away! https://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2021/02/do-lockdowns-work.html?m=1

The problem with balanced, researched, and sources-cited articles like this... the "lock down just doesn't work" part of the public simply doesn't read them.
They want catchy memes, with no thought required to re-inforce the theories that they WANT to be true.
The hitler meme, with continuous ranting about "you've all been duped by CCP science, and ignored Western Science which always knew lockdowns didn't work, you sheeple" - with zero facts or basis - will always trump a full article describing how "Western Science does in fact support lockdowns, and always has - because... not just common sense, but also these facts, and this recorded data, and this lot, and this. Oh - and look, here's a handful of pretty graphs for those you are 'visual learners'. And, yes, there are some obvious downsides to them, so it's always going to be a balancing act."

You haven't used science to back up the efficacy or lack of collateral damage of a year of lockdowns. All you've done is deride the people that don't agree with you. You even claim to know what people are thinking and what they want.

Perhaps people believe there are different more nuanced strategies. Perhaps people believe that, if given a coherent and consistent message that the people don't need government fines to observe social distancing and behaviours that lead to less transmission.
Perhaps people are wanting their doubts discussed on accessible media that comprehensively addresses and dispels the 30,000 health experts that made up the Barrington Agreement. Perhaps the people wonder why pandemic strategies and WHO pandemic guidelines of 2019 were immediately disregarded.

Perhaps people want to see a cost benefit analysis of 2020 strategies.

Perhaps people are concerned that the government interference in their lives is an over reach for a "natural" event that has a demonstrable effect on a very particular segment of society. The same governments that many believe aren't equipped with a history of caring about you more than your family friends and community. The same members of governments that break lockdown restrictions.

I can understand frustration at experts ( not you) having to placate questioning sceptics, but to dismiss scientific enquiry as simply the ranting of inferior people is the least productive aspect of the common goal - to rid society of covid.

The only thing worse than lockdowns is surely silencing questions about lockdown. The efficacy of lockdowns requires data and discussion and evidence. If it's the best strategy, and I hope it is, then it will be demonstrably provable and explained. And for that we'll need facts, recorded data and yes, pretty graphs.

What's wrong with questioning a phenomenon that no one yet has all the answers for?

No - I'm not using science to back up anything. I'm only deriding people who use zero science in their arguments, and applauding the people that do cite references/sources/science in theirs... and perhaps highlighting a theory that one group of people tends to the first approach.

And - I also agree that there are certainly "more nuanced strategies" - in fact, I pointed out, as did the article cited by @pakman - that for the whole "to lockdown, or not to lockdown, that is the question" debate - the more scientific articles typically DO reference the obvious downsides of lockdowns... the side-effects, etc... just like scientific analysis typically does.
The whole "lockdowns don't work, our governments are fooling us" side of the argument... typically does not. Rather, as my post was mostly pointing out, they used to be pseudo-scientists producing dodgy youtube videos, and more recently - just cut-to-the-chase hysterical memes.

Generally - the "efficacy of lockdown" HAS had discussion, HAS had plenty of data and evidence, and it HAS been demonstrably proven and explained.
AND - has down-sides which have plenty of data, plenty of evidence, but is still accumulating, as the economic effects, in particular, are probably going to have a several-year lead-time.

Feel free to question a "phenomenon", but I haven't seen any questioning.

And one thing I fear - the more hysterical and nonsensical the anti-lockdown brigade comes across now... when it's been proven, and is obvious, that they are nutters... the less likely it is that anybody will be taken seriously when real and necessary questions are raised concerning governmental or societal movements in the future.

Anyway -that's my last word... I'd promised myself I wouldn't even respond to this thread any more, thinking of Mark Twain's quote regarding onlookers... but your response was on the surface fairly well-thought out, and I've been drinking, so figured it deserved one more response.

Also - another point I've already raised - logic, science, and all the things which typically back those lovely things up - aren't going to change the mind of people who obviously WANT a thing to be true.
When you watch one side of a debate constantly twisting and changing it's front-of-attack/defense... you know you're pretty much debating religion with a catholic.

Sorry to break this to all you guys, but it doesn't matter anyway, nobody's interested in the World Cup. It's just a money-spinner with fake enthusiasm pushed by the broadcasters, newspapers, and merchandising salesmen.

@KiwiPie said in TSF Super Tipping 2023:

(Kruse forgot to turn up)

WTF? I was certain I tipped. I've got a bloody reminder on my work calendar. Which reminds me to do TSF, then SuperBru.
I always do TSF before SuperBru... and I just checked, I did do SuperBru, pretty fucking well, I might add.
This is bullshit. I finally understand the tern "BOP Mafia". Dodgy... as... fuck.
Where's that Conspiracy Thread?

@Bones said in Thread Tags:

@taniwharugby said in Foster, Robertson etc:

@taniwharugby said in Foster, Robertson etc:

@BerniesCorner the key question about it all, is will we get to 6,000 posts on the topic before then?

so 2 weeks, almost 400 posts, we gonna get to 6,000 easy, I'd wager 5,000 of them are saying the same thing over and over, making this the most repetitive thread ever, surely

We need some kind of tag for "Duplicate" posts, which you can then choose to ignore within a thread!

What sort of masochist is still following that thread?

@Crucial - if you're agreeing-with/upvoting Steve, you've gotta step back and re-think things.

There's not a single point in that ignorant tweet, that hasn't already been addressed in this thread.

@Crucial said in 6N Ireland v England:

Obviously wasn’t avoidable because he tried and failed.

Too late.
He put himself into a position where it had become unavoidable.
Which was avoidable.

A simplistic view, perhaps, but the sort of view that players need to be trained in, to stop this from happening.
Whether or not anybody agrees with how it's being ruled, it's pretty obvious that if you don't want to get carded, don't put yourself in a situation where it becomes a TMO lottery.

@Crucial said in 6N Ireland v England:

The thing is that head contact and foul play are meant to be two separate decisions not one equals the other.

A few years ago, sure.
Not any more.
Again: "Foul Play" no longer means "foul play".
In my opinion - the biggest problem with the Rugby Laws currently, are all the misnomers.
(In regards to the fucking confusion with fans wailing about shit. As to whether the Laws are actually in the right place... completely different conversation)

@nostrildamus said in Microsoft edge:

@Kruse said in Microsoft edge:

@nostrildamus Hmmm... I'll look at Brave, hadn't heard of it before.

Basically Chrome with far less tracking and seems a little quicker (but have not tested). I suspect it doesn't tax the processor as much as Chrome, but again haven't tested.

Yeah - from some cursory research... like many of the new generation - all based on Chromium (even Edge is based on Chromium, ffs) - slightly less heavy than Chrome, with less of the tracking shit by default.
But once again - the classic axiom: if the 'product' is free... YOU are the product. So, gotta wonder how they're making their money. Perhaps via that BAT system, which looks intriguing?

@Duluth said in Brumbies v Moana Pasifika:

Wow Toole is quick

Just watched highlights, found this thread to say exactly that.
Fuckin' fast.

Having said that - it was an unfortunate one.
He had fuck all time to make a decision, and made the wrong one.
BUT - I guess the onus should then become... don't put yourself in that position in the first place.
As to the asinine "What else could he have done?" bleating? It's already been answered several times, but best option was probably to continue with a legal tackle.

• If he was able to do that, and truly didn't have the time to do anything else - then it wouldn't be ruled as a late tackle, as he'd "already committed"
• If he wasn't able to do that, then he was never in a position to do anything other than an act of "Foul Play" -and therefore... a card was always in the pipeline anyway.

The more I see these things though, the more I like what we're doing in Super Rugby... the Yellow which can be upgraded to Red after considered unpressured reflection.

@Crucial said in 6N Ireland v England:

Really not convinced on that RC.
Infield argument was no mitigation but to me the starting premise was all wrong.
Was there head contact? Yes
Was there foul play? Very debatable. The player certainly looked to decide to pull away from a collision. Looked very accidental to me. Did he make the right choice in trying to pull out? No. But that’s not foul play. That’s a split second decision to try and avoid danger that went the other way.
Add to that the Ireland player charged head first into contact while out of control while regathering and it was all just a rugby accident to my eyes.

The problem is - "Foul Play" doesn't actually mean "foul play" anymore.
Just like "Deliberate Knock-On" doesn't actually/literally define what the offence actually is.
"just a rugby accident" - which involves contact to the head - is Foul Play. And will be penalised.
The sooner the players realise that - the less cards there will be.
The sooner the pundits realise that - the sooner we can stop hearing the infantile whines of "The game is an absolute joke."

@nostrildamus Hmmm... I'll look at Brave, hadn't heard of it before.