1

(41 replies, posted in General Bedrock Discussion)

If you're a fan of decent burgers and are ever in Newcastle, id recommend the Fat Hippo....absolute filth, juicy dripping rare as you like burgers served with plenty of kitchen roll

2

(163 replies, posted in General Bedrock Discussion)

simeon79 wrote:

episode 5 is amazing...

[Ho]l[d] the d[or]...

sad

Apparently the guy who plays Hodor is a progressive house DJ from norn iron:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristian_Nairn

Nuole mutsis likaista pillua

Johnny Foreigner could teach us a thing or two here:

Amcýk aðýzlý at yarraðý (pussy mouthed horse dick)
Siki tutmuþ (The one who holds the cock)
Me cago en tu puta madre (I shit in your whore mother)
Eyreh be afass seder emmak (My dick in your mother's rib cage)
Cao ni zu zong shi ba dai (Fuck the 18 generations of your ancestors)
Afatottari (Grandfatherfucker)
Krisnera zhazh tan vred (Let the rats ejaculate on you)
Jebo te Papa (The Pope fucks you)
Sa-mi bagi mana-n cur si sa-mi faci laba la cacat (Stick your hand in my ass and jerk off with my shit)
Spala-te pe dinti ca vin cu pula in inspectie (Brush your teeth, my dick will be inspecting soon)

Dunno about Pantera or Slayer but I sort of see where Hannu is coming from re. Pappa's (and other darker prog) sounds being quite chuggy (not millsy's type of chug) /riffy (dunn-dunn-dunn-dunn-durrrrr) a la rock/metal I suppose

MattBlack wrote:

Sometimes you dont realise what you have till its gone

That was indeed the premise of the thread, Trig

Lol

shitbags.....sorry to hear about that Smashy, hope you manage to recover it

8

(45 replies, posted in General Bedrock Discussion)

now why does that intro sound familiar?......


Actually In Rainbows was ok from what I remember - I liked the first track (You used to be alright, what happened?) and that All I Need tune was good too

10

(45 replies, posted in General Bedrock Discussion)

Dermatron wrote:

'All for one, one for all, if we all join hands we'll make a wall'

Gay

lol

tbh these were my first thoughts when I heard it on the radio this morning

fadass wrote:

Chuffer - I saw them and they were fucking muck. Couldn't sing. Boring unending noodley pseudo rubbish. And that was just after the bends

Haven't seen them live, chief....i was responding to dermo's comments on the stone roses

Dermatron wrote:

They are fucking wank live too

whaaat?

I went to see them at Heaton Park a few yrs back fully expecting them to be shit as I'd heard all sorts about Ian Brown not being able to sing live etc etc......so when I went I wasn't expecting much but (although there's a slight element of truth re Brown) the rest of the band were fucking tight, like session musicians - absolutely nailed it

Don't mind them, some great composition and guitar work on the first 3 albums (try learning to play paranoid android on guitar)....always thought muse were a poor imitation.....not so keen on the recent electronic experimental shit though tbf

....thus spoke Zarathustra

Grant wrote:
chuffer wrote:
Grant wrote:

How did he know it was a small number?  How did he know any kind of number?  That's laughable.

But how does anyone know any number? There's been some pretty strong assertions that there were a significant number of ticketless fans but how did they come to know such "facts"?

I'm basing my opinion on the number of fans inside the ground and those trying to get in.

I'm dropping out of this thread

lol, me too - feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall....sorry for calling you a bell end btw

liquitech1 wrote:
chuffer wrote:
Grant wrote:

How did he know it was a small number?  How did he know any kind of number?  That's laughable.

But how does anyone know any number? There's been some pretty strong assertions that there were a significant number of ticketless fans but how did they come to know such "facts"?

...safe to assume given the culture at the time, no?

So it's more reasonable to believe speculation based on "the culture at that time" over the findings of Taylor's report?

Grant wrote:

How did he know it was a small number?  How did he know any kind of number?  That's laughable.

But how does anyone know any number? There's been some pretty strong assertions that there were a significant number of ticketless fans but how did they come to know such "facts"?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-me … e-35473732

Lord Justice Taylor, in his 1990 report into the disaster, concluded fans were reasonable to arrive between 14.30 and 14.40 as match tickets only requested people be in their places "15 minutes before the game". He was also satisfied that the large concentration of fans arriving at Leppings Lane at 14.40 to 14.50 "did not arrive as a result of any concerted plan".
He concluded that police had "failed" to prepare for controlling the arrival of a large number of fans in a short period. Both the club and police "should have realised the turnstile area could not easily cope with the large numbers demanded of it" unless they arrived steadily over a lengthy period.
He accepted there were "small groups without tickets" looking to "exploit any chance of getting into the ground". But the main problem was simply one of "large numbers packed into the small area outside the turnstiles". He stated categorically that "fans' behaviour played no part in the disaster".
The Hillsborough Independent Panel (HIP) report concluded crowd congestion outside the stadium was "not caused by fans arriving late" for the kick-off. The turnstiles, it said, were "inadequate to process the crowd safely" and the rate of entry insufficient to prevent a dangerous build-up outside the ground.

So the report acknowledges that there were a small number without tickets but that it was not significant in the overall outcome

liquitech1 wrote:

"No contingency plans were made for the sudden arrival of a large number of fans." - answer given by the jury. So although they recognise the need for contingency plans the fact that large numbers of presumably ticketless fans arriving somehow didn't contribute?? This is too confusing, I'm out.

I think the key thing there is your use of the words "presumably ticketless".....do you not think that there could be a sudden arrival of a large number of fans WITH tickets? Say, at 2:45 pm, when most fans leave the nearest pubs to head for the ground just in time for kick off (as BedRob pointed out earlier, tended to happen - and still does to some extent)

BedRob wrote:

but I won’t change my opinion of it

lol, quite

Grant wrote:

I honestly don't know Chuffer.

found another, second part to that Q7 - it reads:

If your answer to the question above is “no”, then was there any behaviour on the part of football supporters which which may have caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles?

Jury’s answer: No.

Now, that seems to me like an open door to allow the jury an option to say something along the lines of "it's feasible that ticketless fans added to the congestion" or "if Liverpool fans weren't pushing so much then perhaps there wouldn't have been so much of a problem" etc etc ......but they didn't for some reason

Grant wrote:

to say that fans are completely blameless is embarrassing, we've all seen the footage.

Grant, look at Q7 again.....if you've seen the footage then the jury has seen the same footage (perhaps even a hell of a lot more than you) and so, with that in mind, how the hell did they arrive at the answer they gave for Q7?

BedRob wrote:

So you are essentially saying that if ONLY ticket holders for the match had congregated outside the stadium the subsequent crush inside would still have taken place ?

I'm saying that, if that was an issue, it would surely have been taken into consideration during the 2 yrs of evidence! If it's as glaringly obvious as everyone says then surely that occurred to those involved in the trial......the police lawyers would have been all over that one.....maybe it was considered and was totally debunked.

chuffer wrote:

6. Unlawful killing: Are you satisfied, so that you are sure, that those who died in the disaster were unlawfully killed? To answer 'yes' to this question, the jurors must be sure of the following:
Firstly, that Ch Supt David Duckenfield owed a duty of care to the 96 who died
Secondly, that he was in breach of that duty of care
Thirdly, that the breach of Mr Duckenfield's duty of care caused the deaths
Finally, the jury must be sure that the breach which caused the deaths amounted to "gross negligence."
Jury's answer: Yes

The issue wasn't just about opening the gate.....there's anecdotes from his colleagues that he totally froze on the day, didn't know what he was doing, was asked if he should call for a delay to the game to sort out the pressure and calm the fans eagerness to get in and he didn't. apparently. allegedly. .....but to lay all the blame at his feet would be harsh, he was out of his depth - the chap who normally ran the show (Mole) had been ferried off somewhere else that day due to internal politics - so as someone else pointed out earlier there's as much blame to be had one rung up the police ladder than duckinfield as he was put in a situation where he was out of his depth. apparently. allegedly.

also...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19545126