Donald J Trump

Was that Priests first PLE Main Event on the main roster? I've been trying to recall if he's featured before but nothing springs to mind. I think he done a reasonable enough job all things considered. Drew could have been Wrestling a waxwork dummy and there would have still been the same level of local interest and investment but he didn't look out of place and he played his part competently enough, both before and during the event. He's actually starting to grow on me a bit. 

16 minutes ago, Supremo said:

I’d love to hear from anyone who was in the arena, to see if the Punk think worked at all live. Was anyone swerved? Or did everyone immediately recognise it as CM Punk because it was CM Punk, with CM Punk’s face.

Like I mentioned earlier, Punk was strolling around Glasgow taking pictures and almost everyone I spoke to before the show knew he was in town. As soon as the referee took the bump, it's almost like the arena sensed that the next person to appear would be Punk, one way or another. That anticipation perhaps shaped what happened next, but even from the second tier and having only seen the back of his head, it seemed to me like everyone in my vicinity recognised it as Punk. The Jordans didn't help. 

That being said, they were showing the action on the screens above the ring and when they cut to that shot, there was a noticeable reaction. I think to an extent that was people playing along theatrically, although there may well have been some who didn't see Punk coming from a mile off. There wasn't much element of surprise and for the most part, people knew what was coming. They were pretty generous with regards to getting into the spirit of the moment. 

I've found at many events I've been to that even when sitting relatively close to the action, a lot of people have one eye on the screen when it comes to the intricate stuff like facial expressions etc. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to suggest that people in the arena will respond to at least some of the stuff that happens on screen. That definitely applies to the commentators, they're frequently seen watching the action on their monitors even though it's happening feet away from them. 

Its a question of trade offs. Theyre going to aim for as few logic gaps as possible, and in serious dramas there shouldn't be any. With something like Wrestling, I don't think they disregard it entirely but at the same time, they're not going to allow themselves to become creatively hamstrung just because it could be picked apart. If I knew Punk was in the building, McIntyre certainly would have, and even if there wasn't anything he could do to mitigate the risk, nothing about him suggested he was aware his mortal enemy was there to ruin to his life. Its a hole with no bottom this, and I think everyone has that point where theyll think "horseshit". Some will get to that point easier than others. 

Calling it pure cinema is obviously over the top, but I'm not sure that something not being completely within the bounds of logic and believability should always be a barrier to different approaches for old ideas. I can see why people would feel it's not for them, and it's a perfectly sensible position, but if large sections of the audience are happy to declare it a masterpiece then it's a sign that it's an idea that's worked. Even under the new regime, I think people are still inclined to interrogate the logic of ideas they feel are bad and poorly executed whereas something like this gets a bit of slack. 

I'm generally a bit relaxed about this kind of thing, because once I start tugging at this thread there's no end to it. The fucker was wandering around the St Enoch Centre on Saturday, so even though I only saw the back of his head when he made his way down to the ring it was clearly him. Even at that, once the screen in the arena cut to his face there was still a reaction. 

I think there was an issue with at least one of the ropes. You don't really see it on TV due to the angle, but during Styles entrance when he bumps into the ropes for his pose, there was a noticeable degree of give on the top rope from where I was sitting. He then tugged the rope and approached the referee with a gesture that indicated there was an issue. The referee himself then checked the rope. Its a minor detail you ordinarily wouldn't pay much heed to but there were a couple of issues that could have been caused by the ring rather than errors from the performers. The top rope wasn't a factor in Priests mishap. His foot slipped off the second rope but he was already past the point of no return by then. Its fortunate that nobody was seriously injured, even in a show that won't be remembered for over the top stunts. 

8 hours ago, FLips said:

It was nice to hear from Ed Davey who was rightly confronted about his stunts and perhaps not being taken seriously, which is one of my concerns as well. I know he talks about policies at these stunts, but that's not what people see or remember. He also struggled, as Labour and Tories have, with direct questions about his failings, talking around the question rather than answering it.

As cheap and as obvious as the tactic of attention grabbing stunts are, it's a bold strategy. If it doesn't pay off and Lib Dems fail to make real progress, spending the campaign prat falling like Norman Wisdom is going to make Ed Davey look like an even bigger clown than the campaign capers have. It seems slightly desperate though, and a sign that they lack confidence in their ability to cut through. This should be easy pickings for the Lib Dems. The Tories are dead and reform are splitting the vote, while even lifelong Labour supporters aren't totally sold on Starmer. When you consider that their relatively small share of the vote is significantly more efficient than other parties, and that they're starting from such a low mark, anything less than serious progress would be a disaster. 

There were a lot of CM Punk fans there last night and hundreds of CM Punk shirts. There are so few genuine superstars on the books that someone of his status appearing unannounced was always going to get a positive reaction from many, even if he is the arch nemesis of the hometown hero. There were people around me on the brink of collapse, such was the enthusiasm and vigor with which they rooted for a McIntyre victory. Once the result was in and Punk was doing his victory lap, many of those same individuals held their replica titles aloft with satisfied, childlike glee on their faces. Some were worse for wear as they slurred their way through CM Punk chants. Like the three gentlemen rubbing themselves against Punk at the end, they were basking in the glow of some world class trolling from Punk. If you've paid that much money for a ticket, you're well within your rights to find some way to leave the event with a spring in your step, and though whilst a minority not everyone left the arena dissatisfied. The only mild degree of contempt was towards the mischievous schoolboys who chanted CM Punk whilst scanning the faces around them to see if anybody gave a shit. I don't think anybody did give a shit, but any form of egregious attention seeking is always going to curl the toes. 

I really enjoyed the show, and it was a great weekend all things considered. You can quibble about the quality of the card but as a live show for a Scots audience it was great. The two biggest titles in Wrestling were on the line and both were entertaining. We got an IC match that has been building since before Wrestlemania and we got two women's title matches featuring Scottish performers, and one of them featured a home title change. Crucially, the fact that the event was in Scotland ran through the show like a stick of Blackpool Rock. Whilst the crowd was amazing in Lyon, you could have held that show anywhere, but in this instance the location was central to the show. For a small nation of 5 Million people to feature so prominently in an international event like that is pretty cool, and I think it was a success. 

I've seen some commentary where there's been an inability to understand why some were cheesed off at the conclusion of the show. That was the entire point wasn't it? Its easy to sneer at people who've become emotionally invested to the point where they genuinely care about the outcome but it shouldn't be difficult to understand. Between winning the titles during covid, having his win shat on at Wrestlemania and missing out at the last Clash of the Castle, Drew having his big moment isn't exactly overdue. Having a Scotsman winning the title in Scotland is beyond the wildest dreams of Scottish Wrestling fans, and given another opportunity is far from likely many were obviously going to be disappointed that it hasn't happened, especially having spent the weekend being whipped into a frenzy. Speaking to a lot of people who were at the event, the sense I got was that it was a bit of an abrupt, bum note on which to end a fairly upbeat, positive weekend. I don't see any way you can avoid that though. That crowd would have shat on any pat on the bum at the end and nobody wants a repeat of American Pie, so whilst dismantling the ring to chants of bullshit wasn't the ideal finale to an enjoyable night there wasnt really any viable alternative. 

The fact is, this thing with Punk is among the best stuff they've done in years and it doesn't need a title. When you've got the likes of Priest trying to get a foothold on the next rung and Gunther on the brink of greatness, there's no sense wasting the gold on something that's already good. The quote about Alexander weeping when he had no worlds left to conquer comes to mind as well. If Drew ever does have his moment, a packed stadium in the UK is as good a place to do it as any. 

I'm getting ridiculously carried away at the minute and I fear the magnitude of the hysterical shit fit I'm going to have if Drew leaves without the gold. McIntyre is as mad as he's going to get, and unless the next stage is rocking back and forward in the corner Punk popping up at the end like the Grange Hill Sausage adds nothing we haven't seen before, not that that's ever stopped them. There's a decent energy about the place, so should be a lively show. 

The problem with Sunak is poor judgement, execution of strategy and an inability to think on his feet. The clip is fairly unremarkable and it doesn't come across badly at all in my view. The issue he's got is that on BBC News there's a picture of him looking slightly dopey and the headline -

"I went without Sky TV as a child" says Sunak. 

People are going to laugh at that, and if that's the big takeaway from an important sit down interview with a major broadcaster it's a problem. It reinforced the idea that he's a clown and that everything he touches turns to shit. They've stitched him up with that headline, and the interviewer was clearly trying to lead him on a merry dance with the question. The most effective political operators have all this in mind when answering questions. They have an instinctive understanding of what the headlines are likely to be and manipulate the situation to get the outcome they want. They'll shape the narrative and the talking points, and it's about trade offs. They might look slightly aloof to people who've watched the whole interview, but they'll avoid stepping in a big shit for coverage of the interview. You could see Sunaks cogs where spinning round and he knew the guy was looking for trouble. He was persistent though, and Sunak couldn't wether the storm. He curled up in a ball and surrendered, and gave Paul Brand exactly what he was looking for. When you've had the campaign that Sunaks had, and when you're in such a dire position in the polls, you can't afford to be making these mistakes. You can only imagine what mess the party would be in if he also had to contend with a hostile print media. 

It is up to individuals to decide, but there's no doubt that the context provided here has helped everyone make an informed decision. You're perfectly entitled to disregard it, but I'm not sure it was necessary to question it or be dismissive of it, particularly in relation to other people. I understand where you're coming from, but I can see why your response might elicit a slightly more robust tone. People are genuinely trying to be helpful here and are looking out for everyones interests, which isn't something that should be taken for granted on the internet in 2024. 

As a new poster, and as someone thats possibly been lulled into a false sense of security on this forum thus far I appreciate the heads up from others who've been around long enough to see threads like this going south. This may have been something I'd have been inclined to contribute to but I know sound advice when I see it. I'm decidedly anonymous now, but Ive been anonymous on forums previously and many of those members have gone on to become some of my closest friends, so you never know. I find the goings on referred to here genuinely surprising given how reasonable I've found most members, but I don't doubt it. 

To no user name, I don't think anyone's trying to stop you from talking about an important subject. I read it as a friendly nudge to make sure we exercise caution. I've found that helpful and I hope you take it in the spirit it was intended, even if you decide there's no personal risk. 

24 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

I’m sure the same press who used a protractor to ascertain if a former party leader was bowing sufficiently at the cenotaph will be applying the same rigorous standards to this. 

To be fair this individual had form for trampling over the graves of our war dead. Let's never forget that time he wore a scruffy coat at the cenotaph. 

Marvelous. 

The Killer (2023) Netflix

Really enjoyed this. It's directed by David Fincher (Seven, Fight Club, Gone Girl) and stars Michael Fassbender as a methodical, idiosyncratic but relatable assassin. It features one of the best fight scenes I've seen in recent years and is a solid 9/10. 

Plot spoiler -

Some top drawer shithousery on display here -

Kane looks like he's there to bring him his mail and say things like "it's quite alright Sir" after Trump throws hot coffee in his face for minor breaches of protocol. 

6 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Well, if the voters are as real and plentiful as the ones on this official photo, it could. 

 

What an all star cast in that photo. I've spotted Mark Zuckerburg, Gyles Brandreth and Jeremy Wade from River Monsters. There's one at the very back as well, but I'm not going there. 

Thanks for that, I think KOF and Anniversary collection will be the way to go. The only fighting game I've tried on the console was a brief shot of someone else's copy of MK1 and it was unplayable. The graphics were widely ridiculed at the time, but the responsiveness of the controls were the main issue. You could make a cup of tea in the gap between putting in the command and it actually happening. That port is the worst game I've ever played and with Switch not having something like Gamepass it's good to get recommendations from people who've played the games. 

5 minutes ago, Chest Rockwell said:

Had a play with modern controls on sf6 this week. It was fun, but feels a bit cheap. I think it's probably a nice way to get to know my way around some new characters and what they can do, particularly the ones I'm not going to go too deep with. 

The biggest issue I had with the modern controls was the change of other buttons. I kept pressing RT/R2 for heavy kick. It was handy for mastering the timing of some of the more complex combos though. In the end I didn't want to go to deep with the modern controls as I didn't want that to replace what I've spent years learning as I can't keep two things in my head at the same time. 

26 minutes ago, Jazzy G said:

Picked up a Hori fight stick mini for my Switch. Was about £45 on Amazon. When they say mini they're not joking. It's decent enough. Fun for playing retro arcade games on me switch. 

Is that the 30th anniversary collection? How does it run on the switch, and does it work well with the handheld? Looking at a fighting game for on the go and MK1 is a complete and utter write off. 

8 hours ago, d-d-d-dAz said:

Iain Dale giving up his bid to be MP of Tunbridge Wells because of an old video where he said how much he couldn't stand Tunbridge Wells is very funny.

He's completely humiliated himself. Before he set off to fulfil his lifelong dream of being an MP he fought back tears as he bid farewell to his listeners on LBC. 48 hours later he was back on the same station explaining why his campaign is dead in the water. His former colleague Nick Ferrari suggested  he was frit during their interview, which is the Tory equivalent of going up to somebody in an American prison and calling them a bitch. I don't think the Tunbridge Wells thing was terminal, but he might suspect that having spent the past few years talking shite 4 nights a week that it was just the first of many comments that'll come back to haunt him if he stays in the race. This is almost as bad as the time he was rolling about the floor with an old chap in the background of an interview. 

1 hour ago, Chest Rockwell said:

They've done their electoral calculus and have clearly decided they don't need or want our votes.  

You've hit the nail right on the head here. Not only have they made a conscious decision to alienate a large section of the electorate, but they've calculated that by doing so they'll ingratiate themselves with voters who are already pretty well represented, and have been for decades. I don't have much time for the "jam tomorrow" argument either. I actually wonder to what extent this ruthless, cynical manoeuvring will manifest itself when this lot have their hands not just on Labours levers of power, but on Britain's. I'm not suggesting they'll usher in some form of sinister authoritarianism, but they've demonstrated how they deal with perceived threats. Tony Blair didn't seek to completely dismantle the left of his party, but this was a time when it was hard to imagine a figure like Jeremy Corbyn avoiding the wooden spoon in a leadership contest. The current Labour party are doing everything in their power to make sure someone like Corbyn never happens again, and they won't stop until they've cemented their grip on the party. Corbyn wasn't a perfect leader by any means, but he's in the position he's in now partly because he resisted the option of adopting similarly ruthless tactics to strengthen his own position. There'll be some who are now wishing they'd played the faction game as mercilessness as Starmer when they had the chance, but even with foresight of what was to come I doubt they'd have stooped to this kind of bullshit. It's not a binary choice of victory with this kind of approach or defeat with anything else either. Any competent, united opposition with fiscal credibility and a clear policy on net migration would wipe the floor with this Conservative party. This bogus, performative shift to where they claim the country sits is a complete con. 

1 hour ago, BigJag said:

Why has Diane Abbott been treated this way?

To put it bluntly, they see her as a liability in their efforts to disassociate themselves from the activist left, and they believe she's unpopular with other voter groups they're looking to appeal to. I think it's terrible, and they've went for the absolute worst option. The fundamental decision to cast her out is bad, but he hasn't had the courage of his convictions to be clear and stand by it. It looks disingenuous and cowardly, even to people you wouldn't describe as progressive, and I think it'll harm him. 

32 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

From a complete layman's perspective, this would appear to make sense as well, looking at how modern wars seem to be fought; there seems to be a lot more emphasis on lots of tech manned by well-trained operatives, supporting small units carrying out focussed operations, instead of mass movements of troops like in WWII. Not to mention that there's a lot less tolerance for high casualties these days; the public and the media tend to start turning against war sentiment when the body bags reach the hundreds. No way anyone would accept the millions or hundreds of thousands of the World Wars, Korean War or Vietnam War. So there'd be no need for a large conscript army anyway.

Lean and well trained has definitely been the conventional thinking for many years and it's the model our military is currently based on. The way events have unfolded on the eastern front has caused ripples of doubt though, not necessarily that mass is more important but that our military is too small either way. I'd be inclined to agree but the preference would always be for a volunteer army. 

I wouldn't give the Conservatives any credit for planning ahead, but this announcement did bring to mind points that have been made over the past couple of years. One was that the public had to be ready to accept a mindset shift as we move from a post to pre war era. If you're looking at ways you get get from A to Z without being overly alarmist at the begining, this type of initiative being part of every day life might be an effective way of at least starting that conversation. I know talking about this as being the first step of a "soft" process to prepare the public for potential conflict does sound slightly conspiratorial, but it is in line with what individuals like our defence secretary and senior figures in NATO have themselves said in recent months. Another point was that the army itself may need to prepare for some form of rapid expansion in the event it was necessary. I think this would be in the form of tens of thousands of volunteers, but they would need to be ready to move quickly. One suggestion was training Ukrainian troops on UK soil, but something like this might be an alternative to putting the groundwork in place if it was ever needed in a real scenario. 

MBS looks like a completely different bloke without the Ghutra. Ordinary he might pass for a young, dashing dreamboat but without it, he's just a balding podgy uncle. 

MmmmmBS - 

IBS -

I'm heading out first thing tomorrow to buy myself some new exotic threads. 

Nicola Roberts is in danger of being relegated from the Less Conventional category these days. 

Comrade Sunak has already made his position on leadswingers clear. If people who are clinically dead can be declared fit for work, you lot are going to the front lines with everyone else. No exceptions.