Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[beninho]

First topic message reminder :

Having concerns about EU immigration does not make you a far right nutter or xenophobe. Mclaren, what is your knowledge on EU immigration, what dealings do you have with it? Can you see why people may have concerns about it?

Unless your concerns about how we can offer a more humane immigration system then you are xenophobe.  If you are worried about the geographical location of where someone popped out of a uterus then you are not thinking rationally.

And no, I cannot see why anyone would have any issue with the current levels of immigration to/from the UK.  Unless as I said above you are worried about how some people coming here are treated.

Do you not agree that an expanding population due to EU immigration, would lead to an extra burden on the NHS, housing, benefit and other public services aswell as the rise in rents?

Do you think that EU immigration, where people get fake payslips in order to claim benefits, working tax credits child tax credits and housing assistance? Or people that work minimal hours and tdo not pay any tax or nino who then can claim housing and benefit assistance? Or people that illegally overstay in the country, in order to achieve a loophole and gain housing or benefit assistance.

All of these are ongoing issues, though you did not answer my question in the first place.

[McLaren]

Super

If you were put in the position of a top teams fitness coach what sort of training would you introduce and what Km covered per game would you expect to be able to get out of your players?

[super_realist]

It's not that I expect the KM to be increased Mac, I'm incredulous that after 90 minutes all they've travelled is 10-13km, the average per KM is incredibly slow, which means lots of standing around doing nothing.

If these players are only covering 13km per game, why on earth do they need a week off between games? It's simply not required.
How can a footballer possible moan about 3 games in a week during the season when that's all they're doing and they've got about a 30% chance of being subbed during that game anyway.

[McLaren]

You keep saying things like "all they've traveled is 10-13km", what makes you think that level of running while playing football is of low physical exertion?

[Hibbz]

The England team wouldn't be a bad place to start. Not look very fit at all. Players needlessly spitting all over the place, excessive gaps between games, low number of KM's covered in a game.

Presumably that makes tennis players poor athletes as well because they only run a couple of miles in over three hours and actually sit down every few minutes?

You do talk some pony at times Super.

The England football team and footballers in general might be an easy target for criticism but I don't think their fitness is what you should be attacking.

[JAS]

Super

If you were put in the position of a top teams fitness coach what sort of training would you introduce and what Km covered per game would you expect to be able to get out of your players?

I'd make them familiar with sand-dunes. I seem to remember Jock Wallace used to take the Rangers squad to Gullane for pre-season training and make them run up the dunes until they were sick. A bit extreme perhaps but interval work is so important, thats what really builds cardiovascular fitness (i.e. able to operate close to your V02max for a sustained period and have your pulse return to a normal range quicker).

The amount of expected KMs covered? Not being a football coach I wouldn't want to put a figure on it because if the average is say 13 and you want your players to be able to cover 15 at a high level that will take away from other training, maybe?

When I ran London last in 2014 Michael Owen ran it too, I remember him speaking at registration and he said it's something he would never have done during his career because the training demands are so so different.

[super_realist]

Footballers, especially the narcissism of England footballers would benefit from less time pointlessly buffing themselves up in gyms  for their Head and Shoulders adverts and more time in improving their speed and stamina, recovery from sprints, fartlek, hills, steps, longer runs etc. 99% of the time, an individual player does not have the ball, he should be improving the things which get him in better positions to receive it, or stop others from getting it and for being as fresh as he can be at the end of the match as he was at the start.

A 10,000m runner doesn't just train by running 10k's. They'll be doing 30k runs in training and running around 90-100k a week. why does a footballer only train to get to about 90 mins + stoppage time?

It's well documented that footballers get afternoons off and often have a lot of time on their hands, often playing golf, betting etc. There's certainly a good reason to think that the likes of tennis players, athletes, boxers, cyclists, swimmers, triathletes etc are far fitter.

Mac, you only need to watch a football match that reaches extra time to see how footballers could improve their conditioning.

Hibbz, Tennis players at the top, are playing 5/6 days a week in ATP events, and every second day in Grandslams. Their training is also ridiculously tough. Not to mention hitting shots like a boxer throwing punches is far more sapping than 40-50 touches in a game of football.
Compare that to footballers who play twice a week and train nowhere near as hard. People like Ronaldo, Bale and Messi stand out, not just for their talent, because of how hard they work. Your average Brit footballer is nowhere near as professional, and it shows through their complete lack of success.
I also mention the lack of distance they cover as a lack of justification for there being a week between some matches in this tournament. There's no reason they couldn't play 2 games in a week. France have played 2 matches in 14 days. That's laughable.

[Hibbz]

Hibbz, Tennis players at the top, are playing 5/6 days a week in ATP events, and every second day in Grandslams. Their training is also ridiculously tough. Not to mention hitting shots like a boxer throwing punches is far more sapping than 40-50 touches in a game of football.
Compare that to footballers who play twice a week and train nowhere near as hard. People like Ronaldo, Bale and Messi stand out, not just for their talent, because of how hard they work. Your average Brit footballer is nowhere near as professional, and it shows through their complete lack of success.
I also mention the lack of distance they cover as a lack of justification for there being a week between some matches in this tournament. There's no reason they couldn't play 2 games in a week. France have played 2 matches in 14 days. That's laughable.

If Ronaldo, Bale (British) & Messi stand out then of course the average Brit isn't going to be as professional you goon nor is the average Argentinian or Portugese player. Far be it from me to defend footballers as compared to tennis players but there is another crucial difference in that the tennis player isn't involved in any physical contact (yes, yes I know they don't really tackle anymore etc etc) which I'm sure has an affect on how often you can play. Also 50% of tennis players at each tournament only play once in a week, once in a fortnight if it's a grand slam so whilst yes the very best play more regularly the average player does not.

[super_realist]

I'm talking about footballers in general, not necessarily having a go at England, although their complete lack of international success shows they aren't trying as hard as they could.

Football is increasingly LESS of a contact sport. in the 1980's I might agree with you, but you see just how soft players are these days and how little contact there ever is. So what if it's a contact sport anyway, hardly a big deal if you train sufficiently. Tennis is undoubtedly a more physically exerting sport anyway, how can you compare running with the occasional pass, cross or shot with baseline rallies, serving and back and forth to the net for 2 plus hours?

It really doesn't matter if 50% of tennis players only play once a week, I don't care, I'm talking about why footballers aren't in good enough shape to play 120 minutes without just about dying and who only appear to be able to just about complete 90 mins at an average pace of 9min/km. There is no need for there to be one week between games. If you can't play twice or three times a week, you aren't working hard enough and you aren't in good enough shape.

Obviously, it isn't down to the players to determine the schedule, but how often do we hear them moaning about 3 games in a week at the end of the tournament. All the bloody time. Bloody softies, and they should look at other sports before complaining about being tired, because it appears they work the least hard.

[pedro]

Well if you look at football in the 80s and 90s things have happened. You only played once a week and fat knackers like Maradona and Gazza could dominate. Now you play 2-3 times a week and there are no free tickets so obviously players can't sit at the pub every afternoon.

Football IS a contact sport, you do get hit, kicked, stepped on, bruises, hamstrings, so there's a limit for how often you can play. And I don't think it's fair to compare it to tennis. Here players determine their own schedule. They easily take 3-4 weeks off and if they have a minor issue they just pull out of a tournament.

[beninho]

Liverpool have - Head of Fitness and Conditioning, Rehab Fitness Coach, Strength and Rehabilitation assistant plus numerous, masseurs, sports therapists, performance analysts. Arsenal have strength and fitness coaches. Premier league footballer have the best training and fitness coaching available. Football is on another level compared to some other sports for its fitness regimes.

I really dont see how lack of overall fitness can be levied at pretty much any player, apart from following injury and general match fitness. I would guess that the level of fitness of most premier league footballer sis more than comparable to other sports.

[beninho]

and tennis they can have a drink every 10 minutes, footballers go 90 minutes or more sometimes without being able to re-hydrate, which is why you see them struggle with cramp.

[navyblueshorts]

It's not that I expect the KM to be increased Mac, I'm incredulous that after 90 minutes all they've travelled is 10-13km, the average per KM is incredibly slow, which means lots of standing around doing nothing.

If these players are only covering 13km per game, why on earth do they need a week off between games? It's simply not required.
How can a footballer possible moan about 3 games in a week during the season when that's all they're doing and they've got about a 30% chance of being subbed during that game anyway.

This is daft to the Nth degree. They're doing sprints and shuttles, backwards, sideways, tackling, jumping etc as well as all sorts of directional changes. In addition, many are getting all sorts of bumps and bruises. You think you know about fitness because you like to run...

[McLaren]

Super

Football matches rarely go to extra time, it would be odd to train for that and it would be better to get used to using all your energy over 90 minutes.

You still don't seem to be able to cite anything that suggests footballers are using lower amounts of energy than 10000m runners or tennis players over a 90 minute match.

[Davie]

Does anyone remember the old Superstars series from the 70s (and 80s?) - the footballers had a dreadful record in that

[raycastleunited]

Hilarious stuff from super, proper wind up in action.

A club runner can do 10k in 38 minutes so there is no reason for a footballer to be tired after covering a mere 10k in 90 minutes.

[raycastleunited]

I think sprinters are amazing but long distance runners are easily the worst athletes in sport. Minimal talent or skill required. Easy and basic sport, all you need to do is be boring enough to spend your time plodding along. Nowhere near the same league as supreme athletes like footballers.

[dynamark]

JAS re Jock Wallace we had him at Leicester and he famously took the team for pre season training to a quarry
and did the sandhills thing .There is a huge picture of this in reception at the King Power. Mate of mine was in the reserves at the time said he could barely understand a word from Jock who one day came out with the line 'you need to keep your high balls low ' ?

[beninho]

I think sprinters are amazing but long distance runners are easily the worst athletes in sport. Minimal talent or skill required. Easy and basic sport, all you need to do is be boring enough to spend your time plodding along. Nowhere near the same league as supreme athletes like footballers.

Sprinters are amazing, Bolt is one of the greatest sportsmen ever, but footballers do 100m sprints during a game a handful of times, and obviously not at the same speeds, but not far off.

[super_realist]

and tennis they can have a drink every 10 minutes, footballers go 90 minutes or more sometimes without being able to re-hydrate, which is why you see them struggle with cramp.

Do they f@ck. Have you forgotten about half time  for 15 bloody minutes? Half you forgotten about substitutions?, have you forgotten about breaks in play where they sometimes  grab a drink?, have you forgotten about how often the ball is not in play so they get a rest?, have you thought about how often a player is not involved in play for minutes at a time?, have you thought about how often a player is standing around doing nothing, which is a lot?

Obviously not.

Dehydration isn't the only cause of cramp anyway.

The point is, that regardless of whether they get a drink or not, they should be able to do their job for 120 minutes without undue stress.

[super_realist]

I think sprinters are amazing but long distance runners are easily the worst athletes in sport. Minimal talent or skill required. Easy and basic sport, all you need to do is be boring enough to spend your time plodding along. Nowhere near the same league as supreme athletes like footballers.

Sprinters are amazing, Bolt is one of the greatest sportsmen ever, but footballers do 100m sprints during a game a handful of times, and obviously not at the same speeds, but not far off.

100m is the length of the pitch, so no, you NEVER see a player sprint the length of the pitch. You hardly ever see them sprint HALF a pitch. Most runs are 20-30 metres maximum.

Ray, If you think distance runner only ever plod along day after day, you know absolutely nothing about how athletes train. You have no idea the work they put into the speed element of their training and all the other aspects that enable them to run at near 4 min mile pace for 26 miles. They have an incredibly varied regime.

[McLaren]

Super

But there is no skill. Anyone could start the training to be a distance runner and if the followed the regime they would end up nearly as fast as an olympic athlete. Anyone who runs and isn't putting in near pro times is just too lazy to do the training.

But in other sports physical fitness is just one aspect and you need to have skills to succeed.

[super_realist]

You could say the same for any sport Mac.
You could be an F1 driver, golfer, footballer, rower, cyclist if you just spent the time at it.

By the way, it's complete bullsh1t to say if you spend the time running you'd end up as fast as an Olympic athlete. Total nonsense.

[raycastleunited]

Mac's right, a large number of people could be distance runners, it's just about putting the miles in. Runners would call it "dedication", I'd call it being boring.

Anyone who does more than 2hrs 30 for a marathon is a fun runner. And there's nothing wrong with running for fun.

[super_realist]

Very good lads. Just like anyone could be a boxer if they threw punches all day, or anyone could be a footballer if they kicked a ball all day, or anyone could be an F1 driver if they just drove round in circles all day.

[raycastleunited]

Ray, If you think distance runner only ever plod along day after day, you know absolutely nothing about how athletes train. You have no idea the work they put into the speed element of their training and all the other aspects that enable them to run at near 4 min mile pace for 26 miles. They have an incredibly varied regime.

"incredibly varied regime" is a bit of an exaggeration isn't it? Ultimately the core part of their training consists of putting the miles in.

It's funny but so far on this thread you've been doing a pretty good job of demonstrating you know absolutely nothing about how athletes train.

[super_realist]

Of course it's varied, and no, it's not just about doing lots and lots of miles, although that's obviously essential. That's as naïve as saying that being a footballer is just learning to kick a ball into a net when there is clearly more to it than that.

In running you'd have all sorts of training types, distance, distance at different paces, sprints, fartlek, interval, strides, hills, stairs, progressive, cross country etc, and that's just the running part of it.

Do you think Bolt just runs hundreds of 100m shuttles? Or do you think there might be a bit more to it?

[raycastleunited]

You could say the same for any sport Mac.
You could be an F1 driver, golfer, footballer, rower, cyclist if you just spent the time at it.

By the way, it's complete bullsh1t to say if you spend the time running you'd end up as fast as an Olympic athlete.  Total nonsense.

I think you missed a key element here which is the skill required to excel as a golfer, footballer or F1 driver. Some of this is natural talent, some is coaching and learning.

There is minimal skill involved in long distance running. Look at Paula Radcliffe in her prime, nodding along, absolutely terrible running technique, she was successful because she just worked harder.

Arguably rowing and track cycling are similar though not as extreme examples in that technique is reasonably straight forward and after that its strength / fitness. The success of the British cycling team demonstrates this perfectly.

[McLaren]

You could say the same for any sport Mac.

Clearly my point was that you couldn't say the same for any sport. If you had bothered to read my post properly you would know I was proposing that distance running was uniquely lacking in any real skill requirements and is only about time spent pounding the road.

[super_realist]

If you don't think there is natural talent, coaching and learning involved in EVERY sport, then you're just a juicehead.

You really think Radcliffe was only successful because she "worked harder"
What a load of tosh.
Why do you think the most successful distance runners in the world come from generally the same area of Africa? You don't think there's a natural evolutionary bed of talent there where people are born with the characteristics and talent to help them run better?

Or do you think that an English person can just work harder and beat them all?

If you don't think runners need to be coached, why do they have coaches, why do they learn to run races better? Is Mo Farah a quality athlete? Didn't he say he needed to LEARN how to run marathons? His failure in marathons has nothing to do with not trying hard enough, it's technical, it's preparation, it takes tactics, it takes knowledge and it takes mental strength whether you are able to see it or not.
You could argue that the talent and skill is DIFFERENT to swanning around and getting knocked out by a bunch of fishermen, but it's still there.

You could say Jim Furyk has a terrible swing technique, but it works doesn't it?
Mullet Watson famously has never had a lesson in his life, can you win 2 Masters by just "working harder than everyone else"?

[super_realist]

You could say the same for any sport Mac.

Clearly my point was that you couldn't say the same for any sport.  If you had bothered to read my post properly you would know I was proposing that distance running was uniquely lacking in any real skill requirements and is only about time spent pounding the road.

I knew EXACTLY what you were trying to say in your plankdom. The difference is you aren't in a position to recognise training and coaching in running because it's not something which interests you, and it is your ignorance which leads you to make that claim.

Hence why I "ironically" stated that all it took to be an F1 driver was time too. Idiot.

[McLaren]

Super

Mo Farrah is pretty bad example to clutch at.

What is clear to everyone on this board other than you is the complete lack of skill needed to be a runner.

Edit (NBS): I deleted the comment that could easily be construed as libellous.

[super_realist]

Mac, you're just an idiot. It's simply that you can't differentiate between the skills of different sports. If running isn't a sport with skill, why do not all footballers at the same club have the same pace? Are some just too "lazy" to learn how to run faster, or why are some better at running for longer than others, is that just down to lack of effort despite them all being trained by the same people? You're a plank.

Whether you can see it or not, there is a talent to running, it's different from other sports granted.

Edit(NBS): Similar edit.

[navyblueshorts]

If you don't think there is natural talent, coaching and learning involved in EVERY sport, then you're just a juicehead.  

You really think Radcliffe was only successful because she "worked harder"
What a load of tosh.
Why do you think the most successful distance runners in the world come from generally the same area of Africa? You don't think there's a natural evolutionary bed of talent there where people are born with the characteristics and talent to help them run better?

Or do you think that an English person can just work harder and beat them all?  

If you don't think runners need to be coached, why do they have coaches, why do they learn to run races better? Is Mo Farah a quality athlete? Didn't he say he needed to LEARN how to run marathons? His failure in marathons has nothing to do with not trying hard enough, it's technical, it's preparation, it takes tactics, it takes knowledge and it takes mental strength whether you are able to see it or not.
You could argue that the talent and skill is DIFFERENT to swanning around and getting knocked out by a bunch of fishermen, but it's still there.

You could say Jim Furyk has a terrible swing technique, but it works doesn't it?
Mullet Watson famously has never had a lesson in his life, can you win 2 Masters by just "working harder than everyone else"?

Wow. Talk about defensive and you still haven't supplied any real or logical evidence to suggest that top footballers aren't actually fit. Don't you think, for one second, that given all the financial riches available to the best footballers, that huge numbers haven't tried to get where, say, Messi is? Given that, it's clearly the case that you have to be extremely fit and, given that, your anti-footballer bias is clouding your judgement re. their fitness.

[raycastleunited]

Some runners have skill: sprinters.

Long distance runners are just plodders, the more anti social they are the more successful they become. Maybe Mo Farrah wasn't successful initially because he had too much of a life?

It's defintely a sport which favours loners, ideal for those who are too socially awkward to be in a relationship.

[McLaren]

Super

Forget about the ax you have to grind with footballers and focus on the miserable skill levels needed to be a top class distance runner. As yet you have not provided any convincing arguments that there is any skill involved in being a distance runner.

[pedro]

Super,
Yes the best long distance runners come from the Kenyan and Ethiopian highland (and in your case maybe the Scottish...), not because of their 'skills', but because of genetics. Similarly the best sprinters are black. It just proves that the main skill to it is being born with a particular skin color. And then you of course take it from there. The best white guy can never be as fast as the best black guy, no matter how hard he practises or how intelligent he is. The main skill in being a good runner in unattainable unless you're of a certain race.

Why do you think there's so much doping/drugs involved in running, cycling, rowing etc.? It's because you can acheive better results in an easy way simply by altering your body artificially. These sports only require little more than big muscles and plenty of white blood vessels. Hard and disciplined training can help you on that, but as I said before, there's no better 'skill' than being black if you want to be a sprinter, or East African if you want to be a long distance runner.

In football however, you see good players from all countries and all races, mainly because the skillset required isn't as bland as that for a runner. So cut the crap, it is easily defineable what makes a good runner, not what makes a good footballer. Too bad nobody ever picked you for football or any other sports in school because of your motoric shortcomings. But don't tell us and your ego that because running is the only thing you're 'good' at it requires particular skills. BS. Or WUM I hope.

[Hibbz]

Does anyone remember the old Superstars series from the 70s (and 80s?) - the footballers had a dreadful record in that

From memory wasn't Malcolm McDonald decent and so was Kevin Keegan 'til he fell off the bike of course. Classic memories.

I agree with Raycastle, anyone that is good at, enjoys, or spends any amount of time running is also socially inept.

[super_realist]

Super,
Yes the best long distance runners come from the Kenyan and Ethiopian highland (and in your case maybe the Scottish...), not because of their 'skills', but because of genetics. Similarly the best sprinters are black. It just proves that the main skill to it is being born with a particular skin color. And then you of course take it from there. The best white guy can never be as fast as the best black guy, no matter how hard he practises or how intelligent he is. The main skill in being a good runner in unattainable unless you're of a certain race.

Why do you think there's so much doping/drugs involved in running, cycling, rowing etc.? It's because you can acheive better results in an easy way simply by altering your body artificially. These sports only require little more than big muscles and plenty of white blood vessels. Hard and disciplined training can help you on that, but as I said before, there's no better 'skill' than being black if you want to be a sprinter, or East African if you want to be a long distance runner.

In football however, you see good players from all countries and all races, mainly because the skillset required isn't as bland as that for a runner. So cut the crap, it is easily defineable what makes a good runner, not what makes a good footballer. Too bad nobody ever picked you for football or any other sports in school because of your motoric shortcomings. But don't tell us and your ego that because running is the only thing you're 'good' at it requires particular skills. BS. Or WUM I hope.

If you become better at any sport, it is because you are improving your skills and technique. Running is no different to other sports in that the skills can be learned and improved. Just because everyone with legs can run, doesn't mean they are all equally or even potentially skilled enough to be good at it. Everyone can kick a football, doesn't mean they have the skills to be good at it either.

According to someone on here though, might have been you, Radcliffe got to where she is by working harder, in spite of her pasty white skin.

You might need a greater "variety" of skills to be a successful footballer or tennis player and that's obvious, but that doesn't mean there isn't skill, technique, tactics and mental strength to running any distance from 100m to 26 miles.

I'm actually good at most sports I've tried. Play golf to a high level and higher than virtually anyone here on this very forum so there is no doubt about my "motor" skills, run well, played tennis and squash at a good standard, football very well too as well as other sports like sport climbing, downhill biking. I'm just not naïve to think that running is only putting one foot in front of the other, because there is more to it than that.

If it was, and anyone could do it, then every footballer at the same team ought to be able to run at the same speed and for the same duration. Yet, they all players from all teams have different techniques from Sterlings poncy mince to Sheringham's trudging snails pace. Did Sheringham just not try hard enough?

If running was so easy and devoid of skill or talent, why are all these failed footballers not getting on the road and changing sports to something which is obviously so easy to be a success at?

Perhaps all those deadbeat England footballers can sign up for the Olympics and at last do something on the international stage?

[McLaren]

Super we were specifically talking about distance running, that skill is needed to be a sprinter was conceded long ago in this debate. So no, Sheringham just didn't have the skills to run quickly over a very short distance. Although luckily it didn't stop him being one of Europes best players.


Quite a few of the sports you claim to have been good at require low skill levels, like squash, sport climbing and downhill biking (FFS gravity does the work for you). So maybe your motor skills are a little weak.

[JAS]

Super we were specifically talking about distance running, that skill is needed to be a sprinter was conceded long ago in this debate.  So no, Sheringham just didn't have the skills to run quickly over a very short distance.  Although luckily it didn't stop him being one of Europes best players.


Quite a few of the sports you claim to have been good at require low skill levels, like squash, sport climbing and downhill biking (FFS gravity does the work for you).  So maybe your motor skills are a little weak.

...lights the blue touch paper and walks away sniggering!!

[pedro]

super, remember golf isn't a sport, right?

[raycastleunited]

What exactly is sport climbing?

I'm thinking of buying a climbing frame for my kids. What type do you use? Is there one you would recommend?

[beninho]

No passion or team spirit from the Welsh. They've been making out tthat'sall you need to win.

[pedro]

They baled out..

[McLaren]

Hard to believe that the semi final of the Euro's could be of such low quality. Pub league stuff.

[super_realist]

Mac, if you become better ay ANYTHING it's because your skills become more refined and you become more efficient at it because your technique improves.

The skills to run might not be as complex as those to play tennis for example, but not everyone can become a good runner, if they could, there wouldn't be any English footballers in International tournaments, they'd all be winning 800m, 1500m, Steeplechase, 5000 and 10000m Olympic medals.

[pedro]

May I remind you can be good at things you're not interested in or that you don't see as fun. Not sure many footballers would trade their footballing career with a running career. (and I'm not thinking about the money). Even if kids are good runners, nobody wants to pursue a pro running career even if it's probably much easier to be the best, compared to playing football.

[McLaren]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36733979

[raycastleunited]

How do you define being "good" at a sport? It's all about the context. Super said he's good at football - by Scottish standards that means he's able to stand on one leg just long enough to swing the other one in the direction of a ball or opponent. By Brazilian standards he wouldn't make it into a local under 9s girls team.

Golf is the only sport I know which has an objective benchmark to define your level of skill. What would be your handicaps for other sports?

Me for example:
Football - I reckon I went from a 7 handicap in my early 20s to a 2 or 3 handicap by late 20s, but since the age of 32 I have gradually gone downhill as injuries caught up with me and I'm now a 12.
Running - off scratch as a kid. Never really interested in it so never kept it going. I wouldn't embarrass myself if I had to run today (I still remember the technique whereby you put one foot in front of the other) so I'd rate myself a 9 handicap.
Tennis - again used to be pretty decent, off 6 or 7, but today I would hack it around like a 21 handicapper with the odd superb shot thrown in.

[MontysMerkin]

The events of the last few weeks have been momentous to say the least.
But this has to top it all...
Headline in the Daily Heil begins with "Forgive me if this is in poor taste but..."
I never, ever thought I'd see such humanity and kindness, especially from that well known cnut Dacre.

[Sponsored content]