Something genuinely heartbreaking about John’s passing comment on the Bureau about interacting with social media about their work. Forget he is a real bloke who can see all this shit.
Was this a snub or did they not submit? What’s going on? Or did they summit but quality has dipped, as I can’t see them on any shortlist and art is only art if it wins awards.
I’ll go first…
Watched the first episode of this (for my sins) and believe Dave’s take that the best bits are in the trailer may ring true. That said it seems very much like a programme about running an elite race horse stables that happens to have a former footballer in charge than an insight into the Owens.
That said, here are my highlights from episode one:
- Michael says a variation of “that’s my humour” twice in the first episode alone after insulting someone.
- He boasts about not eating fruit to a barman, repeats it and stares at the back of a man’s head waiting for him to react, the man doesn’t turn around. Owen walks off in the most Brent moment of the show.
- Refers to two separate M&S ice creams as “world class” with the seriousness of a mortgage adviser
- Also, after saying a horse is his favourite, he looks down the camera and says “I was being sarcastic, by the way”
I get it, you want to make a point that City have sold 11 first-team quality players but they have stretched it to make Kalvin Phillips a CB and Bernardo up top (not the most egregious change). But surely they could have just done 3-4-3!?
Garth Crooks is rolling…
I know the suffixing of “-ball” to a manager to denote their style of play is now more and more common but can it be applied after one game? The Athletic ran with it in a headline and it seemed to reference just pumping it long. Am I going mad?
I guess I am just forlorn that Alan Ball didn’t operate in this era and generate enough of managerial difference to have his style acknowledged as Ball-Ball
Thinking practical rather than parasocial - two things stand out for me.
- John warned against refilling soap bottles with water because it would dilute the cleaning agent and the ability to remove germs. Makes sense but has never clicked
- John also very succinctly explained when to use “and I” in a sentence, which I had got wrong most of my life.
Already feel that Farrell has established himself after only bagging a handful of call ups so far. He is steady in possession (of the chat) and shown he can improvise at a top, top level.
Got me thinking of his England equivalent - not just in the caps/pod appearances metric - and settled on Owen Hargreaves. A little under appreciated in some quarters, cut his teeth in another market (Screen Rot rather than football podcasts) but is obviously a cultured operator.
Agree or disagree? Who would be the others’ comparative England internationals?
Genuinely lol’d at the gear shift in Keys and Gray Corner. Sadly lacked the photoshop skills to put the former Saudi region-based top, top operator into the image above despite it rattling round my head ever since.
Was just thinking about Nic Cage being prolific but having a lot of dross in there. I was trying to think of an actor with a relevant small filmography but with a high percentage of quality films? (Jesse Plemmons?) any suggestions?
Anyone got a clue what Merson means by this? Without being elitist, doesn’t strike me as a big booksman
I fear my unpopular opinion thread has caused a lot of umbrage as it has led people to just level criticism at the podcast rather than voice actual views that may differ from the norm.
That said, if you have truly wandered from the light and Elis and James and still want the cheeky chappy/neurotic Oxbridge man combination then may I suggest switching to Joe and James Fact Up!
John’s output while drinking - while hugely problematic and thankfully over - was the funniest he has been.
My brother in law just dropped this on me as a genuine question as we sat down in Sardinia, but much in the way The Office dictated my speech for most of my 20s, it would appear Cliches is rewiring my brain for my 40s.
Took everything within me not to say “yeah, some boys mentioned it in the bar earlier…” or something similar.
The awkward cameo of the aforementioned fictional American soccer coach at the Super Bowl World Cup Final got me thinking - what is the subs view of the show itself? I watched four or five episodes and couldn’t abide it as it was both too weakly written and lacking in its football aspects. But appreciate my view isn’t universal.
Rice v France. The gradual dribble, the precise finish and slow jog celebration. The wry smile at how well it went without going bananas.
Felt more like the dying embers of Feltham Power League where the score has crept higher and higher to 13-9 among a disparate group of work colleagues than the “bronze” medal final.
It was mentioned somewhere that Argentina have not played a team ranked in the top 10 of the World Cup yet, and are the first semi finalists to get so far without doing so.
At first I thought that was interesting to know but then heard it in the context of “save that for a future pub quiz”.
This got me thinking - have you heard or retained any facts after hearing this phrase that then proved useful in a pub quiz scenario? (Not a Cliches quiz, mind. Very different vibe)
This Argentina one is arguably way too niche and would require some real linguistic gymnastics to turn into a workable question for public consumption any way.
Using Alan Shearer’s logic, are tires therefore privileged?