|
England also talked about their golden generation a little while back, with players like Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, Owen etc. It wasn't so golden after all and now, with no superstars, they play much a little bit better, but still loses in the end.
BTW: Congrats to Australia that scored the best goal so far 
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Haugland wrote: BTW: Congrats to Australia that scored the best goal so far |
but i'm a kiwi 
we were undefeated at the last world cup !
Bryce
MCAD
---
|
|
|
|
|
I think Norway holds the record of just considering one goal and still managed to only play in the group phase; 1994 USA.
|
|
|
|
|
Switzerland went out in 06 without conceding at all, iirc.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Switzerland lost 3-0 on penalties, that was the first time in history that a team lost on penalties without scoring a single goal in the penalties.
Well, they did concede 3 goals, just not in the actual match or extra time.
|
|
|
|
|
Penalties in a shootout don't count as goals (for example they don't get credited to the taker or included in Golden Boot etc). So I'd say Switzerland didn't concede a goal in that tournament.
|
|
|
|
|
I resign... 
|
|
|
|
|
Team you say? Does this have something to do with the sports ball competition down in Carnival land?
|
|
|
|
|
Both games we played quite well, but didn't defend well enough and allowed the opposition to get away from us in/around the box (1st one against Italy and yesterday). Cavani should never have been allowed that crossing time. Pirlo's stepover was nice but not good enough that the other guy should have had a free shot. Our defensive cover for the flick-on for the 2nd yesterday was just bad.
And to be fair it's probably the hardest group at the tournament as well. Our opponents have played well against us and just got the little break in both games (I don't think either would have complained about a draw on the pattern of the games).
|
|
|
|
|
Just curious -- if it's dead, what's replaced it? Or is it still alive and kicking?
As in, do people who write "content" sites still support RSS feeds of the content, or is there some other newage mechanism (that a computer can digest!) for announcing new content?
Marc
modified 19-Jun-14 17:14pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Still alive, but broadly ignored.
Atom tried to overtake it, but never really did. If anything replaced it, most people suggest Twitter, but I don't think it's that useful a replacement.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
I think it might be considered "dead" in the sense that there isn't much development going on.
But, as far as I'm concerned, that's because it's now doing pretty much exactly what it set out to do. Not sure how else it can evolve further at this point. Things tend to get overly complex once they go beyond the "good enough, stop messing with it" state.
I'm still a fan of its simplicity.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, that's what Hanselman (and others) call, "Done, not dead".
It works well for what it does, and I certainly would have a horrid time without it.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: that's because it's now doing pretty much exactly what it set out to do.
Ah, I should have been clearer. I didn't mean "dead", as in no further development, I meant, do sites that provide changing content still use RSS to allow people with feedreaders and whatnot to get the content without having to visit the site.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Gotcha.
I'm not a web developer, but if I had anything to do with any web site, I'd make sure that anything that made sense to have available over RSS would be there.
Of course none of this helps you here...
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm starting to not see RSS feeds when I look for them more frequently than I did a few years ago. 
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
In the olden times you had to send in a model of you invention when you applied for a patent.
These model has of course become collectors items.
Here's a quiz[^] where you can take a guess what they are supposed to be.
I'm ashamed to admit that I only scored 13 out of 20.
|
|
|
|
|
9 / 20 for me... 
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
This reminded me very much of the test psychiatrist used to do, al la tell me what you see pictures[^]. So, we have only found out that the majority of people in the Lounge are raving lunatics.
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Haugland wrote: So, we have only found out that the majority of people in the Lounge are raving lunatics.
I didn't need a test to find that out 
It's an OO world.
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
Well, if your lazy you could only be a lunatic I guess 
|
|
|
|
|
Same here...
It's of course pure guessing! I didn't understood half of the words... 
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Don't feel bad, I only got eight!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
I got 10 out of 20 - strangely enough I would have scored much higher if I'd let my initial instincts dictate my choices.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
