Watch the whole match again?

[tarquinbeech]

This argument has gotten a bit silly IMO.

Sid stated last week at York that he couldn't read the numbers, Elite said the same on the Match Ratings thread and several others have commented on it.....there WERE 10,000 fans at Covo, many of which cannot possibly have read the Notts numbers unless they had telescopic 20/20 vision....is it necessary to read them? IMO yes because I don't know all the players and so it's difficult to reach an assessment on who is sheer pants and who is half decent.

Part of the reason I watched the game twice (apart from masochism) was to try to identify players by their physical shape and size and style.

I've now got Shola (he's the black guy), Stead (he's the guy that never touches the ball but loiters around the box), Collin is the guy scooping the ball out of his net, Aless is the baldish nippy winger, Duffy is the scruffy tall guy that growls at all the other backs and Jones and Milsom spin round in circles when an oppo attacker runs at them.......no idea on the midfield yet as they never touch the ball as it's normally 50 feet above them.....I think I'm doing well so far.

Oops, forgot about HorHey, he's the highly-rated guy from last season who sits on the bench between the Job Creation Scheme trainees and has a snooze.

[ancientpie]

This argument has gotten a bit silly IMO.

Sid stated last week at York that he couldn't read the numbers, Elite said the same on the Match Ratings thread and several others have commented on it.....there WERE 10,000 fans at Covo, many of which cannot possibly have read the Notts numbers unless they had telescopic 20/20 vision....is it necessary to read them? IMO yes because I don't know all the players and so it's difficult to reach an assessment on who is sheer pants and who is half decent.

Part of the reason I watched the game twice (apart from masochism) was to try to identify players by their physical shape and size and style.

I've now got Shola (he's the black guy), Stead (he's the guy that never touches the ball but loiters around the box), Collin is the guy scooping the ball out of his net, Aless is the baldish nippy winger, Duffy is the scruffy tall guy that growls at all the other backs and Jones and Milsom spin round in circles when an oppo attacker runs at them.......no idea on the midfield yet as they never touch the ball as it's normally 50 feet above them.....I think I'm doing well so far.

Oh for a slowmo replay at the ground,you are doing much better than me, I thought Collin's No stood out really well & Shola takes some missing Stead is the one who constantly nearly gets there but apart from them I'm buggered. I shelled out £3 for a Prog on Saturday in the hope that it would help,what a waste of money.

[Elite_Pie]

Oh for a slowmo replay at the ground,you are doing much better than me, I thought Collin's No stood out really well & Shola takes some missing Stead is the one who constantly nearly gets there but apart from them I'm buggered. I shelled out £3 for a Prog on Saturday in the hope that it would help,what a waste of money.

The sad thing is that these days the colour of a player's boots is the easiest way to recognise them from a distance.

[SmiffyPie]

It baffles me why clubs/chairmen/whoever consistently fail to think things like this through. Did the club receive a sample of the shirt and actually have a look at it on the pitch?? What is wrong with a solid black/red/blue (etc etc) number and name??

[Old_pie]

This argument has gotten a bit silly IMO.

It's has become (gotten?? yuk) very silly. It was my post originally and it was a dig at the current regime. They made a lot about the shirts and the numbers after some of the criticisms of last year and AH made a point of saying how well pleased the supporters would be. How hard is it to try it first? He was going for something classy and the faded black was supposed to make the numbers stand out and there was some skepticism but you only get listened to if you praise the man. So as with other issues and promises supporters' requirements (pay at the gate, signings, PA system, mickey mouse cups etc) don't come high up on the list of priorities hence my slightly more than tongue in cheek comment.

Message: Just get the basics right and stop trying to be too clever.

[SmiffyPie]

Message: Just get the basics right and stop trying to be too clever.

ReTweet that !!!

[tarquinbeech]

It's has become (gotten?? yuk) very silly. It was my post originally and it was a dig at the current regime. They made a lot about the shirts and the numbers after some of the criticisms of last year and AH made a point of saying how well pleased the supporters would be. How hard is it to try it first? He was going for something classy and the faded black was supposed to make the numbers stand out and there was some skepticism but you only get listened to if you praise the man. So as with other issues and promises supporters' requirements (pay at the gate, signings, PA system, mickey mouse cups etc) don't come high up on the list of priorities hence my slightly more than tongue in cheek comment.

Message: Just get the basics right and stop trying to be too clever.

In American and Canadian English, the past participle of the verb get is usually gotten. For example, we might say, “I have gotten behind on my work,” or, “The book was not gotten easily.” Got is the participle in some uses, though, such as where has got to or have got to means must (e.g., “We have got to go to the store.”) and where has got or have got means has or have (e.g., “I have got five sisters.”)

In the main varieties of English from outside North America, the past participle of get in all its senses is usually got. Gotten appears occasionally, and it is standard in a few set phrases such as ill-gotten gains, but the shorter form prevails by a large margin.

That gotten is primarily used in North America has given rise to the mistaken belief that it is American in origin and hence new and inferior. But gotten is in fact an old form, predating the United States and Canada by several centuries. It fell out of favor in British English by the 18th century, but it was eventually picked up again on the other side of the Atlantic, perhaps by analogy with forgotten.

The vehemence of some Britons’ scorn for gotten likely has to do with the fact that it has gained ground in British English over the last couple of decades. Many English speakers from outside North America resist the encroachment of so-called Americanisms (many of which, like gotten, are not actually American in origin) on their versions of English, and, for mysterious reasons, some feel especially strongly about gotten.

You Sir, have gotten your comeuppance

[Old_pie]

In American and Canadian English, the past participle of the verb get is usually gotten. For example, we might say, “I have gotten behind on my work,” or, “The book was not gotten easily.” Got is the participle in some uses, though, such as where has got to or have got to means must (e.g., “We have got to go to the store.”) and where has got or have got means has or have (e.g., “I have got five sisters.”)

In the main varieties of English from outside North America, the past participle of get in all its senses is usually got. Gotten appears occasionally, and it is standard in a few set phrases such as ill-gotten gains, but the shorter form prevails by a large margin.

That gotten is primarily used in North America has given rise to the mistaken belief that it is American in origin and hence new and inferior. But gotten is in fact an old form, predating the United States and Canada by several centuries. It fell out of favor in British English by the 18th century, but it was eventually picked up again on the other side of the Atlantic, perhaps by analogy with forgotten.

The vehemence of some Britons’ scorn for gotten likely has to do with the fact that it has gained ground in British English over the last couple of decades. Many English speakers from outside North America resist the encroachment of so-called Americanisms (many of which, like gotten, are not actually American in origin) on their versions of English, and, for mysterious reasons, some feel especially strongly about gotten.

You Sir, have gotten your comeuppance

I'm was generally aware of its history and grammatical correctness and it probably arrived (back) here having been successfully expelled as a result of all those soaps and no doubt a few westerns and it is still yuk, just like those shirt numbers. Anyway, you're Mexican aren't you? Don't say you speak merkin there?

[Bridg4d_Pie_]

Think you're wrong there, Laxton.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0hK1wyrrAU

Try Mcen-Bratt. Eh.