u/Novrev

Yeah it’s the most notable way that the TV show format damages the game itself vs other similar games like Werewolf, Mafia and Secret Hitler. The show is fixed at ten episodes so the traitors have to last until episode ten, which means that they have to be able to recruit when their numbers dwindle to prevent the last one from being removed early. From a faithful POV, you’re actually better off leaving certain traitors in the game and trying to convince them that you believe they’re faithful so they take you to the final with them.

It’s not a 50/50 though, a normal penalty is already a 75-80% chance of success. Adding on the stupid stutter run weighs it even more heavily in their favour

Captain America: Brave New World

Immortality isn’t the same as living life though. Could be stuck in a coma until you’re 80.

Agreed with what you’re saying, I’d definitely go Gomez over Kost or Bart Verbrugs, and De Cuyper feels too short term now (but we’ve been wrong on these kind of things before). But you forgot about best player on the team Jack Hinshelwood who’s finally back from injury and about to kick up a storm.

Yeah if it was a job you had to work for the rest of your life, I’d definitely choose passion over money. But with the money option as high as it is in the question, I can work for just a few years and then retire with so much in the bank that I’ll never have to work again and can chase any and every passion I want.

I think Gomez is the best pick of the 5.0s but is he one of the best three Brighton picks? Probably not? Still worth considering for sure though depending how your team looks

Yeah it’s the 81% threshold that’s the killer here. I’m always a blue voter in these things when it’s around 50% but 81% is unsalvageable with all the selfish people voting red so you have to go the same way.

What do you think is the reason they’ve not won a pen then? Bad luck? Big refereeing conspiracy against poor Spurs? They’ve just been utter shit and everyone knows it.

Yes, it’s unlikely for any team to go a whole season without winning a penalty but better teams usually win more penalties because the opposition are obviously more desperate to stop a dangerous forward on the ball, so inversely bad teams/players usually win less penalties.

Okay so it’s the second part then. The opponent doesn’t foul them because it’s not worth it. Why foul Tel when you can just wait for him to fuck up the final ball? Same goes for Kolo Muani, Gallagher, Xavi Simons, most of the attackers that played last season. They should improve now that they’ve signed some better players and they might win pens now that opposition might bother fouling them. Villa not winning a pen is a much bigger outlier considering they actually had good players like Rogers and Watkins in the box.

There’s a difference between not allowing them to abort and classifying it as murder though. I don’t agree with abortions after 6 months and don’t think they should be allowed unless medically necessary, but I would never put a woman on trial for murder for it.

The issue with PTC for years was that there was no 2FA. They finally got around to adding it a couple of years ago and if you enable it, your account should be as safe as an account linked via Google/Apple/Facebook. If you don’t have 2FA enabled though, then yes it is the weakest by far and the easiest way to have your account stolen.

Is it that surprising for Spurs? First to win a pen you have to get attackers into the opposing box, and then you have to be threatening enough that a defender would choose to foul you rather than watch you whiff your 10th shot

"Fool me once, shame on… shame on you. Fool me… you can't get fooled again."

I mean that’s just silly. Slag off our poor home support and the delusional online-only fans all you want but the travelling away fans are some of the best in the league. I wouldn’t be surprised if most of them are from before the owners came in.

https://giphy.com/gifs/AxNDmjnu0eulL3qSPf

Since you deleted your reply to me further down, I’ll paste my response below:

Incorrect.

In October 2021, the league called an emergency meeting to temporarily put in place APT rules. This vote was passed with 18 votes in favour, Newcastle against and Man City abstaining.

Those rules were then formalised properly in a second vote in December 2021. This time both Newcastle and Man City voted against them.

This is all easy to verify because it was literally disclosed as part of the summary of facts in the final award document after the APT legal dispute.

As before, stop using an AI that just tells you what you want to hear without checking if its “facts” are even true.

They repeated your argument back to you verbatim, disassembled it and proved raids/eggs are (by PEGI’s definition) lootboxes and then you blocked them lol.

Incorrect facts, yes. He said himself City abstained. Those rules passed with 18 in favour, Newcastle against and City abstaining. These are literally the rules we challenged in court and got found to be unlawful lol, City would never have voted in favour of them.

Those aren’t even the current rules. The last vote was in 2025 to adopt SCR, which City did vote in favour of because while it’s still anti-competitive it’s better than what was in place before.

Maybe don’t use a shitty AI summary for your arguments, or at least double check what it’s telling you? It literally says there that City abstained from the main vote. We then went on to challenge it in court and get it overturned as unlawful.

In most cases they pay the minimum they legally have to and employees only show up because they have to in order to survive. Right now a lot of people tolerate poor work conditions, poor pay, awful bosses etc because they feel they don’t have another option; that would change dramatically with a universal basic income.

City weren’t found guilty in the UEFA case. CAS found that anything pre-2012 was time-barred and unable to be looked at, but they also found there wasn’t enough evidence to prove UEFA’s allegations for 2012-2016.

You realise that if City hadn’t cheated, the cartel would have won 12 of the last 15 titles? And 2 of the 3 they didn’t win were won by the other financially doped team

Completely agreed, I don’t condone breaking the rules nor do I think they should be scrapped entirely, but as they currently stand they’re not fit for purpose and are just there to block clubs like Villa and Brighton from lasting success.

I mean I’m not an expert and it’s not my job to come up with this sort of thing, but my suggestion would be capping owner spending/investment in some way like tying it to the revenue of the highest earning team (presumably United for the foreseeable future). That means that owners that don’t want to push their clubs further are still able to maintain their current levels and be fine, while owners who want to dream a little bigger and have the funds to do so are able to actually compete with the top clubs without completely destroying the integrity of the league. You’d probably also need protections in place to make sure the owners can’t overspend and then pull out, like putting the funds in escrow or whatever.