St Landrew

And here was I thinking you were going to nominate a Panther 650 sloper single. The motorcyclist's combination motorcycle of choice. I think more Panther 650 singles made were attached to sidecars than solo, they were that much of the bike to have. Plenty of them still around as the motors were so understressed. Nice story though, hamster.

Exactly the way I like 'em. Not super sports, but able to put themselves about a bit.

It's an ancient hate, starting from the Don Revie era. You're just picking up the old vibes. I won't remove the thread. I might move it though. Let me think about it.

Bloody hell, you can't just write out the most hateful word in the Galaxy without some premise or warning. Even hitchhikers read this forum, you know.

I happened to have the game on in the background, and tbf, Pimply murdered Stoke City. At one point the commentator remarked that the crowd was a disappointing 9500+. But someone must have told him that Stoke fans were there somewhere, because he amended his total to 11,000+. What are the ticket charges for Fratton Park..? That's a poor crowd, even for League Cup action.

The question isn't the clearest I've ever come across, hamster, but I'm assuming you're talking about which is better, leaing out all the desire of badge, and such, yes..? Hmm, well the Guzzi does have a very desirable power delivery, so I'm told, as I've never ridden one. But they do have an Achilles heel, which is they used to grind away their crankshaft main bearings or big ends. I can't remember exactly which set of bearings, but they definitely did have a reputation for doing either at some pretty lowish mileages. Not the sort of thing you want really. I've always liked having to NOT tinker with bikes, They should be designed well enough to not p!ss oil everywhere and just be serviced every so often. Yes, that 650 did have a very good power to weight ratio. Today's normally aspirated sport 600cc bikes still have better though. They often produce 120+ BHP and weigh probably 50lbs or more less than the CX650..

Apologies that my post wasn't about Radio Shows That Horrified You When You Were Young. Because I saw the thread on the forum line up page, and it just said, Radio Shows that horri... and I just clicked on it to write about Paul Miller. Can't say anything used to horrify me on radio as a kid. We never used to have the radio on. It was only when I got my first car that I really started to listen to the radio regularly, and then I could choose.

They ended up making the CX650 Turbo. Yep, a mass production turbo-charged motorcycle. The reason being that the engine was so bullet proof as you describe, hamster, it required very little modification to do it. A good low mileage one is very rare, and worth a very large amount of dosh. Looks a bit like your selection above. Here's a link to the spec, and a pic. Note the power output for the early 1980's That's phenomenal for a 650 back then. Quite respectable now too, for a sports tourer. I bet it went like sh!t off a shovel. http://www.bikez.com/motorcycles/honda_cx_650_turbo_1983.php

Just had a horrid moment before switching on the PC. The radio has been murmuring away pretty much all evening. I even heard Pimply V Stoke in the background. Then horrors..! That complete winker [misspelled] Paul Miller came on. That man is gringe making. He's enough to make milk curdle. How he has managed to achieve any form of radio career is beyond me. Anyone who appreciates him must either be dead, or have the IQ of an Alsation dog. I stuck it for 2 minutes, still at that very low volume, and then could take no more. I found a grey deposit on my shoulders. It was brain matter, either trying to escape, or block up my ears. I mean, I even lasted 90+ minutes with Pimply in the background, so I can stand a lot. BTW, noted that Higginbotham had a stinker for Stoke. Glad he moved on from us.

On the same news website, I see that loose cannon, aka Prince Phillip has opened his gob again. http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/mp/6394061/prince-philip-jokes-about-indians-name/ What a tactless pr!ck. I'd love it if someone gave him like-for-like. I bet he wouldn't wear that for a second.

I like the way it started off light and progressively got onto more serious subject matter. Nice one.

But don't keep an open penknife in your backside pocket when you do so.

I think that when you know the rules of grammar, you can be creative. For example, I will often start a sentence with... And, then go on to continue with my subject. It's rhythm, it's pace. I don't pretend to get it across to everybody, and lots of the time I can't even be bothered. But I do try to respect the reader who takes the trouble to read my posts to give them a moment when.., they can breathe. I've just broken loads of rules that my grammar teacher would have taught me. But [there I go again], I don't care. I know the correct, everyday usage, and I'm happy that, in this situation, this is suitable text. I feel that it's an extremely good idea to have the basic knowledge of how to convey meaning as, not only does it get the message across, but it does so without confusion. It also helps the understanding of, when reading other people's posts. Notice how many people get confused or misinterpret the views of others, for example, on the main forum, and also get quite angry, when all they are actually disagreeing on is the syntax. But it's not the misplaced commas, or the would of's intead of would haves, that ultimately really p!ss me [people..?] off. It's the lazy inability to convey the message. It's also when people appear to write authoritatively, and yet they have no more idea than the man-in-the-moon. If people aren't particularly sure what they are writing, because the idea is ill-founded or ill-conceived, then my advice is, either admit it, or don't write it.

Agreed. No seriously. Forgot to mention my Honda CX500. Ol' Le Timm, who has since emigrated to Australia, sold me it. It turned out to be the bike that rekindled my love of motorcycles. I've sold it on now, but it was a lovely old banger - 25+ years old. Here's a pic: Reviewers at the time thought it a great bike, but really ugly. I agree it was a great bike. So did thousands of couriers. The engines last for many hundreds of thousands of miles. But I also thought it was pretty. Handled nice, and had perfectly adequate power. Respect to anyone who appreciates one. A proper motorcycle.

Why don't you have your own thread..?

I suppose the 500cc category is the classic motorbike engine size, so we can't leave it out. All the big British and European makers after WWII had classic 500cc machines. Some were sports bikes, some were potterers or tourers. Names trip off the tongue very quickly; BSA 500cc Gold Star [they made a good 350cc version of it too], Racing 500cc Manx Norton [which also came in a 350cc version] Racing AJS/Matchless 500cc, which actually came in a more famous 350cc version - the AJS 350cc 7R. The Velocette Venom Clubman [Now go and Google them]. These were all singles, and Triumph had their 500 Speed Twin and latterly the Daytona. Peculiarly, I didn't really like the class, as the bikes were neither big, nor small. You expected them to be fast, and they were. But they seemed to take a lot of trouble being so. On smaller bikes you expected that, but not by the time you reached 500cc. At least, I didn't. Of Jap bikes, one standout was the famous Kawasaki Mach III, a 2-stroke which had phenomenal performance. But if you used it full on, you got 23mpg..! And from a 500c bike too, when you should really be getting 50mpg, at the very least. Oh yeah, and there's the Yamaha XT500. I rode one a couple of times and it was utterly brilliant. But I had no money at the time, so I couldn't buy one. I would have if I'd had the dosh: It's still probably the perfect bike for just buzzing around, doing the everyday stuff. Being light, and a big single, it had tons of effortless grunt to get ahead of traffic, plus you could have fun off-road. One day, I'd still like to get one, if a decent one is still around, or its modern equivalent, if there is one made. As it happens, I only had one 500cc bike back then, and that was a fairly low mileage Suzuki GSX500E. I think it was originally a European import, but it had an MPH speedo/odometer. It went well, but I thought it was crap. It handled OKish, but it didn't want to stay in tune; made too much mechanical noise for my liking, and to get going quickly you had to buzz it really hard. It put me off Suzukis, probably for life. It put me off the 500cc class, and it almost put me off bikes entirely. Come to think of it, I wonder what I ever saw in it. It's undoubtedly pretty, so that's probably it. Here's a pic: I include it, I suppose, to show you that I don't drool over every bike that has ever been made, or I've owned. At the moment I can't think of anything else. Modern day manufacturers have brought about the 600cc class, due to Superstock racing, and from next season, Moto2, MotoGP's smaller brother. But that's another story. An honourable mention must go to Honda's 400cc Four. And although that should go in with my favourite 350s, I forgot about it, and so tacked it on here.

Have done the same. The truth is, is that when the ball is kicked, you can't see Papa in the picture. As soon as you can, he is fractionally ahead of the last defender but no daylight. From what we can see, he was almost certainly onside when the ball was kicked. But as someone else said, we won anyway. Personally, I think we've got a real goal poacher in Papa. He seems to have the knack of being in the right place. Some of his offsides appear to be him being too quick for the officials to spot. I saw him in his first game, and he was too quick on a couple of occasions.

You shouldn't be making comments here... apparently. Now to rummage through my bag of infractions.

Oh yeah, sorry Hammy. Just assume I meant to put it as... "So now we get into the realms of my youth, and total fantasy land for you hamster."

Looking for an infraction, by any chance..?

Wish Ron's interview with Jimmy Hill from the same Big Match programme was still available.

Yeah, saw all three, at their peak. Syddo was super fast, sometimes brilliant, sometimes not. Inconsistent, tbh. But a legend all the same. Big Ron was the ultimate headerer of the ball, but only pretty good with his feet. Didn't have loads of pace, but was nearly always in the right place, and boy could he climb. He was the club hero, and when he didn't do well, people got disappointed with him. I hated that aspect of the crowd. He was doing his best. Some people didn't like Terry Paine. Even his admirers in the crowd didn't like him much. He was sneaky. He'd kick the ball away to cost the opposition time. He was arrogant. He was Ted's favourite. He was the Captain. Lots of the players weren't keen on Painer either. But he was brilliant, and most of the time he was brilliant. So he was almost predictably brilliant. But he wasn't a genius. That's MLT territory only. From that era, let me add Martin Chivers, who I wish I'd seen more often in a Saints shirt. He was superb for us, and pretty much the same for Spurs, when he left. That hurt. Derek Reeves, I never saw play and wish I had. A goal machine. I wish Tom Jenkins had been better. He had bags of potential, and it all pretty much came to nothing. Loved his mazy runs down the left wing. Loads of others before my time and during and I just can't single them out, right now.

...and in the smallest surprise in motorsport, Valentino Rossi today became World Champion for the 9th time. He's the GOAT, and there's just about nobody who stands close to him now. Roll on next season, and a good bet for a 10th title.

Bloke on SKY Sports News. Can't remember his name. Saints fan. Keeps it quiet. We understand. Ssssh..!

You haven't remembered TUS [The Ultimate Saint] yet. Shame on you. He posted on the Techy forum just the other day. See..? They're still out there.