Holmes_and_Watson

Or let it float out more to a little island. It's not solving immigration issues, as such, but would help control population numbers, and resources. The first lot on the island can spend their time attacking later arrivals as immigrants. So, that will keep them happy.

At 4:30, KWP walking past with luggage, and hailing a taxi was also a sign. 🙂

I was careful with that. There's no evidence providing information on the physical development of these athletes. No evidence if there's a DSD or how, if there is, this is expressed. Not surprising, considering the sensitivity. The only thing I have seen is that after competing for years (which does not mean there wasn't an underlying issue), they subsequently failed tests. There's nothing to suggest any of these athletes knew about any issues prior to that. We're no doubt going to be hearing more about that procedure, and it's veracity, in days to come. But the procedure is in doubt, and it will be interesting if the results can be considered credible. I think the majority of both sides will end up with the view they started with. If credible, then will feed into future eligibility criteria, complete with all the issues the IOC, using it's passport approach was trying to avoid. If not credible/ uncertain, then people will have to make up their own minds. But testing may well have to go through changes anyway. You could easily have people legitimately considered by nations to be of one sex, disqualified through DSD advantages, where things like testosterone limits are fine. The IOC would be an arbiter of determining sex, which is exactly what they've tried to get away from. That would shift to national organisations, who would run right into their own legal systems as if hit by a heavyweight. I don't know following those tests what the impact on the athletes was in other competition. It was recent enough that they presumably already knew they passed the Olympics criteria (the same as the last one?). In the absence of other information, and considering DSD (of which there's not even evidence of that here) and identity (a personal driving factor, if arguable in other respects), there's not necessarily any compelling reason for them to have withdrawn.

Yeah, it's clear that historically, whether IOC or IBA or predecessors, all are incredibly dodgy. Where there's doubt about the procedure and doubts about the organisation, no doubt there will be questions on the results. I don't know if the actual tests are carried out by some scrupulous third party. Due to confidentiality, I'm a little surprised at the release of information regarding the test. Perhaps the announcement can only go so far, as in general findings. Likewise, if it relies on a new test from a new sample, the athletes in question are under no obligation to comply. They've met the entry criteria and are going to get medals.

The article used "validity of testing" and another "process". However, it leads to the IOC quote of:- “The current aggression against these two athletes is based entirely on this arbitrary decision, which was taken without any proper procedure — especially considering that these athletes had been competing in top-level competition for many years,” If the IBA present their findings, then the above in bold is not going to look convincing. On the other hand, there have been any number of articles around the IBA's removal from oversight. They cite financing, transparency and integrity of judging. I've not seen any that specify testing falsification (links welcome on that one). Either way, there would then be eligibility discussions around various DSD and how those would be implemented, sensitively considering the identity and cultural backgrounds of those impacted.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/articles/c0w44q1nlw2o Lin now guaranteed a medal. The article says "an interview with BBC sports editor Dan Roan on Thursday, IBA chief executive Chris Roberts said XY male chromosomes were found in "both cases". Not that this would have impacted the IOC's eligibility criteria, as I understand it. And the IOC are disputing the process that resulted in that finding too.

I saw a figure around that mentioned on a couple of Celtic forums too. Don't know original sauce.

Values

On Labour's scheme... "It is said to have cost £5bn, although the London School of Economics has said the true bill would be between £10bn and £20bn." Beeb link containing the above quote

And, in midst of a controversy, the world turns as one, puts aside genotypes and phenotypes and calls out, in one unifying voice... "Stop being a sexist, SOG!" 🙂

You would actually have them play in those empty stadiums?! With all that tackling, loss of balance and risk of running and other contact injury?! Why don't people care about the safety of others?! Why?! And don't get me started on the lack of fully ergonomically designed stadia with all their sharp, pointy, injury causing angles! 🙂

Starmer mentioning embracing facial recognition leapt out at me, giving a shiver and reminding me of the fears aimed at the right of past conservative governments.

While it sometimes/often/always ( delete as appropriate) might end up that way, it's interesting to get underneath that a bit. Here for example there's been interesting posts on sex, gender, how both are determined scientifically and societally (with interpretations, definitions and views) and then how that applies to sport. We've also seen the different criteria sporting organisations use, and the history behind that. Off to watch the boat floating, which is on after the windsurfing. 🙂

Gah! Going to be late... 1000 zippers on my outfit...

I don't know. I just added that bit, as I forgot to ask. General feeling is that they go through this so often, that they're not going to get fleeced.

A quick chat with a Celtic friend, and a peek at some forums, and the expectation is that he'll play. I've not seen a line up that he's not in. Their reasoning is that the club have set out the value. There are plenty of clubs circling, and all capable of paying it. No issues with contract length. So, they just get on with getting as good a start as possible in the league. Tying him up in Euro games might be different.

Growing up, my gran was always pointing out the local punks and saying, "why aren't you more like those nice folks? They've got proper haircuts." 🙂

Dibling's contract expires 2026.

I think the first scoreline is a bit surprising, in that it means we're keeping a clean sheet. 🙂

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/articles/c51yyd8g3ylo Khelif will get at least a bronze, as it stands.

Transfer Meercat...meh! https://www.saintsweb.co.uk/topic/41841-keeping-track-of-the-contracts-2024-25/ 🙂

Hopefully won a lottery and grudgingly having to enjoy every moment of it.

Taking the 11 below (posted earlier), compared to the side that went down (even if the formation was different) McCarthy (improvement overall on Baz, though miss that passing) Sugawara, THB, Bednarek, Stephens, Taylor (unproven with Sugawara (KWP will be a miss), Taylor has experience and considered an upgrade on Perraud. Central defence improved on what came down in Salisu, ABK and Lyanco (although we loaned Bednarek and Stephens out at the time) Downes, Smallbone, Aribo (a decline, but different. JWP at a level above. Lavia talented, but might not have lasted, while Stu wasn't at near his best. We've now got an excellent Downes, Smallbone who developed really well, and a fitter, more mobile Aribo. AA, BBD (AA didn't have a good PL season last time, but was key last season. BBD has had PL goals, and we'll just have to see how effective an Adams replacement he is in other areas. Finishing would seem likely to be better. A lot relies on Martin getting the best out of a side that is in a much better place than the one that went down. But the side obviously can't just match the lot that came down. It has to be a lot better to stay up. I see 6 improvements (McCarthy, THB, Bednarek, Stephens, Taylor, Downes) 2 same (AA, Aribo) 2 unproven (Sugawara, BBD) 1 decline (Smallbone against JWP - so not a disaster here)

A near peak RussBall midfield ! 🙂 Also an 11 with 3 new signings, 2 loans made perm and 1 resign in McCarthy. More than half the side with some work done to it. Looking at the backups, there's not a lot screaming out as direct competition. That 11 is the strongest by a fair bit. Hopefully, it's knowing that it's starters/direct competition that will take a little longer, if required, this window.

McCarthy Sugawara, THB, Bednarek, Stephens, Taylor Downes, Smallbone, Aribo AA, BBD Backups: Lumley, Lis, Bree, Edwards, Wood, Manning, Larios, Lallana, Alcaraz, Stewart, Edozie, SAA, Dibling Probably on their way: Sule, Mara, ABK, KWP, TP, Meghoma