A new way to end matches, courtesy of Denis Shapovalov

Eye eye eyeeee, that's gotta hurt.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_Cvfx9Jl0E

ouch, ouch, OUCH!



Instant fame.....hopefully this will go viral and stop otjer players doing it.
It's been going almost unchecked for some time.

No need for it.

Let's raffle off some puns!

No eye-dea why he did that...

My brain's gone to pot, can't think of anything...except that maybe now apart from tennis elbow may have a new tennis injury - tennis eye....

Poor kid... the probability of that zooming in to the Umpires eye is infintesimal.

It'll probably be good for his career. His coach must be secretly thinking that now he will find it easier to explain why he has to keep a lid on it.

Ouille! Poor guy.

I watched a bit of it yesterday and he has tremendous talent.

I however was a bit surprised to see his pretty large quads already. For being 17 he has a huge potential but I woudl already question his cleanliness substance wise. We all know nowadays that if you take stuff to enhance your game, you better do it before you you are on the main stage.

But this is only questions from me as I have no way to be sure.

Regardless huge talent who will be deadly once he cleans his game.

You have to say though it was a cracking shot!

I did like how Evans tried to maintain his composure

If only Kyrgios had done that the tennis World would have melted down.

bogbrush wrote:If only Kyrgios had done that the tennis World would have melted down.

And rightly so.

He is a nasty piece who tanks matches when he sees he is beaten, mutters non stop trying to distract opponents, insults them personally (Stan).


I can't stand him.

Tenez wrote:Ouille! Poor guy.

I watched a bit of it yesterday and he has tremendous talent.

I however was a bit surprised to see his pretty large quads already. For being 17 he has a huge potential but I woudl already question his cleanliness substance wise. We all know nowadays that if you take stuff to enhance your game, you better do it before you you are on the main stage.

But this is only questions from me as I have no way to be sure.

Regardless huge talent who will be deadly once he cleans his game.

Yes, such a wild and interesting BH, almost like a slingshot.

NITB wrote:

bogbrush wrote:If only Kyrgios had done that the tennis World would have melted down.

And rightly so.

He is a nasty piece who tanks matches when he sees he is beaten, mutters non stop trying to distract opponents, insults them personally (Stan).


I can't stand him.

Using especually polite language considering his case, he is a twat,

It was an innocent mistake and shouldn't have mattered. Getting angry and smacking a ball or a racquet is a part of tennis. It's ridiculous how much people overreact.

Umpire is a drama queen. Get over it. I've had a basket ball kicked into my face that knocked me clean off my feet.  It did more damage than this but I got up and carried on.  This umpire and the commentators make it sound like he's been hit by a nuclear weapon.  Pussies.

Oh don't be soft, he did nothing of the sort. You get a tennis ball in the eyeball and you won't just shake it off.

He was bound to disqualify him by the rules, then shook his hand.

Are you joking?  He milked it like he'd been shot haha.
Anyway, it's beside the point.  I want to see expression on court. Banning racquet smashing and defaulting players for accidents like this one is lousy.  No-one who competes at any sport is immune from this sort of thing. Federer has smashed balls away in anger - one of them could have hit a ball boy/girl.

I'm fed up of this thought police sanitized state we're all living in, where being human is condemned as a deadly sin and everyone has to apologize with a big PR team rallying around. 

The Canadian should just have said "I didn't mean it. It was an accident. It happens. I am not sorry for being human. Fuck off." 

Daniel wrote:Are you joking?  He milked it like he'd been shot haha.
Anyway, it's beside the point.  I want to see expression on court. Banning racquet smashing and defaulting players for accidents like this one is lousy.  No-one who competes at any sport is immune from this sort of thing. Federer has smashed balls away in anger - one of them could have hit a ball boy/girl.

I'm fed up of this thought police sanitized state we're all living in, where being human is condemned as a deadly sin and everyone has to apologize with a big PR team rallying around. 

The Canadian should just have said "I didn't mean it. It was an accident. It happens. I am not sorry for being human. Fuck off." 

Let me guess. Brexiteer?

I think "Brexit" is a silly term.  I prefer to think of myself as someone who defends freedom of speech and innocent people.  That means no open borders for health tourism (like the foreign lady who recently cost us £500,000 in IVF treatment) or terrorists, or dossers, or just plain bad, uneducated people who will add nothing of value to the economy or our culture and values.  It also means having full sovereign control over our own laws. The EU is not Europe; it's a demented, Leftist, political dictatorship, which is now trying to form an army. Its goal has always been a United States of Europe under Leftist rule.

Trump and "Brexit" have put a spoke in the wheels, but I am hoping Le Pen and others, such as Geert, get in and shove the whole hideous project up their arse sideways.

It's amazing that I managed to deduce your political inclinations from a fairly nondescript post about tennis.

I'm fairly sure I know where you stand on other issues too. In fact I was fairly sure even before your last post.

What I don't get with Trump supporters (and this isn't directed at you Daniel, just a general observation) is how on earth they actually believed that this man would look after their interests. I feel for them. They have so much angst and Trump fed into that. Sadly, in every possible way, Trump's policies will make life tougher for them. He is an economic elite; only interested in lining his pockets - Donald does what's best for Donald and his friends. His appointments to his team are  the superestablishment - the epitomy of rich and unaccountable - and somehow those stupid, ignorant folks thought Trump would be looking out for them.

And in the process they've elected a complete moron.

The answer to your question is simple...  Trump is the better man.  Better than  nearly all the ones who went before him. Certainly better than Hillary. Hillary blew Libya to bits and helped ruin Syria. She also wanted to start war games with Russia.  Trump is actually doing things he said he would.  He's trying to defend his country against illegal immigrants and those who mean the country harm. He's building a wall. He's not being politically correct and has done more in a few weeks than Obama did in 8 years.  He's also allying with Russia to destroy IS.  He's so far done exactly what he said he would.  Unlike Bush, Clinton, Obama, and the rest.

They have not elected a "complete moron".  The guy has an IQ of 130-156 depending on the source you read. He owns and runs businesses around the world. He's a billionaire. He's the president and won against a huge Republican field, and the MSM stitch up. 

https://www.quora.com/What-is-Donald-Trumps-IQ

Hate him or love him, the likelihood that

• (1) a complete idiot
  
  
• (2) graduated from the #1 undergraduate business program in the country
  
  
• (3) in economics and
  
  
• (4) then became a billionaire AND
  
  
• (5) won the US Presidency
  
  

actually has an IQ that is lower than 140 is rather slim.

If that's a moron, then everyone I know - including you - is a super moron.

You also can't deduce my political opinions from what I have written, either.  If you tried, you would assume I believe in religion, when I am actually an atheist. You'd make a lot of assumptions because you see this as simply "right" and "left".  I see it in terms of sanity and insanity.

America doesn't want what Leftists (or globalists) are selling - which, looking at Germany, is mass rape, abuse, and destruction.  Hillary wanted to bring unlimited numbers of "refugees".  She's the moron. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTz5CK6rFUA


This is not a moron > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAfGUl-6Rs8

It's a leader.

It's not always so obvious what people's allegiances are.

I'm hugely committed to Britain leaving the EU, a dreadful, anti-democratic, protectionist entity that is riddled with corruption to the extent its accounts haven't been signed off by auditors for over 20 years and is happy to condemn tens of millions of people to misery in the cause of its political project. It's pretty much an updated version of the USSR.

I also would have voted for Trump, mainly because he is not a globalist shill like that warmonger Clinton.

I would not vote Le Pen, she's a socialist.

bogbrush wrote:It's not always so obvious what people's allegiances are.

I'm hugely committed to Britain leaving the EU, a dreadful, anti-democratic, protectionist entity that is riddled with corruption to the extent its accounts haven't been signed off by auditors for over 20 years and is happy to condemn tens of millions of people to misery in the cause of its political project. It's pretty much an updated version of the USSR.

I also would have voted for Trump, mainly because he is not a globalist shill like that warmonger Clinton.

I would not vote Le Pen, she's a socialist.

No but I would have guess that from you. If you were French you'd have little choice who to vote for.

Le Pen is as good as it gets at the moment in France.  She's the ONLY one willing to admit there is a Muslim / immigration problem that isn't going away.  Despite being "socialist" - she is certainly not a globalist or the kind of twat we have running Britain. Le Pen also supports Trump.

Daniel wrote:Are you joking?  He milked it like he'd been shot haha.
Anyway, it's beside the point.  I want to see expression on court. Banning racquet smashing and defaulting players for accidents like this one is lousy.  No-one who competes at any sport is immune from this sort of thing. Federer has smashed balls away in anger - one of them could have hit a ball boy/girl.

I'm fed up of this thought police sanitized state we're all living in, where being human is condemned as a deadly sin and everyone has to apologize with a big PR team rallying around. 

The Canadian should just have said "I didn't mean it. It was an accident. It happens. I am not sorry for being human. Fuck off." 

What milked? So unless the umpire isn't shot, he has to fuck off silently and accept any kind of physical abuse from players. You've not been hit in the eye with a tennis ball, a strong hit like Shaplov did pains as hell. And you don't get to decide how much is that pain.

If the umpire was hit during the normal course of play, it was an accidental hit. Lots of linesmen, ball kids do get hit, some even badly. That's fine as an accident.

Not this. not this behavior of throwing the ball in anger. Learn to control it, if you can't then fuck off. If they let them off easily, next time they will a bring a gun on court. You are fine to see that day, not the organizers. 

A bad behaviour doesn't take long to get worse and worse if you don't control it. This is how you rich kids being let off by their parents for small mistakes, then it doesn't take long before they start crushing people under their Ferrari.

Stop it when its seedling.

Tenez wrote:

bogbrush wrote:It's not always so obvious what people's allegiances are.

I'm hugely committed to Britain leaving the EU, a dreadful, anti-democratic, protectionist entity that is riddled with corruption to the extent its accounts haven't been signed off by auditors for over 20 years and is happy to condemn tens of millions of people to misery in the cause of its political project. It's pretty much an updated version of the USSR.

I also would have voted for Trump, mainly because he is not a globalist shill like that warmonger Clinton.

I would not vote Le Pen, she's a socialist.

No but I would have guess that from you. If you were French you'd have little choice who to vote for.

If I were French I think I'd emigrate! I think our political class (in Britain) is quite bad - though  it's improved since Blair & Cameron disappeared- but it's abysmal over there from what I can see. 

Surely Le Pen being the most popular single figure can only be because the rest are complete charlatans?

Russians and Sports, a NO NO!!!

bogbrush wrote:

Tenez wrote:

bogbrush wrote:It's not always so obvious what people's allegiances are.

I'm hugely committed to Britain leaving the EU, a dreadful, anti-democratic, protectionist entity that is riddled with corruption to the extent its accounts haven't been signed off by auditors for over 20 years and is happy to condemn tens of millions of people to misery in the cause of its political project. It's pretty much an updated version of the USSR.

I also would have voted for Trump, mainly because he is not a globalist shill like that warmonger Clinton.

I would not vote Le Pen, she's a socialist.

No but I would have guess that from you. If you were French you'd have little choice who to vote for.

If I were French I think I'd emigrate! I think our political class (in Britain) is quite bad - though  it's improved since Blair & Cameron disappeared- but it's abysmal over there from what I can see. 

Surely Le Pen being the most popular single figure can only be because the rest are complete charlatans?

yes but at the same time it is a beautiful country and I don't see why I (we) should let it down because a handful of billionnaires hold the press and decide who we shoudl have at the top.

This is a problem most countries have to be fair but France is probably one of the worst cases. We have good politicians but are systematically discredited by that press. Sarkozy and Holland have been the worst presidents by a mile. Simply traitors and should be hanged. Not kidding.

Anyway the world went wrong since humans took over. I do not believe in a quick fix but just hoping that all those wrongs will add up and end up with a Good....at the end of times.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

Daniel wrote:Are you joking?  He milked it like he'd been shot haha.
Anyway, it's beside the point.  I want to see expression on court. Banning racquet smashing and defaulting players for accidents like this one is lousy.  No-one who competes at any sport is immune from this sort of thing. Federer has smashed balls away in anger - one of them could have hit a ball boy/girl.

I'm fed up of this thought police sanitized state we're all living in, where being human is condemned as a deadly sin and everyone has to apologize with a big PR team rallying around. 

The Canadian should just have said "I didn't mean it. It was an accident. It happens. I am not sorry for being human. Fuck off." 

What milked? So unless the umpire isn't shot, he has to fuck off silently and accept any kind of physical abuse from players. You've not been hit in the eye with a tennis ball, a strong hit like Shaplov did pains as hell. And you don't get to decide how much is that pain.

If the umpire was hit during the normal course of play, it was an accidental hit. Lots of linesmen, ball kids do get hit, some even badly. That's fine as an accident.

Not this. not this behavior of throwing the ball in anger. Learn to control it, if you can't then fuck off. If they let them off easily, next time they will a bring a gun on court. You are fine to see that day, not the organizers. 

A bad behaviour doesn't take long to get worse and worse if you don't control it. This is how you rich kids being let off by their parents for small mistakes, then it doesn't take long before they start crushing people under their Ferrari.

Stop it when its seedling.

As someone who was hit by the ball in the eye TWICE (once even self-inflicted!!! )
I agree with what you've said.

Ball abuse's got to stop. FULL STOP!

Tenez wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

Tenez wrote:

bogbrush wrote:It's not always so obvious what people's allegiances are.

I'm hugely committed to Britain leaving the EU, a dreadful, anti-democratic, protectionist entity that is riddled with corruption to the extent its accounts haven't been signed off by auditors for over 20 years and is happy to condemn tens of millions of people to misery in the cause of its political project. It's pretty much an updated version of the USSR.

I also would have voted for Trump, mainly because he is not a globalist shill like that warmonger Clinton.

I would not vote Le Pen, she's a socialist.

No but I would have guess that from you. If you were French you'd have little choice who to vote for.

If I were French I think I'd emigrate! I think our political class (in Britain) is quite bad - though  it's improved since Blair & Cameron disappeared- but it's abysmal over there from what I can see. 

Surely Le Pen being the most popular single figure can only be because the rest are complete charlatans?

yes but at the same time it is a beautiful country and I don't see why I (we) should let it down because a handful of billionnaires hold the press and decide who we shoudl have at the top.

This is a problem most countries have to be fair but France is probably one of the worst cases. We have good politicians but are systematically discredited by that press. Sarkozy and Holland have been the worst presidents by a mile. Simply traitors and should be hanged. Not kidding.

Anyway the world went wrong since humans took over. I do not believe in a quick fix but just hoping that all those wrongs will add up and end up with a Good....at the end of times.

Ever seen "Kingsman"? I have to say I had a lot of sympathy for Samuel L Jacksons characters objectives, even if the methods were a bit crude.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

What milked? So unless the umpire isn't shot, he has to fuck off silently and accept any kind of physical abuse from players. You've not been hit in the eye with a tennis ball, a strong hit like Shaplov did pains as hell. And you don't get to decide how much is that pain.

Starts with a straw man argument - ends with a crystal ball. I've had accidents and mishaps in my life worse than what he did here - and yet he sits there like it's the end of the world. It's an over reaction.  He's fine.  Nothing whatsoever wrong with him—and you can tell he's fine after 10 seconds, because he would have been in real pain - not that fake drama queen type.

I am not going to share your opinion. Understand?  It's an opinion.  Different to yours and based on my own experience and how the guy reacted.

Also, there was no "ball abuse".  It was something that any competitive player will do spontaneously. It cannot be helped.  It's human nature to lose control in certain situations. You aren't ever going to stop "ball abuse" or "racquet abuse". You and NITB look ridiculous for even suggesting it. It tells me that you both don't play tennis or sport seriously - or don't have a winner's mentality.  You should start supporting Monfils. 

There is a difference between walking to your chair, picking up a ball and smacking it at someone - to smacking a ball randomly without thought in an irate state.  The latter is excusable and a mistake.  Defaulting for it is beyond pathetic. Nanny state decision.

Daniel wrote:The answer to your question is simple...  Trump is the better man.  Better than  nearly all the ones who went before him. Certainly better than Hillary. Hillary blew Libya to bits and helped ruin Syria. She also wanted to start war games with Russia.  Trump is actually doing things he said he would.  He's trying to defend his country against illegal immigrants and those who mean the country harm. He's building a wall. He's not being politically correct and has done more in a few weeks than Obama did in 8 years.  He's also allying with Russia to destroy IS.  He's so far done exactly what he said he would.  Unlike Bush, Clinton, Obama, and the rest.

They have not elected a "complete moron".  The guy has an IQ of 130-156 depending on the source you read. He owns and runs businesses around the world. He's a billionaire. He's the president and won against a huge Republican field, and the MSM stitch up. 

https://www.quora.com/What-is-Donald-Trumps-IQ

Hate him or love him, the likelihood that

• (1) a complete idiot
  
  
• (2) graduated from the #1 undergraduate business program in the country
  
  
• (3) in economics and
  
  
• (4) then became a billionaire AND
  
  
• (5) won the US Presidency
  
  

actually has an IQ that is lower than 140 is rather slim.

If that's a moron, then everyone I know - including you - is a super moron.

You also can't deduce my political opinions from what I have written, either.  If you tried, you would assume I believe in religion, when I am actually an atheist. You'd make a lot of assumptions because you see this as simply "right" and "left".  I see it in terms of sanity and insanity.

America doesn't want what Leftists (or globalists) are selling - which, looking at Germany, is mass rape, abuse, and destruction.  Hillary wanted to bring unlimited numbers of "refugees".  She's the moron. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTz5CK6rFUA


This is not a moron > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAfGUl-6Rs8

It's a leader.

More alternative facts?

I think we all know the presidential race has nothing to do with intelligence, morality, leadership. It's about greed, manipulation, ignorance and pandering to the zeitgeist. It's easy to be a populist and pander to the disenfranchisement, anger and alienation that people rightly feel, but sadly, DT and his politics of blaming 'other' ordinary people is not the solution. The problems are due to the power structures that govern the distribution of wealth, the monopoly on resources, the fact that a worker earns a pittance whilst the corporate elite own the world - that's where inequality stems from and that's what drives the wars and conflicts. Not whether a Mexican immigrant or a muslim refugee is desperately trying to escape war and poverty (A wall btw is a symbolic gesture - or do you really think it's going to stop the flow of immigration?). Trump does not represent the interests of the people - he represents unregulated corporate greed, he represents deniers of climate change, arctic drilling for oil, further coal mining regardless of the carbon burden, increasing budgets for the military industrial complex and on and on.

Wasn't the CEO of ExonMobil Trump's top choice for secretary of state? I think that tells you a lot about where his priorities lie.

I agree with you that Clinton is an awful choice.

I also agree with you regarding globalisation. I'm not a fan of it. In short, it means the pillaging of resources by multinationals with destruction of local economies who have no way of competing against these giants.

Which end of that spectrum do you think DT represents. And don't tell me you're naïve enough to actually believe what he says?

I believe what he does. He's doing much of what he said he would - and until that changes I have no reason to criticize him.  He's building the wall, he's stopping (or trying his best) to end illegal immigration and travel from crazy countries.  Everything he's done so far has been great. Including who he has appointed to the Supreme Court.  I've been impressed and that's a first time in my life for any leader USA or UK.

His opinions and where he stands on them are well documented.  He doesn't have a solid view on some things, like abortion, but that's healthy.  He will change his opinion if he is wrong, and will defer to others (like Mattis on torture) where he feels he should listen to an alternate view point.

He is clearly much more to the right than most politicians - and he is not politically correct, which is a bonus.  I don't think you can place him simply as right or left.  As I said, it's sane and insane.  Protecting your country, its people, and its borders is sane.  Not doing is insane.

But the wall that his supporters keep banging on about will not stop immigration. It's a stupid idea that will cost billions of pounds, sour relations with an important neighbour and the tax payer as usual will have to fund it. This is the essence of Trump politics: sound bites that actually have no substance but most of his supporters don't seem to care about whether or not it is actually a viable policy. They're reactionary, mostly poorly educated, ignorant, and don't have a clue about real politics. Trump knows this and therefore he knows he can get away with saying ridiculous things, then making token gestures like the wall, or the temporary lifting of visas for ordinary people from a few countries, whilst simultaneously still dong business with the elites of those countries (so his corporate masters stay happy), and in the end if things go tits up he'll just blame it on the 'establishment' (as if he isn't an integral part of it) or the media or 'alternative facts' or anything else that he can think of.

Daniel wrote:

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:
What milked? So unless the umpire isn't shot, he has to fuck off silently and accept any kind of physical abuse from players. You've not been hit in the eye with a tennis ball, a strong hit like Shaplov did pains as hell. And you don't get to decide how much is that pain.

Starts with a straw man argument - ends with a crystal ball. I've had accidents and mishaps in my life worse than what he did here - and yet he sits there like it's the end of the world. It's an over reaction.  He's fine.  Nothing whatsoever wrong with him—and you can tell he's fine after 10 seconds, because he would have been in real pain - not that fake drama queen type.
I am not going to share your opinion. Understand?  It's an opinion.  Different to yours and based on my own experience and how the guy reacted.
Also, there was no "ball abuse".  It was something that any competitive player will do spontaneously. It cannot be helped.  It's human nature to lose control in certain situations. You aren't ever going to stop "ball abuse" or "racquet abuse". You and NITB look ridiculous for even suggesting it. It tells me that you both don't play tennis or sport seriously - or don't have a winner's mentality.  You should start supporting Monfils. 
There is a difference between walking to your chair, picking up a ball and smacking it at someone - to smacking a ball randomly without thought in an irate state.  The latter is excusable and a mistake.  Defaulting for it is beyond pathetic. Nanny state decision.

Daniel, you must be some player!

Re Shapalov, and all who can't control themselves:tough!
It takes a man to  be able to it.

The wall is the kind of thing a 5 year old would think of.

Mmmm.. how can I stop those dastardly Mexicans from coming to my country.. I know let's build a wall. Eureka.. I must be a genius with an IQ of 150.


Totally ridiculous idea.

The problem Daniel is what if Shap had done it on purpose? Should he also have not been defaulted? Then it's down to the reading of a player's intentions. Too complicated and that's why there is a rule. Some are losing a match cause their FH was 1mm long so losing for not containing your anger seems a good reason too.

As for the visa suspensions - those are not illegal immigrants - they're authorised travellers who have visas or green cards. That policy does not stop or curb illegal immigration. It actually encourages it.

It doesn't make the country safer either. America already has one of the most stringent vetting processes for immigration. So all of those legal travellers have already been vetted and deemed as no risk. Illegal immigrants will still continue travel illegally.

TMF wrote:The wall is the kind of thing a 5 year old would think of.

Mmmm.. how can I stop those dastardly Mexicans from coming to my country.. I know let's build a wall. Eureka.. I must be a genius with an IQ of 150.


Totally ridiculous idea.

The kind of thing a 5 year old would think of?  Israel did it.  China did it.  Hungary did it.  It's been done all through history as an effective means to secure a border.  You do realize that, right?

How would you secure a border that large without one?  You tell us.

No-one is authorized.  The power to let them into the country comes from the president (the president has ABSOLUTE say on not allowing non citizens access to the country if HE deems it necessary. It's right there in law). No non US citizen has any right to go to America whatsoever. The right is given BY America.  Only Americans are protected by the 1st amendment.  Trump suspended travel from terror supporting countries. And I am sure the list will grow when the ban is reinstated.

You missed my point about the visas. Those people had already been authorised by a stringent vetting system. Or is it the idea of all immigration that you are opposed to and not just ILLEGAL immigration? As for the president having absolute say over these matters, that would be the case if America was a dictatorship or an autocracy; thankfully it is not. It has checks and balances and those will people are legally entitled to be there. Not to mention the human tragedy in just suspending the rights of people to be with their families in many cases.

As for the wall - no it will not stop illegal immigration. A wall can be tunnelled under, climbed over and circumvented in many ways. A wall is not a solution. Instead it will lead to loss of Mexican cooperation and that will open the floodgates.

The only way to stop mass migration is to address the underlying causes: poverty, insecurity, inequality. People don't risk their lives, trekking thousands of miles to live in a foreign country where they face further hostility on a whim. They do it out of desperation. DT is not interested in real solutions - hence patently ridiculous ideas like the 'wall'. He is there to line the coffers of the super rich (like himself, funny enough). He is just an extension of the politics of Clinton and the establishment but a more overt, rabid form. He uses populist slogans and appeals to the baser, darker instincts in people to conceal his real agendas. A prime example of which is the proposal for further tax cuts for the super rich.

And the president can and will revoke them. As I said, he has the power to stop ANY non US Citizen.  He makes that clear in the video too with the specific law.  You are arguing against a fact.

There is no way to stop world poverty, so you secure your borders. It will stop the majority of illegal immigration. Tunneling is incredibly difficult because of how they make the walls.  They are also patrolled. 

I am getting the feeling you haven't done any research into real world examples of border walls and are just saying it can't be done because you don't want it to be done. 

Well, it is being done.  That's the end of it.

Well, thanks for the discussion.

I guess we just have to wait and see if the Trump presidency leads to a safer and more prosperous world and in particular whether it benefits his American supporters. I suspect they're in for a rude awakening. But we shall see.

The wall is no more than a secure border. If anyone thinks there should be no borders then that's a position and it can be discussed. Demanding an insecure border is just stupid.

As for the travel ban, it's a time-limited thing while controls on countries identified by the Obama administration as risky are improved. Given Pakistan, India and Indonesia are not involved it's hardly a "Muslim" ban. Whether it's a sound national security move is genuinely not my area of expertise, a position shared by many more people than would admit so.

I still don;t think it was a smart thing to do from DT. I know Obama admin started the list but to make it public can only increase tensions.

he coudl have increased security without creating this mess. But once again what I (or we) think is irrelevant. Those leaders have for centuries done everything we did not want them to do.

How can you increase security when you are allowing in people from these countries and have no sane way of vetting them?  There isn't a choice.

Daniel wrote:How can you increase security when you are allowing in people from these countries and have no sane way of vetting them?  There isn't a choice.

You do have a good point.
Swizerland for example has very strict immigration policies and really protract their nationals.

They will always hire a Swiss over a foreigner which is not the case in the UK where the capital just wants cheap labour at any cost.

Though, of course, these changes and walls are just cosmetic patches to please the masses.

It would be great if America could really go back to her glory days and Europe etc....but who has ever been able to turn the clock back?

Well this got out of hand quickly.

bogbrush wrote:Given Pakistan, India and Indonesia are not involved it's hardly a "Muslim" ban.

Why put India in same sentence as Pakistan? There is no historic known case of any Indian muslim being involved in any terror activities.

Pakistan was a US pet, but now its been adopted by China.

Anyway this discussion doesn't belong in a tennis forum.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Given Pakistan, India and Indonesia are not involved it's hardly a "Muslim" ban.

Why put India in same sentence as Pakistan? There is no historic known case of any Indian muslim being involved in any terror activities.

Pakistan was a US pet, but now its been adopted by China.

Anyway this discussion doesn't belong in a tennis forum.

I include them only because as they have about 140m Muslim people in their borders it would be quite an oversight to exclude them if you were doing a religious based ban.

Fractured eye socket for the umpire. Just milking it the pussy...

Poor guy, I hope he can get some compensation for it.