That’s what the Revolut account says was paid. I have no idea then as actually hadn’t even broken it down!! Either way it’s hefty

That works out just over 2 dollars for a vodka?

If you want pricey beer I paid $94.50 for 5 cans of Stella yesterday at the stadium in Miami. A later round of 12 cans and 3 Vodkas was $233.

Must be a northener

Some guy just walked past wearing a coat!

So 32 games before a break in serve in Men's final

So the same price as a pint of Stella at Wimbledon: [Link]

And belatedly thanks Tom Swig

On the ball hitting wire thing, FIFA released a statement saying they had checked and it didn't happen.

Not saying Oslo was expensive, but the £8.90 beer at my hotel was the cheapest of my entire stay...

Normal £10

One if my mates us off to Norway tomorrow. I suggested he wears an England top so they can charge him £20 for a pint instead of the normal £20

They can shove their cheese and their rowing where the sun don't shine and fuck off home on the next plane

WJ, that would open a can of worms - is the playing blocking or just waiting his (or her) moment to turn?

Some have a very strange mindset. OI !

Mccullum steps down as Test coach, remains in charge of white ball cricket

I’ve only seen weird grainy Instagram video clips of the ball apparently hitting the wire cam cable - as said below, I cannot detect any contact or movement, and I reckon it’s just hard Norwegian cheese, nothing more or less…

Shielding the ball to let it run out of play = obstruction

AIoW - goal kicks to be taken from the side where the keeper collects the ball - law was changed to speed up getting the ball back into play, but has had the reverse outcome.

I'd still go for "you do not have control of the ball before you have touched it"

We make it to the last four and people want to spend time moaning about the Scots?

If you could implement a rule reversal which would you choose. I'd stop the goal-kick where other that the taker, you can have others in the box and the ball has to leave the penalty area.

Re the new rule that if a player is booked or sent off but the foul was actually committed by the opposition team the decision can be changed. This meant that the Swiss player Embolo was only sent of because the ref initially booked Paredes for the foul before changing his decision after looking at the incident on the monitor. If the ref hadn't booked Paredes then he couldn't have changed it to a card for Embolo. So it was the rolling around on the ground that did it for Embolo.

cw - yes, that really was a stunning feat by the sweaties!!!

By a deflected goal...