tonyXIII

Further enlightenment, Grasshopper. (readers under the age of 50 may not get the reference to Kung Fu) Zero Conditional: if/when + present -> present : if he eats peanuts, he has an allergic reaction. First Conditional: if + present -> will/modal + bare infinitive : if I see Helen, I'll tell her you called. Second Conditional: if + past -> would/modal + bare infinitive : if I spoke Greek, I would apply for that job. Third Conditional: if + past perfect -> would have/modal perfect + past participle : if the tickets had been cheaper, I would have bought one. Of course, this is a bit prescriptive but there are variations on this theme. For instance, Mixed Conditionals. Your comments are not wrong, but when you call yourself a pedant, you must expect some scrutiny. Grammar is a slippery beast because you can always find examples which disprove your belief. The main difficulty is in the spoken word, where almost anything goes nowadays. Enjoy your evening.

I was not referring to the conditional use of "I were walking", but to the dialect use in Lancashire and Yorkshire (and possibly elsewhere) of "were" instead of "was". There is no "conditional tense". The confitional is a grammatical construct and can use many tenses depending on whether it is zeroth, first, second or third conditional. I'll be happy to give examples when I am at my laptop instead of this infernal smartphone.

YEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSS! Done it! Won it!

Something about strong foundations.

How very dare you!

Imagine mine and Gubrat's!

When last domiciled in the UK, I lived in Whitby and it took just over 2 hours to drive to the City of Salford stadium. Boy, did I enjoy that beer when I got home just after midnight! Now I live in Rethymno and it's about 2000 miles or 24 hours to get to a game. I did the journey for the 2019 GF, but it's not something I can do on a regular basis.

So let them walk. In fact, tell them to persist off. You can't negotiate with blackmailers. If our income falls, then we just have to cut our cloth according to our means. Money is important, but I value my soul a lot higher.

Well said, Tommy.

I've never been a fan of Sky. I think they squeeze every drop they can from SL. If we had someone who knew how to run a TV channel, I would say, "Bin Sky and do our own thing." I never hear anyone talk about Freeview. How much would it cost to run our own channel, raise our own advertising revenue and take control of our own destiny? It's fta, so should mean more possible viewers.

Not at all. They just have to work out the combination of the lock.

For John, I used to want United relegating again and again until they disappeared off the face of the Earth. I'm older now and I realise that, without United, the Premier League would not hold the same interest for a City fan, and vice versa (though the 'entitled' United fans may not realise it!). Now is our time and I'm going to damn well enjoy it, just as I am enjoying Salford's recent resurgence.

I'm not sure there are that many "die hard" City fans. I've been a "City fan" for more than 60 years and I went for a meal with my wife and friends. Fifty years ago, I remember City fans enjoying a good old laugh at the latest antics of the team. I just don't think City fans are 'tribal'. I do confess that I now consider myself a Salford fan rather than a City fan. I prefer rugby league to soccer, but I still enjoy it when City win.

I have to take issue with your "entirely wrong". British English spelling is different to American English spelling, but to say that one is correct and the other wrong is, er, wrong. They are different, that's all. One may be more logical, perhaps, but that doesn't make the other 'wrong'. The two main exam boards (Cambridge and Michigan) accept both British English and American English spellings but expect examinees to be consistent in their usage. Languages change all the time. They evolve. They are, in a way, 'organic'. You can't fight it, you have to accept it, as the Academie Francaise found when it tried to prevent the use of 'le weekend', for example.

The difference between formal and informal English only became apparent to me when I began teaching English to my students here in Greece. Imagine how hard it must be not just to learn English, but to learn when and how to use formal/informal language. I am blown away by how good some of them are. If you want the top EFL certificate (Proficiency in English), you have to get the register (degree of formality) spot on as well as the grammar and vocabulary.

I could list dozens of common 'mistakes', but they are largely trivial. Some are even due to dialects for example, "I were talking to Bill yesterday." It should, of course, be "I was talking to Bill yesterday." But, who cares? In an informal context, it does not matter. However, if a journalist gets it wrong, he/she should be strung up on the nearest gibbet.

Thanks, SC.

See my previous response. They are not extending the deadline, they are hoping to hit a second, higher target.

Obviously they want more. My point was your "extend the deadline" phrase. The "deadline" is today, afaik, not £250K. You seem confused about 'target' and 'deadline'. They have reached their initial TARGET before the DEADLINE. They are now hoping to pass the initial target, not extend the deadline. Hey ho! Forget the great effort to raise funds, just use it as another stick to beat Salford with. Fill yer boots.

Why would they "extend the deadline"? They have reached their initial target. What they have done is increase the target to £300K. Be interesting to see if they reach that figure.

I'm quite relaxed about grammar when people are speaking because it is usually informal, which means things like, "Me and Tom used to go to Maine Road" are okay. Indeed, in an informal context, "Thomas and I used to go Maine Road" would seem wrong. Where I draw a line is when people who make their living by writing, for example journalists, get the grammar wrong. There is no excuse for that. Imagine a car mechanic who didn't know how to use the tools of his trade. Unacceptable!

And, in case you've forgotten, Everton survived.

That sounds similar to 2011(?), when United thought they'd won the PL until the 93rd minute and Aguerroooooo!

Thanks. You're right about the dislike thing. What is "confident"? I'm still not convinced we'll win the league. Obviously, it's been a good season, but if our neighbours manage to win next week (despite all the hype, it is still a distinct possibility - Ten Hag has transformed them) and Inter spoil the party the week after, then the season will have been a failure of sorts. Expectations have been raised, rightly so, which is why I don't like talk of a "triple" until the "double" has been done and dusted. To answer your question honestly, I'm quietly confident of both the finals, but nervous as hell about both, too.

Funny that that particular accusation is only ever levelled at City, though. Jealousy? Heaven forbid.