Head to head record determines places for sides on equal points, it's only if that's equal that goal difference comes into effect.

If Juve draw, and both Milan and Napoli lose, then Juve will finish fifth. Juve are already guaranteed to finish below Atalanta.
For Juve it's quite straightforward: they need to win, and hope Milan or Napoli drop points.


https://www.101greatgoals.com/top-stories/all-the-permutations-of-the-final-day-of-serie-as-top-4-race/

I normally counter your misinformation by providing links to data - in this instance I don't really need to, as the second link in the search results debunks your claim for me. Nevertheless...

You can go to the World Health Organisation website, and filter for vaccine-derived polio (cVDPV) cases in India since 2000: https://extranet.who.int/polis/public/CaseCount.aspx
The results? 17 cases in total. Quite a contrast with the reported 496,000 incidents of paralysis - for which, as usual for these 'think of a random big number' claims, there is absolutely zero evidence.

You can also read about how this particular anti-vaxxer hoax spread on Facebook, here: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/apr/23/facebook-posts/anti-vaxxers-spread-conspiracy-about-bill-gates-an/
The post was also tagged by Facebook as 'false or misleading'.

Or you could just skip all that, and look at the data for polio here: https://ourworldindata.org/polio
If you start from the facts, and develop an understanding that way, then you'll give little credence to the manipulative anti-vaxxer WuHaN LaB BiG PhArMa mInD CoNtRoL BiLl gAtEs 5G MiCrOcHiP stuff.


Anti-vaxxers are not just wrong, they're dangerous. If they had their way, they'd bring back both polio and smallpox. Anyone who makes outrageous claims, but is unwilling to supply supporting data, must be regarded with a huge degree of skepticism.

I usually watch all races in a season, but I am often tempted to skip Monaco as it's basically a two-hour procession with the pit stop the only real oppportunity to change position.
But this year Hamilton's poor performance in qualifying does add an extra dimension. He starts from seventh, but it seems unlikely he'll finish seventh, even on a track where overtaking is next to impossible. I think he'll either get a podium place or else crash out trying some outrageous overtake.

Yes, it just captured the last few weeks of the season perfectly, with every contender stumbling just when they looked to be in a great position.
It would have been fitting if both Atletico and Real lost, and Atletico won the title that way... but I'm glad that Atletico came back to win again, and actually won the championship through being victorious in their final match.

And I'm happy for Suárez, too. I don't like him as a man, with the biting and the history of racism... but he's a great player, and the way he was kicked out of Barca was disgusting. He has replied to Barca in the best way possible, by not only winning the league, but also by scoring that final winning goal.

^{[CITATION NEEDED]}


You don't accept any form of evolution, so you're unlikely to accept the science (i.e., the facts) of stellar evolution. Nevertheless, it's pretty well understood.
Photo or it didn't happen? Okay, here's a year-long time lapse video of the death of a star, from 2018: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2020/hubble-watches-exploding-star-fade-into-oblivion



You will note that the star didn't explode in 2018, it actually exploded 70 million years ago, and it has taken that long for its light to reach us. You will also note that when this star exploded, humans didn't exist and dinosaurs were walking about on Earth... and yet we can see the evidence and discuss it today. But I don't think you accept the facts of light speed or dinosaurs, either. It's a shame, because reality is so interesting.

My takeaway from this was that Hamilton is genuinely worried about Verstappen this season, and sees him as a real threat for the championship. It's rare that Hamilton initiates mind games and tries to unsettle an opponent, he normally just relies on his own ability. If I were Verstappen, I'd take Hamilton's comments as a compliment, and as a form of encouragement. If he's got Hamilton rattled already, only a few races in, then this could be an interesting season.

I would argue that we're not in a bear market, we're in a bull market. Context is important, and this is obtained by looking at longer term trends...

If you consider the price drops over the last week, it appears that the bear has arrived...


If we consider this against the longer-term price movements over the last year, we can see the last week as a downwards correction within a larger bullish trend.


So how do we achieve the best understanding of price movements? I would argue that the solution is to look at changes over the very long term, and with a logarithmic scale so that history is not smeared to a line. In this context, the terrifying price plunges of the last week are a mere blip.


Looking at log-scale charts is important for understanding anything that has exponential growth, for example the progression of Covid cases.

TBH I'm extremely surprised that the voting in this poll is currently 100% to stop racism.
I assume you've voted... so why are you so vehemently opposed to movements such as BLM?

I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, it's just that it can be difficult sometimes to understand how certain people think, particularly people with whom you disagree.
Opposition to racism and opposition to BLM would seem to be contradictory... unless your position is that oppression due to skin colour doesn't exist?

Yes, this is true. And what this means for both teams is that there is no distinction between drawing and losing - if Atletico lose it's the same as if they draw, if Real lose it's the same as if they draw. So the potentail outcomes are simple:

If Atletico win, they are champions. Also if they don't win and Real also don't win.
If Real win and Atletico don't win, then Real are champions.

Personally I want Atletico to win, as I'm always a fan of the underdog, and I think they deserve it after leading for so much of the season.

I'm not American, so can only comment from the perspective of an uninformed outsider...

I would imagine that the history of the nation plays a huge part in US attitudes to guns. We can go back to the War of Independence, when a bunch of colonists had to raise militias to defend themselves against an organised army - if ordinary civilians couldn't own guns, then the modern US would not exist. And then we can go through to the era of Manifest Destiny, and the taming of a continent... living on the frontier and expanding into wilderness makes guns a necessity, both for protection and hunting food.

We could ask whether gun ownership is appropriate in modern civilised metropolises, but that is a different question. The present is always built upon the past, and can never be understood without context.

So, losing our freedom is a bad thing. To which your proposed solution is restricting freedom of expression.
Sorry, I can't work out the reasoning here.

And I would argue that the quote below applies perfectly to most of the video and 'news' links that you post.

It's lucky that we have vast quantities of data from numerous independent and reputable sources around the world, otherwise we might have to fall back on baseless conjecture.

Well, Ferrari were the big surprise in P2... 1st and 2nd.
It looks like Verstappen, Hamilton and Bottas are all close behind, with Perez further back.

Could Ferrari surprise everyone in qualifying? It's probably too early to say, as we don't know what specs and fuel loads each car was running, but at the moment there's certainly a decent gap between Ferrari and the rest.

Tyre strategy in the race is probably irrelevant... overtaking is ludicrously difficult, so tyre choice doesn't matter that much.
I think last time at Monaco, Hamilton won on ridiculous 68 lap old mediums, driving slowly but no-one could overtake.

Actually the race itself is largely irrelevant. Qualifying is everything here.

Yes, definitely. And arguably it's unclear whether Judaism itself is a religion, an ethnicity, a nation or a culture.

However, when considering the distinction between politics and religion in this specific instance, it is also worth noting that the IHRA 'working definition' of antisemitism is widely considered as attempting to protect the actions of the Israeli government from criticism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Definition_of_Antisemitism#Criticism
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/feb/27/university-wrong-to-ban-israeli-apartheid-week-event

edit: I should add, for balance, that the criticism led to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_Declaration_on_Antisemitism

It's a difficult decision. And it's made worse because this is a bad time to play Villa. They have been poor for the last few months while Grealish was out, but now he's back... and his first full game back, they beat Spurs. It's also the end of the season, Villa's position in the league table is already decided, and they have absolutely no pressure on them both in terms of league position and in expectation against Chelsea, so they can just enjoy their football.

I love the fact that post #16 comes immediately before post #17.

If you're planning on making a sensible, data-driven website, then the site you've linked to wouldn't really be a competitor. It appears to be mostly hysterical headlines about specific individual instances that are unrepresentative of overall patterns. For example, if 50 million people take a vaccine, then "1 person died therefore it's unsafe" isn't a particularly convincing response.

But so long as people start from the data and use this to derive a logic-driven conclusion, it's not a problem, and those sites won't be taken seriously.

Of course no-one would do the reverse, and start from a faith-based conclusion and seek out only whatever data from basement-dwelling wackos and discredited loudmouths appear to "support" their pre-determined "correct" explanation.

That's an interesting point. Thanks for raising it.

I wouldn't say it's a paradox, but there are certainly areas of conflict between the two ideals of making sure that people are treated fairly, and making sure that different cultures are valued. I don't think it's possible to have a perfect solution for this. The hijab ban in France is perhaps one of the most prominent examples and illustrates the distinction between people and cultures. Presumably France do not want to ban the hijab in Muslim-governed countries, in that culture... but they do in their own country... for their own people (and, of course, their own culture). Which then provokes the question of whether a Muslim migrant to France from say Iraq is part of a Muslim culture, or a French culture, or an Iraqi culture (or a Muslim person, French person, Iraqi person). The answer of course being all three (or all six)... which is where a conflict can arise. Often in practice the thing that takes precedence is the culture of the country in which the person resides, in this case French culture supersedes Iraqi or Muslim culture. Which then provokes the question of whether a nation can truly be multi-cultural in the fullest sense of the word. I suppose a good answer to this question is how that nation resolves (or attempts to resolve) these conflicts.

The path to treating everyone equally and fairly is not always clear, but progress is certainly being made. We are moving slowly in the right direction.



I've not looked into it, no. It might be an interesting investigation for the future.

After a long season, could this fixture prove crucial in determining Champions League places? Juventus need to win their last league game, and they need Milan to not beat Atalanta... but both Juve and Atalanta will have played that extra mid-week game.

It's been a long season, but that little extra bit of fixture congestion in the final week could yet play a crucial part.