Posts by Paul Jones7

rustywalker1 said:it’s basically the exact opposite of how things went against Sweden. we played pretty poorly back then but somehow walked away with a halftime lead. now, we actually look like we're playing much better, yet we're still trailing.

I mean, I guess it's pretty obvious that France is just a step above Sweden, isn't it?

Morgan Moore6 said:I swear, if I can actually figure out how we keep throwing this game away. 😕

I mean, we were seeing scores like this back in the 50th minute once.

They put up 18 unanswered points—that's the pattern right there. You basically answered your own question.

At the end of the day, our defense just isn't quite clicking. We're letting them push us around—they're driving right through us—and we're just sitting there handing out freebies, whether it's penalty shots or easy goals.

Is there any way we can actually fix this?

Why on earth didn't Abalo get tossed from the game?

The Americans raised their hands about 10 seconds before the break and then again 10 seconds after... I mean, seriously, what was that? 🙂

Man, what a mess—just total chaos with our guys throwing the ball away like they’ve never played before, and then you've got Abalou just barreling straight into Dulet's feet... absolute madness.

The main thing is that the French actually tightened up those defensive gaps. Meanwhile, we just seem to be losing our steam—both in terms of raw power and how we move through the offense.

Our defense finally started clicking, and Mirko managed to pull off a few stops, but before that, they basically let the French walk right in for 23 goals. A bit late to the party, if you ask me.

Kenneth Clark18 said:Man, Kopljar absolutely tore Omeyer apart. 😂

Don't you remember how much of a disaster he made of him back when they played in Mexico?

The Frenchmen are just bullying us into our own space—they're scoring purely on brute Force. Honestly, if we could actually find a way to push back against that, they’d be in serious trouble.

Kopljar looks like they were keeping him under lock and key just for this game before finally letting him off the leash... 🤣

It’s probably for the best that the refs were giving Francić some breathing room on those drives

And honestly, that call—or lack thereof—on the penalty during Dulet's exclusion? Spot on. No error there at all.
😉Kopljar is basically a walking bad omen, I swear.

it works fine—we've got them right here

I’m starting to really lose faith in these refs

They called a penalty on the French side because someone stepped out of bounds before Fernandez even hit the crease—it was such a soft call. They didn't bother calling a blatant foul on the French players during our fast break earlier, but then they turn around and gift us a charge based on contact that felt like something you'd see in a middle school gym.div>

Daniel Cooper40 said:I wouldn't say Sweden had a truly terrible night—it’s true they looked a bit sluggish on offense for parts of the game (they definitely could have been sharper there), but overall they played pretty well, and their goalie was actually in decent shape. I think the Swedes can definitely make it out of this group if they play at their peak and France doesn't show up with everything they've got... honestly, I don't think the gap between them isn't as huge as people think.

I mean, I agree regarding how strong the Swedes are. But France... man, I'm a little worried. They just seem to have an extra gear that they haven't even needed to tap into yet. Nobody else in this group has really threatened them with a relaxed style of play. I caught that game against the Americans, and I had this feeling that if they actually wanted to, they could have held them under 20 points. It just wasn't necessary, I guess.

Anyway, everything should be a lot clearer after tonight since they'll finally be playing at full strength. If their defense is actually as shaky as it looks, we might just run all over them.

Samuel Baker3 said:If we’re being serious about this tournament—which I haven't been able to follow much because life just keeps getting in the way—I honestly think we have a shot at the semifinals.

Anything can happen in a semifinal. It’s just one game, and even if we end up facing Hip Hop, they won't exactly be feeling themselves either.

Yeah, for sure, I’m already banking on us making the semis. I mean, I think the Swedes are probably the best of all those teams ranked "below" the top tier, and we actually managed to beat them. If we play with enough heart, find our rhythm, and maybe catch an opponent having an off night, we could even go for the title. There's a chance, I guess, though realistically it's pretty slim. We’d basically have to play way above our actual skill level—like, everyone on the roster would need to play like an absolute champion at the exact same time, rather than someone just having a mediocre or "off" day.

It’s true, Slavko really knows how to time everyone's peak right before that third-place game 😉 😁

@Samuel Baker3/">@@Samuel Baker3: If you're actually looking at player form and who we're even playing, I mean, it's debatable whether we even deserve third place right now. Honestly, it feels like it'll come down to pure grit and motivation at this point. Just be real about it—let's skip all that "we're the best Americans" nonsense

rustymaker5 said:Where on earth are you getting that from? 😕

It’s honestly just nonsense! Priests are nothing more than people who happened to discover and actually connect with their spiritual side, unlike everyone else who hasn't quite gotten there yet.

It’s pretty much the same logic as saying a teenager who gets lost in the pages of Tolstoy isn't any more special than a little kid who’s still obsessed with, I don't know, Šegrt Hlapić. 🤷

It really just comes down to the individual, because not everyone is equally aware of what they’ve gone through, nor is the intensity of those experiences always the same, and let's face it, not everyone is an easy communicator either.

By the way, my mom always tells me that when I was a little girl sailing on a boat for the first time, surrounded by all that deep blue water, I looked at her and said the ocean felt as thick as pudding! 😍
I guess the experience was just that intense and beautiful for me—considering I was absolutely obsessed with pudding at the time 😁—but you have to wonder how another kid would describe it, especially if they’d never even seen the ocean before.

And here we are talking about impressions that go way beyond our five senses, yet we're expected to capture them just by stringing together thirty little letters... 🤷

It seems like a certain group of people—including some folks posting here on the forum—claim (either loudly or more quietly) that this process actually opens the door to true knowledge. Which is why I was wondering if there might be different types of awakenings. Because, look, if it all boils down to just feeling that sense of oneness or being inseparable from everything, but those doors to actual knowledge aren't opened at the same time... then we might be talking about two very different kinds of awakenings.

William Roberts3 said:For those who skipped the intro, for the ones who need to overanalyze every single comma, for the people looking through distorted lenses, and for the self-proclaimed knights guarding some religion, doctrine, or any "-ism" out there...:

"There’s zero room in this thread for playing games, arguing, judging, proving points, acting superior, or critiquing someone else's 'awakening' experience."
That's because everyone's path and the fallout from their own "awakening" is totally unique. There isn't some high authority on Earth that gets to judge or grade your current or permanent "awakening." Your journey belongs to you and only you! It's one-of-a-kind, but it might resonate with others who've gone through something similar. They'll just... get it. They'll feel that sense of familiarity in your words.

No one should feel threatened by how someone else describes their "spiritual vision." Every single person is unique and carries their own specific experiences. That's just how it works. I mean, what would the point be if we were all identical?
This thread isn't for everyone. If you feel the urge to lecture someone here, honestly, just stop reading and let people express themselves in a free, open, and totally unique way. This isn't about making anyone look smart or pushing some life-saving dogma. We aren't doing critiques, rigid doctrines, heavy mental gymnastics, or proving anything here.
But there is plenty of room for the "heart."

In this space, let the "heart" do the "thinking" instead of the mind.

Let's at least try to be human to one another here, rather than treating each other like enemies...

The real question I guess is... are there actually different types of awakening, or is it more like layers of awakening? Because if you look at how people who have been through it describe things—you’d probably think that

Lawrence Torres56 said:But honestly, that whole "I just need to be who I truly discovered myself to be" thing? That’s where it gets tricky, isn't it? It’s probably the hardest hurdle there is, and let's face it, most people are going to trip and fall before they ever clear it. If we're being totally real here, how many of us actually know how to practice unconditional love? Most folks out there don't even buy into the concept of unconditional love, let alone live it. But man, that's the key that unlocks every single door... no matter how cheesy or cliché that might sound to some.

So, why not just tell your story? 🙂

stormybadger6 said:... you haven't quite grasped the essence of my response at all...
I was specifically referring to the part that was bolded on that, and I really don't feel like repeating the same examples. Look, if an employer requires a specific degree, that isn't discrimination; it's simply a job requirement for the position being offered—and since anyone can technically pursue that education, the opportunity remains open to everyone. That is perfectly standard practice.
However, when it comes to requiring years of professional experience, that *is* discrimination. To put it more precisely, it is what we call "adverse selection"—an intentional exclusion. In a competitive market, it is nearly impossible for someone fresh out of college to find work because those requirements are practically unreachable for them. (A job isn't necessarily something that is available to every single person on earth...)
In other words, these roles are essentially reserved for a select few!
That, in my view, is discrimination.

But I asked you why that wouldn't count as discrimination, and you didn't actually answer me.

I mean, if an employer has the right to demand a certain level of schooling, why wouldn't they also have the right to ask for experience? Both of those things end up being reserved for a chosen group; the only real difference is that there's just less of the second thing available on the market.

stormybadger6 said:.. look at it this way: you could travel the entire globe, survive being held captive, escape from confinement, master the art of jungle survival, summit the Himalayas, hunt mosquitoes, swim alongside penguins, pick up every local dialect from Cambodia to Guinea, marry women from all walks of life half a dozen times, divorce just as often, raise children, adopt, or even run for Congress or become a tribal leader...
all of those experiences will certainly benefit you, but your employer for a specific role with set requirements—including specific educational credentials on a formal level (which matters because you are signing a legal contract)—will find that your vast, lifetime experience carries absolutely no weight during the hiring process!!

Once you are eventually hired based on those contractual parameters, however, you will be able to use that real-world expertise to effortlessly show them who is truly in charge.. 😉

what does any of that have to do with the concept of discrimination? I was asking for an explanation of why it *isn't* discrimination, not for reasons to justify it

I'm just trying to point out that discrimination, if you look at it in its broadest possible sense, isn't necessarily illegal or even a bad thing. I guess you could say the whole way the world is structured is based on this kind of differentiation. Every single criterion we use inherently involves some level of discrimination