Probably more of a sign of times when work permits were needed for non UK nationals but I recall there being loads of class English/British goalkeepers in the 80s. Tony Coton was definitely up there with the best too.
That is why I don't use BT. (Assuming that you don't mean only BT are worse and everyone else is better).
I'm currently on BT (not by choice) and it's vastly improved since I last had it years ago. Not had any of the problems I used to have. Have it at work too again without issue.
Watched Man U v Liverpool U 23's a couple of days ago on Liverpool TV and the commentators were very complimentary about Joyce. Said currently he was attracting interest from 2 PL clubs.
KC's a bit rubbish in my village, the service drops out every time it rains, so my neighbour decided to switch to BT. He found BT was far worse, so switched back to KC, but BT accidentally disconnected next doors service instead of his. It took them three months to reconnect his neighbours service, they kept denying they'd done anything wrong. The ****s them.
I know the feeling. My broadband is pretty dire - if I'm trying to watch a stream, there's frequent buffering - and much, much worse when it's wet. It has its bright side, though, as the buffering saved me from seeing much of City's humiliation at Bournemouth...
I switched to BT's super fast fibre malarkey last year and it kicks the **** out of the Sky version I previously had. I now get it all around my house whereas Sky only reached around half of it.
I got Lightstream fitted yesterday, nothing new obviously, but I'm getting a guaranteed speed which despite being one of the slower packages KCOM offer, simply isn't achievable in the vast majority of the UK. KCOM are fitting this stuff everywhere as standard. If the rest of the country get plenty of choice of providers, and we get the world-leading technology in every home, I think I'll take that.
What else is it down to? It had been **** since I'd been in the house, Sky couldn't improve it, I switched and it was immediately massively better.
Your wireless speed will be improved simply because your provider has given you a newer router than the one you had before. The wireless signal the router issues is a function of the router not your provider.
It's literally nothing to do with them. Your wireless signal is entirely between you, your house and your router. The provider may give you a router as part of the service and I assume that's what changed in your case. But even then, it's likely that any difference you notice would be down to something as simple as the frequency it broadcasts on which you can change at will, rather than the new one being a 'better' router.
Yeah they gave me a better router than Sky could, so the new provider gave me an improved service. I never thought it was anything else and I don't even know what we're discussing. That's like me saying my new tv picture has improved since I got a new set and you telling me it's got nothing to do with the signal it receives. Yeah I know it's not, it's down to the tv.
I have SKY and have no problems with it. Apart from tablets, phones and various devices and games machines when grandkids are here, I am running two SKY boxes wirelessly with no problems. Good enough speeds for my needs, reasonable price, unlimited data and no bandwidth throttling.
