Sentences with phrase «against the decision if»

You can appeal against the decision if a water company says it won't fit a meter.

Not exact matches

What if the family is against your decision, and they are not bothered by mixing in this business concern?

If you're doing assessment of your mutual funds, you want to be able to take a look at the decisions that were made, compare against benchmarks, and get a report.

Defense spending aside, transatlantic rifts could also occur should Trump continue to make critical foreign policy decisions without first consulting allies (as in the April 7 air strike against Syria in response to a chemical - weapons attack) or if he presses NATO allies to make stronger military contributions in Syria or Afghanistan.

If any of the court cases against Kinder Morgan land in our favour, the public will need to mobilize quickly to force governments to respect the decision.

If you dissent with our decisions, you will be considered rebellious against God.

The campaigner also said that if the discrimination decision against Ashers Bakery was upheld, it would have significant implications for other businesses.

And if Clara is taking on the skills and persona of the Doctor, he can look at her and say, no, she wasn't good in the classic sense of goodness but she is extraordinary — she survived, she saved as many as she could, she made hard decisions, she weighed the good of the many against the loss of a few.

If you need a government contract, sanctioned by the government and granted by the government to make sure you are not discriminated against — for rights to make decisions in a hospital or to pass on your SS benefits or for other human rights — work towards that kind of thing.

If a conservative Christian is against such a decision because he believes he has good reasons against it, these may perhaps be quite weighty and yet his protest against the decision may be unjustified.

Measure the decision to not support World Vision against this teaching of Christ himself and tell me if it's hypocritical or not ««Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.»

Such reasons have also existed against ancient and traditional decisions, even if they were not expressed in so many words and were not felt to be important by conservative people.

If there were a devil it would not be one who decided against God, but one who, in eternity, came to no decision.

He quoted Matthew 18 in support of this decision: «If another member of the church sins against you, go and point Out the fault when the two of you are alone.»

Then again it was the girls choice to become a wrestler which means she think she's brave enough to take on a guy, she knew coming into this business that she would one day have to go against a dude but she still chose to wrestle so that has to do with her if she gets hurt but I take my hat off to the kid cause he made the right decision even if he did get bad compliments because he was being a gentlemen and taking in consideration of her feeling physically and emotionally.

If, because of this risk, a Christian thinks himself dispensed of taking individual decisions he sins against the historicity of his existence and becomes all the more guilty.

Following His wisdom is easier and if you aren't up against enormous pressures in life (fork in the road to make a decision that only benefits you aka unrighteous versus righteous decision that benefits all), you can make it through being a decent, Christ like individual.

When God created humanity with the freedom to go against His will, this freedom necessitated the possibility that history would go bad if we went against His will, which is exactly what happened in Genesis 3, and the negative consequences of this decision are felt in Genesis 4 when Cain murders his brother, in Genesis 5, where the phrase «and he died» is repeated over and over and over, and then in Genesis 6 when people become so evil that the destruction of all mankind becomes inevitable and God steps in to save and rescue Noah and his family.

Even if it is true, finally, that the text accomplishes its meaning only in personal appropriation, in the «historical» decision (and this I believe strongly with Bultmann against all the current philosophies of a discourse without the subject), this appropriation is only the final stage, the last threshold of an understanding which has first been uprooted and moved into another meaning.

Everybody knows this, and men argue against its necessity and legitimacy only if certain decisions offend them morally and / or politically, as occurred for example in the attack on the Warren Court by the Conservative Right.

It seems that angels should know better than to sin against God so it can not be tolerated if they do (and without the level of understanding that angels have we are in no position to understand God's decision in that matter).

Daly and Cobb say there is plenty of room to complain about monopoly profits, but that is a complaint against monopoly, not against profits per se: «If one dislikes bureaucratic decision making then one must accept the market and the profit motive, if not as a positive good then as the lesser of two evils... We have no hesitation in opting for the market as the basic institution of resource allocation» (p. 48If one dislikes bureaucratic decision making then one must accept the market and the profit motive, if not as a positive good then as the lesser of two evils... We have no hesitation in opting for the market as the basic institution of resource allocation» (p. 48if not as a positive good then as the lesser of two evils... We have no hesitation in opting for the market as the basic institution of resource allocation» (p. 48).

If there were some one who early in life steeled his mind against all remorse and who actually carried it out, nevertheless remorse would come again if he were willing to repent even of this decisioIf there were some one who early in life steeled his mind against all remorse and who actually carried it out, nevertheless remorse would come again if he were willing to repent even of this decisioif he were willing to repent even of this decision.

the entire interpretation of the texts are a mess,,, if i considered the case of Soddom and Gomorrah for example (Genesis 18:20 - 33) The Lord already tells Abraham of his intention to punish Soddom,,, and Abraham actually pleads with Him and bargins with the Lord,,, (in other words the decision to burn Soddom & Gomorrah was not because of the offense against the Angels,,, not to mention that there is no indication what so ever, that the Lord appeared in an Angelic figure!»

The Protestant principle, in name derived from the protest of the «protestants» against decisions of the Catholic majority, contains the divine and human protest against any absolute claim made for a relative reality, even if this claim is made by a Protestant church.

2) do nt blame the ref on the stoke game as if it wasnt for his poor game we should have been 4 - 0 down!!!!!! Everyone gets ref decisions going fore and against them throughout the season

But if his decision is more about WINNING MORE CHAMPIONSHIPS, it will be hard to argue against us.

If Arsenal continue to play this modest style of football, like they did in the second half against Everton, like they did for the entire 90 minutes against Manchester City, I expect both Ozil and Sanchez to leave the club, their decision also looks a collective one.

But when we get the benefit of a poor decision against our opponents, which we do if you look across many games, Wenger says nothing — like Mustafis close but offside goal against Spuds, - and so he wants it both ways.

I agree with you that there will be some public resentment if Usyk boxes in Russia, but if against all odds (I think that Usyk will have to beat Gassiev by decision, and is unlikely to get fair judges in Russia) he beats Gassiev in the enemy's own territory, it will only enhance his legend and popularity.

Mike Riley, would you believe, has now said «If the VAR was used a week earlier Mike would overturned the penalty decision against Chambers».

So Wenger expected another penalty to be given against us, and he also thinks that Arsenal would not be down in 6th position in the table if our club hadn't been mistreated by the refereeing decisions, and that is why we are so far from the top.

kronkes influence over the club is minimal at best how many decisions does he actually make in the public club domain that we all know of, i am only guessing here but just because he is majority shareholder it doesn't mean he can just do what he wants without the other board members say so, i suppose the rest of the board would vote him out of power and liquidate his shares if he did something really wrong like leveraged the club against a big debt.

Yeah yeah yeah blah blah blah.even if he scores a winning goal against us tonight, it still wouldn't flaw our decision to ship him out

Even if they turn out to be just the usual sort of spurious rumours that we will be seeing a lot more of in the coming months, the Arsenal boss still looks set to have a big problem with his star striker, all because of the strange decision to hold another Copa America tournament this summer, even though the last one was held less than a year ago, with Alexis scoring the winning penalty against Argentina to win it for the first time.

And, if we did it strictly by position it would be a marginal decision because he would be up against Alexis.

What if we have a new manager next season and a similar decision is given against us.

why was Sead not playing... if he's not better than the little engine that couldn't at left - back or Bellerin playing out of position, why did we get him in the first place... his size would have provided some much needed muscle against an undersized Liverpool front line while his speed would have made those in wide positions play more honestly... I still believe that Wenger was once again punishing the fans for not being satisfied with what had transpired so far in the current window... no matter what the reasons, the decision was indicative of the ineptitude of this manager against top ranked opponents

if the Ox was played to either showcase his skills or to increase any potential bids because of his perceived importance to our starting 11, this was an incredibly risky move that could have cost us dearly... imagine if he was injured or played poorly, like he did, and this negatively impacted our ability to get the best available deal... more importantly, why was Wenger willing to play someone who obviously wants out in such an important game under false pretenses... this kind of behaviour might be less offensive in April, when things are done and dusted, but to do this following a loss against a supposed main rival that pipped us for fourth by a point last year, could be considered at best inappropriate and at worst treasonous... we can't afford to let this coach make business decisions on game day, which has gone on for far too long

why did we play Welbeck in the striker's role... no one can question his heart but to have a player with such limited first - touch and finishing skills against such a game opponent with Lacazette on the bench is almost unforgivable... maybe it's because Welbeck tows the party line or maybe it's because Welbeck doesn't know anything but 100 % on the pitch, unfortunately neither of these qualities makes him a capable starting striker on a team with any real aspirations... I can only hope that he was being showcased for a move elsewhere, as there was some talk last week about some interest from Everton... if he moved on that would be the only silver lining of this coach's decision, but once again it wouldn't excuse this club for putting business decisions ahead of fielding the best possible team to secure 3 points at Anfield

With him in charge no referee faces any sanctions whatsoever for bad decisions against Arsenal if anything he encourages them.

Not excuses everton at goodison is always gonna be a tough and very close game, if you start getting decisions against you it becomes extreamly difficult to get a result.

And if Klopp was debating whether to change goalkeepers, then this incident against Bordeaux last night almost certainly sealed his decision.

That makes us more vulnerable and if decisions or luck go against us, it has too much impact.

I think we remember bad decisions which go against us, particularly if they affect the result but soon forget those in our favour.

Does he realise that those two last games against West Brom and Chelsea could have been won by Arsenal if it were not for poor decisions?

Finally, if Wenger really cares that Arsenal go to the next level with Lacazette in the striker's role he will need to surround him with the proper kinds of players, those who compliment his skills and give him a legitimate chance to lead the line... if they can spread the opposing teams back line with Sanchez on the left and someone of consequence on the right (must purchase this individual), this would likely create some space for Ozil in the middle of the pitch... having 3 players who can not only create their own opportunities, but provide assists and make well - timed runs, could bring some much - needed directness back into our ticky - tack approach of late... unfortunately instead of making the tough decisions and spending the supporters money in the right places, we instead have wasted so much time bashing our heads against the same brick wall over and over again and expecting different results..

When bad decisions go against us we remember them, if they are in our favour we soon forget.

All I would say is so many decisions going against arsenal 4 possible pens and a goal disallowed you can not beat a team if you are up against ref who quite clearly is not above given everything to Stoke and nothing to arsenal I'm not a bitter fan just one who watched the game though football eyes I'm gutted but not supprised because who the ref was

But if we have learned anything about Powell, it is that after a good game when you think he is a legit RB, he will make two or more really bad decisions the next game, leading directly to multiple goals against.