goldfinger
- 09 Jun 2005 12:25
Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).
Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.
cheers GF.
doodlebug4
- 12 Jul 2013 21:18
- 27128 of 81564
Hilary is far too intelligent for you gf, you are obviously more used to trying to chat up the slappers in your local. She won, game set and match with you, long ago.:-)
dreamcatcher
- 12 Jul 2013 21:34
- 27129 of 81564
Three girls named Marie, Alexis and Taylor were driving through the country, when all of a sudden their car stalls. Marie remembers seeing a farm a little ways back, so her and Alexis walk to the farm, leaving Taylor guarding the car.
When Marie and Alexis get to the farm, they tell the farmer what happened. The farmer raises a gun to their head and tells them to get a fruit, vegetable, whatever, just get something from the garden. Marie grabs a plum, and Alexis grabs a single grape. Just as they come back into the farmer's house, Taylor walks in. He tells Taylor to do the same as they just did, and Taylor heads off towards the garden. While she's out in the garden, the farmer tells Marie and Alexis to shove whatever they have up their ass, and who ever laughs, dies. Marie laughs first, so the farmer shoots her. Then Alexis laughs and she gets killed too.
So they are floating out of their bodies, and Alexis asks Marie why she died. Marie said that the thought of sticking a plum up your ass was just too funny. Marie then asked Alexis why she laughed, Alexis said: "I saw Taylor coming around the corner with a watermelon!
Haystack
- 12 Jul 2013 21:36
- 27130 of 81564
d4
Slappers may be above his station. Agree about Hilary wiping the floor with him.
cynic
- 13 Jul 2013 07:59
- 27131 of 81564
Broad should have walked without awaiting the umpire's decision
in professional golf especially, players regularly penalise themselves even when their infraction would never ever have been spotted by anyone else
there's a couple of old but relevant cricket-related adages
play a straight bat
that's just not cricket
it's very sad that today's cricketers never learnt these, let alone were never taught to abide by them and their inherent spirit, regardless that the letter of the law allows the batsman to await the umpire's decision
Haystack
- 13 Jul 2013 11:47
- 27132 of 81564
I am not so sure. With the advent of Hawkeye, players accept the umpire's decision. Cricket is now big business. Do people drone on when footballers foul each other, dive, hand ball, goal keepers see balls cross lines, do all sorts of things unsighted and get away with it. It applies to all sport at the highest levels. It happens in motor racing, tennis etc. W C Grace was a far worse cheat than any modern cricketer. The game gradually developed this special aura of honesty and fairness that it doesn't deserve. Cricket was always a 'gentleman's' sport. Normal working class people didn't play cricket.
Botham said to his team in an ashes match long ago that if anyone walked he would cave their head in. This incident is the luck of the draw. Plenty of decisions go against players often in an unfair way.
How often do people tell shops when they are undercharged?
goldfinger
- 13 Jul 2013 12:07
- 27133 of 81564
Cyners, dont forget the young lad who made 98 in the aussies first innings was stumped and out when he had scored 6 ,the umpire didnt give him out and also Englands Trott was given out for a duck LBW when he clearly knicked the ball.
I didnt see the Aussies helping us out.
Perhaphs before a series starts both sides should come to a gentlemans agreement and decide if they play to the umpire or they play with a sportsmans agreement and walk if the genuinely feel they are out.
Even technology can get it wrong as was shown at the tennis and the machine has something like a 2% tollerance.
cynic
- 13 Jul 2013 13:18
- 27134 of 81564
i haven't been following live, but lbw decisions and stumping are impossible for the batsman to know with any certainty, so to await the umpire's decision is fair enough, even if he gets it wrong.
Mr Broad absolutely had to know he had hit the ball, so unquestionably he should have walked.
football was always a game for snobs played by yobs, and the fact that there is outrageous cheating, and referee abuse as well as some pretty dire referees (so i am told), comes as no surprise.
Hays - village cricket is as old as the game itself, even if the villagers were tenants or servants of the lord of the manor, so you are badly wrong on that score - read The Cricket Match and England, their England
and in answer to your last question - almost (95%+) always especially in an indie shop
dreamcatcher
- 13 Jul 2013 13:20
- 27135 of 81564
King of the globe-trotters: He was much parodied but Alan Whicker was a genius who brought the world into our living rooms
Presenter of Whicker's World died of bronchial pneumonia,
Haystack
- 13 Jul 2013 13:28
- 27136 of 81564
cynic
Why not 100%?
cynic
- 13 Jul 2013 13:36
- 27137 of 81564
because i would be lying and i know damn well there have been (rare) occasions when i have not owned up
Haystack
- 13 Jul 2013 13:43
- 27138 of 81564
Then it might as well be 0%. What sways you? Is it conscience, size of business or the sums involved. I was looking for a very smart briefcase to go to an important meeting and happened to be in the West End. I visited a well known dept store to look at their offerings. I found a Very expensive briefcase that had a label on it for a very low price. I looked around and found some more stock and sure enough they were all priced at around 4 times the price. I took the item to the till and got a great bargain.
The price is what you can get it for.
cynic
- 13 Jul 2013 13:50
- 27139 of 81564
you asked me a question and i answered you truthfully
as to why, it is possibly just whimsical at the time; perhaps i didn't much care for the shop's attitude
in your own example, you were correctly charged - i.e. the shop offered the article for sale at a given price and you accepted it; however, they could legally have refused to sell the item to you.
Haystack
- 13 Jul 2013 13:58
- 27140 of 81564
That's a very 'specific' answer. The 'right' thing would have been to point out that they had mispriced the item and then bought something else. I think it is the same as the batsman not walking. Both are taking advantage of someone's mistake and knowingly benefitting from it.
cynic
- 13 Jul 2013 14:21
- 27141 of 81564
i disagree
goldfinger
- 13 Jul 2013 14:23
- 27142 of 81564
i also disagree
cynic
- 13 Jul 2013 14:25
- 27143 of 81564
but with whom :-)) ?
goldfinger
- 13 Jul 2013 14:27
- 27144 of 81564
A sale in a shop isnt legaly binding until money has changed hands and a receipt given.
If for example a supervisor saw a check out operator punching in a wrong price she could intterupt and point out the mistake before the transaction had taken place. Offering the goods at the correct price.
goldfinger
- 13 Jul 2013 14:28
- 27145 of 81564
With Hays.
Your my hero as you know Cyners.
goldfinger
- 13 Jul 2013 14:35
- 27146 of 81564
I havent seen that doodle pip chap here or on advfn for a while. Has he gone on holiday or been put in a nut asylum?.
Poor lad cant stop arguing and getting into spats.
Edited MONEYAM
cynic
- 13 Jul 2013 16:18
- 27147 of 81564
sticky - if i'm you're hero, God help those whom you depise :-))