Re: Was It a drop goal for Brough : Wed Apr 09, 2014 6:17 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

It is getting boring now?



So, there's this guy. Let's call him Pete. Pete goes on forums. Presumably gets the concept of threads.

There's this thread. It's called "Was it a drop goal for Brough". (This contains a clue to the contents).

Pete doesn't want to talk about the Brough incident any more. Because it is boring him now, and he got better shiit to do with his time. So what does he do?

I'll tell you, because I don't think you'd guess. He goes to one of the few places where he can guarantee that the topic of discussion will be boring to him, namely the "Was it a drop goal for Brough" thread! You may not be surprised, but he finds it boring. I am not sure whether Pete was surprised. I sense he may have been, as I detect a tad of irritation because he then wastes more of his time, when he could have exited the thread and done something interesting, posting to the people who obviously aren't yet bored by it that he is bored by it. Because, I think, he believes this knowledge will in some way be a useful thing for those people to share.

Personally I find rugby union quite boring. Maybe I should go take in a match at the weekend so I can tell the people there I'm bored?

Brilliant, Pete! You gave me a laugh, anyway.

But is was not a drop goal.....

Re: Was It a drop goal for Brough : Wed Apr 09, 2014 6:50 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

It is getting boring now?



So, there's this guy. Let's call him Pete. Pete goes on forums. Presumably gets the concept of threads.

There's this thread. It's called "Was it a drop goal for Brough". (This contains a clue to the contents).

Pete doesn't want to talk about the Brough incident any more. Because it is boring him now, and he got better shiit to do with his time. So what does he do?

I'll tell you, because I don't think you'd guess. He goes to one of the few places where he can guarantee that the topic of discussion will be boring to him, namely the "Was it a drop goal for Brough" thread! You may not be surprised, but he finds it boring. I am not sure whether Pete was surprised. I sense he may have been, as I detect a tad of irritation because he then wastes more of his time, when he could have exited the thread and done something interesting, posting to the people who obviously aren't yet bored by it that he is bored by it. Because, I think, he believes this knowledge will in some way be a useful thing for those people to share.

Personally I find rugby union quite boring. Maybe I should go take in a match at the weekend so I can tell the people there I'm bored?

Brilliant, Pete! You gave me a laugh, anyway.

Re: Was It a drop goal for Brough : Wed Apr 09, 2014 7:04 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

But is was not a drop goal.....

That's the problem. As much as the Huddersfield lot want to believe it was a drop goal and they were hard done to, it's been shown time and again not to have gone over (even by the sky lot, who let's be honest love to jump on any controversy) - so now it's just two sides digging their feet in, arguing the same points over and over.

It wasn't given as a drop goal, it's been show to, within the balance of probabilities be the correct decision. There's nothing more to it.

Re: Was It a drop goal for Brough : Wed Apr 09, 2014 8:43 pm  

I just think a little bit of lateral thinking and repeat viewing can only bring one conclusion and that is that the ball went wide. I have been absolutely convinced having analysed it in depth that it went wide, indeed I think its ludicrously obvious and I'm glad this is now being proven.

Reading some of the inept one dimensional posts that say the goal was good, is a bit like witnessing somebody that's never watched cricket before, give an unqualified and incorrect verdict on an LBW. Once you understand angles and perspective, it becomes far easier to judge, and the loud mouthed knee jerkers become far more irksome.

Re: Was It a drop goal for Brough : Wed Apr 09, 2014 11:14 pm  

But it was a good drop goal ...

Re: Was It a drop goal for Brough : Wed Apr 09, 2014 11:21 pm  

Crackador wrote:

....
Reading some of the inept one dimensional posts

Crackador also wrote:

Once you understand angles and perspective, it becomes far easier to judge, .

The odd thing is, as an expert in angles and perspective, you think you could read a one dimensional post. My limited understanding was you'd need a minimum of 2 dimensions to be able to read it.

Re: Was It a drop goal for Brough : Wed Apr 09, 2014 11:48 pm  

There is no such thing as one dimensional????

Re: Was It a drop goal for Brough : Wed Apr 09, 2014 11:49 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

It is getting boring now?



So, there's this guy. Let's call him Pete. Pete goes on forums. Presumably gets the concept of threads.

There's this thread. It's called "Was it a drop goal for Brough". (This contains a clue to the contents).

Pete doesn't want to talk about the Brough incident any more. Because it is boring him now, and he got better shiit to do with his time. So what does he do?

I'll tell you, because I don't think you'd guess. He goes to one of the few places where he can guarantee that the topic of discussion will be boring to him, namely the "Was it a drop goal for Brough" thread! You may not be surprised, but he finds it boring. I am not sure whether Pete was surprised. I sense he may have been, as I detect a tad of irritation because he then wastes more of his time, when he could have exited the thread and done something interesting, posting to the people who obviously aren't yet bored by it that he is bored by it. Because, I think, he believes this knowledge will in some way be a useful thing for those people to share.

Personally I find rugby union quite boring. Maybe I should go take in a match at the weekend so I can tell the people there I'm bored?

Brilliant, Pete! You gave me a laugh, anyway.

And you, sir, made me laugh.
Brilliant.

Re: Was It a drop goal for Brough : Thu Apr 10, 2014 2:04 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

There is no such thing as one dimensional????

In the context of a post on a forum? Well, it would need length, for a start. Each letter occupies some.

But there's your one dimension used up. In terms of height, my word processing software only goes down to 1 pt and that's hard to see. But that still does have that second dimension. With a magnifying glass, perhaps. But the software doesn't have a zero pt. If it did, that I imagine it would be tough to read The rest of this post is in one dimensional text:

Re: Was It a drop goal for Brough : Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:51 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

There is no such thing as one dimensional????

time is one dimensional