I may have mis heard her tonight but did Nancy say "I can't believe this guy [Anton]" when they were waiting for the judge's comments?
Was Nancy drunk?
2 of 6
You see the thing is with people that are chemically impaired is that they can be a bit difficult Fondants fancy has made a perfectly straightforward valid observation.I have no idea if nancy is on strong tablets, it's a language thing or she went a bit fabulous on the champagne but it is not comfortable viewing and it must be hard for Anton to work with.
He must be longing for the good old days with Ann w
He must be longing for the good old days with Ann w
Originally Posted by strictlystylish:
“You see the thing is with people that are chemically impaired is that they can be a bit difficult Fondants fancy has made a perfectly straightforward valid observation.I have no idea if nancy is on strong tablets, it's a language thing or she went a bit fabulous on the champagne but it is not comfortable viewing and it must be hard for Anton to work with.
He must be longing for the good old days with Ann w”
“You see the thing is with people that are chemically impaired is that they can be a bit difficult Fondants fancy has made a perfectly straightforward valid observation.I have no idea if nancy is on strong tablets, it's a language thing or she went a bit fabulous on the champagne but it is not comfortable viewing and it must be hard for Anton to work with.
He must be longing for the good old days with Ann w
”
Lovely expression!
Originally Posted by fondantfancy:
“Okey dokey.
Which bit of my post was 'righteous'? Where did I say (or even imply) that either I (or Anton) were better than people who drink?
Which bit of my post suggested that Nancy should be humiliated?
Which actual words?”
“Okey dokey.
Which bit of my post was 'righteous'? Where did I say (or even imply) that either I (or Anton) were better than people who drink?
Which bit of my post suggested that Nancy should be humiliated?
Which actual words?”
If we must.
Original post:
"If she is drinking then it wouldn't surprise me if Anton quits - he is very anti booze because of an alcoholic father. (And having had an alcoholic mother I don't blame him one bit.)"
You say it wouldn't surprise you if Anton quits because he had an alcoholic father and is anti-booze. This would suggest that Anton quitting would be based on a principle derived from personal traumatic experience. This would be a righteous act.
Anton quitting would mean Nancy would be out of the show. That he quit because he refused to dance with an alcoholic or a person who drinks would, for Nancy, be quite humiliating.
You go on to condone this action by using your own personal experience with an alcoholic as back-up.
There. I'm not saying that was your intent, and you've clarified it wasn't and I accept that totally, but it's a perfectly reasonable interpretation of what you wrote.
Originally Posted by Aleksis:
“If we must.
Original post:
"If Anton quitting would mean Nancy would be out of the show. That he quit because he refused to dance with an alcoholic or a person who drinks would, for Nancy, be quite humiliating.
.”
“If we must.
Original post:
"If Anton quitting would mean Nancy would be out of the show. That he quit because he refused to dance with an alcoholic or a person who drinks would, for Nancy, be quite humiliating.
.”
actually why should Anton give his time to a person who is worse for wear on a family show? I know I am not keen to see Nancy as she seems either drunk or on drugs on a show either /I make no apoligies for that either
Originally Posted by Aleksis:
“If we must.
Anton quitting would mean Nancy would be out of the show. That he quit because he refused to dance with an alcoholic or a person who drinks would, for Nancy, be quite humiliating.
”
“If we must.
Anton quitting would mean Nancy would be out of the show. That he quit because he refused to dance with an alcoholic or a person who drinks would, for Nancy, be quite humiliating.
”
It wouldn't be an unreasonable excuse for wanting to quit what is essentially Anton's job. Would you want to continue working with someone who consumed drink whilst on the job which subsequently affected their behaviour?
Just A thought on Last weeks Dance it did look a bit odd to me when she Ask Anton what are you doing and he said Dancing as she clearly did no what was going on to me
If she has been drunk for the past 2 week that means she keeps forgetting her steps with her Partner which does go down well witht the judges scoring either,
And it also make the Judges think Anton is not Really trying to do anthing Consrutive with Nancy if she drunk and not remembering her steps
Does anyone thonk that BBC are Regetting getting her on the now if this is the case
If she has been drunk for the past 2 week that means she keeps forgetting her steps with her Partner which does go down well witht the judges scoring either,
And it also make the Judges think Anton is not Really trying to do anthing Consrutive with Nancy if she drunk and not remembering her steps
Does anyone thonk that BBC are Regetting getting her on the now if this is the case
Originally Posted by CloneClown:
“It wouldn't be an unreasonable excuse for wanting to quit what is essentially Anton's job. Would you want to continue working with someone who consumed drink whilst on the job which subsequently affected their behaviour?”
“It wouldn't be an unreasonable excuse for wanting to quit what is essentially Anton's job. Would you want to continue working with someone who consumed drink whilst on the job which subsequently affected their behaviour?”
It's an entertainment show with amateurs. She's not his professional partner or anything.
Originally Posted by Aleksis:
“If we must.
Original post:
"If she is drinking then it wouldn't surprise me if Anton quits - he is very anti booze because of an alcoholic father. (And having had an alcoholic mother I don't blame him one bit.)"
You say it wouldn't surprise you if Anton quits because he had an alcoholic father and is anti-booze. This would suggest that Anton quitting would be based on a principle derived from personal traumatic experience. This would be a righteous act.
Anton quitting would mean Nancy would be out of the show. That he quit because he refused to dance with an alcoholic or a person who drinks would, for Nancy, be quite humiliating.
You go on to condone this action by using your own personal experience with an alcoholic as back-up.
There. I'm not saying that was your intent, and you've clarified it wasn't and I accept that totally, but it's a perfectly reasonable interpretation of what you wrote.”
“If we must.
Original post:
"If she is drinking then it wouldn't surprise me if Anton quits - he is very anti booze because of an alcoholic father. (And having had an alcoholic mother I don't blame him one bit.)"
You say it wouldn't surprise you if Anton quits because he had an alcoholic father and is anti-booze. This would suggest that Anton quitting would be based on a principle derived from personal traumatic experience. This would be a righteous act.
Anton quitting would mean Nancy would be out of the show. That he quit because he refused to dance with an alcoholic or a person who drinks would, for Nancy, be quite humiliating.
You go on to condone this action by using your own personal experience with an alcoholic as back-up.
There. I'm not saying that was your intent, and you've clarified it wasn't and I accept that totally, but it's a perfectly reasonable interpretation of what you wrote.”
Only by you apparently. The rest of us understood it perfectly!
Originally Posted by *stargazer*:
“Only by you apparently. The rest of us understood it perfectly!”
“Only by you apparently. The rest of us understood it perfectly!”
The rest of who? Do you speak for everyone who reads the thread?
People will know now what the intent of the post was, since it has been clarified, but my initial interpretation was perfectly reasonable. Just because it was different to yours does not make it imperfect.
Quote:
“Incidentally, you haven't answered the question posed by the thread title.”
“Incidentally, you haven't answered the question posed by the thread title.”
Reply #3?
Originally Posted by Aleksis:
“It's an entertainment show with amateurs. She's not his professional partner or anything.”
“It's an entertainment show with amateurs. She's not his professional partner or anything.”
She is an amateur dancer under contract to the BBC, being paid with taxpayers' money and bound by its code of conduct. I would suggest that being drunk on a family TV show is not acceptable under that code. I suspect that she may suddenly disappear under some pretext of injury.
Originally Posted by Aleksis:
“If we must.
Original post:
"If she is drinking then it wouldn't surprise me if Anton quits - he is very anti booze because of an alcoholic father. (And having had an alcoholic mother I don't blame him one bit.)"
You say it wouldn't surprise you if Anton quits because he had an alcoholic father and is anti-booze. This would suggest that Anton quitting would be based on a principle derived from personal traumatic experience. This would be a righteous act.
Anton quitting would mean Nancy would be out of the show. That he quit because he refused to dance with an alcoholic or a person who drinks would, for Nancy, be quite humiliating.
You go on to condone this action by using your own personal experience with an alcoholic as back-up.
There. I'm not saying that was your intent, and you've clarified it wasn't and I accept that totally, but it's a perfectly reasonable interpretation of what you wrote.”
“If we must.
Original post:
"If she is drinking then it wouldn't surprise me if Anton quits - he is very anti booze because of an alcoholic father. (And having had an alcoholic mother I don't blame him one bit.)"
You say it wouldn't surprise you if Anton quits because he had an alcoholic father and is anti-booze. This would suggest that Anton quitting would be based on a principle derived from personal traumatic experience. This would be a righteous act.
Anton quitting would mean Nancy would be out of the show. That he quit because he refused to dance with an alcoholic or a person who drinks would, for Nancy, be quite humiliating.
You go on to condone this action by using your own personal experience with an alcoholic as back-up.
There. I'm not saying that was your intent, and you've clarified it wasn't and I accept that totally, but it's a perfectly reasonable interpretation of what you wrote.”
Thanks.
Originally Posted by Aleksis:
“It's an entertainment show with amateurs. She's not his professional partner or anything.”
“It's an entertainment show with amateurs. She's not his professional partner or anything.”
So it would be ok for Tess to present the show whilst having had a drink because it's only an entertainment show?
For the pros it is their job/livleyhood that is on show and at stake when appearing on Strictly and they wouldn't want anyone's actions to impede on the reputation that they have built up - even for 'entertainment' purposes hency why Widdy winning would have dented Anton's and the shows credibility.
Originally Posted by *stargazer*:
“Lovely expression!”
“Lovely expression!”
It is isn't it?
(And if she was at a party I'd say go for it! - And run away, LOL.)
Originally Posted by Aleksis:
“It's an entertainment show with amateurs. She's not his professional partner or anything.”
“It's an entertainment show with amateurs. She's not his professional partner or anything.”
Aleksis - we're chums now
- please don't say you really think it's OK to be drunk on a family show?(If she is, it may be medication for eg.)
Originally Posted by fondantfancy:
“Aleksis - we're chums now - please don't say you really think it's OK to be drunk on a family show?
(If she is, it may be medication for eg.)”
“Aleksis - we're chums now
- please don't say you really think it's OK to be drunk on a family show?(If she is, it may be medication for eg.)”
In the context of SCD, I'm personally not bothered. If she was proper ratarsed and falling all over the place, that would be inappropriate.
If she's been tippling because of nerves and is, at worst, a bit slurry - I don't reckon it's a big deal. We don't even know for sure she is drunk! Maybe she's just weird, or like you said, on meds.
Originally Posted by Aleksis:
“In the context of SCD, I'm personally not bothered. If she was proper ratarsed and falling all over the place, that would be inappropriate.
If she's been tippling because of nerves and is, at worst, a bit slurry - I don't reckon it's a big deal. We don't even know for sure she is drunk! Maybe she's just weird, or like you said, on meds.”
“In the context of SCD, I'm personally not bothered. If she was proper ratarsed and falling all over the place, that would be inappropriate.
If she's been tippling because of nerves and is, at worst, a bit slurry - I don't reckon it's a big deal. We don't even know for sure she is drunk! Maybe she's just weird, or like you said, on meds.”
She was a heck of a lot more than a bit slurry!!!!!
Originally Posted by BeethovensPiano:
“There seem to be all sorts of strange rumours circulating around Nancy.”
“There seem to be all sorts of strange rumours circulating around Nancy.”
The others being?
Originally Posted by *stargazer*:
“The others being?”
“The others being?”
That someone sabotaged her dress or something lol
Originally Posted by BeethovensPiano:
“That someone sabotaged her dress or something lol”
“That someone sabotaged her dress or something lol”
The thread on that is so funny!!
Originally Posted by fondantfancy:
“Who's being righteous?
My childhood was hell and so was Anton's.
Drunks actually make me anxious.”
“Who's being righteous?
My childhood was hell and so was Anton's.
Drunks actually make me anxious.”
Drunks are deadly behind a wheel.
Apart from that situation persons who are sober can be deadly too. The bankers and government regulators who landed us all in penury were not drunk, Appalling child molesters are not usually drunks.
Anton survived Ann Widdicomb, he can survive anything. Apart from Sven Erikson Nancy is not known to have done anybody any harm, and she has no child to give hell to.
Nancy did not fall down tonight, and last week she dealt with the boa with such speed and dexterity she could easily have walked a straight chalk line.
Give Nancy a chance.
Spoiler
Thanks perdie
Nancy was not drunk, just on her normal form.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_vqdRkv7LI
As mentioned in the OP Bruno made reference to to drink, including this "You've had a couple of bottles already haven't you?" Totally out of order to say this if it's not drink.
2 of 6
