|
||||||||
Countdown - so much better these days! |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1501 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: In the southstand
Posts: 87,654
|
Quote:
In the absence of photographic proof, I may have to conclude that that situation exists only in your mind...!
![]() |
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#1502 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Hull
Posts: 3,516
|
Good God. Rachel's knockers look massive today!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1503 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: tredegar south wales
Posts: 51,137
|
i am watching of course solely for the purpose of the game itself![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1504 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 11,837
|
Quote:
Good God. Rachel's knockers look massive today!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1505 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Hull
Posts: 3,516
|
No wonder he went for 'Two large ones' at that final numbers game!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1506 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,329
|
Maybe a calculated response by RR to the (rather out-of-left field) news today about Vorderman being the new Rear of the Year?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1507 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14,065
|
Quote:
Jesus, Mary and Joseph, that woman is perfection!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1508 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Hull
Posts: 3,516
|
Quote:
Maybe a calculated response by RR to the (rather out-of-left field) news today about Vorderman being the new Rear of the Year?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1509 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 559
|
Quote:
Good God. Rachel's knockers look massive today!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1510 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: London
Posts: 20,281
|
Loved one of the words today. "LEGGIER"
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1511 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Hull
Posts: 3,516
|
There was an even better one the other day, 'RANDIEST'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1512 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: In front of the fire
Posts: 1,514
|
![]() Quote:
Oh.My.Gosh. Now that is seriously bad for the - well, bad for a family board such as this! |
|
|
|
|
|
#1513 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,329
|
Quote:
![]() Oh.My.Gosh. Now that is seriously bad for the - well, bad for a family board such as this!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1514 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Perthshire
Posts: 4,188
|
I don't recall her being as top heavy as that in the early days.
Ain't complaining though. The previous days black leggings and short skirt was excellent too. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1515 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Back in Hitchin
Posts: 12,989
|
Rachel is always excellent and I notice the lovely Susie has been showing a bit of cleavage lately too
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1516 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Perthshire
Posts: 4,188
|
What she got on today ?
I can't tell, maybe the ladies will know, but with that backless thing on are the lovely boobies free to dangle, unfettered by bra ? |
|
|
|
|
|
#1517 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London
Posts: 5,415
|
Does she still do the live maths like CV used to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1518 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: In the southstand
Posts: 87,654
|
Quote:
Does she still do the live maths like CV used to?
|
|
|
|
|
#1519 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 559
|
Quote:
Yes. She's amazing in every department, aprt from her choice of footie team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1520 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 15,280
|
Can we bring this thread back to some sort of propriety?
I find the current Graham a smug git and am always suspicious of people who know obscure words, I was hoping that todays other Graham was going to beat him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1521 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 14,718
|
Suzy creates a rod for her own back with that stupid restaurant rule - it would be much more sensible just to say the dictionary definition is final that way there is no room for interpretation and no controversy. If the challenger had got the conundrum he would have won based upon her decision that you could order two gruels in a restaurant.
Even if the term "two gruels" was in common usage there are lots of common words that aren't in the dictionary and aren't allowed - an example would be "pooter" which is a really common word that doesn't happen to be in the dictionary. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1522 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Perthshire
Posts: 4,188
|
Quote:
Can we bring this thread back to some sort of propriety?
I find the current Graham a smug git and am always suspicious of people who know obscure words, I was hoping that todays other Graham was going to beat him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1523 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 156
|
Quote:
Suzy creates a rod for her own back with that stupid restaurant rule - it would be much more sensible just to say the dictionary definition is final that way there is no room for interpretation and no controversy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1524 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 14,718
|
Quote:
They tried this once and it didn't work. It meant you could have brandies and whiskies but not beers.
Yes we would all disagree about certain words, my example of "pooter" which is very common compared to some of the obscure literary definitions used by a tiny number of scholars (the ODoE has a definite bias towards literary terms surprise surprise) but for the game of Countdown the dictionary should be king. If the dictionary says you can't order "two beers" then Countdown shouldn't allow "beers" the same way it doesn't allow "pooter". |
|
|
|
|
|
#1525 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 14,718
|
Quote:
The knowledge of obscure words is the secret to winning Countdown.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:02.






i am watching of course solely for the purpose of the game itself

