Spoilers, Friday 27th March 2009

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:28 pm

Cate Street-Porter looks to continue her assault on octoness against Helen Kerr.

I'd like to see Martin Gardner get a boner about the way Rachel's dressed today. Yeuch.

Innis Carson · Post by **Innis Carson** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:29 pm

Matt Morrison wrote:Re: Spoilers, Friday 27th March 2009

Match, you idiot.

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:30 pm

Innis Carson wrote:
Matt Morrison wrote:Re: Spoilers, Friday 27th March 2009
Match, you idiot.

No, because, check this out, it's actually not funny.

Innis Carson · Post by **Innis Carson** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:34 pm

Nobody else let that get in their way.

Innis Carson · Post by **Innis Carson** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:37 pm

TOOLBARS?

Matthew Green · Post by **Matthew Green** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:38 pm

BORSTAL

Richard Priest · Post by **Richard Priest** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:39 pm

Innis Carson wrote:TOOLBARS?

Yes, I was quite proud of that one in round 4 (spotted after 29.9 seconds).

John Douglas · Post by **John Douglas** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:39 pm

Does BARSTOOL have to be hyphenated? (R4)

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:40 pm

Innis Carson wrote:TOOLBARS?

TOOLBARS. (very nice)

I remember when Rachel first started there was a load of chat on here about the way she wrote her numbers.
Unless I'm mistaken (was only half paying attention) she wrote the 44 there with two different styles of '4'. Interesting.

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:41 pm

John Douglas wrote:Does BARSTOOL have to be hyphenated? (R4)

At a guess I'd say it's more likely two separate words than hyphenated.

Mark Kudlowski · Post by **Mark Kudlowski** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:09 pm

3rd numbers, far quicker than either contestant: (100 - 5) x 4

Karen Pearson · Post by **Karen Pearson** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:14 pm

HEPARIN for a contestant beater.

MESETAS isn't in my dictionary. Does anyone know if it's in the current official version?

Richard Priest · Post by **Richard Priest** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:22 pm

Felt a bit sorry for Helen, she didn't play badly but Cate was rocking.

On Monday we will see Cate take on someone we know from apterous.

Eoin Monaghan · Post by **Eoin Monaghan** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:26 pm

Rich Priest wrote:Felt a bit sorry for Helen, she didn't play badly but Cate was rocking.

On Monday we will see Cate take on someone we know from apterous.

who??

Ben Hunter · Post by **Ben Hunter** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:52 pm

Eoin Monaghan wrote:
Rich Priest wrote:Felt a bit sorry for Helen, she didn't play badly but Cate was rocking.

On Monday we will see Cate take on someone we know from apterous.
who??

Apterous Prune.

Kai Laddiman · Post by **Kai Laddiman** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:55 pm

Ben Hunter wrote:
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
Rich Priest wrote:Felt a bit sorry for Helen, she didn't play badly but Cate was rocking.

On Monday we will see Cate take on someone we know from apterous.
who??
Apterous Prune.

Bolas Bolas Bolas Bolas Bolas Bolas Bolas Bolas

Kieran Child · Post by **Kieran Child** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:21 pm

I hope Kate does become octochamp. She'll overtake Kirk as the sexiest one...

Richard Priest · Post by **Richard Priest** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:33 pm

For those wanting to know - and to avoid annoying anyone who wants to wait till Monday - this is Cate's next opponent - http://www.apterous.org/viewuser.php?user=2547.

Or at least his nameplate was in place as I left - wasn't able to hang around to watch.

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:35 pm

Rich Priest wrote:his

Spoiler. And not just in an annoying "SPOILER!!" way, I had thought it might be about the time that Claire was gonna be on.

Richard Priest · Post by **Richard Priest** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:48 pm

Matt Morrison wrote:
Rich Priest wrote:his
Spoiler. And not just in an annoying "SPOILER!!" way, I had thought it might be about the time that Claire was gonna be on.

Sorry, it's just that as apterous is fairly male-dominated I didn't think anyone would be surprised

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:55 pm

Rich Priest wrote:
Matt Morrison wrote:
Rich Priest wrote:his
Spoiler. And not just in an annoying "SPOILER!!" way, I had thought it might be about the time that Claire was gonna be on.
Sorry, it's just that as apterous is fairly male-dominated I didn't think anyone would be surprised

I think Matt was joking, since it's not a spoiler to say who the challenger is going to be. Sudders starts the Monday after.

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 8:02 pm

So "Gaunty" (you just know someone is a sad friendless loser when they have to give themselves a matey-sounding nickname) believes that the only people who disagree with his views are "the middle class ruling elite in London". Git. He seems to lack the basic facility that most of us have to some degree or another that allows us to monitor and check what we're about to say and think: "No - that would really make me sound like a total tosser."

Kirk Bevins · Post by **Kirk Bevins** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 8:03 pm

Charlie Reams wrote: I think Matt was joking, since it's not a spoiler to say who the challenger is going to be. Sudders starts the Monday after.

I had 13th April on my calendar so 2 Mondays time.

Junaid Mubeen · Post by **Junaid Mubeen** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:51 pm

Kirk Bevins wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote: I think Matt was joking, since it's not a spoiler to say who the challenger is going to be. Sudders starts the Monday after.
I had 13th April on my calendar so 2 Mondays time.

You have a Clare Sudbery calendar? Interesting.

D Eadie · Post by **D Eadie** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 8:49 am

Phil Reynolds wrote:So "Gaunty" (you just know someone is a sad friendless loser when they have to give themselves a matey-sounding nickname) believes that the only people who disagree with his views are "the middle class ruling elite in London". Git. He seems to lack the basic facility that most of us have to some degree or another that allows us to monitor and check what we're about to say and think: "No - that would really make me sound like a total tosser."

Hehe - so you don't like him Phil, as all your posts on the subject would indicate. Bigot, git, loser, friendless.........all pretty harsh.
Whatever happened to tolerance?

Ian Fitzpatrick · Post by **Ian Fitzpatrick** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:20 am

I've never heard of "Gaunty" either, nor Colin Murray for that matter but both have been extremely good DC guests. I was particularly impressed with Colin doing his words on his own and using the dictionary provided.

A good call on whoever found them.

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:31 am

D Eadie wrote:
Phil Reynolds wrote:So "Gaunty" (you just know someone is a sad friendless loser when they have to give themselves a matey-sounding nickname) believes that the only people who disagree with his views are "the middle class ruling elite in London". Git. He seems to lack the basic facility that most of us have to some degree or another that allows us to monitor and check what we're about to say and think: "No - that would really make me sound like a total tosser."
Hehe - so you don't like him Phil, as all your posts on the subject would indicate. Bigot, git, loser, friendless.........all pretty harsh.
Whatever happened to tolerance?

I don't think tolerance of stupidity is a particularly worthwhile virtue but, yeah, I admit that was a pretty pointless post - after a curry and several beers on a Friday night in, the urge to descend to his level overtook my usual admirable self-restraint.

Anyway, I think you'll find Gary Male has summed up "Gaunty" far more pithily than I would ever choose to...

D Eadie · Post by **D Eadie** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:39 am

So changing your stance after a curry, does that make you a Korma Chameleon?

Gaunty had a huge audience on Talksport and was a genuinely decent guy. Never found him to be anything but a gent. He speaks for many people in what he says, although i agree that not everyone shares his viewpoint.

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:08 am

D Eadie wrote:So changing your stance after a curry, does that make you a Korma Chameleon?

Groan. I did spend quite a long time later that evening slumped on the toilet, which I suppose constitutes ALOO SAG.

Gaunty had a huge audience on Talksport and was a genuinely decent guy. Never found him to be anything but a gent. He speaks for many people in what he says, although i agree that not everyone shares his viewpoint.

It's rare to find someone whose opinions are unique, so you could point to pretty much anyone and say that they speak for lots of others. What's irritating about JG is his constantly repeated claim that he "says what everyone thinks", which is no doubt designed deliberately to wind up the majority of ordinary people listening to his radio show so that they phone in to disagree with him - thereby guaranteeing its success.

Rosemary Roberts · Post by **Rosemary Roberts** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:40 am

Phil Reynolds wrote: What's irritating about JG is his constantly repeated claim that he "says what everyone thinks".

I agree that's irritating, although he is not the only political commentator who does it. But if he spiked your curry, that must be a first.

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:06 am

Rosemary Roberts wrote:if he spiked your curry, that must be a first

I made the curry myself so can vouch for its purity. I blame the beer.