Penetration_Guru 04.01.2007 15:26 |
Firstly, my apologies to non-English speakers - you don't stand much chance with this one. Right, some context if you're still with me...Australia v England cricket - Collingwood gives Warne some stick and gets in response "What was your MBE for - scoring 7 at the Oval?". Geoff Boycott is later heard to moan quite a bit about the unfairness of the honours system these days. Cue much discussion on the BBC website, which inevitably asks for comments from the public. Including this magical piece of non-punctuation...I swear it's a direct copy. "i think the mbe's are given out and about a bit to cheaply but shane warne comming out and saying what have you done for england. He is still a dam good player and yer warney can bring up the 7's and 10's but he doesent mension the time where collingwood hit 98 or smashing the aussies about for 206 and steven gerrard has probaly acheveid what has to be acheived i think he thurlery deserves it he won the chgampions leauge and they were 3-0 down against a perfectley deasent club yeah theres no point looking back on that game but its such a remarkable acheivment in english football what cant steven gerrard do you tell me he deserves evry bit of." How bad is that? Even before we start disagreeing with the content (such as it may be discerned), it's hardly English at all. But it's not txt-spk, it's just horrible. |
Penetration_Guru 04.01.2007 15:28 |
Oh, and judging by the writer's nickname, he is 24 years old. I won't tell you his name yet, as it could colour your opinion. |
YourValentine 04.01.2007 15:38 |
How good that we do not have such people on this forum :-) |
thomasquinn 32989 04.01.2007 15:39 |
I've heard drunk schizos on acid talk more sense than that! My god. |
Leaky Luke 04.01.2007 15:42 |
txt spk makes more sense if you ask me. |
JoxerTheDeityPirate 04.01.2007 16:26 |
Penetration_Guru wrote: Firstly, my apologies to non-English speakers - you don't stand much chance with this one. Right, some context if you're still with me...Australia v England cricket - Collingwood gives Warne some stick and gets in response "What was your MBE for - scoring 7 at the Oval?". Geoff Boycott is later heard to moan quite a bit about the unfairness of the honours system these days. Cue much discussion on the BBC website, which inevitably asks for comments from the public. Including this magical piece of non-punctuation...I swear it's a direct copy. "i think the mbe's are given out and about a bit to cheaply but shane warne comming out and saying what have you done for england. He is still a dam good player and yer warney can bring up the 7's and 10's but he doesent mension the time where collingwood hit 98 or smashing the aussies about for 206 and steven gerrard has probaly acheveid what has to be acheived i think he thurlery deserves it he won the chgampions leauge and they were 3-0 down against a perfectley deasent club yeah theres no point looking back on that game but its such a remarkable acheivment in english football what cant steven gerrard do you tell me he deserves evry bit of." How bad is that? Even before we start disagreeing with the content (such as it may be discerned), it's hardly English at all. But it's not txt-spk, it's just horrible.oh dear.please say he isn't english. i did stay up to watch the test match but it was just too much humiliation for my liking and hit the sack. can lizzie strip them of their mbe's like she has with nasseem hamed for crimes against sport? |
Penetration_Guru 04.01.2007 17:54 |
pot...kettle. MBE doesn't need an apostrophe (nothing does if it's plural) and you should consider using the odd capital letter. |
AspiringPhilosophe 04.01.2007 18:13 |
Um...as an American I stand no chance of being able to read this. Translation please?? |
Big Wag Dong 04.01.2007 18:14 |
Did you ever stop to think that this person may have a learning disability? Do you think it's funny when someone cannot spell as good as you? Going by recent topics it is easy to spot that you are nothing but a bully. God help anyone who knows you in the real world. |
deleted user 04.01.2007 18:23 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: Um...as an American I stand no chance of being able to read this. Translation please??I think he meant: "I think the MBEs are given out a bit too easily, but Shane Warne is coming out and saying what he has done for England. He is still a damn good player and Yer Warney can bring up the 7's and 10's, but he doesn't mention the time where Collingwood hit 98 or smashed the Aussies about for 206. Steven Gerrard has probably achieved what has to be acheived; I think he thoroughly deserves it. He won the Champions' League, though they were 3-0 down against a perfectly decent club. There's no point looking back on that game, but it's such a remarkable achievement in English football. What can't Steven Gerrard do, you tell me. He deserves every bit of [it]." That's just what I think it says. I have no idea about English football. lol |
JoxerTheDeityPirate 04.01.2007 18:27 |
Penetration_Guru wrote: pot...kettle. MBE doesn't need an apostrophe (nothing does if it's plural) and you should consider using the odd capital letter.water...duck.You noticed my deliberate mistakes then.Surprised you didn't notice my spelling of Naseem Hamed though.Maybe next time. |
AspiringPhilosophe 04.01.2007 18:31 |
<font color=gold>Thirtynine<h6>Wooooooo! wrote:That's what it looked like...but I know squat about soccer.CMU HistoryGirl wrote: Um...as an American I stand no chance of being able to read this. Translation please??I think he meant: "I think the MBEs are given out a bit too easily, but Shane Warne is coming out and saying what he has done for England. He is still a damn good player and Yer Warney can bring up the 7's and 10's, but he doesn't mention the time where Collingwood hit 98 or smashed the Aussies about for 206. Steven Gerrard has probably achieved what has to be acheived; I think he thoroughly deserves it. He won the Champions' League, though they were 3-0 down against a perfectly decent club. There's no point looking back on that game, but it's such a remarkable achievement in English football. What can't Steven Gerrard do, you tell me. He deserves every bit of [it]." That's just what I think it says. I have no idea about English football. lol Thanks! |
iGSM 04.01.2007 19:06 |
That's ok. He's talkin' about cricket. On which I'm sure England will go back to the UK and cry in their beers for the..who cares, really!? We've got The Ashes *does little fuck you dance, dee-dee-dee!* Take that England! Cricketing superiority, my eyelash! |
JoxerTheDeityPirate 04.01.2007 19:17 |
iGSM wrote: That's ok. He's talkin' about cricket. On which I'm sure England will go back to the UK and cry in their beers for the..who cares, really!? We've got The Ashes *does little fuck you dance, dee-dee-dee!* Take that England! Cricketing superiority, my eyelash!the only thing our cricketers are good at now is ballroom dancing. |
iGSM 04.01.2007 19:20 |
Heh. And walking... ...from the dressing rooms to the centre and back to the dressing rooms, giggle, giggle. |
JoxerTheDeityPirate 04.01.2007 19:24 |
all we got to do now is bowl you lot out for 44 to win. no problem! |
thomasquinn 32989 04.01.2007 19:25 |
joxerthemighty wrote: all we got to do now is bowl you lot out for 44 to win. no problem!LOL! |
iGSM 04.01.2007 19:35 |
Odder things have happened. There's a chance it could... Not very likely but a chance none the less. Australia lost in Sydney last time they played England there. Mind you we were chasing 451 for victory...so I think that is a fair enough clout. Anderson really just wouldn't get out. The nerve tarnishing McGrath's figures. Edit: Although I must know - what did the English team receive MBEs for winning a sporting series? That is actually worse than The Beatles getting theirs for services to...music? Looks good though - Richard Starkey, MBE. |
iGSM 04.01.2007 20:53 |
Whitewash, much? lolzozz! I am looking back to the 2025 Ashes Series so I can say 'Son, I remember when we thrashed the Poms in 2006/2007' then have the kid say 'I'm not your son. In fact I'm 43! I'm 4 years older than you!'. Of course by that time I will be insanely drunk. |
Eviltwin 04.01.2007 22:47 |
Just for the record iGSM has a great knowledge of a site that perfectly explains Cricket. You should really indulge us romeo. |
iGSM 04.01.2007 23:00 |
I know nothing about cricket. |
Lester Burnham 04.01.2007 23:49 |
I find that hard to. |
Lester Burnham 04.01.2007 23:50 |
Lester Burnham wrote: I find that hard to.Believe? |
Lester Burnham 04.01.2007 23:50 |
Lester Burnham wrote:Yes. Believe.Lester Burnham wrote: I find that hard to.Believe? |
iGSM 05.01.2007 03:26 |
lol, totl spmr? fifflegig1 Fuckin' idiots. Learn...things and..be merry. |
Penetration_Guru 05.01.2007 14:38 |
Back to the subject. The name associated with the original attempt at gibberish.......... "mattyk24" quite a coincidence, i wunda iff linda wud lyke 2 comment? |
magicalfreddiemercury 05.01.2007 14:41 |
Penetration_Guru wrote: Back to the subject. The name associated with the original attempt at gibberish.......... "mattyk24" quite a coincidence, i wunda iff linda wud lyke 2 comment?Uh-oh. Somebody's in trouble... |
Eviltwin 05.01.2007 20:33 |
Courtesy of iGSM, Modest Australian bastard! CRICKET: As explained to a foreigner... You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side thats been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay all out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game! and there you have it. |
write your letters in the sand 05.01.2007 21:18 |
<font color=red>?Sasha wrote: Courtesy of iGSM, Modest Australian bastard! CRICKET: As explained to a foreigner... You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side thats been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out. ET! : ) Long time no chat! I hope all is well. Xs and Os, CLT When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay all out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game! and there you have it. |
iGSM 05.01.2007 21:49 |
That is an appropriate explanation of cricket. |
brENsKi 06.01.2007 05:38 |
yes it's all a load of balls and bails |
iGSM 06.01.2007 05:44 |
No balls, legs before wickets and ducks! My type of game! |
Eviltwin 06.01.2007 14:08 |
I like this thread. |