Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Matthew asked….Is Nathan Hughes the chap who goes on about Cricket in the sports thread
That certainly sounds like the same one to me. The John Arlott(OBE) of The Racing Forum.
The sweet sound of leather against willow on the village green, cucumber sandwiches, a gentle warm breeze wafting over me as I recline in my deck chair …and Nathan Hughes approaches the crease looking his usual confident self with a steely determination in his swagger. The bowler sees no fear in Nathan’s eyes as he hurtles a googly at breakneck speed. "Owzatt" the opposition scream. The umpire confirms the inevitable and Nathan returns to the clubhouse in abject shame and misery.Matthew wrote…We want young, fun people on here rather than boring people
So, where does that leave Nathan Hughes, Matthew?
Matthew asked…Why are you bothered? who cares?
That’s not very nice Matthew. If Pinza wants to know that’s all that matters. Now say you’re sorry, there’s a good boy.
Do you mean to tell us you weren’t on it Matthew? I was only able to get fifty quid on in a win single and another fifty in a win double with Fealing Real in the next at Bangor. Wish me luck.
K….oh what a wonderful dream I’ve just had….
Matthew, look on the bright side….at least you earned your Ladbrokes bonus points and will be able to play them up at some future point.
Having had inside info. that Sariska would be rooted to the spot I had a huge lay and made loadsamoney…..aren’t you just a wee bit jealous?
Not true.
K
p.s. Rather than waste that negative energy try to direct your anger toward a positive outcome. Here endeth the lesson.Katabatic,
Excellent effort from your horse Nawow earlier on. Another ten yards and I reckon you’d have been really celebrating yet another great performance.
Cheers
KenBad news Zen. I called in at the newsagents and saw this sign behind the counter…’Under 18’s not allowed to purchase cigarettes’.
Well because I’m over 18 it just seemed to be giving me permission to buy some so I’ve relapsed, though instead of twenty a day I’ve cut down to ten so I suppose you could say I’ve half stopped.It’s just that you seemed so confident with your selection I really thought you knew what you were talking about so I put my house, my car and even my dog on it to win.
So I’m bound to be a little disgruntled, don’t you think?
Sorry, I didn’t realise you were a new member. Okay, fair enough…welcome. Personally, I’d be so embarrassed putting up such a rubbbishy tip that I’d leave gracefully with my tail between my legs.
This thread should be posted on the Daily Lays and Plays section Cyjax. In view of the result perhaps it should be dismissed to the outer regions of the Universe. Just in case you try to make excuses for the performance the only thing that matters is, did it win? No. End of. Move on.
Would it not make for a neater and much more compact forum if Cormack introduced two new sections:-
one entitled ….. ‘Matthew’s *hite Jockeys,Trainers etc.’
and the other entitled ….. ‘Matthew’s Not So *hite Jockeys, Trainers etc.’
…and perhaps even a third…..’Matthew’s Over Exuberant and Knee Jerk Reactions to Jockeys, Trainers etc.’
Just a suggestion.
In that case, I apologise Eddie. Unlike yourself, with your super dooper piece of software to hand I just have a tired, old brain that often gets confused.
It would seem therefore that Luke, as is sometimes the case, has proffered a subjective opinion rather than based on facts. Even so, I reckon his subjectivity is often one of his most endearing qualities which is why, I think, he enjoys a certain popularity amongst ATR viewers though I much prefer him commentating on National Hunt rather than Flat Racing.
Eddie, I’m no statistician but I would have thought that to give substance to your argument you have to show not just the past winners and the lowest ratings but for a true comparison you have to include the top-rated entries from previous years. Perhaps fellow-forumite Luke Harvey is basing his thoughts on there having been a higher percentage of top-rated entries previously which, if that is the case, rather backs up his opinion.
Agree with Bob W re. Prescott. Interesting insight about someone I’d always presumed to be aloof and snooty.
Think Alastair could sue his employers though for subjecting him to being in a confined space and inhaling Prescott’s cigar smoke. Perhaps it’s one law for the wealthy cigar-smoking elite and another for down-at-heel cigarette smokers. I thought broadcasters were supposed to refrain from smoking images?Cormack wrote….I might have handled that thread differently, perhaps removed it temporarily (although Im not sure if we can do that), went through it in detail and then re-posted. I will have a look into whether we can do something like that with similar future problem threads.
Last night I had a dream…….
The venue: TRF Headquarters, Isle of Skye, Annual General Meeting.
The Motion:
‘Hands up all those in favour of a blanket amnesty for former banned members (spammers excepted) and the return of all previously locked threads.’Okay, so that’s 95% of members voting in favour.
Cormack intervenes…"Much as I would wish to accede to your wishes fellow-forumites, it just ain’t gonna happen."
Loud boos. The meeting closed.
Outside, in the pouring rain stood Conundrum looking disconsolate and dishevelled. "Those were the days" he uttered "I’d love to know how that guy from the Bahamas with the fool-proof system was getting on. That was an incredible thread."Nathan Hughes used to be a friend. I think he’s on Facebook. Pretty boy though we’ve never spoken. Not sure if he still rides, a motorbike and sidecar.
