Jump to content


Gold Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hebridean

  1. Watching the darts just now and Whitlock has his John Smith's advert sewn on upside down Not even enough skill to see which way up writing should be! Edit: it's been removed. Presumably not sewn on then.
  2. Och, stop being so serious.
  3. Impossible for me to take sides in a StewartyMac v Skyline Drifter debate, but a couple of observations... The pockets are tighter now than they used to be. The cloth, however, is much faster and this aids break-building as clustered reds split more easily. Joe Johnson - I really don't think he was as bad as he's being presented here. Yes, he was an outsider when he won the World Championship, but he'd been a finalist in the Amateur World Championship before he turned pro so he hadn't exactly come from nowhere. And he was no more an outsider than Shaun Murphy was when he won the world championship a few years ago. Anyway, an outsider winning doesn't mean the standard is or was weak, it just means an outsider has won. Anyone trying to argue that the standard now isn't far higher than it was 20 years ago is on a hiding to nothing. ... and is there really less snooker on the tv now than there was 20 years ago? I'm not at all convinced.
  4. Ok, you can only legally concede a frame if you need snookers. If you concede when you don't need snookers, you've broken the rules.
  5. Disputing that Phoenix. The rules of snooker cover this under the player's conduct section and it IS based on arithmetic. You can only concede a frame if you need snookers to win. Refusal to continue a frame you don't need snookers in falls under "ungentlemanly conduct" and means that if you do it again your opponent will be awarded the match.
  6. Clicky - third last post on that page. Prefer our version where the OP gets the piss taken out of him though.
  7. I rather suspect that someone claiming a midwife warned him his kid would be fat and stupid is more likely to be the one who got touchy about something he didn't want to hear.
  8. How would you have liked them to have phrased it then? Or would you have preferred to have been left to make the decision based entirely on what suited yourselves and without regard to the various reasons that one choice over another is best for the baby? The evidence points to higher average intelligence amongst breastfed children (dubious though that one is) and has proven lower rates of obesity in later life. You won't disprove that with a sample of one, nor do you negate the implications of the decision you made by pouring scorn on the manner in which you perceive the advice was given. The principle that no one should be bullied into this or any other parenting choice is all well and good, but against a backdrop of perpetual bullying from formula manufacturers who break and flaunt the law at every turn, inadequately trained health professionals in this area and a general consensus that bottle feeding is the "norm", pussy-footing isn’t the answer. And if the presentation of facts causes offence, then so be it. If someone interprets “bottle feeding will increase the risk of obesity” or “breastfeeding will decrease the risk of obesity” as “your kid will get fat”, then it’s a pity. It’s the chance you take. But that’s all I believe has happened. If they had gone on to say that breastfeeding would reduce the chances of cot death, Diabetes, Mutiple Sclerosis, Chron’s disease, respiratory infections, tooth decay and breast cancer would you have interpreted that as them saying that the baby (and mother) were going to suffer from all of these if you used formula? You’ve already taken liberties quoting what was said to you. If the phrase used annoyed you that much, tell us what they really said.
  9. - Because they are well aware of the attitudes like those of the poster who started this subject off and don't want to be subjected to them. - Because they themselves are uncomfortable with the prospect of breastfeeding in public no matter how accepting the public might be. - Because their mothers belong to the generation with the lowest uptake of breastfeeding and have passed on the attitudes of 20-30 years ago. - Because breastfeeding is more problematic than bottlefeeding - a point proved if they are fortunate enough to find out about breastfeeding support (well, you don't get bottlefeeding support do you?) - Because they have partners who are repulsed by the idea of "sharing" the breasts with a baby. - Because they have partners who would not let them feed in public, or even in their own house in company. - Because formula milk is now "closer than ever" to breast milk. There's a variety of reasons for starters. Dismissing the validity of a choice to bottlefeed as "ridiculous" is lowering yourself to the level of the people who have imparted their "wisdom" on Rowan.
  10. Am no givin up yet. Name your price. (must not include gardening)
  11. You can't pin my thread for me.
  12. Well done you! Are we going to see some photos?
  13. I hope you realise that if you ate the lot it only counts as 0.0025 of your "five-a-day".
  14. She'd be best saving it till there's ten times that amount - to get value for money out of the second class stamp!
  15. Well done - you've found a purpose for home grown produce - environmentaly friendly golf tees!!!
  16. Oh well, I guess it's time now to read posts from people trying to make out that it was all worthwhile!
  17. Aye. Keep a cow in your garden and you can call it the Derry.
  18. I think you should freecycle the Ivy that's growing on your wall. That way someone will come along and take half of it and your neighbour will only have to get rid of the other half.
  19. Aw feck. Is it HIS birthday too? Oh well, Happy Birthday Nizzy.
  • Create New...