Up Front by Emma Hart

Read Post

Up Front: The Up Front Guides: Relationships for the Unisexual

183 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    Can we make this thread the cricket one? That wouldn't make me a bad person ... would it?

    I'm hardly going to argue. Waiting on the challenge...

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4327 posts Report Reply

  • Rich Lock, in reply to Max Rose,

    might want to comment on the relationship between Poisson distributions and the "it never rains but it pours" effect.

    A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle?

    Plenty more fish in the sea, but not when it's raining cats and dogs?

    It's raining fish, hallelujah?

    Sorry, I'll stop trolling/trawling now, and get me sou'wester. It's an off-topic red herring after all.

    back in the mother countr… • Since Feb 2007 • 2326 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen,

    So it was an awful test pitch, if you count lost time for rain less than 4 days play.

    Both batting line-ups struggled. Both bowling attacks had periods when they were unplayable.

    We didn't really miss Vettori's bowling but his batting might have been nice.

    In the end the difference was actually the blackcap batsmen trying their level best to not give away their wickets. And it shocks me to be writing that given how they played at the Gabba. The Aussie batsmen seemed to be playing to prove they should still have a place in their side but the blackcap batsmen seemed to have even more determination than that.

    And as a final injustice, Bracewell gets 6 for 40, tears up the Aussies to win the match and a freaking Aussie batsman gets man of the match ... where's the review system for that?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3217 posts Report Reply

  • Rob Stowell, in reply to Rich Lock,

    It’s an off-topic red herring after all.

    Ahh, the cricket! :) Young Doug Bracewell is something, eh?

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 1434 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    So it was an awful test pitch, if you count lost time for rain less than 4 days play.

    Matthew Littlewood called it "greener than a first year at Orientation".

    And it's not entirely off topic because "intelligent interest in cricket" = "hot".

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4327 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to Rob Stowell,

    Ahh, the cricket! :) Young Doug Bracewell is something, eh?

    What. The. Fuck???

    I predict drug tests all round...

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 1768 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Emma Hart,

    And it's not entirely off topic because "intelligent interest in cricket" = "hot".

    Curious, the deepest cache of middle aged virgins in my acquaintance are all cricket lovers. It seems like a game specifically designed to make you content sitting around at home on your own for days on end.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 8305 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to BenWilson,

    "intelligent interest" is not the same as "obsessional devotion" (e.g. knowing which players are on form vs. memorising Wisdens for the last 50 years)

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 1768 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to BenWilson,

    you're not saying cricket nuts are wankers, are you? <ducks>

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16272 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Sacha,

    you're not saying cricket nuts are wankers, are you?

    I'm not entirely sure if their genitalia ever enter their minds. Crowded out by cricket.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 8305 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to nzlemming,

    “intelligent interest” is not the same as “obsessional devotion”

    Indeed. I can't remember the last time I had sex with someone who didn't like cricket.

    No. Wait. Actually, I can.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4327 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to Sacha,

    you're not saying cricket nuts are wankers, are you? <ducks>

    I think he's subtly referring to a "sticky wicket" </wanders_off_whistling_nonchalantly>

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 1768 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Sacha,

    wankers

    Not that there's anything wrong with that of course

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3217 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Emma Hart,

    No. Wait. Actually, I can.

    See, your memory is still good dear. Now can you remember their name?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3217 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    some of my best friends, etc

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16272 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    Now can you remember their name?

    Just what are you implying, Bart? Do you think I habitually can't remember the names of people I've slept with? Hmm?

    ...

    Fuck.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4327 posts Report Reply

  • Megan Wegan, in reply to Emma Hart,

    Just what are you implying, Bart? Do you think I habitually can’t remember the names of people I’ve slept with? Hmm?

    There is probably _other_ people who can remember them, if that helps?

    Welly • Since Jul 2008 • 1273 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to nzlemming,

    I think he's subtly referring to a "sticky wicket"

    Nah, they seem simply unconcerned about sex at all. They're just addicted to something that is, to them, far more powerful, the drip feed of random tosses of a ball, interspersed variously with good and bad outcomes. Intermittent reinforcement at it's most powerful, rather like gambling or WoW. I can see why people love it, but I'm also thankful that I don't.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 8305 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Megan Wegan,

    There is probably _other_ people who can remember them, if that helps?

    See that's what you have friends for

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3217 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    See that’s what you have friends for

    That's why. I was wondering.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4327 posts Report Reply

  • Megan Wegan, in reply to Emma Hart,

    That’s why. I was wondering.

    That, and so Is can sleep with them?

    (Sorry Is, it's just that it was right there, and you know what I am like.)

    Welly • Since Jul 2008 • 1273 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Beard, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    So it was an awful test pitch, if you count lost time for rain less than 4 days play.

    I think we've hit upon the formula for exciting test cricket: good bowling, careless batting and a pitch that's greener than an Aro Valley polling booth.

    Not that there's anything wrong with unexciting test cricket. There's a lot to be said for the sort of match that is just an excuse to sit around for five days reading, drinking G&Ts, and occasionally looking up to say "well played, old chap". But if you want results, then batting-friendly pitches and a line-up of solid, cautious batsmen isn't going to deliver.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1039 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Beard,

    Or there's another way to spice up test cricket: Rollerball.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1039 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Megan Wegan,

    That, and so Is can sleep with them?

    I manfully resisted that line, mostly because I really don't know Is at all. But I'm glad someone used an utterly perfect setup.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3217 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Tom Beard,

    if you want results

    Watch Twenty 20. Which is the perfect result mode cricket match.

    Test cricket is, as you say, for idling away 5 days in the sunshine with alcohol.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3217 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.