Ash35 425 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 How appropriate the caption on the photo says "Not allowed out", when clearly, "it" is almost all out. NOT ALLOWED OUT (take care when opening)
Deelusioned 0 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 How appropriate the caption on the photo says "Not allowed out", when clearly, "it" is almost all out. Ash, I'm sure you've answered this question before, but why do you post on a Demon forum? Nothing against it, I am just a little baffled.
Ash35 425 Posted July 3, 2007 Author Posted July 3, 2007 Ash, I'm sure you've answered this question before, but why do you post on a Demon forumn? Nothing against it, I am just a little baffled. My wife is a Melbourne member. So I often go to the footy with her, thus seeing alot of Melb games. Plus, I just like talking footy sometimes, and I find Demonland a better "chat" than Bomberblitz.
Deelusioned 0 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 Ahhh got 'cha. Hope there were no punch-ons Friday!
CHAMP 347 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 How appropriate the caption on the photo says "Not allowed out", when clearly, "it" is out. Much ado about nothing. The shady object in question is the back of his shorts.
Brocky 4 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 Much ado about nothing. The shady object in question is the back of his shorts. Yep, it sure is. Pic is on the Age website.
Deelusioned 0 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 press conference from collingwood on issue now on SEN
Ash35 425 Posted July 3, 2007 Author Posted July 3, 2007 Ahhh got 'cha. Hope there were no punch-ons Friday! It was a frosty trip home at times. Although we spend a fair bit of the trip discussing and reflecting on Neale Danihers caoching career. I have to admit, I had a lump in my throat as he left the field to a standing ovation.
Ash35 425 Posted July 3, 2007 Author Posted July 3, 2007 SEN apparently talking about it now. Actually spoke to the guy who took the pic. They reckon it's definately his snag.
timD 994 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 I opened the document, enlarged it 400% and still cannot see a thing.
Whispering_Jack 31,365 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 I opened the document, enlarged it 400% and still cannot see a thing. In law there is a doctrine called the De Minimus rule which means that the law does not concern itself with little things. Perhaps that's why you can't find it.
old55 23,860 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 How appropriate the caption on the photo says "Not allowed out", when clearly, "it" is almost all out. NOT ALLOWED OUT (take care when opening) Which one is the "Didak"? Or is that what both of them are called? I guess he couldn't let Chris Tarrant upstage him.
CHAMP 347 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 I opened the document, enlarged it 400% and still cannot see a thing. If you open an image, enlarged from the Age >pdf, in a more advanced editing program that supports "levels" it can be seen that the object in question is a continuous curve of the hem of the shorts. Sorry.
mikeod 21 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 Definitely nothing more than a curve in the shorts.
deesrock 0 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 My first glance and I have to admit that I thought "it" was hanging out. I then enlarged the area and it is obvious the it in question is in fact Didak's shorts. I have just had major issues with myself - yuk - I was actually trying to enlarge a photo to look at Didak's old fella - thank God it was just his shorts! I am ashamed of myself!!!
diesel 420 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 My first glance and I have to admit that I thought "it" was hanging out. I then enlarged the area and it is obvious the it in question is in fact Didak's shorts. I have just had major issues with myself - yuk - I was actually trying to enlarge a photo to look at Didak's old fella - thank God it was just his shorts! I am ashamed of myself!!! Jeeeez!!! Go have shower. Yuk!
deesrock 0 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 Yep - shower required - i am making myself feel very creepy but I bet I am not the only one who has sat here today trying to enlarge Didaks privates! What were we thinking????? Also, I am a girl which is just a bit less creepy than you blokes trying to do it!
Jaded No More 68,976 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 Also, I am a girl which is just a bit less creepy than you blokes trying to do it! Disagree. You were enlarging Didak's groin area... it's disturbing regardless of gender *Vomit*
QueenC 74 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 Disagree. You were enlarging Didak's groin area... it's disturbing regardless of gender *Vomit* Agree on all counts...... Sorry deesrock !!!
CHAMP 347 Posted July 4, 2007 Posted July 4, 2007 In an amusing irony Didak's last words at his most recent Media Conference were "Basically I need to pull my head in".
deesrock 0 Posted July 4, 2007 Posted July 4, 2007 Come on - everyone of you that has looked at this topic has done the same thing!!! At least I admitted it and stopped as soon as I realised what I was doing!
Jaded No More 68,976 Posted July 4, 2007 Posted July 4, 2007 Come on - everyone of you that has looked at this topic has done the same thing!!! At least I admitted it and stopped as soon as I realised what I was doing! Actually I saw it, threw up a little, and chucked the paper in the bin... Of course, if the same unfortunate misprint happened to the guy on the left, I probably would have framed it
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.