hardtack

I agree, it was hilarious. I didn't mind Jimmy Kimmel (sp?) as presenter either...the byplay between him and Matt Damon was very funny.

If it was darts it would be one hundred and eiiiiiiighty!

No, the person responsible for handing the presenters the envelope, gave them the wrong envelope (best actress) and because it contained the name of the La La Land actress, the presenters concluded the winner must be La La Land.

Even Weideman threads are Watts threads now?

DC, I think you'll find that at that time there was no conclusive evidence, and there was certainly no major anti-smoking campaign. In fact, from memory even as recently as the late 70's (when I quit for reasons of cost), there was no solid link established between smoking and cancer.

I only wish both my parents were alive to corroborate that... they must have been the exceptions that proved the rule I suppose.

This transcends political leanings... it's just [censored] funny, plain and simple. The accompanying blurb by the creator: "Trump's press conference is easier to take if you slow it down a bit. Then it's like watching an old drunk ranting at you in a bar at 3:00am—the only circumstance where any of this would seem normal. You're welcome."

A reasoned response is considered as being "a tad sensitive"? Physician heal thyself.

Watts (disciplined), Pedo, Kent and Jetta (all coming off injuries), Trennners (probably play this week), Garland (pretty much expected to be depth only with the current backline). I'd say that the psychological scarring excuse is well past its use by date.

That read more as a rhetorical question, which is probably why it got no answer.

Threadgold Thoroughgrip Garterettes

When I was in primary school in the late 50's/early 60's kids were beaten up for daring to be different and the teachers turned a blind eye... this continued on into high school as well, with the only difference being that the beatings were far worse. Back then bullying 'didn't exist' and the teachers made a sport out of belittling kids. Yes, we all breathed out carbon dioxide back in the day (much as we do now) and we also thought that smoking was cool and were told that there were no adverse affects or health issues associated with it. I guess those pesky scientists were just conspiring against the tobacco companies in order for the govt to apply a hefty tax on ciggies. I don't recall the scores being any more important back in the 50's and 60's at school as they are at my childrens' school today... the emphasis was (and still is) on getting involved, getting fit and having a good time doing that. As nutbean so eloquently stated, "whether we consider all progress good, bad or otherwise, one thing is certain - you can't halt progress.".

In which case Jetta must have done something terribly wrong as well...after all, he would be one of the first picked in any team we field.

Yep, and Jetta refused to play in a show of solidarity with his one true captain.

Having lost both parents to smoking, I consider $30 to be too cheap! The thing that I cannot understand is that armed with all of the knowledge that is now available regarding the dangers of smoking, why would anyone even consider taking it up... a seriously dumb decision. My parents and their generation could at least plead ignorance due to that knowledge not being readily available. Booze is probably priced right, but when you consider the amount of damage it can do directly and indirectly, maybe it is priced too low as well. There is talk of a tax on junk food and soft drinks, and I have no issue with that either. All of these things, smoking related cancers, obesity and alchoholism and hospitalisation of people indirectly affected by the consumption of alchohol (car crash victims, violence victims etc), place a lot of pressure on the public health system. The taxes are there to reduce consumption and ease the burden... unless of course you have any better suggestions as to how it can be effectively dealt with.

I thought I read in a couple of places (Twitter, Facebook, here?) that Watts had some sort of thumb injury that occurred during the intra-club match and that he has his thumb in some sort of 'brace' (supposedly seen at the family day). Is there any truth to that? If so, wouldn't that go some way to explaining his omission?

You're right Biff... and it's probably not beyond him to do that ;-)

I get the feeling that they will persevere with JKH, otherwise, if not, it could be a lifeline for Harmes who might otherwise not have made the cut for Round 1.

Geez, Nev's got a long arm!

Apart from the fact that a "triplicate" would require every one of the three prmierships to be identical in every way, what would that technicality be?

I'd like that premiership, in triplicate, on my desk first thing in the morning!

Actually, it was Bush Snr and the Gulf War that really started things rolling...some described Dubya's invading Iraq as dealing with unfinished business.

Binary logic?

I could practically sense the foam and spittle forming around ProDee's mouth as he spat out that string of invective