FootballNews
http://www.footballnews.com.au/forum/

David Warner walking off pitch
http://www.footballnews.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=85172
Page 1 of 2

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Tue Oct 30, 2018 12:48 pm ]
Post subject:  David Warner walking off pitch

How funny was that? From all accounts, the biggest sledger in international cricket has a cry because of some mild sledging.

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Tue Oct 30, 2018 12:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

https://m.betootaadvocate.com/headlines/roxy-jacenko-lines-warner-up-with-lucrative-endorsement-deal-as-new-face-of-johnnie-walker/

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Tue Oct 30, 2018 12:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

https://m.betootaadvocate.com/uncategorized/warner-abandons-car-in-middle-of-a-six-lane-highway-after-being-told-to-learn-how-to-drive/

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Tue Oct 30, 2018 12:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

https://m.betootaadvocate.com/sports/warner-walks-out-of-brunch-after-mother-in-law-says-he-looks-like-hes-been-in-a-good-paddock/

Author:  Wayne Kerr [ Tue Oct 30, 2018 1:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

talking to yourself, again ........

Author:  Bomber [ Tue Oct 30, 2018 2:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Maybe Warner should have instead seen a shrink like half the ex-england team did years back.

Author:  ozzie owl [ Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Wayne Kerr wrote:
talking to yourself, again ........


:lol: :lol:

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Tue Oct 30, 2018 4:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Wayne Kerr wrote:
talking to yourself, again ........



No, provided some links to some articles I found amusing.

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Tue Oct 30, 2018 4:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Bomber wrote:
Maybe Warner should have instead seen a shrink like half the ex-england team did years back.



Can you name three of them?

Author:  Bomber [ Wed Oct 31, 2018 5:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Maybe Warner should have instead seen a shrink like half the ex-england team did years back.



Can you name three of them?


Trott, Swann & KP - all mental.

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Wed Oct 31, 2018 5:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Maybe Warner should have instead seen a shrink like half the ex-england team did years back.



Can you name three of them?


Trott, Swann & KP - all mental.


1/3 - see me after class.

Author:  Bomber [ Wed Oct 31, 2018 5:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

So there were even more that lost their minds - like I said, half the team. :P

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Wed Oct 31, 2018 5:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Bomber wrote:
So there were even more that lost their minds - like I said, half the team. :P



Can you name 3 of them?

Author:  Bomber [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
So there were even more that lost their minds - like I said, half the team. :P



Can you name 3 of them?


I did - you didn't believe me.

Can you?

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
So there were even more that lost their minds - like I said, half the team. :P



Can you name 3 of them?


I did - you didn't believe me.

Can you?


No, I can't.

Author:  Bomber [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

See me after class

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Bomber wrote:
See me after class


Would it have been better to name one who has and 2 who hadn't?

Author:  Bomber [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
See me after class


Would it have been better to name one who has and 2 who hadn't?


Yes - beats nothing at all.

You do realise getting a zero or failing to answer is a fail in most tests.

Plus unless you personally know and regularly liaise with the "other two" how would you know for sure they haven't? Many won't openly advertise the fact.

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
See me after class


Would it have been better to name one who has and 2 who hadn't?


Yes - beats nothing at all.

You do realise getting a zero or failing to answer is a fail in most tests.

Plus unless you personally know and regularly liaise with the "other two" how would you know for sure they haven't? Many won't openly advertise the fact.


1/3 is a fail.

However, in my case - I have the correct answer. You asked if I could name 3 and I answered the trick question.

3 shoild have been easy for you as you said there was at least 6 of them.

Author:  Bomber [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Sorry, but another fail. What is half of eleven? PS - hint - it's "not at least six".

Plus: 1/3 > 0/3 (even though I got 3/3)

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:45 am ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Bomber wrote:
Sorry, but another fail. What is half of eleven? PS - hint - it's "not at least six".

Plus: 1/3 > 0/3 (even though I got 3/3)


How are you going to name 0.5 of a person? You need to round up to 6.

You didn't get 3, you named 3 but two were incorrect. I suggest we get some back up to of those names or you admit you exaggerated and got called out on it.

Author:  Bomber [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Sorry, but another fail. What is half of eleven? PS - hint - it's "not at least six".

Plus: 1/3 > 0/3 (even though I got 3/3)


How are you going to name 0.5 of a person? You need to round up to 6.

You didn't get 3, you named 3 but two were incorrect. I suggest we get some back up to of those names or you admit you exaggerated and got called out on it.


You only think two are incorrect, meaning you aren't likely to know much more on the matter.

And if you are going to say "at least" then you need to round down, not up.

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 1:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Sorry, but another fail. What is half of eleven? PS - hint - it's "not at least six".

Plus: 1/3 > 0/3 (even though I got 3/3)


How are you going to name 0.5 of a person? You need to round up to 6.

You didn't get 3, you named 3 but two were incorrect. I suggest we get some back up to of those names or you admit you exaggerated and got called out on it.


You only think two are incorrect, meaning you aren't likely to know much more on the matter.

And if you are going to say "at least" then you need to round down, not up.



5 would be less than half, it would need to be at least 6.

Do you have any thing to back up your answer? If you can provide proof then I will remark your test.

Author:  C U Next Saturday [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 2:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

https://www.firstpost.com/sports/fighti ... 02204.html

Monty Panesar
Jonathon Trott
Marcus Trescothick
Andrew Flintoff
Michael Yardy
Steve Harmison

Author:  Bomber [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 2:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

To GIAE : No, 6 is more than half, so using "at least" you are referring to the minimum, therefore the lesser sum. Had you said "up to six" you would have scored a tick.

As for proof, I don't have any, just word of people in the know, and given I doubt you can provide proof to the contrary, it's your word against mine and therefore you'll have to deal with it, accept it or just agree to disagree.

*KP still is a nutter - you only have to hear his commentary to know that he needs ongoing mental therapy.

Author:  Old Redback [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Bomber wrote:
To GIAE : No, 6 is more than half, so using "at least" you are referring to the minimum, therefore the lesser sum. Had you said "up to six" you would have scored a tick.

As for proof, I don't have any, just word of people in the know, and given I doubt you can provide proof to the contrary, it's your word against mine and therefore you'll have to deal with it, accept it or just agree to disagree.

*KP still is a nutter - you only have to hear his commentary to know that he needs ongoing mental therapy.

Splitting hairs after being proved wrong....

Author:  Bomber [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Old Redback wrote:
Bomber wrote:
To GIAE : No, 6 is more than half, so using "at least" you are referring to the minimum, therefore the lesser sum. Had you said "up to six" you would have scored a tick.

As for proof, I don't have any, just word of people in the know, and given I doubt you can provide proof to the contrary, it's your word against mine and therefore you'll have to deal with it, accept it or just agree to disagree.

*KP still is a nutter - you only have to hear his commentary to know that he needs ongoing mental therapy.

Splitting hairs after being proved wrong....


Proved wrong? How so, Perry Mason?

Author:  Old Redback [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Bomber wrote:
Old Redback wrote:
Bomber wrote:
To GIAE : No, 6 is more than half, so using "at least" you are referring to the minimum, therefore the lesser sum. Had you said "up to six" you would have scored a tick.

As for proof, I don't have any, just word of people in the know, and given I doubt you can provide proof to the contrary, it's your word against mine and therefore you'll have to deal with it, accept it or just agree to disagree.

*KP still is a nutter - you only have to hear his commentary to know that he needs ongoing mental therapy.

Splitting hairs after being proved wrong....


Proved wrong? How so, Perry Mason?

Quite simple - you claimed half, named three and two were wrong.

Author:  Bomber [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Can you prove that two were wrong? And looks like C.U.N.S named another five, which so far no-one is disputing, so shall we say "up to 8" then?

Author:  God is an Englishman [ Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: David Warner walking off pitch

Bomber wrote:
To GIAE : No, 6 is more than half, so using "at least" you are referring to the minimum, therefore the lesser sum. Had you said "up to six" you would have scored a tick.

As for proof, I don't have any, just word of people in the know, and given I doubt you can provide proof to the contrary, it's your word against mine and therefore you'll have to deal with it, accept it or just agree to disagree.

*KP still is a nutter - you only have to hear his commentary to know that he needs ongoing mental therapy.


To be half the team, what is the least number you could have given. 5.5, that number is not possible, so it has to be 6. Had I said up to 6, then you could have named one person.

The minimum number you could give to be right would be... how many class... yes, well done, it's 6.

So, "As for proof, I don't have any," - that's all we need. You've just made up numbers.

CUNS list - mentions players with mental disorders, nothing about seeing a shrink. The number needed would also go up as they all played at different time. You now need half of MANY teams. However, at least he has managed the 3 I was looking for.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC + 9:30 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/