London 2012 - Chat Thread

Pico wrote:

Ed wrote:Robyn get off Danny's back, I hadn't heard that fact and it is actually quite interesting

Is it really a fact? Sounds like pure speculation. But if it makes precious Britain look good then it must be true.

no, I mean its a fact we won 7 out of 10, and they did change the rules shortly after britain dominated the last olympics in cycling.

weird how with all the technology available today, they still couldnt see who won out of the two 3rd places

Ed wrote:

Pico wrote:

Is it really a fact? Sounds like pure speculation. But if it makes precious Britain look good then it must be true.

no, I mean its a fact we won 7 out of 10, and they did change the rules shortly after britain dominated the last olympics in cycling.

But the link that connects those 2 facts is pure speculation, and what draws attention to the statement in the first place.

Ed wrote:weird how with all the technology available today, they still couldnt see who won out of the two 3rd places

Dead heat I guess. They were probably genuinely level.

Ed wrote:weird how with all the technology available today, they still couldnt see who won out of the two 3rd places

What I want to know is where they nicked the extra medal from

Pico wrote:

Ed wrote:no, I mean its a fact we won 7 out of 10, and they did change the rules shortly after britain dominated the last olympics in cycling.

But the link that connects those 2 facts is pure speculation, and what draws attention to the statement in the first place.

why else would they suddenly change the rules? They don't just change the rules because they get bored you know?

Pico wrote:

Ed wrote:no, I mean its a fact we won 7 out of 10, and they did change the rules shortly after britain dominated the last olympics in cycling.

But the link that connects those 2 facts is pure speculation, and what draws attention to the statement in the first place.

Either way, the IOC clearly didn't like one country dominating one event, so the rule change was meant to balance it out.

The majority of people would think our dominance is quite impressive even with the rule change.

lol @ Steve Redgrave doing a John Terry.

Ed wrote:

Pico wrote:

But the link that connects those 2 facts is pure speculation, and what draws attention to the statement in the first place.

why else would they suddenly change the rules? They don't just change the rules because they get bored you know?

Rules change in many sports for many different reasons. Neither you nor I know the exact reasons why, so let's not pretend like we do.

Pico wrote:lol @ Steve Redgrave doing a John Terry.

Ed wrote:why else would they suddenly change the rules? They don't just change the rules because they get bored you know?

Rules change in many sports for many different reasons. Neither you nor I know the exact reasons why, so let's not pretend like we do.

no, but alot of others do know, and they have said its because of our dominance. I dont know about you but I'll take their word for it

Danny has said it. I will not take his word for it.

Shock.

When I said others do know, I was not referring to Danny.

Moving on.


Mens Hockey now, just need a point

Ed wrote:When I said others do know, I was not referring to Danny.

I was not doubting this. However, the only ones who truly know the reasons for the change (and indeed what these changes are) are the committee in charge.

but classing it as speculation is a bit of an understatement, it is pretty much definitely because of that. Although it is not a fact, of course.

Holy shit. Just saw someone get clothes-lined in handball. They don't play around.

EDIT: One woman stopped by dragging her down by the breast.

Ed wrote:but classing it as speculation is a bit of an understatement, it is pretty much definitely because of that. Although it is not a fact, of course.

So it's definite but it's not a fact?

Come on now, Jeff.

Slow day, huh?

Pico wrote:

Ed wrote:but classing it as speculation is a bit of an understatement, it is pretty much definitely because of that. Although it is not a fact, of course.

So it's definite but it's not a fact?

Come on now, Jeff.

i said pretty much definately

bitch pls.

Our discus thrower looks like a tank

Has the jamaican film industry produced its hilarious feelgood comedy about british people putting together an olympic sprinting team yet?

Cam wrote:Has the jamaican film industry produced its hilarious feelgood comedy about british people putting together an olympic sprinting team yet?

should be canadian sprint team

Oh god he said leave it.

another frimpong type character

Felix got this.

White wins the 100m hurdles.

Australians finally getting some reprieve.

Eternal Witcher wrote:White wins the 100m hurdles.

Australians finally getting some reprieve.

She was the heavy favourite

Good race though.

Sally Pearson

Ed wrote:

Pico wrote:

So it's definite but it's not a fact?

Come on now, Jeff.

i said pretty much definately

bitch pls.

Oxymoron

ayvee1 wrote:

Eternal Witcher wrote:White wins the 100m hurdles.

Australians finally getting some reprieve.

She was the heavy favourite

Good race though.

She looked shocked, that threw me off.

Pico wrote:Sally Pearson

Ed wrote:i said pretty much definately

bitch pls.

Oxymoron

how is it?

an oxymoron would be

No way Definitely

maybe i could phrased it better, such as "almost definitely" but stop nit picking