| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... 16:46 - May 27 with 11715 views | Zx1988 |
Only the f**king CEO of Sky Betting and Gaming.
Shameful. [Post edited 27 May 2023 17:04]
|  |
| |  |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:51 - May 31 with 1282 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:27 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
There are all sorts of ridiculous ideas when it comes to beating slots/fruit machines.
Another thing that amazes me is how many people still use the martingale system. The other day a customer (of where I work) asked me if he should play on after losing something like £117. That's where it's frightening. Cigarettes have to have a health warning. I would like to see casino games have a warning that over the long term you WILL lose and that they should be played for entertainment purposes only with money you an easily afford to lose.
Try proposing that one and seeing how hard the bookies fight it! Propose they get to go through your statements if you lose £125 on sports and they will be all for it. |
The idea that they want bank statements upon some decent sized withdrawals is a disgrace as well and something that has developed as a direct result of the uncertainty around when the white paper would be released in recent years.
And god forbid you show them the bank statement and have an incoming transfer for the same amount as the stake of the bet or they’ll ask for that persons statement too. And if you say no they’ll withhold your withdrawal and claim it as third persons betting until you provide that persons bank statement and an explanation as to what the money is for. And the gambling commission allows it.
It’s an enormous invasion of privacy. And it’ll be decent punters who’ve earned a good fair crust over the last few years that will suffer
That’s not even the mention that an antepost bet is counted as a loser for the profit/loss. So I could stick on a couple of £75 anteposts for Cheltenham in 10 months time and be asked for a bank statement ffs. Bookies can hide behind the white paper as their excuse. As if someone with a gambling problem places bets for 10 months in advance.
Their absolutely must be stuff done to protect problem gamblers but also some balance in place to stop genuine punters being shafted out of the game by bookies hiding behind the idea of the white paper and it’s affordability checks. |  |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 15:01 - May 31 with 1249 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:51 - May 31 by The_Romford_Blue |
The idea that they want bank statements upon some decent sized withdrawals is a disgrace as well and something that has developed as a direct result of the uncertainty around when the white paper would be released in recent years.
And god forbid you show them the bank statement and have an incoming transfer for the same amount as the stake of the bet or they’ll ask for that persons statement too. And if you say no they’ll withhold your withdrawal and claim it as third persons betting until you provide that persons bank statement and an explanation as to what the money is for. And the gambling commission allows it.
It’s an enormous invasion of privacy. And it’ll be decent punters who’ve earned a good fair crust over the last few years that will suffer
That’s not even the mention that an antepost bet is counted as a loser for the profit/loss. So I could stick on a couple of £75 anteposts for Cheltenham in 10 months time and be asked for a bank statement ffs. Bookies can hide behind the white paper as their excuse. As if someone with a gambling problem places bets for 10 months in advance.
Their absolutely must be stuff done to protect problem gamblers but also some balance in place to stop genuine punters being shafted out of the game by bookies hiding behind the idea of the white paper and it’s affordability checks. |
Agree.
The deck is stacked against us. |  |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 15:16 - May 31 with 1235 views | Herbivore |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:22 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
I don't wish to snipe but a big part of the problem is that people want to attack gambling so once this thread dies and gambling is mentiioned again the same attacks will come and people will ignore everything we've said. At a minimum, Rommers, Ryorry and myself have made these points repeatedly.
Another problem I have is you saying things like this:
So we all seem to agree these should be tightened up - but let's say you do that - then what? Surely a problem gambler without access to the easy FOTB bets will then move on to other forms of gambling?
To me that is just going in with bias and looking for a reason to attack the entire industry. Apologies if that sounds harsh but to give a comparison it's like saying a heroin addict might smoke some weed if they can't get heroin or a hardcore gin alcoholic might switch to beer. Problematic? Yes but clearly not the biggest problem and most people can enjoy a beer without any problem. Our points have been taken on board for the duration of this thread but I strongly suspect they will be forgotten as soon as possible.
People who want sports betting to be under extremely tight regulations are just helping the bookies. They would love more monitoring of accounts and to be able to ban anyone who wins even earlier. That's all they will use it for. They will take all the sports betting controls you can throw at them but they will fight everything when it comes to casino/FOBTs.
It's fashionable to attack gambling. I don't believe most of you would accept solving 95% of the problem with FOBT/casino restrictions because it's a witchhunt.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying you have no good points. Stopping bookmaker ads during sporting events, stopping gambling sponsors etc are all things I would support. But I don't believe this is about solving the problem for most people. It's about completely decimating the industry.
Apologies if that seems harsh but I haven't seen anything to suggest i'm wrong. Next time gambling comes up I will wait for the same posters to make the same arguments we've answered and I will link to this thread. |
Is anyone here actually arguing for a ban on gambling or decimating the industry though? You seem to agree that there are lots of problems with the industry, as does Rommers, and there's broadly consensus on that. I have seen people suggesting tighter regulation, particularly in relation to FOBTs, and better support for problem gamblers. Again, not sure there's much disagreement on that either.
People will always have a pop at the industry because, let's be honest, it's mucky AF. It's not alone in that but it is an industry that profits off people's misery, that has historically lobbied hard to protect its ability to do so, and that rigs the game so it always wins, not just through FOBTs but also through restricting the capacity of those who can beat the system to actually do so.
As it's an industry you and some others are close to and profit from I can see why attacks on the industry might feel personal, but take a step back and surely you can see why people see it as problematic, and when you unpick what those problems are you seem to broadly agree. |  |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 15:49 - May 31 with 1199 views | Ryorry |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 15:16 - May 31 by Herbivore |
Is anyone here actually arguing for a ban on gambling or decimating the industry though? You seem to agree that there are lots of problems with the industry, as does Rommers, and there's broadly consensus on that. I have seen people suggesting tighter regulation, particularly in relation to FOBTs, and better support for problem gamblers. Again, not sure there's much disagreement on that either.
People will always have a pop at the industry because, let's be honest, it's mucky AF. It's not alone in that but it is an industry that profits off people's misery, that has historically lobbied hard to protect its ability to do so, and that rigs the game so it always wins, not just through FOBTs but also through restricting the capacity of those who can beat the system to actually do so.
As it's an industry you and some others are close to and profit from I can see why attacks on the industry might feel personal, but take a step back and surely you can see why people see it as problematic, and when you unpick what those problems are you seem to broadly agree. |
It's a question of deal with the huge piles of horse plop before you deal with one hedgehog pellet though innit.
And the much, much bigger issue than betting on horse-racing is surely how youngsters are flooded at every game of football, whether at the ground or watching on TV, with football betting advertising, whether on hoardings, the moving perimeter surrounding the pitch, players' kit, clubs' sponsorship - and obvs the "Sky Bet Championship, TV" etc. It's sheer brainwashing - there should be a total ban on that.
(Side note - running total on casino phishing/spam mail into my junk email - 31 since midday today). |  |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:10 - May 31 with 1175 views | Ryorry |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 13:18 - May 31 by bluelagos |
Am not objecting to tightening the rules on FOTBs
My issue is very much "Is that it?" - and experience tells us that these things only get properly looked at (in terms of regulation/laws) every few years.
So I can see a scenario where we tighten up on FOTBs, listen to the betting industry and water down all the other measures - and then things carry on pretty much as now only a few problem gamblers simply move to another form of gambling - and it takes another x years before we revisit the issue...
If we all agree that some people (problem gamblers) need help and protecting from themselves - then lets do all we can to help them (and prevent future addicts) - and if that means the betting industry gets a bit upset - that's a price well worth paying imho |
The day any government actually thinks ahead long term in the interests of ordinary people, the country and the planet, instead of only as far as their & their mates personal bank accounts, the next election & power; will be the day ITFC win the quadruple as Champs of England, pigs fly over PR, and every TWTD poster wins £10K on the lotto  | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:14 - May 31 with 1161 views | Herbivore |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 15:49 - May 31 by Ryorry |
It's a question of deal with the huge piles of horse plop before you deal with one hedgehog pellet though innit.
And the much, much bigger issue than betting on horse-racing is surely how youngsters are flooded at every game of football, whether at the ground or watching on TV, with football betting advertising, whether on hoardings, the moving perimeter surrounding the pitch, players' kit, clubs' sponsorship - and obvs the "Sky Bet Championship, TV" etc. It's sheer brainwashing - there should be a total ban on that.
(Side note - running total on casino phishing/spam mail into my junk email - 31 since midday today). |
Banning the widespread advertising of gambling would be an easy win, no argument from me. I'd also ban horse racing altogether personally, but for different reasons and let's not make this a twenty pager by going there again! | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:16 - May 31 with 1154 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 15:16 - May 31 by Herbivore |
Is anyone here actually arguing for a ban on gambling or decimating the industry though? You seem to agree that there are lots of problems with the industry, as does Rommers, and there's broadly consensus on that. I have seen people suggesting tighter regulation, particularly in relation to FOBTs, and better support for problem gamblers. Again, not sure there's much disagreement on that either.
People will always have a pop at the industry because, let's be honest, it's mucky AF. It's not alone in that but it is an industry that profits off people's misery, that has historically lobbied hard to protect its ability to do so, and that rigs the game so it always wins, not just through FOBTs but also through restricting the capacity of those who can beat the system to actually do so.
As it's an industry you and some others are close to and profit from I can see why attacks on the industry might feel personal, but take a step back and surely you can see why people see it as problematic, and when you unpick what those problems are you seem to broadly agree. |
Attacks on the industry don't feel personal. It does feel like people want to do as much damage as possible though.
The attitude of most on here was summed up by Needham Chris who said I would like to stop you putting £150 on a horse to Rommers. No explanation and no response when asked why.
What would you say are fair restrictions on the sports side of things? I won't lie, if it's all or nothing then I will oppose all restrictions. I am happy to be reasonable though. There's a hell of a lot that can be cleaned up but the lobby groups are definitely trying to decimate the industry. I can understand it when they have lost a family member to gambling etc but it's frustrating when their only aim is do as much damage as possible. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:24 - May 31 with 1148 views | Herbivore |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:16 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
Attacks on the industry don't feel personal. It does feel like people want to do as much damage as possible though.
The attitude of most on here was summed up by Needham Chris who said I would like to stop you putting £150 on a horse to Rommers. No explanation and no response when asked why.
What would you say are fair restrictions on the sports side of things? I won't lie, if it's all or nothing then I will oppose all restrictions. I am happy to be reasonable though. There's a hell of a lot that can be cleaned up but the lobby groups are definitely trying to decimate the industry. I can understand it when they have lost a family member to gambling etc but it's frustrating when their only aim is do as much damage as possible. |
But as you yourself have suggested the industry is a bit sh*t isn't it? They ban winners and encourage more problematic forms of gambling, so surely you can see why people who don't gamble or have been adversely affected by gambling might want to damage an industry that has caused such damage itself?
Personally I'm in favour of reform rather than banning stuff. I'd ban betting firms from advertising as they way it's currently promoted is pretty toxic and adds to the risk of problematic gambling. Beyond that I don't have sufficient industry expertise to be able to say what would be effective further controls but I'd certainly like to see more of the revenue the industry generates going towards supporting those affected directly and indirectly by gambling addiction.
As for Needham Chris' comment, I can't speak for him but I interpreted that as his position being he'd rather horse racing was banned so people can't bet on it at all. That was the gist of his position on the other thread the other day and its one I agree with, not because I'm anti-gambling but because I'm anti-horse racing. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:33 - May 31 with 1134 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:24 - May 31 by Herbivore |
But as you yourself have suggested the industry is a bit sh*t isn't it? They ban winners and encourage more problematic forms of gambling, so surely you can see why people who don't gamble or have been adversely affected by gambling might want to damage an industry that has caused such damage itself?
Personally I'm in favour of reform rather than banning stuff. I'd ban betting firms from advertising as they way it's currently promoted is pretty toxic and adds to the risk of problematic gambling. Beyond that I don't have sufficient industry expertise to be able to say what would be effective further controls but I'd certainly like to see more of the revenue the industry generates going towards supporting those affected directly and indirectly by gambling addiction.
As for Needham Chris' comment, I can't speak for him but I interpreted that as his position being he'd rather horse racing was banned so people can't bet on it at all. That was the gist of his position on the other thread the other day and its one I agree with, not because I'm anti-gambling but because I'm anti-horse racing. |
Fair points.
It is sh1t but we find ways to beat them. To this day I am still making decent money from matched betting. The income from that and other little bits of risk free gambling I do allows me to work a 32 hour 4 day week which has been amazing for my mental health.
I am all for banning advertising etc.I just don't think people understand that it helps the bookies behave even worse if you grant them new powers to demand more info from people who bet on sports with a very low threshold. If you target their casino operations you will see much better results and force them to behave better.
Right now, if you open an account and place 10x £10 bets you can be restricted within a week. If someone else opens an account and deposits £200 per day for a month straight and loses it all they will know they have a problem and send them free spins to get them to go on gambling.
Again, not suggesting we don't have any sports regulations and safeguards. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:34 - May 31 with 1132 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:22 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
I don't wish to snipe but a big part of the problem is that people want to attack gambling so once this thread dies and gambling is mentiioned again the same attacks will come and people will ignore everything we've said. At a minimum, Rommers, Ryorry and myself have made these points repeatedly.
Another problem I have is you saying things like this:
So we all seem to agree these should be tightened up - but let's say you do that - then what? Surely a problem gambler without access to the easy FOTB bets will then move on to other forms of gambling?
To me that is just going in with bias and looking for a reason to attack the entire industry. Apologies if that sounds harsh but to give a comparison it's like saying a heroin addict might smoke some weed if they can't get heroin or a hardcore gin alcoholic might switch to beer. Problematic? Yes but clearly not the biggest problem and most people can enjoy a beer without any problem. Our points have been taken on board for the duration of this thread but I strongly suspect they will be forgotten as soon as possible.
People who want sports betting to be under extremely tight regulations are just helping the bookies. They would love more monitoring of accounts and to be able to ban anyone who wins even earlier. That's all they will use it for. They will take all the sports betting controls you can throw at them but they will fight everything when it comes to casino/FOBTs.
It's fashionable to attack gambling. I don't believe most of you would accept solving 95% of the problem with FOBT/casino restrictions because it's a witchhunt.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying you have no good points. Stopping bookmaker ads during sporting events, stopping gambling sponsors etc are all things I would support. But I don't believe this is about solving the problem for most people. It's about completely decimating the industry.
Apologies if that seems harsh but I haven't seen anything to suggest i'm wrong. Next time gambling comes up I will wait for the same posters to make the same arguments we've answered and I will link to this thread. |
Fantastic post J2, and it has swayed me. You, Ryorry and Rommers are the good guys in this debate, and you (all of you) are so spot on with your words.
I had a dalliance in gambling for a while. I followed an expert tipper who came good for a stretch, and I made some exciting profits. My parents warned against it but when I showed them the cash they started softening. Then things got harder. Dunno why, but his winning tips diminished. Maybe I should've rode out the dip.
Got to the point where I put £100 on a 5-1 just because this guy had mentioned him in the past. It was losing most of the way, until the last second.
I'd got a decent win that had 'chased my loses'. Many gamblers would keep going but I saw it as a sign to quit. Never gambled properly since (had a pound on Micky Stockwell at 14-1 when I knew he'd be pushed up front).
Appreciate your no-lose version, but gambling for me is a mugs game. Unless you put countless hours into it like Rommers does. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:38 - May 31 with 1109 views | Herbivore |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:33 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
Fair points.
It is sh1t but we find ways to beat them. To this day I am still making decent money from matched betting. The income from that and other little bits of risk free gambling I do allows me to work a 32 hour 4 day week which has been amazing for my mental health.
I am all for banning advertising etc.I just don't think people understand that it helps the bookies behave even worse if you grant them new powers to demand more info from people who bet on sports with a very low threshold. If you target their casino operations you will see much better results and force them to behave better.
Right now, if you open an account and place 10x £10 bets you can be restricted within a week. If someone else opens an account and deposits £200 per day for a month straight and loses it all they will know they have a problem and send them free spins to get them to go on gambling.
Again, not suggesting we don't have any sports regulations and safeguards. |
I think we're largely in agreement to be fair. I agree that restrictions should largely be targeted where they can reduce the most harm and that putting stuff in place that enables betting companies rather than act as a check and balance on them isn't a good way forward. [Post edited 31 May 2023 16:41]
| |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:39 - May 31 with 1107 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:34 - May 31 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Fantastic post J2, and it has swayed me. You, Ryorry and Rommers are the good guys in this debate, and you (all of you) are so spot on with your words.
I had a dalliance in gambling for a while. I followed an expert tipper who came good for a stretch, and I made some exciting profits. My parents warned against it but when I showed them the cash they started softening. Then things got harder. Dunno why, but his winning tips diminished. Maybe I should've rode out the dip.
Got to the point where I put £100 on a 5-1 just because this guy had mentioned him in the past. It was losing most of the way, until the last second.
I'd got a decent win that had 'chased my loses'. Many gamblers would keep going but I saw it as a sign to quit. Never gambled properly since (had a pound on Micky Stockwell at 14-1 when I knew he'd be pushed up front).
Appreciate your no-lose version, but gambling for me is a mugs game. Unless you put countless hours into it like Rommers does. |
Fantastic post J2, and it has swayed me. You, Ryorry and Rommers are the good guys in this debate, and you (all of you) are so spot on with your words.
I am baffled by this. Not sure that post deserves that sarcastic response. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:42 - May 31 with 1103 views | Ryorry |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:34 - May 31 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Fantastic post J2, and it has swayed me. You, Ryorry and Rommers are the good guys in this debate, and you (all of you) are so spot on with your words.
I had a dalliance in gambling for a while. I followed an expert tipper who came good for a stretch, and I made some exciting profits. My parents warned against it but when I showed them the cash they started softening. Then things got harder. Dunno why, but his winning tips diminished. Maybe I should've rode out the dip.
Got to the point where I put £100 on a 5-1 just because this guy had mentioned him in the past. It was losing most of the way, until the last second.
I'd got a decent win that had 'chased my loses'. Many gamblers would keep going but I saw it as a sign to quit. Never gambled properly since (had a pound on Micky Stockwell at 14-1 when I knew he'd be pushed up front).
Appreciate your no-lose version, but gambling for me is a mugs game. Unless you put countless hours into it like Rommers does. |
Well done for quitting while you were ahead, very sensible, & it makes you *not* a mug - which kinda contradicts part of your last para, but you know what I mean! Tens of thousands of people obviously don't take sensible options, hence the big problem. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:45 - May 31 with 1080 views | Ryorry |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:39 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
Fantastic post J2, and it has swayed me. You, Ryorry and Rommers are the good guys in this debate, and you (all of you) are so spot on with your words.
I am baffled by this. Not sure that post deserves that sarcastic response. |
I'm baffled by your take on it tbh, I didn't see it that way at all. Internetz comms eh?! | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:49 - May 31 with 1055 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:45 - May 31 by Ryorry |
I'm baffled by your take on it tbh, I didn't see it that way at all. Internetz comms eh?! |
I am baffled that you are baffled that I am baffled tbh 
I am very much enjoying using the word baffled though. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:50 - May 31 with 1046 views | Herbivore |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:42 - May 31 by Ryorry |
Well done for quitting while you were ahead, very sensible, & it makes you *not* a mug - which kinda contradicts part of your last para, but you know what I mean! Tens of thousands of people obviously don't take sensible options, hence the big problem. |
It's not quite as straightforward as people not taking sensible options. Gambling is addictive and has similar mechanisms (i.e. release of chemicals in the brain) for that addiction as many drugs do. For most of us we can overcome the compulsive pull to keep gambling or keep doing lines until all our money has gone, but for some people - often folk who are already quite vulnerable - they can't. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:51 - May 31 with 1039 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:39 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
Fantastic post J2, and it has swayed me. You, Ryorry and Rommers are the good guys in this debate, and you (all of you) are so spot on with your words.
I am baffled by this. Not sure that post deserves that sarcastic response. |
Maybe I’m wrong but I really don’t think he was being sarcastic there mate.
He can be stubborn at times can Dolly but he is open minded on stuff other people are likely to know more about (and seeing as all three of us are gamblers and two of us work in the industry, that’s a fair enough comment I’d say). I think he was being sincere. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:54 - May 31 with 1034 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:50 - May 31 by Herbivore |
It's not quite as straightforward as people not taking sensible options. Gambling is addictive and has similar mechanisms (i.e. release of chemicals in the brain) for that addiction as many drugs do. For most of us we can overcome the compulsive pull to keep gambling or keep doing lines until all our money has gone, but for some people - often folk who are already quite vulnerable - they can't. |
Agree. This is why I think log ins with a one hour cooling off period when you lose a certain amount would be a huge help. Losing £100 is sh1t but being forced to remove yourself from that environment would likely have a positive impact. When you are able to keep spinning and upping your stake with a click of a button you can easily chase and lose a big amount before the red mist descends. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:55 - May 31 with 1023 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:51 - May 31 by The_Romford_Blue |
Maybe I’m wrong but I really don’t think he was being sarcastic there mate.
He can be stubborn at times can Dolly but he is open minded on stuff other people are likely to know more about (and seeing as all three of us are gamblers and two of us work in the industry, that’s a fair enough comment I’d say). I think he was being sincere. |
Going to have to send this to VAR...
Dolly? | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 17:07 - May 31 with 991 views | Ryorry |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:50 - May 31 by Herbivore |
It's not quite as straightforward as people not taking sensible options. Gambling is addictive and has similar mechanisms (i.e. release of chemicals in the brain) for that addiction as many drugs do. For most of us we can overcome the compulsive pull to keep gambling or keep doing lines until all our money has gone, but for some people - often folk who are already quite vulnerable - they can't. |
I know. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 17:08 - May 31 with 985 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:39 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
Fantastic post J2, and it has swayed me. You, Ryorry and Rommers are the good guys in this debate, and you (all of you) are so spot on with your words.
I am baffled by this. Not sure that post deserves that sarcastic response. |
Sarcastic?! | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 17:09 - May 31 with 968 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 17:08 - May 31 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Sarcastic?! |
My apologies.
I don't think we have ever been referred to as the good guys in the debate!
Not sure we have ever had a reaction like that.
Sorry again. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 17:12 - May 31 with 965 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 16:55 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
Going to have to send this to VAR...
Dolly? |
No idea why you think this of me. Maybe years of TWTD has jaded us. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 17:15 - May 31 with 943 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 17:12 - May 31 by The_Flashing_Smile |
No idea why you think this of me. Maybe years of TWTD has jaded us. |
I have to be honest, even now I am wondering if you are sitting there laughing your head off!
My brain just cannot square your reply to my post. My sarcasm scanning metre is showing a reading of 99% likely.
I fully accept I may be wrong and I apologise. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 17:17 - May 31 with 930 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 17:09 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
My apologies.
I don't think we have ever been referred to as the good guys in the debate!
Not sure we have ever had a reaction like that.
Sorry again. |
I consider you one of the best posters on TWTD.
Right up there with guthers, something, stokers, ry, rom, herbs...
To be honest it would be easier to nominate the sh.it. They know who they are. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
