Bedford Fox Posted 14 January 2005 Posted 14 January 2005 heres just an idea of what it would look like with the badge in the centre
Cobbo Posted 14 January 2005 Posted 14 January 2005 heres just an idea of what it would look like with the badge in the centre 54877[/snapback] Better on the side I say!
Cobbo Posted 14 January 2005 Posted 14 January 2005 I really think it's horrible in the middle, good work by Bedford, but I just don't like it
weegie jambo Posted 14 January 2005 Posted 14 January 2005 heres just an idea of what it would look like with the badge in the centre 54877[/snapback] you could do the away strip in maroon so that all the ex Jambo's would feel at home next season ( Craig Levein, Kenny Black,DeVries,Maybury,Kisnorbo,Kirk,if you get him too !) might even order one myself !
Oli Posted 14 January 2005 Posted 14 January 2005 I think it looks shocking in the middle, but thats just me.
Cobbo Posted 14 January 2005 Posted 14 January 2005 I think it looks shocking in the middle, but thats just me. 54948[/snapback] No it's not, it's me too
Scarby Posted 14 January 2005 Posted 14 January 2005 I think it looks shocking in the middle, but thats just me. 54948[/snapback] No it's not, it's me too 54955[/snapback] after looking at it again maybe the badge on the side looks a little better but i wont mind either both top notch material
Foxes_Trust Posted 15 January 2005 Posted 15 January 2005 Ok at the time there wasn't an actual "vote", i was refering to polls (in the mercury for example) where the majority of people said they wanted bowl. Also people calling into radio leicester were saying the same. The club at the time made the point after the name was announced that it was the most popular name.The problem is the 70% of the people who actually who have time to write to the mercury or call radio leicester are complete spanners, hence bowl being the most popular choice in straw polls before the naming of the stadium. 54671[/snapback] It was never the most popular name. There were no straw polls before the name was announced, (unless they asked Walkers employees ) How could they run one on the radio/mercury before being announced - you are not making sense Mercury did some interviews on the street (with citizens of Leicester who didn't give a stuff about City) after it was announced. Remember wondering at the time why they didn't do the interviews outside the ground (fear of criticism perhaps) Personally think the bowl stuff was all a diversion tactic - get the fans to kick up about bowl - agree to change it & then fans won't moan about it having a commercial name because they have won a battle.
Chandler Posted 15 January 2005 Posted 15 January 2005 I think Ricey's design is highly 'homocentric' and the concerns of 'wimmin' fans have not been sufficently taken into consideration. Look at the shorts for starters, no imagination, far too conservative. Did he stop for one moment to consider what Katy, Lisa and Louise might like? No. The thought of deep cleft revealing , off the bollock willy enhancers never crossed his sexist mind...
Scarby Posted 15 January 2005 Posted 15 January 2005 I think Ricecy's design is highly 'homocentric' and the concerns of 'wimmin' fans have not been sufficently taken into consideration.Look at the shorts for starters, no imagination, far too conservative. Did he stop for one moment to consider what Katy, Lisa and Louise might like? No. The thought of deep cleft revealing , off the bollock willy enhancers never crossed his sexist mind... 54985[/snapback] how would you change it then you stupid head
Chandler Posted 15 January 2005 Posted 15 January 2005 Scarborough Fox, I remember you from 'talkingtesticles.' I remember you as dull, obtuse and literal minded in the extreme. For my previous post to soar so far above your tiny mind shows that you are the sole survivor of species 'Homus Intelligens Pigmybus'. I suggest that you cancel all forthcoming engagements. I'll phone the British Museum and let them know their prize exhibit is on it's way.
Scarby Posted 15 January 2005 Posted 15 January 2005 Scarborough Fox, I remember you from 'talkingtesticles.' I remember you as dull, obtuse and literal minded in the extreme.For my previous post to soar so far above your tiny mind shows that you are the sole survivor of species 'Homus Intelligens Pigmybus'. I suggest that you cancel all forthcoming engagements. I'll phone the British Museum and let them know their prize exhibit is on it's way. 54991[/snapback] intelligens pigmybus if it were a species wouldnt have capital letters and the whole species name as it is latin would have to be in italics or underlined. Other than this a very funny post like most of your posts. But however you didnt answer my question! which i for one would like answered also my name isnt Scarborough Fox it is scarboroughfox and please dont forget this is i find it insulting for you to call me the former!!
Chandler Posted 15 January 2005 Posted 15 January 2005 You are a very big person, Scarbo. I'd be raging if I were on the end of wit like mine. Your point about the italicization and underlining of names species is correct. But it applies only to academic texts. Capitalization is a moot point - I have done it for emphasis. As you may now be aware the cleft revealing/off the bollock (a play on plunging neck line/off the shoulder) etc shorts is my own tongue in cheek (facial cheek that is) suggestion. Now feel free to rage away...
Scarby Posted 15 January 2005 Posted 15 January 2005 You are a very big person, Scarbo. 54995[/snapback] thats what all the ladies say anyway pal!! I'd be raging if I were on the end of wit like mine. Your point about the italicization and underlining of names species is correct. But it applies only to academic texts. Capitalization is a moot point - I have done it for emphasis. As you may now be aware the cleft revealing/off the bollock (a play on plunging neck line/off the shoulder) etc shorts is my own tongue in cheek (facial cheek that is) suggestion. Now feel free to rage away... 54995[/snapback] and as for tis dribble! 1) what is a moot point point? 2) paragraph 3 out of 4 is just plain crazy talk i have no idea what you are rattling on about and last but not least 3) i have no rage only love..love for all.
stez Posted 15 January 2005 Posted 15 January 2005 chandler had a point re the shorts how about these for the away kit/lcfc chixs to wear?
Babylon Posted 16 January 2005 Posted 16 January 2005 Ok at the time there wasn't an actual "vote", i was refering to polls (in the mercury for example) where the majority of people said they wanted bowl. Also people calling iI5{r were saying the same. The club at the time made the point after the name was announced that it was the most popular name.The problem is the 70% of the people who actually who have time to write to the mercury or call radio leicester are complete spanners, hence bowl being the most popular choice in straw polls before the naming of the stadium. 54671[/snapback] 1) It was never the most popular name. 2) There were no straw polls before the name was announced, (unless they asked Walkers employees ) 3) How could they run one on the radio/mercury before being announced - you are not making sense Mercury did some interviews on the street (with citizens of Leicester who didn't give a stuff about City) after it was announced. Remember wondering at the time why they didn't do the interviews outside the ground (fear of criticism perhaps) Personally think the bowl stuff was all a diversion tactic - get the fans to kick up about bowl - agree to change it & then fans won't moan about it having a commercial name because they have won a battle. 54970[/snapback] 1) Yes it was the most popular, with the spanner Leicester fans who have nothing better to do than write in to the mercury or call radio Leicester. To the normal Leicester fan it was not popular, but we usually have better things to do. I suggest go and find old copys of the Leicester mercury with all the letters written in saying it should be called the bowl. 2) See 3) 3) I am making perfect sense, you obviously can't understand. The polls were done with papers and radio stations saying "what should the stadium be named?". As pointed out in 1) bowl was the name mentioned the most in the papers and on the radio.
Ricey Posted 16 January 2005 Posted 16 January 2005 I think Ricey's design is highly 'homocentric' and the concerns of 'wimmin' fans have not been sufficently taken into consideration.Look at the shorts for starters, no imagination, far too conservative. Did he stop for one moment to consider what Katy, Lisa and Louise might like? No. The thought of deep cleft revealing , off the bollock willy enhancers never crossed his sexist mind... 54985[/snapback] Are you James Walker? No one else could talk so much pompous rubbish.
Chandler Posted 17 January 2005 Posted 17 January 2005 I think Ricey's design is highly 'homocentric' and the concerns of 'wimmin' fans have not been sufficently taken into consideration.Look at the shorts for starters, no imagination, far too conservative. Did he stop for one moment to consider what Katy, Lisa and Louise might like? No. The thought of deep cleft revealing , off the bollock willy enhancers never crossed his sexist mind... 54985[/snapback] Are you James Walker? No one else could talk so much pompous rubbish. 55489[/snapback] ...and another literal minded moron
Guest Daniel Posted 17 January 2005 Posted 17 January 2005 I think Ricey's design is highly 'homocentric' and the concerns of 'wimmin' fans have not been sufficently taken into consideration.Look at the shorts for starters, no imagination, far too conservative. Did he stop for one moment to consider what Katy, Lisa and Louise might like? No. The thought of deep cleft revealing , off the bollock willy enhancers never crossed his sexist mind... 54985[/snapback] Are you James Walker? No one else could talk so much pompous rubbish. 55489[/snapback] ...and another literal minded moron 55543[/snapback] Well said Chandler. How you doing?
shen Posted 17 January 2005 Posted 17 January 2005 I think Ricey's design is highly 'homocentric' and the concerns of 'wimmin' fans have not been sufficently taken into consideration.Look at the shorts for starters, no imagination, far too conservative. Did he stop for one moment to consider what Katy, Lisa and Louise might like? No. The thought of deep cleft revealing , off the bollock willy enhancers never crossed his sexist mind... 54985[/snapback] Lisa already approved of it and said she liked it so I cant see what youre on about besides unless you are a woman, how can you tell what they want to see? And even dare generalise? Maybe Ricey DID have those thoughts but didn't want to offend some of the blokes on here
Alexikokopops Posted 17 January 2005 Posted 17 January 2005 I think Chandler was making a funny. He said that the kit is missing a "deep cleft revealing , off the bollock willy enhancer", somehow I think it's meant to be taken with a pinch of salt. I laughed anyway.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.