Jamikel Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 nonsports related. but i would love to see the word YONDER deleted from exisistanceHaha, my mom's family is terrible for that. Here's a sample conversation.Me: Where'd (relative) go?My uncle: He went over yonder (no specific terms or gestures as to where)Me: ?????!!!But if it makes you feel any better, you can just think of it as a remnant from Shakespearian times that somehow managed to survive in eastern North Carolina through all these generations. "What light from yonder window breaks?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HedleyLamarr Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 Speaking of "walk-offs", I was watching ESPN a couple days ago (SportsCenter or Baseball Tonight, I forgot), and they were talking about Mariano Rivera's walk-off HR's allowed since 2003, and the yellow arrow on the bottom had the comment: "All occured on the road."No kidding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEAD! Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 Speaking of "walk-offs", I was watching ESPN a couple days ago (SportsCenter or Baseball Tonight, I forgot), and they were talking about Mariano Rivera's walk-off HR's allowed since 2003, and the yellow arrow on the bottom had the comment: "All occured on the road."No kidding?well... at least it's factual I saw, I came, I left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFoA Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 Speaking of "walk-offs", I was watching ESPN a couple days ago (SportsCenter or Baseball Tonight, I forgot), and they were talking about Mariano Rivera's walk-off HR's allowed since 2003, and the yellow arrow on the bottom had the comment: "All occured on the road."No kidding?Wow. Tim McCarver-esque. Â Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milo Meningocele Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 Near-missWhen two things almost collide, they call it a near-miss.It's not a near-miss...It's a near-hit!!A collission is a near miss.=============================*BOOM!*"Look... they nearly missed.""Yeah, but not quite!"George Carlin called--he wants his bit back. You quoted it almost verbatim and didn't attribute it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EatSleepJeep Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 Speaking of "walk-offs", I was watching ESPN a couple days ago (SportsCenter or Baseball Tonight, I forgot), and they were talking about Mariano Rivera's walk-off HR's allowed since 2003, and the yellow arrow on the bottom had the comment: "All occurred on the road."No kidding? For serious?That's bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred T. Jane Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 Marian Hossa, clutch playoff player. [Croatia National Team Manager Slavan] Bilic then went on to explain how Croatia's success can partially be put down to his progressive man-management techniques. "Sometimes I lie in the bed with my players. I go to the room of Vedran Corluka and Luka Modric when I see they have a problem and I lie in bed with them and we talk for 10 minutes." Maybe Capello could try getting through to his players this way too? Although how far he'd get with Joe Cole jumping up and down on the mattress and Rooney demanding to be read his favourite page from The Very Hungry Caterpillar is open to question. --The Guardian's Fiver, 08 September 2008 Attention: In order to obtain maximum enjoyment from your stay at the CCSLC, the reader is advised that the above post may contain large amounts of sarcasm, dry humour, or statements which should not be taken in any true sort of seriousness. As a result, the above poster absolves himself of any and all blame in the event that a forum user responds to the aforementioned post without taking the previous notice into account. Thank you for your cooperation, and enjoy your stay at the CCSLC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HedleyLamarr Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 Speaking of "walk-offs", I was watching ESPN a couple days ago (SportsCenter or Baseball Tonight, I forgot), and they were talking about Mariano Rivera's walk-off HR's allowed since 2003, and the yellow arrow on the bottom had the comment: "All occurred on the road."No kidding? For serious?That's bad.I kid thee not. I had to look twice, just to verify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopard88 Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 I will second "golf shot" (and any similar variation from any other sport). The use of the sport's name as an adjective is completely unnecessary.I will also nominate "taking/playing them one game at a time." That is the only option. Even when playing a doubleheader, you have to play the first game before moving on to the second. Most Liked Content of the Day -- February 15, 2017, August 21, 2017, August 22, 2017   /////    Proud Winner of the CCSLC Post of the Day Award -- April 8, 2008 Originator of the Upside Down Sarcasm Smilie -- November 1, 2005  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSky Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 I have three phrases I'd like banned:"(Insert sport) club," as in, "The Rangers are a fine hockey club." I know it's the "official" name (Atlanta Falcons Football Club or whatever) but still."I like our chances," as in, "Since we have our top player back and their quarterback just broke his leg, I like our chances."And finally, "(team) is (number) games over .500." Let's say the team is 20-10. Someone saying this will usually say they're "ten games over .500." No. They've played 30 games so .500 would be 15-15, thus a 20-10 team is FIVE games over .500, not ten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyboy1 Posted April 24, 2007 Author Share Posted April 24, 2007 And finally, "(team) is (number) games over .500." Let's say the team is 20-10. Someone saying this will usually say they're "ten games over .500." No. They've played 30 games so .500 would be 15-15, thus a 20-10 team is FIVE games over .500, not ten. You may be right, but you are not going to get anyone to go along with that one if it requires them to do math. Seriously. Click here to read Third String Goalie - The Hockey Jersey of the Day Blog Click here to see my hockey and baseball jersey collection online ?You don?t like to see 20 kids punching 20 other kids. But it?s not a disgrace, It?s hockey.? - Michael Farber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epiphanic Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 And finally, "(team) is (number) games over .500." Let's say the team is 20-10. Someone saying this will usually say they're "ten games over .500." No. They've played 30 games so .500 would be 15-15, thus a 20-10 team is FIVE games over .500, not ten. I think you make an interesting point. Out of curiosity, how would you classify a team that is 11-8? 1.5 games over .500? "In the arena of logic, I fight unarmed."I tweet & tumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camden Crazy Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 I used to hate it when Keith Jackson referred to timeouts as "times out". Who says that other than him, honestly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VandyDelphia Mike Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 I used to hate it when Keith Jackson referred to timeouts as "times out". Who says that other than him, honestly?Dave Sims. Maybe even Gus Johnson.I would like to throw the phrase "threw him under the bus" under the bus. Cliché at its worst. NCAA Baseball Champions | 2014, 2019 facebook Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jman077 Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 The phrase "walk off homerun" drives me nuts. It's so over used.In a similar vein, I find "double" overused.Seriously though, walk-off homerun is an actual baseball term. That is what they are. Would you really rather them say "Game-ending home run"? If it really that big of a deal? I can understand the frustration with things like "walk-off double" or "walk-off sac fly", but, a Walk-off homer is a Walk-off homer.Near-missWhen two things almost collide, they call it a near-miss.It's not a near-miss...It's a near-hit!!A collission is a near miss.=============================*BOOM!*"Look... they nearly missed.""Yeah, but not quite!"George Carlin called--he wants his bit back. You quoted it almost verbatim and didn't attribute it.OWNED!I really don't like it when football announcers, any time the cornerback was closer to the ball than the WR, they say it was almost intercepted. Or any time the CB touches the ball. Often it wasn't almost intercepted at all. It was batted down when the CB knew he was too far away to make the interception. Often neither the WR nor the CB were ever really near the ball but the CB made a fake, last-ditch effort for it. It's just unnecessary. This was brought to my attention in a USA Today article in December, and I really noticed it throughout the playoffs. Sig courtesy of LEWJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSky Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 And finally, "(team) is (number) games over .500." Let's say the team is 20-10. Someone saying this will usually say they're "ten games over .500." No. They've played 30 games so .500 would be 15-15, thus a 20-10 team is FIVE games over .500, not ten. I think you make an interesting point. Out of curiosity, how would you classify a team that is 11-8? 1.5 games over .500?Now you have made an interesting point. I don't know how that would be addressed but they're sure not 3 games over .500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epiphanic Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 See I think the current system works fine enough. A team that is 11-8 can be referred to as 3 games over .500 because they could net lose 3 games and become a .500 team. Granted it seems a little silly to refer to a 82-80 team two games over .500 at the end of the season when if they lost one game they'd be 81-81 instead. Ultimately it's a matter of perspective. How many games can you lose (or win) to fall (or get) to .500? Or how many games could have won (or lost) to be at .500? "In the arena of logic, I fight unarmed."I tweet & tumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VitaminD Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 And finally, "(team) is (number) games over .500." Let's say the team is 20-10. Someone saying this will usually say they're "ten games over .500." No. They've played 30 games so .500 would be 15-15, thus a 20-10 team is FIVE games over .500, not ten. I think you make an interesting point. Out of curiosity, how would you classify a team that is 11-8? 1.5 games over .500?Now you have made an interesting point. I don't know how that would be addressed but they're sure not 3 games over .500.They're not? What happens if they go on a 3-game losing skid, and wind up with a record of 11-11, and a .500 winning percentage? I get your point, but you're going to have a hard time making your case, since it involves going into the Wayback Machine for potential outcomes of games that have already been decided (basically, taking away earned wins or losses to even the record to .500, then adjusting win and loss totals relative to that). As per the current convention, there are no "half-games over .500" to deal with, as epiphanic suggested. Moreover, your theory doesn't work any time a team has played an odd number of games, since there's no way to be .500 unless you've played an even number of games. You may not like it, and I understand what you're trying to say, but the system works and is readily understood by everyone. And mathematically, it makes sense. "Start spreading the news... They're leavin' today... Won't get to be a part of it... In old New York..."In order for the Mets' run of 12 losses in 17 games to mean something, the Phillies still had to win 13 of 17. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitedawg22 Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 My recent top pet peeve:"He's out with a knee."Really? Is his backup now in with a knee? Did he not have a knee before he went out?Not only is it less descriptive, but it sounds moronic. oh ,my god ,i strong recommend you to have a visit on the website ,or if i'm the president ,i would have an barceque with the anthor of the articel . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shumway Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 Not a sports term, but my one friend uses the term "irregardless" constantly. Is that even a correct word? The way he uses it, it seems like plain old "regardless" is more correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.