So, Who was right?

[jimi]

Re: Very good question

I think you're leaping to conclusions here .. its all Joe Brands fault for strolling down by the river in tight leather trousers, the original poster is obviously an alchoholic who was to busy drinking to have noticed her.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[tcm]

Re: Very good question

Well, you should take a share of the blame. All your stories of YM derring-do have caused a noticeable increase in the desire of people to find a nerwsworthy nautical story, so instead of stopping accidents they are all standing aside, scribbling down notes to puttem up here and impress you. I just hope you're bloody pleased with yourself for causing all this mayhem.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Re: Very good question

There is absolutely no truth in the rumour that the harridanof the windward rail was Jo Brand in tight leather trousers, I doubt if even Claysie's fenderstep would have got her onboard. I of course blame Steve101 for starting it all.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[claymore]

Re: Very good question

How tight would Jo Brands leather trousers be on Kylie Minogue? You see the subjectivity of your diatribe is leading you into difficult areas - can we try to take a more distant, objective perspective where your claims might be substantiated? Also - when discussing Fiona the Fenderstep, it is, I feel, essential to review the body fat index in relation to users. Take 23% as your arbitrary benchmark and develop your research from there.
Hope this helps

<hr width=100% size=1>regards
Claymore
/forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[Rob_Webb]

Re: Very good question

Sure, at speed both 4s and 8s are slow turners but what I meant was that if you need to in an emergency you can crash stop a 4 or an 8 in about a length and a half - the only downside is the discomfort to the crew's ribcages as they 'hold her up'! You can then, of course, spin the thing in its own length by rowing on and backing down on opposite sides.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

23%

23 % is a relatively objectionable standard than really can only be measured in relation to total mass minus the aforesaid blubber so really we a re saying that fat is in fact 23/77 or 30% of the non fat constituents. If we then exclude from the non fat constituents all essential organs and structural materials on the basis that they are non discretionary we then come close to a figure of 193%. So in reality Jo Brand's fat is really 193% of her bodyweight. Hope that helps.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jhr]

Re: 23%

Saw Jo Brand on stage a couple of weeks ago (I presume it had been strengthened specially).

As an encore, she told a great story to underline the different levels of sophistication of the various audiences she performs in front of. On a previous tour, she had finished her act by brandishing an obscure object (whose real use now escapes me but which was formed of a length of wood with a loop of rope on the end) and asking the audience "what's this"?

In Cambridge, the reply was "erm, is it an Inuit implement for drawing sledges along"? In Hartlepool, someone shouted out "it's a fat bird with a stick"!

I've seen her a couple of times on stage and she has been killingly funny both times. Not suitable for those who are squeamish about gynaecology..................

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[claymore]

Re: 23%

OK I'm fine on that one so far - could we move on to discuss the feasibility of implanting elasticated gussets into leather jeans to establish an outcome of overall uniformity of tightness?

<hr width=100% size=1>regards
Claymore
/forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[Sybarite]

There is an old adage which many people forget :

"Nobody has right of way; everybody can give it".

If you are the stand-on vessel you are still obliged to make every effort to avoid a collision when it is evident that the other vessel is not taking avoidance measures; so no absolute right of way exists.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[graham]

Re: 23%

It amazes me how a postabout collision regs mutated into a thread about Joe Brandts gusset.

More interesting than some though.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: How would

A coxless four at full chat keep a lookout ahead? Without giving the clubs physio a field day. If they're going for it big time in with the general river traffic they should either have a support boat or any vessel who see's them should get clear.

The other thing is that I've noticed on the Itchen just how hard it is to spot a rowing skiff. They are very stealthy and they go from very narrow to very wide with each stroke. Getting a bit clear only to shatter four oars down your flanks would likely p*ss off four big lads.

<hr width=100% size=1>