Dont you hate when you smash your PB and the photographer misses you ...

41 to 60 of 212 messages
30/04/2013 at 08:17

DF 3 Good Work.  

And people wonder if this is a hostile forum...  

Interestingly, he may have carried it to deposit it at the end to avoid a charge for not returning it (if applicable). 

The plot thickens...

30/04/2013 at 08:17

and bringing this into a public domain so that Manchester and the chip providers are ridiculed is a bad thing?

DF never said she was a cheat, that is the conclusion you have drawn: "which to me is saying that he believes that she gave the chip to her husband or some guy to run for her to cheat......."

seren nos    pirate
30/04/2013 at 08:19

put in williams and any adjoining numbers are linked together/.loads of them......some people must have been carrying 4 or 5 chips on their ankles

30/04/2013 at 08:31

Perhaps this thread should be retitled: "Don't you hate it when you think you've uncovered a conspiracy only to find out it was a universal chip timing problem all along?"

30/04/2013 at 08:37

For a guy who proudly states he works in IT, it seems his search skills let him down this time. I would have thought that a man with his immense IT skills would have been able to do just a few seconds more digging to make it blatantly obvious he was barking up the wrong tree.

30/04/2013 at 08:39

Can we go back to getting laid ?

seren nos    pirate
30/04/2013 at 08:39
Big_G wrote (see)

For a guy who proudly states he works in IT, it seems his search skills let him down this time. I would have thought that a man with his immense IT skills would have been able to do just a few seconds more digging to make it blatantly obvious he was barking up the wrong tree.

 

no DF3 is a conspiracy theorist.........he would never admit he was wrong......it just shows that the cheating he has uncovered is much more wide spread than he first realised.........couldn't possibly be an IT problem.....we know that they are all perfect....

30/04/2013 at 08:40
Dave The Ex- Spartan wrote (see)

Can we go back to getting laid ?

Seconded.

30/04/2013 at 08:40
Absolutely not Screampillar because they would be prejudicing the outcome of this inquiry. An open title and presenting the facts fairly allows people to make their own minds up.
Pudge    pirate
30/04/2013 at 08:40
Dave The Ex- Spartan wrote (see)

Can we go back to getting laid ?

I think all the talk of IT has killed the mood...

30/04/2013 at 08:41
Dave The Ex- Spartan wrote (see)

Can we go back to getting laid ?

 

Sussex Runner (NLR) wrote (see)
Absolutely not Screampillar because they would be prejudicing the outcome of this inquiry. An open title and presenting the facts fairly allows people to make their own minds up.

Why am I hearing Tony Blair's voice in my head?

kittenkat    pirate
30/04/2013 at 08:42

Keys in the fruit bowl, laptops away. You know the drill (literally)

kittenkat    pirate
30/04/2013 at 08:43
Screamapillar wrote (see)
Dave The Ex- Spartan wrote (see)

Can we go back to getting laid ?

 

Sussex Runner (NLR) wrote (see)
Absolutely not Screampillar because they would be prejudicing the outcome of this inquiry. An open title and presenting the facts fairly allows people to make their own minds up.

Why am I hearing Tony Blair's voice in my head?

Ok, now THIS has killed the mood.

30/04/2013 at 08:51

I know someone on this thread who claimed they ran Reading HM, yet there was not one photo from the official photographer. How did that work out DF3. Oh I remember now, you were wearing your woolly cardy over your race number.   So there are many genuine reasons for the official photographer to miss your day out on the course.

That better not be repeated this weekend, otherwise it will look a little suspect.

Carry on Philip Marlowe.

30/04/2013 at 08:55

Manchester timings are a complete F*** up and I doubt it can be corrected, too much to do, and who would trust the outcome, also it was an easy race for people to cheat, being an out and back

seren nos    pirate
30/04/2013 at 09:08
David Falconer 3 wrote (see)

Also the difference being is that her splits had her by her husbands side the whole time, yet in 23 photos, not a trace of her (in fact there was not a shot of any woman in any of the shots of this guy).

the difference is that she was one of hundreds who were allocated the time and splits of someone who had the adjoining number to theirs..Not a one off .

but you ain't big enough to admit that you failed to notice it are you.......Funny that it was a woman you picked on again David.....scared that if you had picked on one of the hundreds of blokes affected by this thye might have landed you one.

30/04/2013 at 09:08
Once again it seems that one or even two strange occurrences can be put down to an anomaly but being missed 23 times, the same person in the photo, the same person out,both with identical splits. That's more difficult to swallow.
30/04/2013 at 09:10
I think there was a pair involved in this controversy. He is as much in the spotlight, if not more than her.
seren nos    pirate
30/04/2013 at 09:11

sussex...maybe they didn't run....the chip is giving times for people who didn't run.usually just the time of the person next to you....have you actually going to look at the results or just be the faithful sidekick and stick by your man whatever the evidence says

30/04/2013 at 09:16
So if he didn't run. Who is the guy in the photo with his number on and why is a time recorded under his name. A time and a photo? How much gravy did they spill on those chips to make them do that?
41 to 60 of 212 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums