hmm... A rugby ball from Currys/PC World.

Does it have wifi capability?

No, despite the fact that you think that it is a mute point, what you need to do is nip it in the butt and accept that you got the phrase wrong, realise what its etymology is and move on.

Or for all intensive purposes stay ignorant irregardless of the mistakes you are making; which we all do of course.

A damp squid? Squib*

Robbed, yes
All the way to the final???? :confused:

Was a real damp squid after England went out.

hmm... A rugby ball from Currys/PC World.

Does it have wifi capability?

Robbed, yes
All the way to the final???? :confused:

He patriotic, he's been on the scotch whisky.
He realize in the morning, it was just illusion!

you should support rugby as a sport and a spectacle. not just your own team!

Really good deal for a Gilbert rugby ball separate to the rugby!

Squids live in water, hence damp squid.

Anyone know what size the rugby ball is please?

200 by 200 by 300. Smaller size I think?

a nice unused England ball obviously

I believe this is a size 5 ball going off the dimensions?

Ordered anyway, hot

ha ha, i can see why you might think that :smiley:

a squib is a small firework, so the term "damp squib" relates to something not being as good as it should ie a damp firework would not work very well :smiley:

But a damp squid is expected, therefore not a disappointment. Squib was a type of mining explosive and a damp one would not go off when lit. Your text here

Hi is this a size 5?

Thanks :-)

Haha you beat me to it!

The whole meaning of the phrase means 'a disappointment'

Exactly how disappointing would a damp squid be! Haha

No, despite the fact that you think that it is a mute point, what you need to do is nip it in the butt and accept that you got the phrase wrong, realise what its etymology is and move on.

Or for all intensive purposes stay ignorant irregardless of the mistakes you are making; which we all do of course.

As a Scot even I find that silly! Obviously any team could get to the final if they don't lose, unfortunately we did lose!

Same for England, if they had won all of their games they could have got to the final.

And all they had to do to win those games was to score more points.

A carnt speak!!!

That were diabolical!

https://youtu.be/o58stoJJ5No

A damp squid, as I was expecting England to lose and go out early and ruin the whole tournament.
I got exactly what I was expecting.
If I was surprised I would have said damp squib.

I got one reserved, thanks

Nice try #fail
BTW you are now confusing surprise and disappointment.

You are living in

sold out Leicester

technically OP you should have said 'delivered to Currys' not [email protected]' because home delivery is not available, its instore only

thx ordered pick up from dorchester

None anywhere near Cardiff or even South wales

We certainly would have had a chance against Argentina.
Scotland did really, really well. Last 5 in the tournament, I'll take it :smiley:

Still the question is, and it's confused me a little. As what the hell is a electrical retailer selling a rugby ball for?

My local Tescos where selling these off cheap too....

Picked one up in Derby but the staff were all after the other one there when found out! It is a size 5 and a proper ball.

North East Africa?

Reserved thanks.
Hopefully get more use out of this than I do out of my England shirts - can barely get them washed and ironed before they're out of a tournament...

Nice ball

Nowhere within 30 miles of Cardiff in stock and not available for home delivery, so basically useless for me.

Still available in High Wycombe . . .

I am English....but it is quite clear to see that Scotland should have won that match. It was an incorrect decision by the referee.
Given that Scotland ran the Aussie's ragged, I doubt the Argentinian's would have put up much of a fight.

It should be a Scotland vs New Zealand final. & it is a crying shame that it isn't. That Michael Cheika guy is an an absolute bell - and Australia are ungracious victors.

(I am still annoyed that Pocock got away with a yellow card offence against Mike Brown back in the group stages! :smiley: )

£2 Morrisons, instore and online

Size 4 one free if you buy two bottles of coke for £2 on ocado. Got ours today - comes with a pump aswell.

I am guessing somewhere near to de Nile.

I'll wait for he launch of size 6

Thank you, it means a lot :wink:

I agree it was a bad/wrong decision, but talking about "could" is a pointless exercise. For example, Australia "could" have scored a try from the scrum that should have followed and we "could" have still lost.

There were other things in the match that "could" have happened that meant we lost or won by more, but they didn't. Most of our tries came from sloppy Australian play so it is just as legitimate to say that Australia "could" have played better and won.

In the next game or games anything "could" have happened, a bad refereeing decision for or against us, and individual error at a crucial point, injuries.

Yes, it was a bad decision but where do you draw the line at things that "could" have happened if not for certain other things happening?!

Warning: Will not work correctly with northern hemisphere nationals. (particularly those who are too scared to throw it around)

No longer available for home delivery, you're able to collect instore if you're lucky enough to find stock.

It was the 79th minute and some...Scotland had done enough for victory. Everyone in that stadium thought they'd done enough.
If the referee had operated with more conviction, then he would have gone to the TMO (they would hardly have refused him), and the correct decision would have been made,
From the ensuing scrum, the likelihood of Australia scoring was FAR less than via that penalty.

Scotland deserved to be in that semi final at the very least. Given how they performed against Australia, there is every likelihood that they would have made it to the final.

The bigger point in all of this is that we shouldn't even be having such discussions. In the 79th minute of a World Cup Quarter Final, the referee simply cannot make a decision unless he is 100% sure it is the right one.

Joubert should never have been officiating either...he has a history of screwing over teams; he did it in the World Cup Final back in 2011

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XBqetaCfgo

They eat dry squid in South Korea. If they got a damp squid they would be very upset and disappointed...

He couldn't go to the TMO, been quite clearly established since the event. Going to the TMO would have been the wrong decision.
Yes it was the 79th minute but anything "could" happen in that last minute, how many times in tight games have you seen a last minute penalty or try turn it round. Why couldn't it have happened this time?
I agree a try would have been less likely from the scrum, but it "could" still have happened. Or maybe something "could" have happened to have another penalty awarded with the same result. Sporting events don't always follow perceived likelihoods, before the game how many people would have said it would be likely that Scotland would be so close to winning it?
We will never know, that is why it is pointless talking about what "could" have happened. Like I said, there would have still been another match and anything "could" have happened in that one.
And how do you know he wasn't 100% certain at the time? Haven't you ever been 100% certain of something and still got it wrong? Don't forget you are looking at it with the benefit of countless slow replays from every angle, he didn't have that luxury at the time.

It was a human mistake and referees in all sports make them all the time. Ok it had a big effect on the outcome, but lets not lose sight of the fact that it was just a mistake.

It was a mistake, yes. But in a world of TMO, these mistakes shouldn't have a hugely crushing outcome.
Laidlaw knew the ref had made an error - he implored him to go to the video ref.
You can bet that if it is was Nigel Owens, that decision would not have been made so rashly.

Joubert is a very average referee that time and again fails to make the right call. Running off at the end of the game just shows his poor judgement.

If the correct decision had been made, then Australia would have had a fair crack at trying to get to the winning line in a just way. If Scotland had then lost, then we wouldn't all feel aggrieved. It was the fact that a game was lost so unfairly when the technology was there to allow for the correct decision.

A good referee would have stuck his head above the parapet and said - 'you know what, I'm going to the TMO on this. It may break the 'rules', but in the spirit of this game, I cannot allow a result to be decided on a technicality'.

Scotland in that 79th minute were odds on favourite for the victory. Joubert stole the opportunity from them. He then showed huge disrespect by running off.

why they never used the video refer, or the lines man didn't intervene I never know. Did other occasions throughout the world cup.

OK, but you're missing the important point which is that every decision a referee makes or fails to make in any sporting event affects the course of that event in some way. You can't go for replays every time a referee has to make a decision (because that decision will affect the course of the game) which is why they have rules about when you can go to the TMO.

Yes, but you are also missing the point....

This was the 79th minute of a World Cup quarter final.

It was a VITAL moment...one which would have fully warranted a TMO referral. But we can't be too surprised at Joubert's decision making - after all, he sin binned the Scottish player without consulting with any other match officials. Another decision that was incorrect.

Scotland were robbed of that result. Joubert should not referee a major international again.

OK, but if you are the governing body of any sport you have to make the rules to apply evenly across all events. So your rule would be any decision you make in the 79th minute of a World Cup quarter final or later has to go to the TMO?
What about if it was the 78th minute? Or the 77th? Or a group game? Where do you draw the line and why do you draw it there? Especially given that a bad decision earlier on in a game can potentially affect is as much as later on.

I'm not saying he didn't get it wrong. I'm not saying it didn't have a big effect. It just seems that people only want referees to ignore the rules when it affects something they care about. Obviously it would have been great if he had ignored the rule, but what happens next time when a ref ignores the rule and it adversely affects your team?

Scotland aren't my team, England are...

But I just think it was a tragic thing for the sport. Scotland earned their right to be in the semi final. This World Cup desperately needed them to be in the semi final too.

Referees should be able to use their discretion. If a match hinges on one decision (which is what this match did), then the referee should have the latitude to be able to seek another opinion in order to ensure the result is the right one.

This World Cup needed some magic. Scotland were that magic. They were removed from the competition by a referee that gifted the 2011 World Cup to New Zealand. That cannot be right.

Nice thread, I like how its turned into therapy for some, and we learnt about damp squids.

Thanks. that's strange as I even went as far as Taunton in Devon and there was nothing showing in stock.

Its a size 5 and comes in a box. Imagine Tom Hanks had found this instead, he would have spent 5 years living with Gilbert!

comes in presentation box, same ball in john lewis is £20. they were meant to be part of Cannon Packages

Nothing within 75 miles apparently. I thought the point of "Collect in store" was that the store didn't need stock, as the product would be delivered there for you to collect in person? It's the same confusing system Argos uses.