tom webster Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 I'm not sure what annoys me more, the fact that no one seems to be able to spell ridiculous or Tom Webster's consistent butchering of Kaleta (only one T please). I thought I had gotten better at that. My only defense is that I spent almost 20 years in the tire industry and Regatta was an almost constant in those twenty years. At least I have done better with Pominville, not Pomminstein and I think I've done better with the then/than.
spndnchz Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 OK, is it Ger-bee or Ger-BAY? Rick said BAY the other night. It's Gerber bay-bay! or if you prefer Grr-bay-bay.
Buffalo Fan Posted December 10, 2008 Author Report Posted December 10, 2008 I'm not sure what annoys me more, the fact that no one seems to be able to spell ridiculous or Tom Webster's consistent butchering of Kaleta (only one T please). ...this kind of hijacking IS RIDICULOUS and serves to pat one's self on the back...good catch Ink!
2ForTripping Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 I don't know if it's just in Firefox, but with iSpell installed, it spell checks as you type in post boxes. It puts a red underline below spelling mistakes. Doesn't help with to/two/too and there/their/they're, but will remind you that it's "ridiculous", not "rediculous".Yeah, that's a personal favorite of mine, too. or the folks who use prolly instead of probably
SwampD Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 ...this kind of hijacking IS RIDICULOUS and serves to pat one's self on the back...good catch Ink! Also, spelling is not an indication of intelligence, so that is a misguided pat on the back at that. It's just memorization. Now, using than for then, or your for you're...well that's just dumb. Oh yeah, I think Gerbe shoots tonight, instead of differing like the last game. I hope so anyway.
darksabre Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 or the folks who use prolly instead of probably yeah, but prolly seems to be an adaptation of a local colloquialism. I've always spoken probably in a rather slurred manner. "that prallly the one" it's kinda like "ya'll".
2ForTripping Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 yeah, but prolly seems to be an adaptation of a local colloquialism. I've always spoken probably in a rather slurred manner. "that prallly the one" it's kinda like "ya'll". no, it is not
Bmwolf21 Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 I don't know if it's just in Firefox, but with iSpell installed, it spell checks as you type in post boxes. It puts a red underline below spelling mistakes. Doesn't help with to/two/too and there/their/they're, but will remind you that it's "ridiculous", not "rediculous". Firefox does have a spellchecker installed and it does check in the post boxes. The spellcheck was brutal at first, but thankfully it's (slowly) getting better.
wjag Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 I'm not sure what annoys me more, the fact that no one seems to be able to spell ridiculous or Tom Webster's consistent butchering of Kaleta (only one T please). I'll go with the spelling of ridiculous...................... I'm glad I'm not the only one who gets annoyed by that. Another word that's just as bad: definitely. And your old favorite, "then" instead of "than," which showed up in Kelley's article. I don't know if it's just in Firefox, but with iSpell installed, it spell checks as you type in post boxes. It puts a red underline below spelling mistakes. Doesn't help with to/two/too and there/their/they're, but will remind you that it's "ridiculous", not "rediculous".Yeah, that's a personal favorite of mine, too. or the folks who use prolly instead of probably yeah, but prolly seems to be an adaptation of a local colloquialism. I've always spoken probably in a rather slurred manner. "that prallly the one" it's kinda like "ya'll". no, it is not Easy fellas.. There may be some who suffer from Ortographobia... You could send them into a deep pyschosis... Speaking of pyschosis, anyone suffer from: Arachibutyrophobia, Defecaloesiophobia, Graphophobia, Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia, Myxophobia (hint, Sabres logo), or Sesquipedalophobia?
spndnchz Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 no, it is not Who can deny, who can deny, it's not just a change in style?
JujuFish Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 Easy fellas.. There may be some who suffer from Ortographobia... You could send them into a deep pyschosis... Speaking of pyschosis, anyone suffer from: Arachibutyrophobia, Defecaloesiophobia, Graphophobia, Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia, Myxophobia (hint, Sabres logo), or Sesquipedalophobia No. Nor, along similar lines, do I suffer from triskaidekaphobia.
spndnchz Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 Easy fellas.. There may be some who suffer from Ortographobia... You could send them into a deep pyschosis... Speaking of pyschosis, anyone suffer from: Arachibutyrophobia, Defecaloesiophobia, Graphophobia, Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia, Myxophobia (hint, Sabres logo), or Sesquipedalophobia I can say I do not suffer from Astrapophobia. GFGI.
LabattBlue Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 Firefox does have a spellchecker installed and it does check in the post boxes. The spellcheck was brutal at first, but thankfully it's (slowly) getting better. One of my all-time favorite features! :thumbsup:
LabattBlue Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 Easy fellas.. There may be some who suffer from Ortographobia... You could send them into a deep pyschosis... Speaking of pyschosis, anyone suffer from: Arachibutyrophobia, Defecaloesiophobia, Graphophobia, Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia, Myxophobia (hint, Sabres logo), or Sesquipedalophobia I'm suffering from buffalosportsteamsaresuckingthelifeoutofme-itis
nfreeman Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 If you've watched most of the games this year, there is a very consistent and recurring theme that keeps appearing when the Sabres give up goals. Most of the goals they have given up this year have come from transition defense breakdowns with a trailer or open man skating free in the slot or the backdoor and who is not picked up by any of the Sabres forwards on the backcheck. It has been a recurring problem all season long. Even the first Fedetenko goal was due to him not being picked up by anyone on the transition. There have generally been a lot of defensive zone breakdowns where either the forwards or the defenseman are not getting back and picking up the trailer and he gets a wide open net to shoot at. Miller's definitely given up the soft goal here and there, but by and large I've noticed that most of the goals this season have been coming from breakdowns by the forwards in the defensive zone not picking up the open man. Maybe you could argue that Miller should be faster at covering the other side of the net, but Miller comes out pretty far to cut the angle and so it's almost impossible for him to get back fast enough to cover the other side of the post, which makes it even more critical for the forwards to be responsible in the defensive end and pickup the trailer and make sure he does not get an open net to shoot at. It's kind of a trade off you have to choose. If Miller does not come out so far to challenge the shooter, he gives the shooter a better angle to shoot at, if Miller stays back in the net he can cover post-to-post better but shooters generally will have better angles to shoot at meaning Miller's reflexes have to be even quicker than most goaltenders. Goalies like Esposito, Fuhr, Brodeur, and Potvin were able to get away with sitting so far back in the net because they had glove hands and reflexes faster than most everyone so they could afford to sit back in the net, but a goalie that plays butterfly technique must come out to challenge the shooter and cut down the angle, which can leave them vulnerable to the backdoor play. This is why Jay McKee was so valuable with his blocked shots and why the Sabres need to play sound responsible defense to cover the backdoor and pickup the trailer on the transition. Just one man's take. Apologies for hijacking the thread on Nathan Gerbe's +/-. Good post. Isn't this the bottom line for every goalie? A goalie that doesn't have to move can concentrate on the shot and protecting a zone of the goal. A goalie on the move is clearly improvising and vulnerable. And another one.
inkman Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 I'm suffering from buffalosportsteamsaresuckingthelifeoutofme-itis We all are. :(
2ForTripping Posted December 10, 2008 Report Posted December 10, 2008 Who can deny, who can deny, it's not just a change in style? I saw things getting out of hand, I guess they always will
carpandean Posted December 11, 2008 Report Posted December 11, 2008 I just wanted to point out that Gerbe also leads the team in face off %. Apparently, he took one in one of the first two games and won it. He's sitting at 100%! :thumbsup:
spndnchz Posted December 11, 2008 Report Posted December 11, 2008 Anyone else hear RJ last night on Gerbe? "Gerbe hit him and bruised his navel" Priceless.
Two or less Posted December 11, 2008 Report Posted December 11, 2008 He'll probably go with a "say goodbye to Portland, say hello to Buffalo" like he did for Mancari. :rolleyes: Actually, I'm expecting a "Grrr-BAY! Grrr-BAY! Grrr-BAY!" Not on the topic of Gerbe, but on RJ.... last night he did DREWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW Stafford! After his goal, like he used to do for STUUUUUUUU Barnes. When did he start that? I don't ever recall noticing it? Maybe it's because i was calm last night and could listen and not cheering loudly after the goal? lol
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.