"Here in the Lord Duck Trap," we love football. We are attracted to the unpredictability of the game, turns emotional, aesthetics, intelligence, a game that is basically a strategy, that is, if there is a ball and twenty-two players, how you can get a goal but is thinking? But what bothers us, many times, is too literary spirit of some reporters and commentators, which often goes against the understanding of the game or just irritated. For example, when the commentator, instead of explaining that subsection of that article applied the referee to penalize failure, attempts to analyze the complex psychological dimension of defense wanted to hit but not hit. Never mind the clichés, like saying "this player has a glove on the foot," really, what do you mean by that? That hit the ball better? or otherwise? tried to make a delicate task with gloves, and count coins or running the pages of a newspaper?, is very complicated, so I do not understand the meaning of metaphor. Another is the rhetorical question "But how Gonzalez is on the court?". One who runs fast, how many will there be? Or is there an interdimensional portal in any sector of the field, which allows that player to go from one place to another without effort? Also made statements like "the ball came asking permission," assuming the audience that when the ball goes hard, just "ordered" the rude. Another, very also curious, is the expression "owner undisputed." There is no "undisputed head" is in possession or not. Or perhaps there is a "holder discussed" or who is neither one thing nor the other, ie the "owner pusillanimous? Oh, and another thing, do not you call attention to the players who have many, many games at first and became one, two or three goals? Why not make it understandable but do so little, I mean, what miraculous event took place for these men, more than four games, scoring one goal and then never again?
"I said it was a very intelligent person because I knew what was the capital of Scotland.
"Something that is always crisp is crisp, no matter the size or color, or any other external circumstance. Yes, it's crunchy, it's crunchy, period.
- Where is the "Old Zealand?
sitcom "Some Yankees should modernize their jokes and, when they want to insult the manhood of one of its protagonists, instead of converting this former wife a lesbian, should put a nympho and that the character in question will remove the desire to have sex again. The effect is the same and, even if they cease to be copied.
-Best which has the opposition is not a government.
-phrases that you will never see a state in a social network:
"I'm putting my phone credit"
"I'm taking out the trash"
"I'm in the bathroom"
"I masturbate"
"I'm making love"
"I'm making love with a transvestite"
"I have cooties"
"I have crabs"
"I was one-eyed"
"I'm being kidnapped"
"Kidnapped"
"I am committing suicide"
"Viewing Grondona program"
"I fell off the ladder"
Emoticons I owe. Speaking of which
. I wonder why companies do not pay social network users so that, in the state, write advertising. It would be simpler and cheaper, the money would be paid according to number of contacts and time online. But do not for that network administrators are receiving money from advertising, while we're gawking, others used to make the money that we could pay it to us. Another thing that worries me is knowing what will happen when we leave this world with all social networking accounts that we have at this time. Undoubtedly we have no notion of cyberspace trash is going to be. Personally, I record in my will that my executor to connect for three days and three nights, by way of mourning, with the state: "I'm going to hell. The prontito see. " Then, you delete the account.
- How is it that tolerance is not to criticize those who think differently? Who do I criticize, then? Those who think the same? I understand about not attack him in any way, either physically or verbally, but do not criticize? What kind of world would this?
- "I went to college small, neighborhood, away from the bustle of the city. Perhaps the academic level was not the best, but it is also true that it was very difficult to be removed, you had to do something very serious. Let's say we were like a family. We knew all together, almost in detail, and we hated. But it was a cordial hatred, knowing that we could not escape from there, we were doomed to see us every day, to live. A strong anger was a passenger, was not sustainable over time, the cordial hatred was, then, so he turned. Outside, everything was cool and joy, inside, we bit her tongue to contain the poison. Like a family. "
"Remember when they went to the primary? The teacher made us read a text and, perhaps out of laziness, we said that we look in the dictionary for words that did not know where she was, of course, which was already pointed out the words we did not know. What was that we could convert all experts in the language. "Eclectic? Of course that means. "Soliloquy? Too. "Apostasy? Of course you tell me one who does not know. " Of course, even today does not mean those words. "
" Do you really believe that the frozen spot, the elastic, the yo-yo, among others, were games healthier, more fun and more encouraged intelligence and sociability to the play-station? Ah, yes, really? Well, okay, I'll shut up, do not criticize those who think differently. "
0 comments:
Post a Comment