Date:         Mon, 1 Nov 2010 07:45:25 -0700
Reply-To:     Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Laurent Delamare <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Seattle vs. LA (no score)
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Thanks. "no score" sounded like a draw to me.  May be "no score spoiler"
would be clearer next time.

On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Tom Simonds <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> The words "no score" in the header are to indicate to you, the concerned
> reader, that no scoring information is contained in the message, and
> therefore can be opened by those of us who have Tivo'd, DVR'd, or otherwise
> will be enjoying the match at a time other than its live original broadcast.
>  No score does NOT, in this instance, indicate a nil-nil draw.
>
> Ergo, the words no score are protecting you, in fact, from the very
> potential danger which you proclaim.
>
> Might we all be so fortunate to remain shielded from the information we
> fear.
>
> T
>
>
>
> On Nov 1, 2010, at 0:23, Laurent Delamare <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Please don't put the game result on your email title.  Some of us haven't
> > watched the game yet!
> > --Laurent
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Lawrence Savell <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> A couple interesting things:
> >> 1. The ARs were using violet colored flags. Not that it really makes a
> >> difference but it seemed to look nice on TV.
> >> 2. Toward the end of the game a Seattle player challenged the GK by not
> >> letting him release the ball into play and kicked it away. He was
> rewarded
> >> with a caution. What the heck was he thinking?
> >> ...larry
> >>
>