Would it be rude to point out that it actually took 53 dice to score 3 hits?
(11/0; 12/0; 10/0; 10/1; 10/2 - all against an
I'd like to thank Darrell for doing all the organisational stuff and for his help with two tricky situations in my last game. I'd also like to thank my opponents - Bob, Pete, Keith, Paul and Mark for being such great opponents to play against.
Mr Pearce has sent an email out to participating teams (well, I think one player in each at least).
There was a little confusion in the results of the first division as we ended up short one team, and Darrell errr - how to put this politely. Bear with me a moment..........right, got it. Well, as good as it'll get anyway.
The lovely Darrell entered into the realms of numerical confusion.
Yes, that's a workmanlike job, I'm sure you'll agree. Far better than my initial thought of "the numbskull can't add up".
So, on the day, it was announced that Reigate won, but now it appears that MAWS did. But then again Reigate did beat MAWS 43-22. Including Mr Ruddick surrendering 25-0 after 90 minutes when he didn't need to. So I'll leave you to decide who gets the moral victory.
Maws___________273.6
Reigate_________270
Hampshire Hogs__224
Warlords_________208.8
Team Amey_______199
Seal Pups_________191
MK______________190
Team Akers_______181
BunShop_________173
Dim Mortals_______119
Khoregate _________103.2
Escape to Defeat____93
Oxford___________57.6
Oxford ___________49.2
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
Phil - shouldn't those be split up into Division 1 and "the rest"? For "the rest", shouldn't they then be split up and ranked according to their Sunday pooling?
