dargla Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 Was just browsing Web when I came across a Peterborough newspaper with a review of our 2 - 1 win. This is just a part of it, which I thought was very harsh "a close-range header from a corner six minutes from time by Steve Brooker, a man who looks as though he's dieted on cake and chips for most of his life." Yes I must admit we were poor that night but damn... http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/sport/P...an-a.4384436.jp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhyde Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 Name: Steve Brooker Height: 6' 0" (183cm) Weight: 14st 0lbs (88.98kg) Body Mass Index: 26.6 Body Description: Overweight Name: Lee Trundle Height: 6' 0" (183cm) Weight: 11st 6lbs (72.64kg) Body Mass Index: 21.8 Body Description: In Normal Range Name: Lee Johnson Height: 5' 6" (168cm) Weight: 10st 7lbs (66.74kg) Body Mass Index: 24.5 Body Description: In Normal Range Name: Ivan Sproule Height: 5' 8" (173cm) Weight: 11st 9lbs (74.0kg) Body Mass Index: 24.7 Body Description: In Normal Range There's the 3 highest according to the BMI and I thought to give Trundle as a comparison. McCombe is reasonably close to being underweight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 In fairness the BMI is b***ocks because it takes no account of muscle mass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BristolCity1992 Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 Exactly not only that but when I reached 11st 6 earlier in the year it said I was of normal weight but it did not feel like it, it said i could go to something like 12 stone and be fine. I am 10 stone 2 now probably a bit underweight but not according to the bmi. Not that it is of any interest to anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockin-robin Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 In fairness the BMI is b***ocks because it takes no account of muscle mass. Correct, the margins either way are also so small that someone with a larger muscle mass will be considered overweight. And vice a versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheshire_red Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 Correct, the margins either way are also so small that someone with a larger muscle mass will be considered overweight. And vice a versa. ohhh excellent, me relaxed muscle previals. I wish I had only five times as much fat as Brooker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rednready Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 In fairness the BMI is b***ocks because it takes no account of muscle mass. Exactly, I boxed in the Army at 15st 7lbs and looked sickly and that was at 6ft. I played rugby union and/or soccer at around 110kg/16st 7lbs. A sports Physio said I was heavy boned, many good boxers/rugby players look a little boney, but weigh in heavy. Unfortunately many sports fans equate their weight/shape with athletes. Brookers 6ft/14stone is solid mass, he puts himself about and defenders are soon aware of his impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Captain Chaos Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 Was just browsing Web when I came across a Peterborough newspaper with a review of our 2 - 1 win. This is just a part of it, which I thought was very harsh "a close-range header from a corner six minutes from time by Steve Brooker, a man who looks as though he's dieted on cake and chips for most of his life." Yes I must admit we were poor that night but damn... http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/sport/P...an-a.4384436.jp Sod all wrong with Cake and Chips if it bags you two in two (and both were winners). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BristolCity1992 Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 John Hartson Or Steve - Which one actually looks unfit? Silly comment really but then it is hardly a professional effort anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest walshy-shuffle-carl-shutt Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 Just sour grapes by the journo who couldnt think of anything that best describes his anger and dissaponitment. May have been better to say they was robbed and on balance you could agree with that in the first 60mins but football is 90mins plus. In conclusion chips and cakes all round if they all score. BTW did anyone notice the freekick towards the EE where carey was the only bloke up and then was repeated for the goal well worked set piece from the trainig ground. I think Carey will have his best return on goals this season 7-10 who take the bet??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudecowboy Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 And who stopped City from reaching the Premier League with Hull's only goal? Exactly, there a quite a few good players who carry extra weight - Trundle was at his most profiling whilst being a fatso. Odd I know, but some players benefit from a little more bulk. Both Trundle and Brooker don't have the pace, but they have the control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spectator Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 Amazing.if they lose, he's our fat slob, but if he plays for them and they win, he's a muscular winning machine, tuned to perfection like a World Championship winning Formula One Racing Car ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Horsman Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 And who stopped City from reaching the Premier League with Hull's only goal? Exactly, there a quite a few good players who carry extra weight - Trundle was at his most profiling whilst being a fatso. Odd I know, but some players benefit from a little more bulk. Both Trundle and Brooker don't have the pace, but they have the control. Good point, well made. Le Tissier was haedly twiggy, but what class!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DR DICKNOSE Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 Was just browsing Web when I came across a Peterborough newspaper with a review of our 2 - 1 win. This is just a part of it, which I thought was very harsh "a close-range header from a corner six minutes from time by Steve Brooker, a man who looks as though he's dieted on cake and chips for most of his life." Yes I must admit we were poor that night but damn... http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/sport/P...an-a.4384436.jp theres nothing wrong with cake & chips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.