SH*TFA*E?

[DrBear]

A Cambridge University contestant on the long-running British word game gives an answer that won't get on the air...

and the sad part is he didn't use the D he still had.

[Jay Temple]

I have to think that this were a U.S. show, there would be a serious S&P problem with the way the handled it.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'250285\' date=\'Nov 5 2010, 10:44 AM\']I have to think that this were a U.S. show, there would be a serious S&P problem with the way the handled it.[/quote]
I have to think that the clause "if the producers deem a round to be unacceptable to air, they reserve the right to throw it out and replace it with another round" is prominently in the game's rules.

[JasonA1]

You'll recall we found out some years ago that PYL had provisions to throw out entire rounds due to a lack of spins earned/"a flood of whammys" (sic). The only way these are issues is if they're not stated beforehand and/or agreed to by all parties. Whether you agree with the philosophy of it seems to be the issue at hand. I personally would rather have the round remain in the game canon, but censor it/retape it in a way that doesn't change the results.

-Jason

[Kevin Prather]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'250287\' date=\'Nov 5 2010, 10:47 AM\'][quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'250285\' date=\'Nov 5 2010, 10:44 AM\']I have to think that this were a U.S. show, there would be a serious S&P problem with the way the handled it.[/quote]
I have to think that the clause "if the producers deem a round to be unacceptable to air, they reserve the right to throw it out and replace it with another round" is prominently in the game's rules.
[/quote]
You could also have a clause in the rule that any word categorized as "vulgar slang" in the dictionary is inadmissible. Not saying that's what the British show does, but it's an option there for the taking.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'250300\' date=\'Nov 5 2010, 04:04 PM\']You could also have a clause in the rule that any word categorized as "vulgar slang" in the dictionary is inadmissible.[/quote]
Well, yeah, that's effectively what I mean. But you still pretty much have no choice but to toss the whole round out and do it again. Otherwise you get:

HOST: "Very good, Robert, what do you have?"

ROBERT: "I have an 8, Host."

H: "Excellent. Let's have your 8."

R: "<censored>"

H: "Oh my, that's the filthiest word I've ever heard. No points for you."

...which, while I would find it personally hilarious, is pretty awful television to Joe Sixpack.

[Kniwt]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'250306\' date=\'Nov 5 2010, 04:48 PM\']R: "<censored>"[/quote]

There's precedent for this as recently as last year:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFthbY1g0XU

[tpirfan28]

Haven't they censored "wankers" before?  Or has those been from blooper specials?

[That Don Guy]

It took me a few minutes to figure out what the article meant by, "the highest ever total for the word 'octochamp'".

(Apparently, the show retires players after eight wins, and the contestant in question set the record for the most total points scored in winning eight games.)

-- Don

[parliboy]

[quote name=\'DrBear\' post=\'250280\' date=\'Nov 5 2010, 07:49 AM\']and the sad part is he didn't use the D he still had.[/quote]

If you're to believe Fark, the past tense is hyphenated in OED, and thus would have been disallowed.

Give the skill level of the player in question, I'm almost willing to buy that.

[Fedya]

I don't have the OED at hand.  Collins Scrabble Words lists SCAITHED as the only eight; there aren't any eights in the North American word list.  Both list SHITFACED (but not SHITFACE) as a legal word, which would mean it's unhyphenated.

[parliboy]

[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'250321\' date=\'Nov 5 2010, 09:08 PM\']I don't have the OED at hand.  Collins Scrabble Words lists SCAITHED as the only eight; there aren't any eights in the North American word list.  Both list SHITFACED (but not SHITFACE) as a legal word, which would mean it's unhyphenated.[/quote]
Unfortunately, that puts those lists in conflict with the word source on Countdown.  So that's another conundrum.  (But it's not crucial.)

[vtown7]

Well!  I'm not sure that I should be proud of this, but this could be the most entertaining contribution that I ever make to this forum.  I'm able to help on two fronts.

First, from the OED that every contestant gets in their goody bag upon departure from the programme: sh*tface is "an obnoxious person" and is acceptable whereas sh*t-faced is "drunk or under the influence of drugs" and is unacceptable.  They are very strict that the OED is the only acceptable source and has sunk many a scrabbler.

Secondly, I went and checked my copy of the rules... and there is nowhere in the rules saying that they will throw out the round.  Not to say that it doesn't exist as many players wouldn't even go down that road.  My hunch is that the game was so in hand that they could delete the round and it wouldn't affect the scoring.   Just my thought, however.

Ryan

/"Please say consonant clearly so it does not come out as constonant, continent or even condiment.

[Fedya]

It just always amazes me that words that make it into Scrabble still haven't made it into the supposedly complete and comprehensive OED.

(I would only have found one of the sevens, of which there are several.)

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'vtown7\' post=\'250331\' date=\'Nov 5 2010, 11:53 PM\']First, from the OED that every contestant gets in their goody bag upon departure from the programme: sh*tface is "an obnoxious person" and is acceptable whereas sh*t-faced is "drunk or under the influence of drugs" and is unacceptable.  They are very strict that the OED is the only acceptable source and has sunk many a scrabbler.[/quote]
Wait, confused.  You're saying BOTH words are in the OED, yet one is acceptable and the other isn't?  How does that work?

[quote name=\'vtown7\' post=\'250331\' date=\'Nov 5 2010, 11:53 PM\']/"Please say consonant clearly so it does not come out as constonant, continent or even condiment.[/quote]
THIS they have a rule about?