Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,800
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 16, 2021 18:17:06 GMT -5
Anyone who follows professional tennis knows dress code for players, staff, and spectators is a huge portion of tennis etiquette—especially at Wimbledon. I haven't watched it for years, and when I did, I wasn't watching for the dress code. Eta: asked my DH, who also watches pro tennis. Also" didn't know, didn't care." Also doesn't watch it to see how people in the stands dress. I remembered they have a strict dress code policy for players, i.e. all white, but I never heard anything about spectators. Not an official source, but dressing up is probably tradition more than requirement as a spectator. There is no official Wimbledon dress code for spectators beyond a few forbidden items: no torn jeans, running vests, dirty sneakers, or sport shorts. Though this is all that will be formally enforced, visitors to Centre Court are still expected to dress up for the more important games of the tournament in a way that is very different from most other sporting events.
Obviously, this isn’t the kind of event you wear a jersey and face paints too. Wimbledon attire is much more refined. Men traditionally wear fashionable suits and ties at major Wimbledon matches, and while women have a bit more latitude, they often wear white dresses, or similarly summery outfits.www.mybucketlistevents.com/event-detail/wimbledon-faqs/
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,651
|
Post by chiver78 on Mar 16, 2021 18:23:46 GMT -5
I haven't watched it for years, and when I did, I wasn't watching for the dress code. Eta: asked my DH, who also watches pro tennis. Also" didn't know, didn't care." Also doesn't watch it to see how people in the stands dress. I remembered they have a strict dress code policy for players, i.e. all white, but I never heard anything about spectators. Not an official source, but dressing up is probably tradition more than requirement as a spectator. There is no official Wimbledon dress code for spectators beyond a few forbidden items: no torn jeans, running vests, dirty sneakers, or sport shorts. Though this is all that will be formally enforced, visitors to Centre Court are still expected to dress up for the more important games of the tournament in a way that is very different from most other sporting events.
Obviously, this isn’t the kind of event you wear a jersey and face paints too. Wimbledon attire is much more refined. Men traditionally wear fashionable suits and ties at major Wimbledon matches, and while women have a bit more latitude, they often wear white dresses, or similarly summery outfits.www.mybucketlistevents.com/event-detail/wimbledon-faqs/^that. I remember the huge media frenzy waiting to see if Andre Agassi would thumb his nose at the dress code 20+, close to 30y ago. and, the cheer from the crowd as he took off his warmup jacket to show all whites.
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on Mar 16, 2021 18:24:25 GMT -5
Maybe it's too much seeing this with Trump, but now I'm wondering if the press isn't focusing the public's ire at Megan in order to distract from the whole Andrew thing.
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on Mar 16, 2021 18:27:20 GMT -5
I remembered they have a strict dress code policy for players, i.e. all white, but I never heard anything about spectators. Not an official source, but dressing up is probably tradition more than requirement as a spectator. There is no official Wimbledon dress code for spectators beyond a few forbidden items: no torn jeans, running vests, dirty sneakers, or sport shorts. Though this is all that will be formally enforced, visitors to Centre Court are still expected to dress up for the more important games of the tournament in a way that is very different from most other sporting events.
Obviously, this isn’t the kind of event you wear a jersey and face paints too. Wimbledon attire is much more refined. Men traditionally wear fashionable suits and ties at major Wimbledon matches, and while women have a bit more latitude, they often wear white dresses, or similarly summery outfits.www.mybucketlistevents.com/event-detail/wimbledon-faqs/ ^that. I remember the huge media frenzy waiting to see if Andre Agassi would thumb his nose at the dress code 20+, close to 30y ago. and, the cheer from the crowd as he took off his warmup jacket to show all whites. Yeah, just about any sport has a strict code for their players. My husband was telling me how he had to run out and get different pants for a pba tournament because his pants had little tiny pockets down on the side of the legs. That's bowling.
|
|
hurley1980
Well-Known Member
I am all that is wrong with the world....don't get too close, I'm contagious.
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 17:35:06 GMT -5
Posts: 1,943
|
Post by hurley1980 on Mar 16, 2021 19:37:23 GMT -5
Not really. Prime ministers come and go.... and they are representative of a political leaning....... Those who haven't voted that way, are not so keen. What he (Boris) does in his private life we don't really care about...unless it limits his ability to do the job we pay him for.......or he has murdered someone. The Queen is apolitical and doesn't vote ....... so she can represent more people. I hope they don't.... and these two disappear in to the quiet life they said they wanted. What exactly are you saying? .... Meghan Markle represents the whole of the US so must defended at any cost?... Lots of the aristocracy are American, there hasn't been a problem before.and its not true.....We like American actresses .... just not those who are trying to hurt us because they didn't get their own way. Not what I was saying at all, but you skipped over the first part of that comment, so I will rewrite it in the form of a question. Why is all the scandalous stuff Andrew has done okay, but the minor things Meghan has done not? Is it because she is American? Because it sure seems like it. Someone else mentioned that everyone in Britain is throwing a fit over Meghan to cover up and distract from the horrendous things an actual British prince has done, and I'm beginning to think that is correct.
|
|
hurley1980
Well-Known Member
I am all that is wrong with the world....don't get too close, I'm contagious.
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 17:35:06 GMT -5
Posts: 1,943
|
Post by hurley1980 on Mar 16, 2021 19:37:49 GMT -5
Maybe it's too much seeing this with Trump, but now I'm wondering if the press isn't focusing the public's ire at Megan in order to distract from the whole Andrew thing. I think this is absolutely spot on!
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Mar 16, 2021 19:50:12 GMT -5
Not really. Prime ministers come and go.... and they are representative of a political leaning....... Those who haven't voted that way, are not so keen. What he (Boris) does in his private life we don't really care about...unless it limits his ability to do the job we pay him for.......or he has murdered someone. The Queen is apolitical and doesn't vote ....... so she can represent more people. I hope they don't.... and these two disappear in to the quiet life they said they wanted. What exactly are you saying? .... Meghan Markle represents the whole of the US so must defended at any cost?... Lots of the aristocracy are American, there hasn't been a problem before.and its not true.....We like American actresses .... just not those who are trying to hurt us because they didn't get their own way. Not what I was saying at all, but you skipped over the first part of that comment, so I will rewrite it in the form of a question. Why is all the scandalous stuff Andrew has done okay, but the minor things Meghan has done not? Is it because she is American? Because it sure seems like it. Someone else mentioned that everyone in Britain is throwing a fit over Meghan to cover up and distract from the horrendous things an actual British prince has done, and I'm beginning to think that is correct. Called it! www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/09/lawyer-accuses-palace-using-meghan-take-focus-off-prince-andrew
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Mar 16, 2021 19:57:06 GMT -5
Prince Andrew is old news.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,087
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Mar 16, 2021 20:02:55 GMT -5
There was an American talk show host on the news saying that she has it good authority that Harry had talked to his father and brother. What the heck has a private conversation got to do with her? ....or anyone? .......... and who is feeding her this stuff? She also said something about the lies that are being told about Meghan. The truth will out, there is an independent investigation into how Meghan treated her staff. There has been rumours before but it will be good to get a truthful assessment of the situation. They are causing great distress and harm to the Monarchy. Like petulant kids who didn't get their own way. She's trouble, even her own family don't like her. Little has been said of her only inviting one relative to the Royal wedding But seriously... who does that? If she couldn't get on with the half relations ...... an aunt, a cousin, anyone Just a few distant friends and show bizz people. What harm are they exactly causing? Can somebody explain that to me? I don't see their heads being lopped off or thrown out of the palace or anything that would indicate she has done HARM to the monarchy. Am I misunderstanding that word? Oh they said words you don't agree with? How exactly is that HARM? The kind of language you are using should be for people like who caused Diana to die in a horrible car accident not someone who granted an interview to Oprah. And if they cause distress SO WHAT? Lots of families cause each other distress. Kayne West is causing Kim Kardashian a great deal of distress with his antics if you want just one example. Why is it any business whatsoever of yours? The fact that they publicly air their dirty laundry does not mean you are required to consume it. And as far as only inviting one relative there are plenty of people who do, or don't invite any at all dysfunction doesn't stop simply because it's a wedding day. Just because your family is apparently super close knit and would never dream of not inviting a single soul to a wedding doesn't mean that's the case for everyone. Also doesn't mean that it is anything to do with Megan herself though you seem 100% convinced you know that's the case. it's just a fucking excuse. and this is circling the drain all over the uk press. if you say anything about meghan disrespecting, causing stress, etc. to the queen, the family royal, the monarchy, little brittain, the corner shopkeeper, then you are immediately granted license to say any dispicable thing you want about meghan and it's ok because your frame it as a defence of queen and country. you know who doesn't want this? the fucking queen. she wants to handle this as a family - at least alledgedly via the press - but no one would allow that are they? anyone who respected the queen and didn't want to cause her distress would stop writing irrelevant shit about her family, stop reading irrelevant shit about her family, stop spewing irrelevant shit about her family. and guess what - no one here knows anything for sure. there is no truth to come out either. If a couple of staff step forward and say x, y, z, no telling if that is the truth or not. if every rotten thing said about her is true, she still doesn't deserve this treatment. She didn't deserve the stupid and idiotic press on her constantly, insolently, like that hideous peirs morgan. there's been more compassion in the press for serial killers for god's sake.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,087
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Mar 16, 2021 20:09:55 GMT -5
Maybe it's too much seeing this with Trump, but now I'm wondering if the press isn't focusing the public's ire at Megan in order to distract from the whole Andrew thing. I think this is absolutely spot on! oh yes, is andrews long time friendship and association with a convicted pediphile, an accuse sex trafficer, an accusation of sex with unwilling teens not a fucking threat to the monarchy pshaw! hush hush! shut up who cares meghan markle wore jeans to winbledon! heavens preserve us!!! I remember watching princess diana's wedding on tv. I was totally skeeved out! she was only what - 18? I was 2 years younger than her, there was this whole fairy tale princess narative going on and I was excited to watch. And then. And then she was marrying this old man and I was disgusted. runs in the family?
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,087
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Mar 16, 2021 20:13:35 GMT -5
Not really. Prime ministers come and go.... and they are representative of a political leaning....... Those who haven't voted that way, are not so keen. What he (Boris) does in his private life we don't really care about...unless it limits his ability to do the job we pay him for.......or he has murdered someone. The Queen is apolitical and doesn't vote ....... so she can represent more people. I hope they don't.... and these two disappear in to the quiet life they said they wanted. What exactly are you saying? .... Meghan Markle represents the whole of the US so must defended at any cost?... Lots of the aristocracy are American, there hasn't been a problem before. and its not true.....We like American actresses .... just not those who are trying to hurt us because they didn't get their own way.please listen to yourself! It's like you're talking about a toddler! she got told no! she didn't get her way. it's her fucking life to live as she sees fit.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,087
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Mar 16, 2021 20:17:32 GMT -5
haha - funs stuff this thread!
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,334
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Mar 16, 2021 20:52:36 GMT -5
Prince Andrew is old news. I must be weird. I don't consider a man who has allededly preyed on young girls and seemingly escaping answer for his actions by hiding behind his wife's skirts (something Harry has now been accused of multiple times) to be old news tossed aside because heaven forbid a princess whose husband is #8 in line for the throne wore jeans to a tennis match. Which shows this isn't about protecting the crown from harm or embarrassment at all. If it was hiding a potential pedophile in their ranks should completely topple it. So what gives? ETA: Charles treatment of Diana while banging Camilla and then marrying her should have also toppled it. I recall it being quite the scandal in its day. Megan must really be something if all that couldn't toppled the monarchy but an interview with Oprah can.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,800
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 17, 2021 3:32:02 GMT -5
Prince Andrew is old news. I must be weird. I don't consider a man who has allededly preyed on young girls and seemingly escaping answer for his actions by hiding behind his wife's skirts (something Harry has now been accused of multiple times) to be old news tossed aside because heaven forbid a princess whose husband is #8 in line for the throne wore jeans to a tennis match. Which shows this isn't about protecting the crown from harm or embarrassment at all. If it was hiding a potential pedophile in their ranks should completely topple it. So what gives? ETA: Charles treatment of Diana while banging Camilla and then marrying her should have also toppled it. I recall it being quite the scandal in its day. Megan must really be something if all that couldn't toppled the monarchy but an interview with Oprah can. I think its mostly contrived melodrama from the press, with the British Press being the usual drama queens using 'a source', 'palace insider', or some royal pundit who believes they can speak for the royals. Much like Welts opined about Meghan thinking she holds a winning hand of cards. (In what universe does anyone think that? The monarchy has no history of taking anyone back. ) So let's go back to King George VII and Wallace Simpson. Sure he eventually abdicated the throne in order to marry her, but prior to that he was caught in bed with her in the palace and even watched an event about him with her publicly from a window. The palace was so concerned he ascended the throne anyway when the prior King died. Prince Charles wasn't allowed by his mother to marry who he loved because she was currently married and the divorce thing was still big. So apparently it was far better to get a fresh virgin face from the population and treat her badly than let Prince Charles marry Camilla back then. Having destroyed Diana and thankfully for them she was killed, freed up a change in opinion and now Charles who cheated on his wife will eventually ascend the throne with his former mistress as Queen. So two for two in not so punished male heirs. Andrew. Sure he got stripped of titles and he is no longer a working royal. But apparently it is considered less news worthy to point out he is being financially supported by the Queen than point out Harry was supported by his father, Prince Charles. The crime of marrying the wrong woman, actually being a woman who married into the BRF is a far worse thing than being a male heir flouting the norms of the monarchy. I guess the 1000 year old tradition of blame the women and essentially act like boys will be boys is still in place. Some traditions are not a plus. Maybe Rainbow Randy needs to make a video singing Tradition while flashing pics of cheating male heirs contrasted with believed bad women like Diana, Meghan, and perhaps Fergie.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,619
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 17, 2021 8:12:25 GMT -5
Someone doesn't like anyone sharing the spotlight with him. Trump on possible Meghan 2024 presidential bid: 'I hope that happens'
Former President Trump in an interview late Tuesday said that he is hopeful that Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, runs for the White House in 2024, saying her candidacy might compel him to jump into the race as well. "Mr. president, what was your take on Meghan Markle now saying - meeting with Democratic operatives, she may want to run for president?" Fox News host Maria Bartiromo asked Trump during a wide-ranging interview. "I hope that happens," Trump responded. "If that happened, I think I'd have an even stronger feeling toward running," adding he's "not a fan" of Meghan. Article link here: link
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,800
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 17, 2021 16:18:36 GMT -5
Someone doesn't like anyone sharing the spotlight with him. Trump on possible Meghan 2024 presidential bid: 'I hope that happens'
Former President Trump in an interview late Tuesday said that he is hopeful that Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, runs for the White House in 2024, saying her candidacy might compel him to jump into the race as well. "Mr. president, what was your take on Meghan Markle now saying - meeting with Democratic operatives, she may want to run for president?" Fox News host Maria Bartiromo asked Trump during a wide-ranging interview. "I hope that happens," Trump responded. "If that happened, I think I'd have an even stronger feeling toward running," adding he's "not a fan" of Meghan. Article link here: linkI think this is just DT fake news designed to capitalize on conservatives dislike of Meghan and perhaps even a way to diss her for Piers Morgan his buddy. Earlier in the day I noticed only RW media were carrying this story based on the report she met with some Dems like she did prior to her get out the vote project.
|
|
Spellbound454
Senior Member
"In the end, we remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends"
Joined: Sept 9, 2011 17:28:42 GMT -5
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by Spellbound454 on Mar 17, 2021 17:50:54 GMT -5
She's a Democrat and has made no secret about it.
Whatever.... welcome her back into the fold if you wish..... believe all her mawkish guff if you want to.
but if she continues to attack us .... we'll continue to dislike her.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Mar 17, 2021 22:42:39 GMT -5
Geeze why are H&M talking on record to Gale King about how phone calls with William are unproductive? Like I don't see a positive reason for doing this 1) it keeps them in the press for personal matters 2) it's obvious that anything you say to them is likely to be immediately told to the press which makes future talks less likely to be productive 3) now that you're not part of the firm why does talking to your brother have to be productive?
Like I've been riding the neutral stance - some stuff is just uncalled for while other didn't make sense - but this news piece doesn't shine a great light.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,800
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 18, 2021 1:51:37 GMT -5
Geeze why are H&M talking on record to Gale King about how phone calls with William are unproductive? Like I don't see a positive reason for doing this 1) it keeps them in the press for personal matters 2) it's obvious that anything you say to them is likely to be immediately told to the press which makes future talks less likely to be productive 3) now that you're not part of the firm why does talking to your brother have to be productive? Like I've been riding the neutral stance - some stuff is just uncalled for while other didn't make sense - but this news piece doesn't shine a great light. Agreed. I think it was stupid on all fronts. Hopefully it will make Harry realize Gayle King and others want to use him more than they want to be his friend. Reporting that they even had talks is questionable, adding they were not productive is just non news showing you are desperate for views. I think parts of the American media are seeing dollar signs in their eyes and want to add royal coverage. I do not want to hear about H&M on a weekly or even monthly basis. Keep royal news to the usual - marriages, deaths, and births. The exit is over, let it go.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,447
|
Post by thyme4change on Mar 18, 2021 9:58:03 GMT -5
Maybe "productive" refers to making amends in their personal relationship.
My husband and I have had several conversations about what things are counter-productive and what things "work" with our families.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Mar 18, 2021 10:53:10 GMT -5
Yeah, I guess I see that -- though if it's all just personal that leans even more to why are you telling this to someone who is repeating it on national news? If you want to keep your private life private why are you telling them about your personal relationship with your brother?
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,087
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Mar 18, 2021 16:32:35 GMT -5
Yeah, I guess I see that -- though if it's all just personal that leans even more to why are you telling this to someone who is repeating it on national news? If you want to keep your private life private why are you telling them about your personal relationship with your brother? because will gave out info on his side of it? who knows.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Mar 18, 2021 18:07:44 GMT -5
Yeah, I guess I see that -- though if it's all just personal that leans even more to why are you telling this to someone who is repeating it on national news? If you want to keep your private life private why are you telling them about your personal relationship with your brother? because will gave out info on his side of it? who knows. Source? Only thing I've seen Will say was that he hadn't spoken with his brother but will a few days after the interview came out.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,800
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 18, 2021 18:36:56 GMT -5
because will gave out info on his side of it? who knows. Source? Only thing I've seen Will say was that he hadn't spoken with his brother but will a few days after the interview came out. Haven't read any of them as they are in sources that use 'palace insider' 'a source', etc. but I've seen headlines like "William is protective of Kate since the interview came out', 'William mad their phone calls have been shared' (with Gayle) etc. Getting tired of all the non news news.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,423
|
Post by NastyWoman on Mar 18, 2021 18:53:55 GMT -5
^that. I remember the huge media frenzy waiting to see if Andre Agassi would thumb his nose at the dress code 20+, close to 30y ago. and, the cheer from the crowd as he took off his warmup jacket to show all whites. Yeah, just about any sport has a strict code for their players. My husband was telling me how he had to run out and get different pants for a pba tournament because his pants had little tiny pockets down on the side of the legs. That's bowling.So in all the post I have seen here is an important point being made and we skipped straight over it. Duh, of course your DH had to go out and get different pants. He could have hidden a secret, altered BB in one of those pockets. That is a recipe for cheating in the making
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Mar 18, 2021 19:36:53 GMT -5
Source? Only thing I've seen Will say was that he hadn't spoken with his brother but will a few days after the interview came out. Haven't read any of them as they are in sources that use 'palace insider' 'a source', etc. but I've seen headlines like "William is protective of Kate since the interview came out', 'William mad their phone calls have been shared' (with Gayle) etc. Getting tired of all the non news news. And neither of those are William talking about the private conversation he had with Harry first - which is what rukh said.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,087
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Mar 18, 2021 20:43:58 GMT -5
because will gave out info on his side of it? who knows. Source? Only thing I've seen Will say was that he hadn't spoken with his brother but will a few days after the interview came out. yeah - so will says - we haven't talked but will, then harry says later - yes we talked but not productive. I suspect because of a question did he speak to will? And then not productive, both vague and shuts things down, nothing to report?
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,800
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 18, 2021 20:47:40 GMT -5
Source? Only thing I've seen Will say was that he hadn't spoken with his brother but will a few days after the interview came out. yeah - so will says - we haven't talked but will, then harry says later - yes we talked but not productive. I suspect because of a question did he speak to will? And then not productive, both vague and shuts things down, nothing to report? It should be, but apparently Gayle felt this was news.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Mar 18, 2021 21:10:08 GMT -5
Source? Only thing I've seen Will say was that he hadn't spoken with his brother but will a few days after the interview came out. yeah - so will says - we haven't talked but will, then harry says later - yes we talked but not productive. I suspect because of a question did he speak to will? And then not productive, both vague and shuts things down, nothing to report? Uhhhh...it's been over a week since Will said they hadn't talked. And that was in response to a question he was asked at an appearance a couple days after the interview aired... not calling up a national news anchor to report on Harry's personal phone calls with his brother knowing it was going to be on the national morning show the next day.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,800
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 18, 2021 21:13:24 GMT -5
Is there a reason you don't think Gayle called him?
|
|