Re: all eyes were at
- From: Nick <1-nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:48:02 +0000
John Varela wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 15:16:25 -0500, Mike Lyle wrote
(in article <4850645f-9709-43c8-9481-42309c91e739@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>):
A mistake, and rather a silly one, I reckon. But what about "back to back"? Unless the second game in some mysterious way started at the end and was played until the beginning, it's nonsense.
What's wrong with "back-to-back Cup victories"? To me, back-to-back is a synonym for "one right after the other".
I'd agree - it means not just consecutive, but contiguous. I suspect the author simply meant "two matches one after the other".
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: all eyes were at
- From: Donna Richoux
- Re: all eyes were at
- References:
- all eyes were at
- From: Adrian Bailey
- Re: all eyes were at
- From: Mike Lyle
- Re: all eyes were at
- From: John Varela
- all eyes were at
- Prev by Date: Re: Meaning of "demonstrably"
- Next by Date: Re: Ass/arse
- Previous by thread: Re: all eyes were at
- Next by thread: Re: all eyes were at
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|