by Dogwatcher » Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:23 pm
by HH3 » Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:25 pm
by Dogwatcher » Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:26 pm
by Booney » Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:27 pm
by Spargo » Thu Jun 02, 2016 8:35 pm
by bennymacca » Thu Jun 02, 2016 10:04 pm
Spargo wrote:People who get invited to a wedding & then have the gall to ask the couple if they can bring their kids along.
If they wanted kids at their wedding, they would've been on the invitation.
(children under 12 months of age are obviously an exception, being simply too tight to organise a sitter isn't).
by stan » Thu Jun 02, 2016 10:17 pm
bennymacca wrote:Spargo wrote:People who get invited to a wedding & then have the gall to ask the couple if they can bring their kids along.
If they wanted kids at their wedding, they would've been on the invitation.
(children under 12 months of age are obviously an exception, being simply too tight to organise a sitter isn't).
why the hell would you wanna bring your kids anyway when there is free booze on offer
by Spargo » Thu Jun 02, 2016 10:19 pm
by mighty_tiger_79 » Thu Jun 02, 2016 10:43 pm
by Dogwatcher » Fri Jun 03, 2016 9:48 am
Spargo wrote:People who get invited to a wedding & then have the gall to ask the couple if they can bring their kids along.
If they wanted kids at their wedding, they would've been on the invitation.
(children under 12 months of age are obviously an exception, being simply too tight to organise a sitter isn't).
by Booney » Fri Jun 03, 2016 9:55 am
Dogwatcher wrote:Spargo wrote:People who get invited to a wedding & then have the gall to ask the couple if they can bring their kids along.
If they wanted kids at their wedding, they would've been on the invitation.
(children under 12 months of age are obviously an exception, being simply too tight to organise a sitter isn't).
Definitely agree.
However, I went to a wedding recently where the invitation said "Sweet dreams to children under 12".
I, along with everyone else, figured that meant they could come to the 1.30pm ceremony. A week out, a row erupted because one of the guests had a 6 week old premmy baby and was told she couldn't bring it to the wedding. Next thing you know, we're all being told kids can't come to the ceremony and "that's what the invite said". Well, no, it didn't.
I'm not sure why you'd not want kids at a ceremony, but it's their wedding - just get the message right.
I did enjoy not having them around at the reception, though.
by Magellan » Fri Jun 03, 2016 9:58 am
Booney wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:Spargo wrote:People who get invited to a wedding & then have the gall to ask the couple if they can bring their kids along.
If they wanted kids at their wedding, they would've been on the invitation.
(children under 12 months of age are obviously an exception, being simply too tight to organise a sitter isn't).
Definitely agree.
However, I went to a wedding recently where the invitation said "Sweet dreams to children under 12".
I, along with everyone else, figured that meant they could come to the 1.30pm ceremony. A week out, a row erupted because one of the guests had a 6 week old premmy baby and was told she couldn't bring it to the wedding. Next thing you know, we're all being told kids can't come to the ceremony and "that's what the invite said". Well, no, it didn't.
I'm not sure why you'd not want kids at a ceremony, but it's their wedding - just get the message right.
I did enjoy not having them around at the reception, though.
I don't see what that message was meant to mean anyway!
by Booney » Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:14 am
by HH3 » Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:15 am
by Dogwatcher » Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:27 am
by Dogwatcher » Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:28 am
by HH3 » Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:38 am
by Dogwatcher » Fri Jun 03, 2016 11:18 am
by HH3 » Fri Jun 03, 2016 11:31 am
by Wedgie » Fri Jun 03, 2016 11:37 am
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |