The Block: Kylie rubs Durie's knob
Tourette's
Durie tonight as their auction was being run? She was sitting in
between him and her hubby/boyfriend, and they were all pretending to
get excited at the price going up ... the blonde strumpet had her hand
on Durie's thigh, but she kept inching it higher so that it MUST have
been brushing against his dick.
A more blatant display of flirtatious knob-rubbing I've not seen for
some years. And on national TV, with her bloke next to her too.
Disgraceful!
Tourette's
---
"Reggie The Rabbit"
"Tourette's" <emily...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b8734499.03081...@posting.google.com...
Michelle
THAT!
""Reggie The Rabbit"" <Bug...@Bugger.com> wrote in message
news:3f3f5512$0$14561$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
David Springthorpe
>Hey cats, did you see Kylie doing a not-so-subtle knob-rub on Jamie
>Durie tonight as their auction was being run? .....
You're just jealous it wasn't you doing the rubbing.....
DS
North Queensland Lady
manpower when they visited newcastle back in the early 90's
"Tourette's" <emily...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b8734499.03081...@posting.google.com...
Kevin Hendrikssen
Yes I have to admit I commented on same myself! LOL.
Peter Lucas
news:b8734499.03081...@posting.google.com:
I'm glad I wasn't the only one to see that. It ended when Jamie actually half
got up so that she couldn't grab his crotch anymore!!
I think he knew that it would come out on the show and he was trying to
'defuse' the situation.
But GAWD!!! She was almost in his lap, and he was perched up there looking
down her top!!
The Charming Ones
"Typhoid" <neins...@yahoo.de> wrote in message
news:MPG.19a9da883...@news.cis.dfn.de...
You're an idiot.
ferret
He was probably wishing wilma and betty were there, as he always
REALLY enjoyed being with the boys a lot.
Vanessa
LOL it was sooo obvious. Even the media are commenting on it on radio today
:)
matt
Hugh McGuinness
She even (sort of) admits it in
http://www.bordermail.com.au/newsflow/pageitem?page_id=628786
Kylie was still in shock after yesterdays auction, saying: “I was
so nervous. My heart was pounding throughout the whole auction and
I could feel I was shaking and ... grabbing on to Paul and Jamie
(the host) on each hand.”
I thought it was pretty naff, myself :-)
--
Hugh - to reply, don't c me
Scotty
news:7abff349.03081...@posting.google.com...
> Anyone got vidcaps or an avi?
Yeah, I can't believe I missed it...
Peter Lucas
news:BVZ%a.41257$bo1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au:
http://theblock.ninemsn.com.au/theblock/Unit4/episode13.asp
Just under the main pic they have a dialup or broadband version of their
auction. I haven't looked at it, but it will most likely show her crotch
grabbing there.
Scotty
"Peter Lucas" <sky...@gil.com.au> wrote in message
news:Xns93DBA516B186FG...@127.0.0.1...
> http://theblock.ninemsn.com.au/theblock/Unit4/episode13.asp
>
> Just under the main pic they have a dialup or broadband version of their
> auction. I haven't looked at it, but it will most likely show her crotch
> grabbing there.
Haha I saw it! Thanks for the link
HeadRush
Scotty <scott_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:M0%%a.41348$bo1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Kylie didn't seem to be fully with it, her mind was definately set on
groping for Jamie's manhood. And that female/transvestite auctioneer had
the most annoying voice!!.
HR
The Charming Ones
Pretty good when you can stand up and admit you are an idiot.
lea
>>>> Hey cats, did you see Kylie doing a not-so-subtle knob-rub on Jamie
>>>> Durie tonight as their auction was being run? She was sitting in
>>>> between him and her hubby/boyfriend, and they were all pretending
>>>> to get excited at the price going up ... the blonde strumpet had
>>>> her hand on Durie's thigh, but she kept inching it higher so that
>>>> it MUST have been brushing against his dick.
I thought same.
Notice in the next shot, her hand was back on her own land, like he gave her
an electric shock ;)
lea
>
>And that female/transvestite auctioneer
> had the most annoying voice!!.
yeah.
I couldn't wait for her to shut up. No warmth, all witchy-poo sharp edges.
Barbara
Just looking at him, gives me an electric shock.
Darkfalz
news:bhqd5a$224ut$1...@ID-68626.news.uni-berlin.de...
I agree. She was really, really bad... she was trying to sound like one of
those really cool auction guys but it just wasn't convincing.
Tourette's
> She even (sort of) admits it in
> http://www.bordermail.com.au/newsflow/pageitem?page_id=628786
I don't buy it. She kept looking at him with a quizzical look
as though she was waiting for a response.
It's in the papers today too. Here's a link:
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,6995447%255E662,00.html
Tourette's
---
elv...@ozzienet.net
Screen grope causes a stir
August 19, 2003
IT's the grope that had the nation talking, but what was really behind The
Block's Kylie Ingram's affection for Jamie Durie's thigh on Sunday night?
As their upstairs apartment was being auctioned and bids reached $700,000,
Kylie appeared to have a firm grip on Durie's thigh, which only increased as
the bids got higher.
The grope had talkback callers in a frenzy yesterday, eager to know if there
was anything behind it.
Kylie and husband Paul Ingram weren't commenting officially yesterday, but
sources told the Herald Sun that it was just a case of jitters.
Kylie did say after their apartment sold for $747,000 that she was
incredibly nervous.
"My heart was pounding throughout the whole auction and I could feel I was
shaking and grabbing on to Paul and Jamie," she said.
While getting into the whole auction process himself, Durie did appear a
little uncomfortable.
But Paul and Kylie's marriage seems as solid as the upstairs veranda of
their Bondi apartment. They won $152,000.
">
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.510 / Virus Database: 307 - Release Date: 14/08/2003
Fish!
dark...@xis.com.au says...
"MAKE NO MISTAKE"
Cackling Pipes
http://entertainment.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4459,6997903%255E10431%
255E%255Enbv,00.html
Sponky
(in message <bhrf0h$2frd2$1...@ID-182197.news.uni-berlin.de>):
> But Paul and Kylie's marriage seems as solid as the upstairs veranda of
> their Bondi apartment. They won $152,000.
so... not very then?
+--================@==================--+
"So that sanity be kept, I sit at open windows"
- Dylan Thomas
Sponky
========================================
Peter Lucas
newsgroup....... news:3f41723a$0$15133$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au:
> Also
> http://entertainment.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4459,6997903%255E104
> 31% 255E%255Enbv,00.html
>
>
>
Try this...........
tiny URL's are a wonderful thing :-)
BTW, the first picture on that page...... looks like Paul is glaring at her
hand in Drury's crotch.
elv...@ozzienet.net
the *.mov (or whatever it is)
make it look so seedy LOL
"Cackling Pipes" <NOSPAMn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f41723a$0$15133$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Also
>
http://entertainment.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4459,6997903%255E10431%
> 255E%255Enbv,00.html
HeadRush
> http://theblock.ninemsn.com.au/theblock/Unit4/episode13.asp
>
> Just under the main pic they have a dialup or broadband version of their
> auction. I haven't looked at it, but it will most likely show her crotch
> grabbing there.
At 6:15 into the stream, Kylie seems to sniff her hand pretending to be
wiping her brow.
HR
Kevin Hendrikssen
news:0001HW.BB6797D8...@news.m.iinet.net.au...
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 5:04:43 +0800, elv...@ozzienet.net wrote
> (in message <bhrf0h$2frd2$1...@ID-182197.news.uni-berlin.de>):
>
> > But Paul and Kylie's marriage seems as solid as the upstairs veranda of
> > their Bondi apartment. They won $152,000.
>
> so... not very then?
LOL
ho'JU
news:3f41e8f5$0$23588$5a62...@freenews.iinet.net.au...
I thought they won $250,000 all up.
ho'JU
Kevin Hendrikssen
news:3f41f1a0$0$23588$5a62...@freenews.iinet.net.au...
They came second. Ken and Barbie won, but only by a small margin.
Iggy
They all looked like Ken and Barbie, except for Ken and Ken.
ho'JU
Ah. So basically they all won a heap of cash.
Doesnt really make the game that challenging then surely.
ho'JU
Kevin Hendrikssen
> Ah. So basically they all won a heap of cash.
>
> Doesnt really make the game that challenging then surely.
Yep, they'd have to have been pretty crap to have spent $40k on a property
and not reached the $595k reserve. If you couldn't be arsed, I suppose you
could have just thrown a huge party and to hell with the property and prize.
Too bad most of the initial dosh was vouchers.
Peter
jas...@iinet.net.au says...
> > > I thought they won $250,000 all up.
> >
> > They came second. Ken and Barbie won, but only by a small margin.
>
> Ah. So basically they all won a heap of cash.
>
> Doesnt really make the game that challenging then surely.
The whole thing boiled down to the luck of the trowel draw. The show was so
successful that people wanted an apartment, any apartment, whether for
publicity or investment or whatever, and when there was only one left
naturally the price went up. The quality of the renovation and furnishings
was immaterial.
I also make the point that there was far less than the prize money
difference between the lowest and the highest apartment - the game could be
won by collusion between contestants and bidders. I'm not saying this
happened, but it's a fundamental flaw in the game.
Maybe one way to get around the problem is to offer all four apartments for
auction at once. The winning bidder gets to choose one out of the four, and
then the remaining three are put up, same deal, the winner gets to choose
one from three. Then one from two and finally the last apartment is
auctioned by itself.
That way, in theory, the most attractive apartment would be sold first, and
the final one on the block would be the least attractive.
Or offer them on (say) eBay, with all auctions finishing simultaneously.
Or make it into a lottery. Viewers vote for the apartment of their choice,
each vote costs a dollar and gives the voter a chance at winning the
apartment they voted for. At a set time the lines are closed and the
winners announced.
Kevin Hendrikssen
news:MPG.19acb9219...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> The whole thing boiled down to the luck of the trowel draw.
I agree. All four auctions should have run at the same time, although I
wonder what would have happened if the order had been reversed. Do you think
Amity and Phil's (IMO crap) apartment would really have won if it had come
last?
> I also make the point that there was far less than the prize money
> difference between the lowest and the highest apartment - the game could
be
> won by collusion between contestants and bidders. I'm not saying this
> happened, but it's a fundamental flaw in the game.
You've got to wonder what could be done to check that this didn't happen.
> Maybe one way to get around the problem is to offer all four apartments
for
> auction at once. The winning bidder gets to choose one out of the four,
and
> then the remaining three are put up, same deal, the winner gets to choose
> one from three. Then one from two and finally the last apartment is
> auctioned by itself.
So the person willing to spend the most gets to choose the winner? Hmmm.
Plus having to get building inspections, different agents etc, this is
really unworkable IMO.
> That way, in theory, the most attractive apartment would be sold first,
and
> the final one on the block would be the least attractive.
"the most attractive apartment" in the opinion of the person with the most
money.
Peter
says...
> "Peter" <lon...@the.top> wrote in message
> news:MPG.19acb9219...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> > The whole thing boiled down to the luck of the trowel draw.
>
> I agree. All four auctions should have run at the same time, although I
> wonder what would have happened if the order had been reversed. Do you think
> Amity and Phil's (IMO crap) apartment would really have won if it had come
> last?
It would have gone for more than it did, i reckon.
>
> > I also make the point that there was far less than the prize money
> > difference between the lowest and the highest apartment - the game could
> be
> > won by collusion between contestants and bidders. I'm not saying this
> > happened, but it's a fundamental flaw in the game.
>
> You've got to wonder what could be done to check that this didn't happen.
>
> > Maybe one way to get around the problem is to offer all four apartments
> for
> > auction at once. The winning bidder gets to choose one out of the four,
> and
> > then the remaining three are put up, same deal, the winner gets to choose
> > one from three. Then one from two and finally the last apartment is
> > auctioned by itself.
>
> So the person willing to spend the most gets to choose the winner?
Well, that's how it works out now, anyway. I suggest four auctions, but the
first winning bidder takes the apartment they like the most out of the
four. In theory they would pick the "best" one.
> Hmmm.
> Plus having to get building inspections, different agents etc, this is
> really unworkable IMO.
Use one auctioneer, and have plans, building inspection reports etc
available for sale in a package. If anyone *really* wanted to use their own
inspector, they could.
>
> > That way, in theory, the most attractive apartment would be sold first,
> and
> > the final one on the block would be the least attractive.
>
> "the most attractive apartment" in the opinion of the person with the most
> money.
Well, yeah. The winning criterion would still be the one that gained the
highest price, but this way the best apartment would be chosen first and
the worst last, thereby negating the trend to increasingly higher prices to
some extent.
Tim Chmielewski
news:b8734499.03081...@posting.google.com:
> A more blatant display of flirtatious knob-rubbing I've not seen for
> some years. And on national TV, with her bloke next to her too.
> Disgraceful!
Post GIF or Retract!
Thanks.
--
My Tomorrow Series & Hong Kong Movie Reviews Site
http://members.dcsi.net.au/chuma/
IQC: 198344892
Tim Chmielewski
news:3f41c7eb$0$23603$5a62...@freenews.iinet.net.au:
> http://entertainment.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4459,6997903%255E1
> 0431%
>: 255E%255Enbv,00.html
>
> Bloody hell. She can deny it all she wants but theres no doubt in my
> mind after seeing that pic.
I'll have to see what Fred Negro makes of it tomorrow in the Pub Strip (you
have to be from Melbourne) and Beer Pig on Thursday.
Kevin Hendrikssen
> It would have gone for more than it did, i reckon.
I agree with that, tho personally I doubt it would have been the winner.
> > So the person willing to spend the most gets to choose the winner?
>
> Well, that's how it works out now, anyway.
Yes - and no. The other bidders may have their hearts set on a different
unit in your scenario.
> I suggest four auctions, but the
> first winning bidder takes the apartment they like the most out of the
> four. In theory they would pick the "best" one.
As I said, they get first choice. they may like a unit the other bidders
hated. Get what I'm saying?
> Use one auctioneer, and have plans, building inspection reports etc
> available for sale in a package. If anyone *really* wanted to use their
own
> inspector, they could.
OK. In that case the agent could be a further sponsor of the show (as if it
needed any more).
> Well, yeah. The winning criterion would still be the one that gained the
> highest price, but this way the best apartment would be chosen first and
> the worst last, thereby negating the trend to increasingly higher prices
to
> some extent.
It doesn't work because the bidders aren't necessarily bidding on the same
property. Not everyone has the same taste or needs. See above.
Scotty
news:Xns93DCE6F47A24...@130.133.1.4...
>
> Post GIF or Retract!
>
> Thanks.
>
A link to a gif has been posted...
Peter
says...
> "Peter" <lon...@the.top> wrote in message
> news:MPG.19acc1ab...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > In article <3f4212c8$0$23606$5a62...@freenews.iinet.net.au>,
> sp...@spam.com
> > says...
>
> > It would have gone for more than it did, i reckon.
>
> I agree with that, tho personally I doubt it would have been the winner.
>
> > > So the person willing to spend the most gets to choose the winner?
> >
> > Well, that's how it works out now, anyway.
>
> Yes - and no. The other bidders may have their hearts set on a different
> unit in your scenario.
Sure. So what?
>
> > I suggest four auctions, but the
> > first winning bidder takes the apartment they like the most out of the
> > four. In theory they would pick the "best" one.
>
> As I said, they get first choice. they may like a unit the other bidders
> hated. Get what I'm saying?
Yeah. But so what? The winner is the unit with the highest price once all
four have been sold.
>
> > Use one auctioneer, and have plans, building inspection reports etc
> > available for sale in a package. If anyone *really* wanted to use their
> own
> > inspector, they could.
>
> OK. In that case the agent could be a further sponsor of the show (as if it
> needed any more).
>
> > Well, yeah. The winning criterion would still be the one that gained the
> > highest price, but this way the best apartment would be chosen first and
> > the worst last, thereby negating the trend to increasingly higher prices
> to
> > some extent.
>
> It doesn't work because the bidders aren't necessarily bidding on the same
> property. Not everyone has the same taste or needs. See above.
It doesn't matter. You'll see the same technique used at auction houses
around the nation, where there are a group of similiar items for sale,
whether they be kitchen sinks or computers. I might want the light-coloured
one, someone else wants the one with the rubber feet, a third person wants
the one that has additional access slots. Or whatever. The key point is
that the *choice* is important to the bidders - the only way to make sure
of buying the item they want is to win the first auction round, because if
they don't, they might miss out.
This will work to pull the prices down in subsequent rounds, as bidders
drop out because "their" unit is no longer available.
Scotty
news:3f40c...@news.iprimus.com.au...
>
> Yeah I noticed that too, it stood out pretty bad,
> as much as Fiona's sweat stains on her underarms during the auction....
>
Ohh yeah, that was bad!
John
I keep wondering if they got to keep all those power tools.
Ian Galbraith
<sp...@spam.com> wrote:
>"Peter" <lon...@the.top> wrote in message
>news:MPG.19acb9219...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> The whole thing boiled down to the luck of the trowel draw.
>I agree. All four auctions should have run at the same time, although I
>wonder what would have happened if the order had been reversed. Do you think
>Amity and Phil's (IMO crap) apartment would really have won if it had come
>last?
They came up with the best design solution so yes. Where they did fall
down was in the details.
[snip]
--
Ian Galbraith
Email: igalb...@removeozonline.com.au
"Journeys! Intrigues! Sword fights! Young persons having
adventures! Beloved older characters having adventures too!
Quests! Battles! Romance! Snappy dialogue! Extravagant
food! And the missing heir to the imperial throne!"
- Blurb for The Lord of Castle Black by Steven Brust
lea
> "Kevin Hendrikssen"wrote:
>
>> All four auctions should have run at the same time,
>> although I wonder what would have happened if the order had been
>> reversed. Do you think Amity and Phil's (IMO crap) apartment would
>> really have won if it had come last?
>
> They came up with the best design solution so yes.
Bullshit. Who wants to walk through someone's bedroom to get to your own ?
That's CRAP design. Different, yes - but crap all the same.
--
On passover week
You be careful with wheat
It's bread unleavened
Twenty-four seven
Down, down, down
Down to Jew'Town
Ian Galbraith
>Ian Galbraith wrote:
>> "Kevin Hendrikssen"wrote:
>>> All four auctions should have run at the same time,
>>> although I wonder what would have happened if the order had been
>>> reversed. Do you think Amity and Phil's (IMO crap) apartment would
>>> really have won if it had come last?
>> They came up with the best design solution so yes.
>Bullshit.
Got up on the wrong side of the bed?
>Who wants to walk through someone's bedroom to get to your own ?
>That's CRAP design. Different, yes - but crap all the same.
I was talking mainly about the living area, but you are right the
bedroom is a drawback.
SFChu
> Hey cats, did you see Kylie doing a not-so-subtle knob-rub on Jamie
> Durie tonight as their auction was being run? She was sitting in
> between him and her hubby/boyfriend, and they were all pretending to
> get excited at the price going up ... the blonde strumpet had her hand
> on Durie's thigh, but she kept inching it higher so that it MUST have
> been brushing against his dick.
>
> A more blatant display of flirtatious knob-rubbing I've not seen for
> some years. And on national TV, with her bloke next to her too.
> Disgraceful!
>
he was interviewing Jamie.
Incidentally, this story was followed by a Toyota ad featuring Phil and
Amity.
Francis Chu
Sydney, Australia
sf...@tig.com.au
> ---
Astro
I don't think she was brushing his dick, merely putting her hand on
his thigh, when he moved her hand rubbed over his dick which was
unintentional on her part.
Paul
> Did you watch 60 minutes on 31/8? Charles Woolley made mention of it
> when he was interviewing Jamie.
How did Jamie reply?
Astro
wrote:
He played it down as though it wasn't deliberate.
Tourette's
> I don't think she was brushing his dick, merely putting her hand on
> his thigh, when he moved her hand rubbed over his dick which was
> unintentional on her part.
Yep, I'm willing to accept that.
Right along with Clinton not inhaling, the Warren Commission report
and Saddam's funny green gas-bombs.
Tourette's
---
Astro
wrote:
You clearly need glasses or stronger ones.