There have been many times where there is a strange sense of inconsistency regarding certain things being counted as deviation, and although some of them were correct, a great deal of them have been penalized or cast aside as being too pedantic. now it's difficult to even understand how one thing can be counted as deviation in one sense, but when the exact same thing is done again years later, it's given against someone for deviation even though Nicholas had firmly established that 'you can take the subject any way you wish provided you haven't deviated from the subject', because half the time he talks about people speaking colloquially and usually in reference to NON-existant colloquiallisms and yet when he comes face to face with actual colloquial speech, he gives against someone for deviation.
one example comes from a 2005 episode featuring Paul, Clement, Chris Neil and Rob Brydo on the subject of confidence.
RB: In this motion picture she played the part of Maria who was a very confident nun, in training in the hills of Austria. She fell in love with Christopher Plummer, this took great confidence. How...
BUZZ
NP: Paul challenged.
PM: Well it's deviation because she, she fell in love with a baron, he was played by Christopher Plummer...
NP: I'm afraid that's right.
PM: But Maria, the nun, did not fall in love with Christopher Plummer.
now isn't it kinda pedantic and picky to say that Maria didn't fall in love with Christopher Plummer? i mean, the baron was played by Christopher Plummer, we all knew what he meant, so what's the deal?
another prime example would have to be a 1995 episode featuring Derek Nimmo, Peter Jones, Tony Hawks and Jeremy Hardy and the subject was 'Rainbow':
JH: The colours of the rainbow are violet, indigo, blue, brown, grey and tartan...
BUZZ
NP: Derek Nimmo challenged.
DN: Hes wrong!
NP: He said wrong, you deviated.
JH: It depends how much benolin youve been taking!
NP: Yes well, I think we have to say you were deviating there, 54 seconds for you Derek on rainbow starting now.
now, I seem to recall something similar happening years ago when Dr. Magnus Pyke was a guest, the subject was 'the International Candle' and he was talking about it, then Peter challenges, gets the subject starts talking about his own interpretation of the subject, Magnus tries to get it back for deviation but Nicholas states categorically that Peter wasn't deviating for 'HIS' international candle not THE international candle, and leaves the subject with Peter.
now how is it that Jeremy takes the subject, talking about his own interpretation of rainbow, and gets challenged for deviation? it may be deviating from fact, but he wasn't deviating from the subject, he was on A FLIGHT OF FANTASY and surrealism and he was penalized for it. tell me that isn't being pedantic.
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
in the
Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.