After Grog Blog: SOX OFFENDER

« NOT QUITE RIGHTS | Main | TWENTY/20 VISION »

SOX OFFENDER

People drone on about socks and sandals. Why, I don't know. If you've got cold feet, you put on socks. It's really not that difficult.

Posted by Tony Tea on 10 January 2006 at 15:35 in Marvellaneous | Permalink

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The sock with sandal is aesthetically displeasing as it forces an open-toe vs closed-toe dichotomy on the viewer.

And will you please post on Twenty20 so we can all start bitching about it? This is the only place I know where cricket is discussed sensibly.

Posted by: Some other Bruce | 10 January 2006 at 15:59

I'd also question the fashion senses of bloke who wears jeans with his sandals!

Posted by: Anthony from Chippendale | 10 January 2006 at 16:00

Funny you should mention that, Bruce. The cricket, that is.

Now they're bagging jeans and sandals?!? I'm shocked! Shocked, I am.

Posted by: Tony.T | 10 January 2006 at 16:03

Socks, or what happens when one's underwear is too tight. Complete with pustules.

Posted by: carneagles | 10 January 2006 at 16:12

Boxers for me. Tightness not an issue, unlike riding.

Posted by: Tony.T | 10 January 2006 at 16:28

Do you wear socks with thongs as well?

Posted by: pat | 10 January 2006 at 16:29

Haven't worn thongs in 20 years. And no, I didn't wear socks with them.

Posted by: Tony.T | 10 January 2006 at 16:32

You must be getting on a bit old man. Are you eating dinner at half past five yet?

Posted by: DJ | 10 January 2006 at 17:17

Please! Six thirty at the earliest.

Posted by: Tony.T | 10 January 2006 at 17:19

Surely the sock/sandal controversy itself depends upon one's position on the different-coloured-sock debate. Is it acceptable to wear different coloured socks? If so, is it acceptable to wear them in such a way that they are noticed, or should you hide them up?

I sometimes wear different coloured socks to work; then again, I also wear trousers and sandals to work, which cover them up.

Opinions, anyone?

Posted by: TimT | 10 January 2006 at 17:23

I don't have an opinion, Mr.T, just a question. How do the sandals cover up the diff coloured socks?

Posted by: Anyone | 10 January 2006 at 17:28

I'm with Anyone, and his mate Everyone, for that matter. I suspect T (no dot) is gilding the silly.

Posted by: Tony.T | 10 January 2006 at 17:30

PS Notice those socks are spotted. Did you get them at This Shop?

Does This Shop stock short socks with spots? Sure This Shop stocks short socks with spots. This Shop stocks boxed sport socks, short flocked black socks, chic slack silk socks, and slick taut flax socks. We've racks of sharp black-backed blocked Scots socks, and stacks of posh knit lush cropped-top socks. This Shop's short-topped sock stock's tops.

Posted by: TimT | 10 January 2006 at 17:31

Whoa, mistake by me. If I wore sandals to my job, pretty soon I wouldn't have a job. Obviously, that's shoes.

Posted by: TimT | 10 January 2006 at 17:32

No, My Shop.

Posted by: Tony.T | 10 January 2006 at 17:39

I have a sandal related question. A friend of mine, when refering to his level of sexual want, is fond of the saying: "I'm toeier than a Roman sandal." Would you consider 'toeier' to be the correct spelling of this slang word? I have often struggled with this, and my limited knowledge of 'official word rules' - aka proper English - has not helped me find the answer.

Posted by: gav | 10 January 2006 at 18:20

I'd go with toe + ier in the same way as it's toe + ing. Gotta maintain the integrity of the tootsies, you know + ier.

Posted by: Tony.T | 10 January 2006 at 18:32

thanks +ier

I thought as much, but deemed it best I pass through official channels before increasing usage as I quite like the saying.

Posted by: gav | 10 January 2006 at 18:46

So much wrongness on two feet... Tsk tsk.

Posted by: anne | 10 January 2006 at 19:34

So is Anyone a sock puppet?

Posted by: boynton | 10 January 2006 at 20:05

APPALLINGST!

Even for a simian.

Posted by: Armaniac | 10 January 2006 at 23:58

Sorry, cat got on the keyboard again!

Tony it just doesn't work, it is aesthetically displeasing.

Nothing wrong with wearing things that are the epitomy of uncool, just as long as you pull of an expression of unembellished irony.

Posted by: Armaniac | 11 January 2006 at 00:01

Thank God you cropped the purple turtleneck sweater from the photo.

Posted by: Clem Snide | 11 January 2006 at 00:07

Yeah, I gotta that look is just not working for me, either. It's a bit better) or less bad, I guess) than the style my dad's wife is rocking, namely black sandals with white socks. White socks are so rarely right.

Posted by: vague | 11 January 2006 at 07:44

You people are quick to criticize my wrongness. I say it's all rightness. After you lot traipse around home in your grubby socks and house-coats, it will be me laughing with the holeless socks. Ha!

Note: In keeping with this blog's minimalist policy, my expression of unembellished irony was chopped from the photo. A temptation to replace it with a white sock puppet in a purple turtleneck was manfully resisted.

Posted by: Tony.T | 11 January 2006 at 12:32

I'm thinking of using this chop on my banner.

http://wherearemysocks.blogspot.com/2006/01/socks.html

Posted by: peemil | 11 January 2006 at 13:03

Coincidence? I think not, Peemil. Without seeing your comment here, I just left my own comment at your very funny sock post. Love it.

Posted by: Tony.T | 11 January 2006 at 13:08

Let's call it sockronicity.

Posted by: Tony.T | 11 January 2006 at 13:10

no holes in socks? Surely theres an entry hole? (A Dad's Joke)

Posted by: Francis Xavier Holden | 11 January 2006 at 14:10

More than one hole and you've got a windsock. Or something.

Posted by: Wicking | 11 January 2006 at 14:24