52 bowmans
WinPitcher
Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
just looking thru my set and thought id share these two with ya's.
the feller is a vg while the campy is ex/exmnt
the feller is a vg while the campy is ex/exmnt
Good for you.
0
Comments
my mick....in vg ex darn print line but has a clean back
DAVID!!! glad to see u aint banned!
<< <i>Who's the feller on the left? >>
Yeah, this is some pretty campy stuff.
<< <i>
my mick....in vg ex darn print line but has a clean back
>>
Nice Mantle print line notwithstanding Steve! What else ya got?
Thanx for sharing
Stone
Yet . . . Heh©
not enuff....
the Mays from the set has mint corners but (always a but) is OC
that line running thru willies mouth is not on the card but must be on the scanner. how do u clean a scanner?
I use the cloth that comes with my glasses to clean my scanner.......never have used any kind of liquid on it.
Now collecting:
Topps Heritage
1957 Topps BB Ex+-NM
All Yaz Items 7+
Various Red Sox
Did I leave anything out?
The unwritten law, my friend. I alluded to an incident that I am not allowed to allude to, an incident that I'm probably not allowed to allude to and an incident that may or may not have happened. That last allusion may actually be an illusion, although there are those who say it involved collusion. The charges, however, were no delusion. The thread that was recited was later rescinded and will not be resuscitated. As it stands, I must be careful not to complicate the matter through conflicts that conceptually are not consistent with what the current constituents condone. Furthermore, I cannot conspire to create consternation through a concerted effort to conjoin conjectures for the purpose of confronting the constructs which have been put forth. This would conceptually end my ability to make conjectures that conclude a compromise occured with those concerned. As such, I concede that the concerns of those who condemn my conclusions represent a condition where my conduct would not be allowed to continue.
heh
<< <i>Why would you get banned? Did you break the law?
The unwritten law, my friend. I alluded to an incident that I am not allowed to allude to, an incident that I'm probably not allowed to allude to and an incident that may or may not have happened. That last allusion may actually be an illusion, although there are those who say it involved collusion. The charges, however, were no delusion. The thread that was recited was later rescinded and will not be resuscitated. As it stands, I must be careful not to complicate the matter through conflicts that conceptually are not consistent with what the current constituents condone. Furthermore, I cannot conspire to create consternation through a concerted effort to conjoin conjectures for the purpose of confronting the constructs which have been put forth. This would conceptually end my ability to make conjectures that conclude a compromise occured with those concerned. As such, I concede that the concerns of those who condemn my conclusions represent a condition where my conduct would not be allowed to continue. >>
<< <i>Thanks Chris. While I have been constrained from construing that a conscious and continual effort has been made to conceal certain controversies. I have contrived to contain my contentiousness through conversations that convey my concern that certain parties have connived to control conjectures on this board. The convoluted controls that contort the meaning of people's contentions have only succeeded in creating a continuing condemnation of such contrivances. >>
Damn Vargha
You been watchin Law and Order?
Stone
thanks dave
Shame on you, Joe O.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.