S'funny -as I was watching that I thought for the first time about how a year or two back, when she won silver behind Muttola, a lot of peeps were up in arms about how it was all a collaborative effort, and that Kelly wasn't good enough to beat the other athletes without help.
Two Olympic golds rather makes the point that she was )
I´ve said this on another thread, but I thought the dress was fab. Reason? When you´re a muscly girl, it´s easy to look like a trannie when dressed up to the nines. And that dress ( and oh! the shoes!) made Kelly look powerful and feminine and proves that you can look gorgeous even if you have big arms and not a lot of bust.
Ahem! I said it first (well on this thread anyway) but I'm just going by the piccies on the BBC site. She also did far better with her hair, certainly than her Olympic do.
Comments
Yeh.
Great result though.
Two Olympic golds rather makes the point that she was )
Really pleased she won it, although packing for son to go on outdoor pursuits hol so didn't get round to voting.
As a (Zzz whispers) 35 year old Kelly gives me hope, and proves that us over 30's are not past it.
But why did they make her wear that awful dress? Who is her publicist trying to convince?
(could be the first ever cazzing for Sassie!)
That dress was bloody awful. Made Kelly look like a brickie with her muscley, veiny arms.
and that dress.....NO!!!!!
Can't really remember her hair in the olympics, but it's not surprising it looked better for a night out than a day on the track!:o)
was for hilly's better late than never "correction"
I thought Kelly looked a lot better on the Kumars last night.