Human Animals? Yes. The animal connections are human.

Human construct? Yes (with a fairly broad definition of 'construct')
Artistic connections? There are some artistic connections, but they are tangential. The words on the card do not refer to something artistic.

Phrase or saying? Well, strictly speaking the words on the card do constitute a phrase, but it is not a saying or proverb or adage or aphorism or anything of that kind.

Phew! That 'whoops!' button's really useful.

A particular human being? Not a particular human being, but the animal connections are to particular individuals, Yes.
To do with the law? That's a tricky one. My first response was No, but on reflection a better answer might be Yes, absolutely!
Sporting connection? The least misleading answer is clearly No, though you can make a case for Yes.

Olympian? No. (Again, I can make a case for a very tangential Yes, but sport is not a fruitful line of enquiry.)

From a particular country or culture? Yes. *applause*
Human activity? Yes, for a reasonably broad interpretation of "activity".

Connected to political activity? Yes. *sustained applause*

Denver Demfest '08? No.
British? No. *some muttering in the audience*
A legislature? No.

English? No.
A referendum? No. *some audience laughter*
EU-related? No.

African country's election process? No and No.
In Europe? Yes.

(I suppose that while my answer to African country was unequivocal, I should note that there is at least a tangential connection to "election process".)

Current news? No.
USSR? No.
Dutch treat? No.

Does it involve a change in power in a country? No. *applause*
Gerrymandering? No.
Relate to a specific European country? Yes. (A case could be made for No, but it would be misleading.)
French revolution? No. *more applause*

Treaty of Versailles? No. *audience sits in stony silence*

To do with royalty? No (except tangentially).
A failed revolution/coup/uprising? Yes! *sustained applause*

Spanish Civil War? No.

Czequered past? No.

Dunkirk Landing? No.

Uprising against a colonial power? Yes.
Napoleonic? No.

Black Hole of Calcutta, Europe? No.

We have a winner! The words on the card were "The Easter Rising". *hands an orange and green baton to Irouléguy*

---

I agree with the mutterers when Rosie asked "British" and you said "No". Ireland was part of Britain in 1916, and remained so until 1920, IIRC. There are some that say Ireland is still part of Britain, but not "Great Britain", but I think that's a bit over(t)ly confrontational.

[Phil] Well, it all comes down to the meaning of Britain.

My preferred usage has always been to treat Britain and Great Britain as synonymous, referring (as a geographical term) to the island which makes up the bulk of England, Scotland and Wales, and more generally (and as a political term) to England + Scotland + Wales. Another view is that Britain (but not, I think, Great Britain) is synonymous with the UK; this seems to be your preferred usage. Wikipedia points me both to the Guardian style guide, which claims that "Britain is the official short form of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland", and also points to a quote from a British government website that says "the term 'Britain' is used informally to mean the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" [my emphasis in both quotes].

So, having gone most of my life thinking I understood these demarcations perfectly, I'm now not sure. If anyone can point me to an official site which disambiguates "Britain" and "Great Britain" conclusively, I'd be grateful.

There is another subtlety (and here I am convinced, or almost), which is that "British" perhaps has a wider meaning than simply "pertaining to Britain". It is true, for example, that my passport of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland describes me as a British citizen. On the basis of that distinction, I would accept that perhaps I should have said "yes" to "British?" though I might still disagree with your claim that "Ireland was a part of Britain in 1916". In any case, I thought my answer together with the audience muttering was a sufficiently non-misleading response.

To follow up, here are two sites that both seem reasonably reliable and that, taken together, support the view that (i) "British" has a meaning that extends beyond Britain in the specific case of nationality, but that (ii) using "Britain" to refer to the UK is at best informal and at worst incorrect. Here, we read:

BRITAIN. The informal name for the United Kingdom.
BRITISH is the formal designation of the nationality of citizens of the United Kingdom, and of certain others.

Compare with the following from here.

The adjective "British" is, of course, used in relation to Great Britain but there is also a common tendency to use it when referring to issues relating to both Great Britain and the United Kingdom. This is inaccurate and from a legal point of view erroneous. [emphasis mine]

Sometimes, however, in legislation the term "British" is used to refer to the United Kingdom as a whole, especially in matters relating to the question of nationality.

I'm not sure I am much wiser.

[CdM] I must re-examine myself. I have never in the past confused the UK with GB. I can't understand why I posted that. Although the time-stamp might explain it :-)

Phil, CdM] From another angle, I thought CdM's answer was fine, in that the participants in the 1916 rising certainly didn't think of themselves as British.

At one point Wikipedia suggests that Britain might be used for the island alone, and Great Britain for England, Scotland & Wales (ie including the Isle of Wight, Anglesey and so on), but it doesn't give a source for this, and I'm not sure why anyone except geographers would need such a distinction.

Anyway, our next is ABSTRACT, containing ANIMAL and VEGETABLE with a small amount of MINERAL.

Rosie - Animal human? No
irach - A balanced diet? *applause* No

[Phil] But note from my first comment that the Guardian style guide supports your original objection.

CdM - Is the answer related to a food item? Yes
Dujon - A loaded coffin? No

irach] A type of sandwich? No
CdM] A pie of some kind? Ye-es
Rosie] Part of a specialised diet? *giggles from the audience* Possibly

irach] Shepherd's Pie? No

Rosie} A Cornish pasty? *applause* No
Graham III] Named after a person? No

Raak] Humble pie? No. The ABSTRACT was probably a mistake - this is edible
Rosie] Named after a place or area? *applause* Yes

irach] Yorkshire pudding? Nay, lad

Bet that's wrong.

Rosie] Devon cheesecake? You win the bet
CdM - Is the place or area in UK? *applause* Yes

CdM] Is this an edible item with a metaphorical meaning? Not really, no (it's not clear where the name comes from, but it's probably not a metaphor).
Graham III - Is the animal element the meat of the animal? Yes!

Bigsmith] Is the animal a pig? Often (though not in all recipes)
CdM] Is the animal named or directly implied (e.g., pork) by the words on the card? *audience members of a certain age giggle* No
Raak] The Dunmow Flitch? No

That's wrong as well.

Rosie] Scotch egg? No

Thrashing around in the dark.

Rosie - Welsh rarebit? No
Graham III - Melton Mowbray Pork Pie? No

Rosie - Is pastry involved? Yes
Bigsmith - Or bread? No

irach] The Fleet Street "Long pork" pies of Sweeney Todd? No - see Rosie's earlier question about the animal being human.
Rosie] Is it a dessert? *applause, followed by lengthy discussion* Yes and no (more accurately, no and yes)

(Pork and rhubarb - delicious!)

as opposed to savoury.

ImNotJohn - Wakefield Pie? No, I've not come across that - sounds great!
Graham III - Is it sweet? Partially
as opposed to savoury? No (ie it's both)

CdM] Is this essentially a Cornish pasty by some other name and location? Um, no - it has a distinct USP. It might well look like a Cornish pasty, though, and parts of it might well taste like one.
Raak - Sweet and sour eel pasty? Eww! No

Just to clarify, I always understood the traditional Cornish pasty to contain two separate fillings: one meat-and-potato-based and one fruit-based. Is the USP that you refer to something other than this?

(A little googling reveals that although this form of the Cornish pasty is mentioned in many places, it is much less of a defining feature than I had thought.)

Graham III - Shropshire Fidget pie? No
CdM] *applause* Yes, that is the USP. But I took your earlier question to mean a present-day Cornish pasty, which as far as I know is just a savoury.

wikipedia is my friend

CdM] A Bedfordshire Clanger? YES! Wikipedia is indeed your friend (where do you think I got it from?) One pork and raspberry baton handed over to CdM.

---

Never 'eard of it. Stupid. What's the point?

---

I'm with Rosie on that (though maybe not quite so forcefully). Sometimes you may have to do research to get the answer, but it shouldn't be 'pick one from a list at random'. I think the best answers are ones where, either the majority of players will have heard of it, or you're pleased to have had this thing drawn to your attention.

---

(INJ) Yeah, a bit "forceful" (as usual) but I was annoyed that I'd wasted time and thought with no chance whatever of hitting on the answer. The only Bedfordshire Clanger I can think of is the management of Luton Town FC.

---

This is obviously going to be one of those perennial debates here. There is room to disagree about where to draw the lines, but this is an online forum, which does make it different playing AVMA here rather than as a parlour game. I don't think there is any harm in subjects that require a bit of googling. As indeed this next one might for some people; I don't know.

MINERAL

(On reflection, this almost certainly has a significant VEGETABLE component as well.)

Fossilised? No.

Used in construction? No.

Natural? In the sense in which I presume you mean the term, No.

Here is a clarification of the category that will hopefully make things nicely more muddled. :-)
The words on the card refer to something that can be reasonably interpreted relatively narrowly, or a bit more broadly. In both cases we are talking about something primarily mineral, and I can do no more than make educated guesses about the vegetable component. Under the narrow definition, my guess is that the vegetable component is present, but small. Under the broader definition, the vegetable component is surely more prominent, but the mineral component still clearly dominates.

(To be honest, you will probably make more progress if you ignore the vegetable component.)

Bog standard food for steam locos.

Diesel substitute? No.