Roast dinner at 1 - which of us is being rude?

I would agree to move it to a slightly later time but eat mine when it was ready whether he’s there or not - you have offered a compromise and he’s still late then that’s on him

OK, I've read all of OP posts now - only read a couple before. She does a spectacular U turn after nearly every poster points out she is BU.

He's not really agreeing - OP has made it clear she is not willing to negotiate a time. It must be 1pm.

YANBU. It sounds like he doesn’t appreciate your efforts. Does he ever cook, OP?

YANBU, and tbh, I wouldn't be waiting every week for DH to come home before I ate, even if the temperature of the food wasn't an issue. Even if I'm eating a cold sandwich, I usually want to eat around the same time every day, not an hour later or whenever he finally makes it home. It's not a problem for either of us to eat the occasional meal at different times.

I'd wait if he were running late for a special occasion or due to an unpreventable delay, but late every week, by choice? No way!

I'd cook it I would eat mine at the agreed time, and then I would probably fuck off out to get on with my own thing/get busy with my own thing... and see if THEN it sinks in?

YANBU, he is being very rude!

Get yourself a hobby on Sunday mornings too. Arrive back at lunchtime and play a game of dare who cooks enjoy cooking the meal together

For me it’s a strange time Sunday roast (to cover lunch and dinner) is normally anywhere between 1430 and 1530 if it was me I would have zero interest in it at 1300, I would rather heat it up later but wouldn’t care if you wanted to have it earlier

She’s making dinner either way why not let him socialise. If this was a man curtailing his wife’s social life by refusing to cook later I’m sure you’d have plenty to say.

Also, could you let us know how late he actually is? Are we taking five minutes late or half an hour? I think that makes a slight difference, again. Differences in how people view time means that for some up to ten minutes later than arranged is still roughly on time while for others not being five minutes early is actually late...

It’s a home, not like school canteen where lunch occurs on a bell and if you snooze you lose, so I’d definitely give him some leeway and keep things warm for a bit. Maybe 15 mins. Then I’d eat without him.

Yes you could move it to teatime, but equally he could be at home for 1.

Tbh your dinner, you cooked it so you eat when you want. When he cooks the roast he can dictate what time he eats

His actions are telling you he doesn't want a roast at 1pm. Whatever he says, he doesn't want the roast at 1pm. Take the chance and adjust.

Honestly, if I invite someone for lunch at 1 p.m. I don't have it on the table as they walk in the door, and perhaps you shouldn't do this for your husband as well. If you left a little slack time for a drink and chat when he comes in then you could eat together at 1.30 with less clock watching. You say he'd be later if you pushed back the time but it doesn't sound as though you've actually tried that, more that you're assuming it would be the case. Why not try saying 'obviously it's a bit of a rush for you after the game so why don't we push back lunch to 1.30' then plan for 1.45, with loving greetings and a drink to fill in 15 mins should he unexpectedly arrive on time. I agree it is disrespectful to be consistently late if you've agreed a time but also it is Sunday and it doesn't sound like a very restful situation for either of you at the moment! Surely eating together is nicer all round?

What happens if you don't cook the roast at all?

I’d move it to 2pm
and if he is late after that I would eat without him

You both sound inflexible!!!

Sorry @Rachellllleeee 😉

But we can only take what is posted as the story. Even if it in a subsequent post.

If it stands to reason that nothing is to be believed unless it is in the first post,. Op just said he does an activity.

To be consistently late, it could well be that the activity involves Barbara from number 11 upside down round the bins at Lidl rather than a chinwag at the golf club. Which was only mentioned in a later post.

We could all make up pish to fit our narrative. Only the OP knows what the score is.

The OP’s first post was all about how she has always done dinner for 1pm on a Sunday, through their whole marriage and with the kids and still does it. She only started saying that she is happy to move the time once she got responses saying she was wrong. Given how insistent she was in her OP that is has always been 1pm for 30 years, I don’t believe that she is offering her husband a genuine option of having it later. It’s probably one of those, “well, we can have it later but I’ll be in a mood about it every week” offers.

If she was genuine, she’d have said it in her OP rather than being so insistent that it’s 1pm and always has been.

Why? Why can't you read the OPs posts? He agrees with 1pm dinner. The OP doesn't care if he is later she just wants to eat her dinner hot when it is made.

What is a bit sad really is that he has asked for his lunch at 1 and can’t be arsed coming home for the time he has asked for his dinner.

More sad is that he is nipping at OP for starting without him as she doesn’t want a fresh meal spoiling for her. He can do as he pleases if he can’t be there on time.

As can she.