"was sat" or "was sitting"/ "was stood" or "was standing"?
Okay, okay - maybe I am just an old pedant but I can't help it. I can often forgive ordinary people's grammatical errors in everyday conversations but when such errors creep into the communications of highly paid and well-trained BBC broadcasters, my hackles rise.
Let's get it clear. If you were "sat" somewhere - that means you were picked up and literally placed in your seat but if you sat there of your own freewill, then you "were sitting" in that place. It's the same with "stood". If you were "stood" say in the middle of a field, that means you were picked up and placed there but if you "were standing" in the field, that means you had walked through the gateway independently, dodging festering cowpats before arriving in the middle of said field to stand. Incidentally, why you should do that - I have no idea.
So in Standard English terms, when you say: "We were stood at the bar waiting to be served" you are mangling our language. You should say: "We were standing at the bar waiting to be served". And when you say: "The cat was sat on the mat" you should really be saying: "The cat was sitting on the mat" or indeed "The cat sat on the mat".
It may be that other fusty old pedants and I are fighting a losing battle on this one. The English language is forever evolving - not just through the addition of new vocabulary but also through changes to previously accepted grammatical constructions. Nonetheless, as I move inexorably towards my state funeral, I shall never say: "I was sat at my computer churning out nonsense", nor shall I say: "We were stood in the West Stand watching Hull City thrash Southampton". I cannot condone abuse.