mhs2ou99 (4) - Danville, Kentucky, USA - MAR 11, 2002 does not count
4.2 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
Most appealing about this particular gift from the land down under is the color. A light amber/golden tone sets this beer apart from most UK lagers, which are too dark to drink, let alone stomach. I especially appreciate the malty taste, combined with the light touch of flowery hops within the brew. Much better than a traditional lager, Fosters gives you the flavor of lager without the filling after effects. The aroma leaves a bit to be desired, and yet the beer is remarkably smooth, despite the slightly metallic nose (perhaps it is the oil can). Also interesting was the slightly bitter taste it had. The finish, though a touch bitter, is one that is still quite smooth for a lager. Though not quite as impressive as say a thicker, more full bodied lager in the íheadí departmentí, Fosters is a reasonably priced beer, and one that will make you think twice about picking up a bottle of UL lager!
BallsToTheWall99 (11) - Houston, Texas, USA - MAR 9, 2002
0.8 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 1/20
Very skunky and watery with a horrible aftertaste. If you can finish one of these big oleí cans without throwing up or inducing vomiting, iíll buy your next one.
Ernest (6540) - Boulder, Colorado, USA - MAR 9, 2002
1.4 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 5/20
UPDATED: AUG 4, 2007 Bottle (Toronto, Canada production). Head is initially small, frothy/fizzy, white, mostly diminishing. Body is clear light to medium yellow. Aroma is lightly malty (grain, husks), trace hops (flowers), with notes of soap and DMS. Flavor is lightly to moderately sweet, lightly bitter. Finish is lightly sweet, lightly bitter, very unclean. Light to medium body, watery texture, lively/fizzy carbonation. Not much good to speak of here. Very unpleasant.
AxeMaster221 (343) - Portland, Oregon, USA - MAR 6, 2002
2.2 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 8/20
Used to get these in the big can at Anna Bananas in Hawaii, served almost frozen.
noy-zee (63) - Minnesota, USA - MAR 6, 2002
2.3 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
sucks to be australian. dingoís eating your babyís and now this? the can aint that big either.
Choke (96) - Massachusetts, USA - MAR 5, 2002
0.9 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 4/20
For one thing this beer is neither smooth or has a good head,,no wonder why the aussieís drink bud that tells ya how good fosters is
Volgon (2763) - Manchester, New Hampshire, USA - MAR 4, 2002
1.9 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 8/20
UPDATED: AUG 28, 2006 Oil can: Pours a clear yellow with a diminishing white head, sweet grains in the aroma with a hint of grass, thin bodied with prickly carbonation, starts ends ends barely bitter. Not as bad as I remembered.
OD40oz (774) - Box Elder, South Dakota, USA - MAR 4, 2002
2.8 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
The best way to drink Fosters is in the huge can. It makes you feel like a little kid drinkin such a big can but its a good smooth brew, not the kangaroo piss i expected it to be.
CQC (224) - Sydney, AUSTRALIA - MAR 3, 2002
0.6 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 2/20
Donít drink the Aussie version. Get the stuff brewed in the UK. Totally different taste Rumour has it that itís also a different Beer (Crown Premium) over there, just re-badged cause the Pomms ainít stupid enough to drink the real stuff.
On Tap in the UK, itís an easy beer to drink when you wanna have a rest from the real stuff and need to slow down before you fall down.
In any form in Aus..donít touch it. Use the full bottles for target practice (alongside VB).
DrunkCaleb (69) - Michigan, USA - MAR 2, 2002
3.3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
Very good beer for easy drinking. A good American Standard.