Originally posted by CrowleyNice try, but if you are unable to debate the merits and faults of a rugby team, albeit a bunch of ill-disciplined criminals, without insulting others who disagree with your view, then you simply have no arguement. You defeat yourself with your biase.
See what I mean?
tsk tsk tsk
And we can all see that now, so Crowley, get thee to a board and learn the chess. It might improve your perception of tactics, on and off the field........ nah - second thoughts - total waste of time as you need to demonstrate a degree of impartiality for that to come about.
Same could be said for the springbok but that's not going to change anytime soon, I suspect.
skeeter
Originally posted by KJCavalierYea, you're right but that Crowley needed a wind up. When he gets pissed enough he'll boot it - that's his style - much like the SA rugby team - ball or no ball.
Yeah but I didn't see him bring it up until you did in this thread. Maybe elsewhere, but shouldn't stay there?
skeeter
Originally posted by KJCavalierWell, just a little, maybe, perhaps, but he should be able to handle it. If he can't then he should move out of the glasshouse. It's only a rugby game for crissake, and it's suppost to be sport - not a 'last man standing' slugfiest and the 'bok need to be reminded of that, albeit via some very good unbiased refereeing.
OK now your just trying to egg him on.
skeeter
Originally posted by skeeterYeah! GO Skeeter!
Wow. Not exactly the reply I was expecting and since it was insulting I must have really struck a vein. Get over your prejudices Crowley and face facts - thuggery in rugby is not acceptable anymore despite a perceived level of frustration - and the refs won't tolerate it either, hence the cards and subsequent penalties, which then costs the SA team territor ...[text shortened]... hey learn ?
skeeter
PS .... and I'm not [b]your 'honey', you prick.[/b]
I will forever admire you from afar for that post.
