Drastic Change of opinion?

[muzby]

So knock Crowe , knock Souths , can only assume you are jealous of the direction Souths are heading.

not jealous at all about the direction souths is heading..

i'll say the same thing to souths that i say to mrs muzby..


i'm quite happy that you are going down...

 

[Vic Mackey]

as for 1909 , these are latest facts from internet search and they are in line with all stories i have heard in the past. Different times , however the scoreboard counts.

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The NSWRL though was still looking to recoup money owed on the Wallabies raids, and decided to make the Final a double-header with an unscheduled 4th ‘Kangaroos v Wallabies' game. The Final was relegated to the under-card and all proceeds of the day were to go to the League. Understandably both Souths and Balmain voiced their disapproval to the downgrading of the Final. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The earlier kick-off time also meant many players would struggle to arrive on time after Saturday moring work duties. Both club's apparently agreed with each other not to play. But in a move that would ensure the two clubs were bitter rivals for the rest of the century, Souths turned up ready to play, kicked off, picked up the ball and scored a try.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The referee then awarded Souths the game and with it the title, much to Balmain's protestations in the week that followed. [/FONT]​

This is the real events. I have been a balmain fan for over 30 years and I have not once heard bunnies mans version.

Souths official line was 'we never agreed that we wouldn't turn up' however this new one 'balmain were trying to bankrupt the league' is completely new to me.

The league gods have punished souffs since, they have never beaten us in a grand final and have had to put up with the last 20 years of rubbish hahaa

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Did they or did they not show up for a scheduled grand final? That by itself makes them unaustralian traitors..

No it doesn't. It makes them men who made a stand rightly or wrongly. There is only one thing that is 'unaustralian' and that is tossers like you who freely bandy the term around to make themselves look righteous.

So please spare your fake anger, it's not about the "long dead men", it's about your anti souths agenda and you know it. If it was the other way around and Souths tried to convince Balmain to backstab the NSWRL, you'd still be bitching about Souths and praising Balmain for staying loyal.

I don't have anti souths agenda dopey I have an anti souths bandwagon russell/inglis/mundine is god AFL loving gimp troll called bunniesman agenda. That, I freely admit.

 

[rupertpupkin]

Yes it does you dumb merkin.
You know even if Balmain showed up and won that day they still wouldn't have been premiers? There would have been another game the next week and they'v have to win that as well.

Then address Loudstrat's question.

 

[BunniesMan]

Mate, we are bagging out a club who had an agreement with another club NOT to play the GF. BOTH clubs agreed. ONE club honoured the deal. ONE club renigned.

If it was the other way around, I would be saying the same thing. Your "everyone hates us" attitude is like when the Broncos first came in. That insular attitude. It can work to galvanish a club. It did work for the Broncos in winning premeirships, but I doubt it will work for your mob.

Show me where there is any evidence of this?

Seeing as this happened 102 years ago there is little reliable evidence. We have to use logic (I know, I know, a challenge for some of you). What motive would Souths have in sitthing out a GF that they would have to lose twice to not get the premiership? In a league where 5 other clubs thought Souths was 1 of the 2 that was unfairly favoured. What motive we have to agree in the first place?

Zero.

Balmain made it up in their humiliation after that day so it would look they weren't alone in their disgusting hidden agenda.

And excuse me if I attribute all this to an "everyone hates us" attitude. There are many disputed facts in this situation but one fact isn't. Balmain wanted to not show up to a scheduled GF and destroy the NSWRL. And NOONE has a problem with that. But everyone is bitching about us supposedly backing out of a handshake deal. A handshake deal that noone knows for sure existed and the only claims that it did happen came from a club openly trying to destroy the NSWRL. Hardly a club whose version of the story I would trust.

 

[Galeforce]

a lot of hot air re 1909. the official scoreboard counts . Souths premiers 1909.
Balmain got back at souths in 1969 ,when they slowed down the pace of the game by going down throughout. Again the scoreboard counts for 1969 as Balmain were premiers, however as someone who did go to each Souths game that year , Souths were the best team throughout the season.

 

[Doomednow]

Show me where there is any evidence of this?

Seeing as this happened 102 years ago there is little reliable evidence. We have to use logic (I know, I know, a challenge for some of you). What motive would Souths have in sitthing out a GF that they would have to lose twice to not get the premiership? In a league where 5 other clubs thought Souths was 1 of the 2 that was unfairly favoured. What motive we have to agree in the first place?

Zero.

Balmain made it up in their humiliation after that day so it would look they weren't alone in their disgusting hidden agenda.

And excuse me if I attribute all this to an "everyone hates us" attitude. There are many disputed facts in this situation but one fact isn't. Balmain wanted to not show up to a scheduled GF and destroy the NSWRL. And NOONE has a problem with that. But everyone is bitching about us supposedly backing out of a handshake deal. A handshake deal that noone knows for sure existed and the only claims that it did happen came from a club openly trying to destroy the NSWRL. Hardly a club whose version of the story I would trust.

You are talking out of your arse mate. Cling to invented noble deeds if you helps you sleep at night, but don't expect any acknowledgement around here. You're just dirtying the name of your beloved club and undermining whatever credibility you may have had.

 

[BunniesMan]

You are talking out of your arse mate. Cling to invented noble deeds if you helps you sleep at night, but don't expect any acknowledgement around here. You're just dirtying the name of your beloved club and undermining whatever credibility you may have had.

f**k you, mate? So now you've lost any credibility you had even further.

Now there's wankers (you and some others) who are refusing to acknowledge the Tigers agenda. So apparently they wanted to sit a GRAND FINAL out for the fun of it?

 

[BunniesMan]

This is the real events. I have been a balmain fan for over 30 years and I have not once heard bunnies mans version.

Souths official line was 'we never agreed that we wouldn't turn up' however this new one 'balmain were trying to bankrupt the league' is completely new to me.

The league gods have punished souffs since, they have never beaten us in a grand final and have had to put up with the last 20 years of rubbish hahaa

I've shown you a link from well respected source. So your claiming Balmain weren't trying to bankrupt the NSWRL? I'm sitting here slapping myself in the face and rereading this BS because it's just so unbelievable.

Then tell me why the f**k did Balmain not show up to a GF that they agreed to play (by involving themselves in the league and agreeing to the rules)? Did they get lost on their way to the stadium? Did they all simultaneously develop amnesia and forget what they were supposed to be doing that day?

Give it a rest, it's one thing to claim we agreed to your traitoring and then went back on our word. Even though we didn't, that's fair enough to be debated. But to suddenly say you had no agenda (even though it was well publicised) is beyond belief.

 

[Doomednow]

The reasoning has already been explained. I think it was Galeforce who put up the story. Both teams were dirty about being relegated to the earlier spot to make way for union. Union and League were not best mates, so they allegedly decided on a boycott. I don't see why you find this that hard to believe, makes sense to me, and apparently everyone else. Then you go banging on about how there's no reliable evidence, but insist your story is fact? On the back of what? Some reasoning you're pushing about a grand Balmain conspiracy?

Objectively, as a supporter of neither club, the accepted version is much easier to swallow. I think you're just having trouble coming to terms with the possibly that The Pride of League made a pretty huge dick move early in its glorious history. Just move on mate, its in the past.

 

[LESStar58]

You do know that Penrith forced them out?

I hate neither club.

I reckon though Saints would have that title. The animosity toward them after they won the comp has been astounding.

Does that mean the same thing as "Fittler and Sing remained loyal to the ARL during the Super League War in 1995".

I remember Parramatta almost coming away with Freddie's signature on top of the Canterbury lads and Adam Ritson. f**king shame what happened to the latter.

 

[BunniesMan]

The reasoning has already been explained. I think it was Galeforce who put up the story. Both teams were dirty about being relegated to the earlier spot to make way for union. Union and League were not best mates, so they allegedly decided on a boycott. I don't see why you find this that hard to believe, makes sense to me, and apparently everyone else. Then you go banging on about how there's no reliable evidence, but insist your story is fact? On the back of what? Some reasoning you're pushing about a grand Balmain conspiracy?

Objectively, as a supporter of neither club, the accepted version is much easier to swallow. I think you're just having trouble coming to terms with the possibly that The Pride of League made a pretty huge dick move early in its glorious history. Just move on mate, its in the past.

So now supposedly Balmain is the hero because they were giving a big FU to union? The reasons why that is bullsh*t has also been explained. The Wallabies v Kangaroos match was part of our war on union ffs. A bunch of wallabies were paid to come and play against us, this was back when union was strictly amateur. Union hated that. The day was part of our war on them, anyone who was against union supported that day.

 

[adamkungl]

Rabbitohs, scum since 1909

 

[Doomednow]

Just out of curiosity, why did Souths need to kick the ball and score a try at all? Shouldn't it have just been a forfeit? By playing the game it implies that it needed to be played, and rules would have to be followed. What would have happened if they had messed up the kick off and the ball had gone out? A draw?

 

[Doomednow]

So now supposedly Balmain is the hero because they were giving a big FU to union? The reasons why that is bullsh*t has also been explained. The Wallabies v Kangaroos match was part of our war on union ffs. A bunch of wallabies were paid to come and play against us, this was back when union was strictly amateur. Union hated that. The day was part of our war on them, anyone who was against union supported that day.

Balmain a huge hero? Wouldn't say that. They just got f**ked over, which is not really a heroic quality. Ineffective martyrs maybe. It doesn't matter now anyway to be honest, was 100 years ago. Its basically just an odd little story from antiquity. Ancient history. I wouldn't worry so much about it.

 

[rupertpupkin]

apparently they wanted to sit a GRAND FINAL out for the fun of it?

Did they get lost on their way to the stadium? Did they all simultaneously develop amnesia and forget what they were supposed to be doing that day?

Keep digging. It's not much deeper, I swear.

 

[BunniesMan]

Just out of curiosity, why did Souths need to kick the ball and score a try at all? Shouldn't it have just been a forfeit? By playing the game it implies that it needed to be played, and rules would have to be followed. What would have happened if they had messed up the kick off and the ball had gone out? A draw?

From what I've heard the NSWRL wanted a game to take place so they couldn't be sued by the crowd for advertising X amount of footy and not delivring. The whole issue started from gate takings. Basically the NSWRL needed a certain amount that day just to survive, they insisted the kick off happened so the crowd members wouldn't have any ground to get their money back. In the end the NSWRL just got over the line and made enough...to the disappointment of the Tigers.

 

[cleary89]

And it set up the foundations of a club built on lies and cheating.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Does that mean the same thing as "Fittler and Sing remained loyal to the ARL during the Super League War in 1995".

I remember Parramatta almost coming away with Freddie's signature on top of the Canterbury lads and Adam Ritson. f**king shame what happened to the latter.

Super League's the best thing to happen to Parra since the 80s.

 

[Loudstrat]

This has nothing to do with cheating. I'm not accusing Balmain of being cheats, I'm accusing them of being unaustralian traitors who chucked a tanty and tried to kill the league in it's infancy.

To have a grand final you need two teams to compete. They thought without a real game happening that it would send the NSWRL broke, well it turns out they made just enough money to get by..


They'd be foundation clubs if it was the same club. We weren't in the comp for 2 years but we came back as the exact same club. Not a different club with a similar name. The exact same club.

As did Newcastle!

Too many folks here continue to have a chook raffle mentalily and they can if they want and if they feel good attacking Souths , good luck to them. Being newsworthy increases the marketing value of Souths to sponsors.

And it has nothing with the chookraffle mentality of Souffs fans bagging other clubs? Dickhead - if you thing Eels fans, for example, are worried that Souths might win the comp, and don't worry about the Dragons wining it, or any other club, you are more of a complete f*cing genius than we all think you are!

As for Crowe , good luck to him , and i can only assume , the knockers, are really jealous . As for buying a team consider what Crowe is actually doing
a) brings Sam Burgess from the Super league ( reversing trend)

Copying off Wests and Gareth Ellis.....

b) brings out his young brother George ( how many players who have not yet made UK Superleague have been bought to NRL toyota cup to develop?)

Copying off Brian Smith and Chris Thorman. Lets not forget the family influence of a big brother when Dad has passed on.

c) ensures Inglis was not lost to AFL

:lol: AFL didn't want the fat slob any more than darts or dominoes did!

d) SBW , well i will believe it when i see it , however again a major trend reversal from Union.

That;s either the result of Mundine and Rusty exchanging blow jobs, or a CONTINUATION of the trend shown by Rogers, Sailor, Lote, Tahu and Gasnier

e) Ben Ross , a chance to resurrect his career after a major career ending injury.

Then it wasn't a career ending injury was it numbnuts!!!!!!!

As for other buys Asotasi ( Souths or Roosters)

Souths on twice the offered money, and Nick merely bought Miles instead, for cheaper and far better value

Crocker ( could not get a visa for Superleague)

Only had 2 emplyment options - with Souffs or with some colourful Kings Cross identity ,

Wesser ( twilight of his career),

Areed

Dave Taylor (signed when could not make Brisbane top team)

:lol: - they onlygot him because he wouldn't wait for cutie to make up his mind ,

Lowe ( signed when in Cowboys feeder team)

Who? Is he a player of note?

Oh yes and coming from Souths Toyota cup -- Farrell,Sandow,Clark, Luke
Other Souths Juniors - sutton, Merrit, talanoa,Peddybourne,Shannon mcpherson, Faloon.
playing with Souths since 2002 - Stuart/Geddes

So knock Crowe , knock Souths , can only assume you are jealous of the direction Souths are heading.

Certainly not jealous. As a Parramatta fan heading for a seemingly dismal year, I can EMPATHISE with where Souffs are heading. Tell ya what, you can come to my place in September and watch the other teams compete in the finals.
It is an old saying and right now i think we are heading into period of justification. When Souths are doing well the game is doing well.
The haters will come to see Souths play , hoping to see them get smashed. that is great.[/QUOTE]

Then address Loudstrat's question.

No it doesn't. If Balmain had won they would have had form, and gone into the second game with confidence!

a lot of hot air re 1909. the official scoreboard counts . Souths premiers 1909.
Balmain got back at souths in 1969 ,when they slowed down the pace of the game by going down throughout. Again the scoreboard counts for 1969 as Balmain were premiers, however as someone who did go to each Souths game that year , Souths were the best team throughout the season.

Not against Balmain they weren't!

Does that mean the same thing as "Fittler and Sing remained loyal to the ARL during the Super League War in 1995".

I remember Parramatta almost coming away with Freddie's signature on top of the Canterbury lads and Adam Ritson. f**king shame what happened to the latter.

Parra were not remotely in the hunt for Fittler. It was between Easts (Gus) and Manly (Fulton - whose daughter was Freddies gf at the time). Freddie bought a house in Manly, and signed with Easts. He had as much chance of going to Parra as he did of going to the Hunter Mariners.

Just out of curiosity, why did Souths need to kick the ball and score a try at all? Shouldn't it have just been a forfeit? By playing the game it implies that it needed to be played, and rules would have to be followed. What would have happened if they had messed up the kick off and the ball had gone out? A draw?

Maybe it's heresay that the game went ahead at all. Who scored the try - revealing that name will settle it once and for all. Anyone????