Ex Parra Prop Belted

[ashrafieh]

It's quite funny... The same people who are reading and making assumptions from this article are the same people who bitch about the Daily Telegraph on a daily basis and it's bias/agenda. Hypocrites? Not the Daily Telegraph they do it all the time, the posters like El Dumbo, Hindmarsh is a twig & Bet are the hypocrites...

The article is very vague and is written out of speculation not fact... How do we know that Terry didn't start the fight by verbally abusing the people? LL3 i take it you're a St Merge fan? Taking illegal flares into games is better? That endangers hundreds of people yet St Merge fans do it all the time... hypocrite? I think so!

Those teams without bad supporters who take illegal fireworks, verbally abuse people, have fights etc can write all they want about Bulldog fans... Those that have those supporters and rubbish the Bulldogs are just hyprocrites (Every NRL club does).

 

[Bulldog Force]

scum club, scum fans

Scum rivals.

 

[nomarg]

Scum rivals.

That's clearly no way to talk about the Raiders-

They are not Scum rivals- They are just SCUM-

To be scum Rivals they would need to have won something this century.....:lol:

 

[Raider_69]

thats it lads, keep burying your head in the sands, deflecting the issues is not going to work

the sooner you face up to the fact your club is a disgrace and your fans continually disgrace themselves, the sooner the good fans and the club can start actually doing something about these incidents.

 

[nomarg]

thats it lads, keep burying your head in the sands, deflecting the issues is not going to work

the sooner you face up to the fact your club is a disgrace and your fans continually disgrace themselves, the sooner the good fans and the club can start actually doing something about these incidents.

When have the Tigers been a disgrace?

 

[Raider_69]

When have the Tigers been a disgrace?

Clearly i was refering to the Bulldogs, i dont know why you felt the need to bring the Tigers into the equation.

 

[nomarg]

Clearly i was refering to the Bulldogs, i dont know why you felt the need to bring the Tigers into the equation.

you said lads under my post- thought you meant me

 

[donkeywong]

he is a sl*t and probably deserved it

you are a dickhead mate!!:x

 

[Loudstrat]

Which is part of the reason this article is ridiculous. It doesn't give any details about what happened in the lift. Is it not in the realms of possibility that Leadbeater did/said something to provoke an attack? Maybe Leadbeater should have been a bit more specific to give his story more merit.

Maybe the journo should have done their job better and found out more about what happened in the lift.

Who cares which onlookers said what. Both statements are made by a group of people who were supposedly there.

Wrong. "Some people" could refer to 6 blind eskimos in a Russian brothel.

Nobody ever said otherwise. But if they weren't completely to blame it implies that some of the blame lies with Leabeater. By assualting him, these people instantly have part of the blame attached to them in this situation. But wouldn't the story look a little bit different if it turns out Leadbeater provoked an attack somehow.

Firstly - how is assault ever justified? How is an assailant innocent? "He called me names, officer, so I bashed him" FFS - it's a typical Canterbury defence - ironic that you are using it.

All these assumptions we are making are just highlighting the lack of alot of facts which could change this story completely.

You hope - desperately.

 

[Ulysseus]

Hmmmmmmmmmm

I don't give Greenberg a sh*tload of credit for "turning the club around" off the field etc, even when they do something good.
By the same token I don't see how the CEO can be held responsible for the actions of a few prize f**kheads.

 

[The General]

Wrong. "Some people" could refer to 6 blind eskimos in a Russian brothel.

You obviously aren't great with English so i'll explain it again.

The article said 'Onlookers said the attackers were Bulldogs supporters."

This was immediately followed by

"Some claim the fans were not entirely to blame for the flare-up."

Usually when you use the word some it is in reference to a group mentioned earlier. Since it was immediately preceded by the sentence containing the word onlookers it is pretty f*cken obvious the some referred to were the bloody onlookers.

Firstly - how is assault ever justified? How is an assailant innocent? "He called me names, officer, so I bashed him" FFS - it's a typical Canterbury defence - ironic that you are using it.

You hope - desperately.

Yes assault is never justified. Just ask the people in the Charmaine Palavi thread.

They should probably not consider self defense in court cases as well. Let's put out a hypothetical. Leadbeater abuses these people, and then proceeds to hit one of them. He then gets smacked in the face. Seems pretty justifiable to me.

 

[Loudstrat]

If he hit them first, he'd hardly be crying about assault would he.

BTW, in your lather about "onlookers' being the extremely credible "some people" - HOW MANY ONLOOKERS CAN YOU HAVE IN A LIFT FFS??????????

 

[The General]

If he hit them first, he'd hardly be crying about assault would he.

Who knows what his motives were. He obviously chose to discuss things with the media so maybe it would have been better to reveal all the details to minimise speculation. He mentions it was a misunderstanding so it seems he has a fair idea why the incident occurred.

BTW, in your lather about "onlookers' being the extremely credible "some people" - HOW MANY ONLOOKERS CAN YOU HAVE IN A LIFT FFS??????????

How the f*ck would I know who these onlookers were. Maybe you should ask the journo who they were and how they tracked them down.

 

[NGR]

fool me once, shame on you
fool me twice, shame on me..

keep burying your heads in the sand people...

 

[sting]

LOL at all the dogs fans with their heads in the sand.

we all know what happened here deep down.

the dogs have a lot of piece of sh*t fans that ruin the rep of a whole club.

the sad part is i'm not even surprised.

 

[The General]

LMAO at the continual calls of Dogs fans having their head in the sand. It seems like the only argument alot of people can throw out.

Pretty much every (if not every) Dogs fan on here admits that there is a f*ckwit element that comes to our games. We all despise the sh*t they cause and publicly state that we don't stand for it.

That doesn't mean we can't debate the merits of a very vague article which omits important details on the incident that occurred. If it turns out that Leadbeater was attacked for no reason then I guarantee every Dogs fan here will blame nobody but the idiots that did it and call for them to receive heavy punishment.

But yes we all have our heads in the sand.

 

[Loudstrat]

If you debate the article, and ignore 99% of the info in it and focus on 1% of innuendo, twist it your way and repeat it 60 times ffs.

But yeah, ignore the paragraphs about Bookend's injuries, how he complained to the club, police were involved etc, and focuss on mythical onlookers and the iron clad 'some people'. You will convince us all that Dogs fans are innocent bird watchers who collect stamps and butterflies.......:roll:

 

[The General]

If you debate the article, and ignore 99% of the info in it and focus on 1% of innuendo, twist it your way and repeat it 60 times ffs.

But yeah, ignore the paragraphs about Bookend's injuries, how he complained to the club, police were involved etc, and focuss on mythical onlookers and the iron clad 'some people'. You will convince us all that Dogs fans are innocent bird watchers who collect stamps and butterflies.......:roll:

Please. Right now all we know is he recieved undisclosed injuries due to an attack which we know nothing about. It was reported to officials who are still investigating.

Excuse me for reserving judgement until we know all the facts. Especially when the report comes from a newspaper regarded for bullsh*t and exaggerations.

 

[ramble_on]

What a beat up- This story has no proof to back it up- I bet the guy asked for it and got snotted- he has 2 witnesses why not make a police complaint....

If you go to the Footy and act like a dickhead chances are someone will snot you...

Just like if you go anywhere and act like a dickhead...

Greenberg has a right to be pissed by this sort of "journalism"

So the judgement of what pertains to being a dickhead is declared by who..?? At a guess I'd say you think you're qualified... grow some pubes you f**king genius........

 

[Generalzod]

were they young male middle eastern dogs fans by any chance?

You mean males with a Mediterranean appearance...