Avenger said:To think that this person is an immortal is downright pathetic.
That is not accurate AFAIK, there was no mention of Boyd UNTILL she rang in and instigated the discussion. So what was her motive? Brohman's column in the DT was also just a response to Boyd's comments in the Courier mail so again the whole issue was instigated by Boyd.ShadesOfTheSun said:With the majority of posters on this issue. However:
It's idiotic to defend a family member when you hear them being attacked? You'd say nothing, I suppose, if you turned on the radio and someone you cared about was being talked about in unflattering terms?.
JJ said:And Boyd's actions as a player are why he's an embarrassment and a disgrace
RainMan said:His actions as a player is why he is an Immortal.
I don't see how this makes my comment inaccurate. From the perspective of Boyd's wife, Boyd wrote a fairly harmless article, the primary purpose of which was to reveal the instructions allegedly given to him by the selectors. In passing, he mentioned that his hit was accidental. His comments were, for the most part, fairly innocuous. They were offensive to Brohman only insofar as they suggested that Brohman felt embarrassed about what had transpired.CrazyEel said:That is not accurate AFAIK, there was no mention of Boyd UNTILL she rang in and instigated the discussion. So what was her motive? Brohman's column in the DT was also just a response to Boyd's comments in the Courier mail so again the whole issue was instigated by Boyd.
ShadesOfTheSun said:I don't see how this makes my comment inaccurate. From the perspective of Boyd's wife, Boyd wrote a fairly harmless article, the primary purpose of which was to reveal the instructions allegedly given to him by the selectors. In passing, he mentioned that his hit was accidental. His comments were, for the most part, fairly innocuous. They were offensive to Brohman only insofar as they suggested that Brohman felt embarrassed about what had transpired.
Brohman has responded by calling Les a liar ("Of course it wasn't deliberate, Les. That is the way we were taught to tackle: you must run in with your elbow cocked at the head of an opponent. That should stop 'em, shouldn't it, Les?"), and calling him an embarrassment to rugby league and to his family.
Why exactly was it idiotic for Boyd's wife to wish to respond?
ShadesOfTheSun said:I don't see how this makes my comment inaccurate. From the perspective of Boyd's wife, Boyd wrote a fairly harmless article, the primary purpose of which was to reveal the instructions allegedly given to him by the selectors. In passing, he mentioned that his hit was accidental. His comments were, for the most part, fairly innocuous. They were offensive to Brohman only insofar as they suggested that Brohman felt embarrassed about what had transpired.
Brohman has responded by calling Les a liar ("Of course it wasn't deliberate, Les. That is the way we were taught to tackle: you must run in with your elbow cocked at the head of an opponent. That should stop 'em, shouldn't it, Les?"), and calling him an embarrassment to rugby league and to his family.
Why exactly was it idiotic for Boyd's wife to wish to respond?
JJ said:Nobody here is perfect, but have you missed Boyd's original comments implying that Brohman should be the one ashamed, and according to Boyd couldn't look him in the eye...