Greg Inglis headed to South Sydney - no players to be shed

[Eels Dude]

You two should get a room. Make love not war.

 

[ANTiLAG]

Your mother and I think it's best you go to bed now.

I'm all for giving you another 30 minutes on the computer, but she's cracking the whip.

She owns you already? You're not only a fool but also pathetic "New Dad".

 

[Jason Maher]

Inglis the best, most powerful running back? bullsh*t. Ever heard of a bloke named Mal Meninga?

 

[RWB]

I disagree. If a club challenges the cap and it's deemed a restraint of trade than it risks the future of the NRL and other clubs simply for that club's own benefit. Selfish.

That's just your opinion though, it's not fact.

Team sponsorship was declined in mid 70's for a very similar reason to the above...

 

[ANTiLAG]

Inglis the best, most powerful running back? bullsh*t. Ever heard of a bloke named Mal Meninga?

Yep. And I'd still choose Inglis over him...

 

[boxhead]

Yep. And I'd still choose Inglis over him...

Surely you jest?

 

[Loudstrat]

Hah - Inglis is only 23. He's played a lot less games than Gaz at club level and nearly scored as many tries. He has played more origin and more tests and has a far better try scoring rate. Inglius has won a Clive Chruchill - at stand off no less Gaz got a golden boot? Inglis does. How many successful origin series Gas been a part of? Gaz is famous for an Anzac test try - who did work to make that try famous?

Now you could say others did the work for Inglis to score those tries - but then people like you accuse Boyd of feeding of Inglis's work in origin. Hah.

Gaz won any dally m rep player of the year awards?

Inglis has already achieved more than Gasnier in a lot less time. Get over your bias Loudstrat.

Gaz will play well in front of 9000 people on a wet saturday night in Canberra. Inglis needs 50k+ and some award to get motivated. Plus Inglis needs a test quality half or pivot inside him, look at the crap that Gasnier has worked with!

15m out - ball in hand against a set backline - I'd have my money on Gasnier every day. One on one and fed a money ball by Thurston, Cronk or Heather, Inglis has it.

Best I've ever seen. If you consider Daley and Fittler as standoffs his only competition is Mal and Peter Jackson. Inglis eclipses them for mine. 10 origin tries in 13 games. 15 test tries in 16 games. Set up countless others for supporting players "feeding" off him - such as Gasnier's famous Anzac try. Clive Churchill medalist. Big game player. Loves the big stage and doesn't choke.

Clive Churchill medallist -fast becoming a joke anyway - is irellevent if the premiership is stripped for cheating.

In your time, you forget Steve Renouf. Similar danger I guess. Inglis has been far less consistent though, so both are ahead of Inglis IMHO. I also saw Steve Rogers play, and The Crow. Inglis played pivot, and even Brett Finch ignited Melbournes outside men better. As fullback, again he'd struggle to make the top 20. On the wing? I would have loved to have seen Inglis marked by Eric Grothe in Origin - who would have ran over him in attack, and run him down easily in defence.

Inglis is the pin up boy. Others have done the work to make him look good - that's why he's running around the NRL looking for a home (got a renter application in at Redfern) while Cronk, Slater and Smith are still riding trams.

Souths deserve Inglis to live up to your hype, but I suspect that history will show that Terry Fahey and Mike Cleary were Souths most damaging running backs in limited tackle football

 

[ANTiLAG]

Gaz will play well in front of 9000 people on a wet saturday night in Canberra. Inglis needs 50k+ and some award to get motivated.

Inglis is certainly a big game player. But he doesn't choke.

Plus Inglis needs a test quality half or pivot inside him, look at the crap that Gasnier has worked with!

Nah Inglis played standoff pretty well in 07 - was dally m standoff of the year from memory. Fail.

15m out - ball in hand against a set backline - I'd have my money on Gasnier every day.

A fool and their money are soon parted.

Clive Churchill medallist -fast becoming a joke anyway - is irellevent if the premiership is stripped for cheating.

Why? He still has the Medal. I fail to see why it is irrelevant. He had 16 other superstars on his own cap cheating team to beat to get it. Highly relevant.

In your time, you forget Steve Renouf. Similar danger I guess.

What danger? I don't rate Renouf as highly as Peter Jackson or Mal even, let alone Inglis.

Inglis has been far less consistent though, so both are ahead of Inglis IMHO. I also saw Steve Rogers play, and The Crow. Inglis played pivot, and even Brett Finch ignited Melbournes outside men better.

Steve Rogers is irrelevant. I said last 25/30 years... Rogers was at the tail end of his career by then and nowhere near as effective as his 70's self. Apparently a stellar 1981 - but thats one season in the last 30. Inglis has had an awesome 3-4-5 years already ... I didn't watch the 70's - hence not doing a comparison to that decade. Now - this crap about Finch ingiting better - Finch's job was to pass the ball to Inglis because he was more effective for the team wider - had they PS3 option of Inglis at five eigth over FInch and Inglis at centre - Im sure thats the way they would have gone.

As fullback, again he'd struggle to make the top 20. On the wing? I would have loved to have seen Inglis marked by Eric Grothe in Origin - who would have ran over him in attack, and run him down easily in defence.

Ah yes - the Eric Grothe Snr myth. Refer to fresh thread in Interstate "Origin Super teams" with my view on whether Eric Grothe Sr would run over the modern wingers of Boyd, Inglis, Tuquri. Lets be real ERic Grothe aint exactly Manu Vatuvei or Taniela. Players have conditioning coaches now. Different ball game.

Inglis is the pin up boy. Others have done the work to make him look good - that's why he's running around the NRL looking for a home (got a renter application in at Redfern) while Cronk, Slater and Smith are still riding trams.

Err Inglis makes himself look good. Goto Youtube - watch his dazzling efforts.

Souths deserve Inglis to live up to your hype, but I suspect that history will show that Terry Fahey and Mike Cleary were Souths most damaging running backs in limited tackle football

I suspect you'd give you anything to be a Rugby League journalist/writer. But you're not. We are all just fans with humble view points. Our opinions are worth no more than Gaba's or Haynetrains.

 

[ANTiLAG]

Surely you jest?

No.

Just using try scoring ability - Inglis has already got more first grade let alone origin tries than Mal does - from far fewer games. A much better strike rate for test tries to boot.

Inglis also sets up the men outside him for tries - ala Boyd.

Inglis is worth far more points to a team. Now Mal played outside some great halves, Stuart, Daley, Langer, Lewis...

Inglis is far more the goods than Big Mal.

 

[BunniesMan]

Gaz will play well in front of 9000 people on a wet saturday night in Canberra. Inglis needs 50k+ and some award to get motivated. Plus Inglis needs a test quality half or pivot inside him, look at the crap that Gasnier has worked with!

15m out - ball in hand against a set backline - I'd have my money on Gasnier every day. One on one and fed a money ball by Thurston, Cronk or Heather, Inglis has it.




Clive Churchill medallist -fast becoming a joke anyway - is irellevent if the premiership is stripped for cheating.

In your time, you forget Steve Renouf. Similar danger I guess. Inglis has been far less consistent though, so both are ahead of Inglis IMHO. I also saw Steve Rogers play, and The Crow. Inglis played pivot, and even Brett Finch ignited Melbournes outside men better. As fullback, again he'd struggle to make the top 20. On the wing? I would have loved to have seen Inglis marked by Eric Grothe in Origin - who would have ran over him in attack, and run him down easily in defence.

Inglis is the pin up boy. Others have done the work to make him look good - that's why he's running around the NRL looking for a home (got a renter application in at Redfern) while Cronk, Slater and Smith are still riding trams.

Souths deserve Inglis to live up to your hype, but I suspect that history will show that Terry Fahey and Mike Cleary were Souths most damaging running backs in limited tackle football

That's dumb logic. If anything his one counts for more than others because he was competing against multiple superstars for it. He was the best player on a team so packed with talent it was illegal.

 

[GongPanther]

After originally shunning selection for NSW.

After pi$$ing off from Melbourne for Brisbane.

And after Brisbane & Melbourne washing their hands of Inglis if his contract to Souths is null and void,he should go to Lowes and get measured up for a Turncoat.

 

[Loudstrat]

Inglis is certainly a big game player. But he doesn't choke.

WTF? No he's not Brian Smith.........
Oh if that is a dig at St George - who won the premiership LEGALLY, - and suggesting that losing a big game = choke, wander over to the Manly forum mention the words "forty" and "blot".

Nah Inglis played standoff pretty well in 07 - was dally m standoff of the year from memory. Fail.

Rely on bodgey awards - neither Brett Kenny or Wally Lewis got pivot of the year. Mainly Inglis was sucessful as an extra running forward playing outside Cronk. Besides, who else shone as Pivot in 07? Heather aside (injured), can you actually remember a pivot from 07?

A fool and their money are soon parted.

So don't waste yours backing Inglis!

Why? He still has the Medal. I fail to see why it is irrelevant. He had 16 other superstars on his own cap cheating team to beat to get it. Highly relevant.

Ronnie Biggs still has the proceeds of The Great Train Robbery too.

What danger? I don't rate Renouf as highly as Peter Jackson or Mal even, let alone Inglis.

Obviously. :roll:

Steve Rogers is irrelevant. I said last 25/30 years... Rogers was at the tail end of his career by then and nowhere near as effective as his 70's self. Apparently a stellar 1981 - but thats one season in the last 30.

You said "lifetime" - stop trying to shift the posts because your arguments are crap! Basically there are people alive who would remember Frank Hyde and Tom Bourke playing. Meaning Reg Gasnier is a valid comparison. But he must be crap because he played for Saints and never stooped to wearing that silly dark pink Queensland jersey right?

Ask Dragons fans about Sludge in the 84 finals series

Inglis has had an awesome 3-4-5 years already ...

Wrong. He has an awesome highlights package, but he is a passenger in most games and rarely has a dig before Origin these days. Half the season is just about up by then.

I didn't watch the 70's - hence not doing a comparison to that decade.

But I did -which is why I mentioned - among others - Sludge - who you argued against.

Now - this crap about Finch ingiting better - Finch's job was to pass the ball to Inglis because he was more effective for the team wider

If that was all Finches job was they could have gotten any dope like old Matt Geyer to do that! In fact they even preferred a no-name Maori kid with drug problems ffs!!!!-

had they PS3 option of Inglis at five eigth over FInch and Inglis at centre - Im sure thats the way they would have gone.

:lol::lol: PS3? Pick a team of Inglis's then. They would bludge for the first set of 6 and be down by 40 at half time!!!!!

You dumb tool - using PS3 to argue why Inglis is fantastic - that'l dead set do me!!!!

Ah yes - the Eric Grothe Snr myth. Refer to fresh thread in Interstate "Origin Super teams" with my view on whether Eric Grothe Sr would run over the modern wingers of Boyd, Inglis, Tuquri. Lets be real ERic Grothe aint exactly Manu Vatuvei or Taniela. Players have conditioning coaches now. Different ball game.

He'd run over the lot of them given the same conditioning. In fact, Grothe was the laziest trainer he'd probably make Inglis look like Wayne Pearce! Ask Greame Eadie about what Grothe did to him in a GF. Grothe was also impossibly fast, often cutting across field to run down the opposing winger on the other side of the field.
John Monie coached Grothe and Martin Offiah - and without hesitation states that Grothe was better.

Inglis, Manu, Tequiri and especially Boyd would be roadkill, because half the Canterbury pack was!

Err Inglis makes himself look good. Goto Youtube - watch his dazzling efforts.

I have seen his efforts at the pie shop.

I suspect you'd give you anything to be a Rugby League journalist/writer. But you're not. We are all just fans with humble view points. Our opinions are worth no more than Gaba's or Haynetrains.

Yours maybe - but as for the rest of us - we don't rely on PS3 to back our arguments.

Inglis is quality. To say - as you did - that he's a once in a lifetime player, could only be true if you talk about obscure rep jersey selection. As a centre, there were better before, and there will be better after.

 

[Sans Souci Sainter]

AntiFlog savouring her own queefs again.

I presume she has been instructing people to re-read her sh*tty posts again and critiquing their comprehension.

AntiFlog is a vacuum of intelligence and any of her posts should not be taken seriously.

 

[ANTiLAG]

WTF? No he's not Brian Smith.........
Oh if that is a dig at St George - who won the premiership LEGALLY, - and suggesting that losing a big game = choke

Not a dig at St George at all. You're a paranoid idiot. I'm merely saying he is a big match player who generally shines in the big occassion as opposed to a round 1-26 bully who chokes in the cauldron of finals or rep games. Not a dig at clubs - Im talking about an individual. You're a fool.

Rely on bodgey awards - neither Brett Kenny or Wally Lewis got pivot of the year. Mainly Inglis was sucessful as an extra running forward playing outside Cronk. Besides, who else shone as Pivot in 07? Heather aside (injured), can you actually remember a pivot from 07?

You try convincing the players, administration or anyone other than LU members that the dally m awards are "bogey". You fool.

Ronnie Biggs still has the proceeds of The Great Train Robbery too.
Obviously. :roll:

Clearly you are stupider than I first thought. I will spell this out for you. Inglis was Churchill medal winner and its relevance is that surrounded by 16 cap cheating superstars he shone above them and was the best on the field. Relevance to Ronnie Biggs is zero. You clearly think you're smart, but I am guessing your teachers and employers did not agree.

You said "lifetime" - stop trying to shift the posts because your arguments are crap!

Refer above for Ronnie Biggs or Dally M arguments about crap. You're a fool

Basically there are people alive who would remember Frank Hyde and Tom Bourke playing. Meaning Reg Gasnier is a valid comparison. But he must be crap because he played for Saints and never stooped to wearing that silly dark pink Queensland jersey right?

Thats nice dear but I never compared Inglis to them... I merely said the past 25/30 years. Not in the games entire history.

Ask Dragons fans about Sludge in the 84 finals series

Ask any NSW fan about Inglis 06-10

Wrong. He has an awesome highlights package, but he is a passenger in most games and rarely has a dig before Origin these days. Half the season is just about up by then. But I did -which is why I mentioned - among others - Sludge - who you argued against. If that was all Finches job was they could have gotten any dope like old Matt Geyer to do that! In fact they even preferred a no-name Maori kid with drug problems ffs!!!!- :lol::lol: PS3? Pick a team of Inglis's then. They would bludge for the first set of 6 and be down by 40 at half time!!!!!

Why all the exclamation marks - are you losing the plot? Now - why is it relevant that someone is Maori? Are you racist? Is that why you do not like Greg Inglis? Ahhh - I think we have found it....

Anyway - to answer your question... read my post above again. Slowly this time. Let the words and concepts wash over you. Inglis is more effective running wider as he has more opportunity to break the line and score tries. Thats pretty simple and obvious to most. It does not mean Finch is a better stand off in the least.

You dumb tool - using PS3 to argue why Inglis is fantastic - that'l dead set do me!!!!

I am guessing you do not get to univeristy or do well there because the ability to grasp analogy seems to be well beyond you. I only made that argument for your benefit so that you may understand. Clearly you now think "straw manning" will help you save face. It won't.

He'd run over the lot of them given the same conditioning. In fact, Grothe was the laziest trainer he'd probably make Inglis look like Wayne Pearce! Ask Greame Eadie about what Grothe did to him in a GF. Grothe was also impossibly fast, often cutting across field to run down the opposing winger on the other side of the field.
John Monie coached Grothe and Martin Offiah - and without hesitation states that Grothe was better.

Offiah was a nuffy. Jason Robinson was a far superior player. What does Offiah have to do with anything here? Are you suggesting Offiah is a better player than Inglis?

Grothe Snr - great player - but I doubt his style of play would be as succesful today as it was then. He is not Taniela Tuiaki - even with all the conditioning in the world.

Inglis, Manu, Tequiri and especially Boyd would be roadkill, because half the Canterbury pack was!

I fail to see the relevance - Inglis Manly, Tuquri and Boyd do not play in the pack. They have pace. You are a fool.

I have seen his efforts at the pie shop.

And.....?

Yours maybe - but as for the rest of us - we don't rely on PS3 to back our arguments.

I used PS3 as an analogy so that you could benefit the understanding that notwithstanding Inglis is a better standoff than Finch it was better for the team to have Inglis running wider. I used PS3 as obviously you cannot have two GI's on the field - but if you could then you would.

Inglis is quality. To say - as you did - that he's a once in a lifetime player, could only be true if you talk about obscure rep jersey selection.

No - Noa Nandruku, Steve Rogers, I mean NSW and Qld been doing obscure rep selections since origin started.

As a centre, there were better before, and there will be better after.

Agreed. But not in the last 25/30 years in my view.

Loudstrat its not too late to get an education. Plenty of adults now go back to school. I think you could do with taking some philosohpy or basic logic papers should you get the chance. You clearly have a lot of knowledge - its just a waste when your critical thinking skills are inept.

Good luck!

 

[ANTiLAG]

That's dumb logic. If anything his one counts for more than others because he was competing against multiple superstars for it. He was the best player on a team so packed with talent it was illegal.

But but but Ronnie Biggs...

Haha - I think Loudstrat gets frustrated in life a lot. He clearly retains facts but he cannpt process information and sysnthesise arguments. It is as if he has a massive HDD but no CPU. (Thats also an analogy Loudstrat - before using computers to make a point will "dead set do you". I think High school may have deat set done you

 

[Jason Maher]

Martin Offiah a nuffy? Now I know Antiflag is on the level...

 

[Loudstrat]

Not a dig at St George at all. You're a paranoid idiot. I'm merely saying he is a big match player who generally shines in the big occassion as opposed to a round 1-26 bully who chokes in the cauldron of finals or rep games. Not a dig at clubs - Im talking about an individual. You're a fool.

You have spent all thread bagging Gasnier an the Dragons - I'm not to kno that your medication has suddenly kicked in and you are temporarily relieved of your "Big Red V Paranoia" syndrome.

You try convincing the players, administration or anyone other than LU members that the dally m awards are "bogey". You fool.

Easy. I'll start with Mark Geyer from 91, Allan Langer from 92 Tunza Carrol or Luke Phillips from 2000, Ben Kennedy from 2001, Billy Slater from 06, Fiu Fiu Moi Moi from last year, and Dean Young, or Jason Nightingale from this year with the players.

Admin: Merv Cartwright and the Panthers admin from 01 will do. I'd ask Reebs about 02, but you cannot trust what he says.

Clearly you are stupider than I first thought. I will spell this out for you. Inglis was Churchill medal winner and its relevance is that surrounded by 16 cap cheating superstars he shone above them and was the best on the field. Relevance to Ronnie Biggs is zero. You clearly think you're smart, but I am guessing your teachers and employers did not agree.

Smarter than you thinking someone is a school kid and a salary earner at the same time. The people selecting the CC also once thought it a good idea to put Trent Waterhouse in the centres.

And in case your brain cells haven't developed enough, the CC medal is usually awarded to a member of a winning team - and the Storm cheated and were stripped - ruled ineligible to compete. You cannot claim a MOM award for a game that is ruled null and void. If you can tell me who was the MOM in the 1909 decider???

Refer above for Ronnie Biggs or Dally M arguments about crap. You're a fool

You are a dumb f*ckwit if you cannot see the parallel. Well, you are a dumb f*wit anyway.

Thats nice dear but I never compared Inglis to them... I merely said the past 25/30 years. Not in the games entire history.

Ahem. On post 1655 you wrote:

Inglis is a once in a generation if not lifetime player

The dawn of time was not in 1985, sunshine!

Ask any NSW fan about Inglis 06-10

OK. I'll ask one.

ME - Loudy, what do you think of Inglis 06-10
ME - What Loudy, when he suddenly looked good playing outside Thurston who was having blinders?
ME - Well, yeah.
ME - Well, I think he only looked good because he was playing outside Thurston who noticed that Steve Turner couldn't tackle in a fishing shop, and aimed Inglis at him.
ME - That's what I thought.

Why all the exclamation marks - are you losing the plot? Now - why is it relevant that someone is Maori? Are you racist? Is that why you do not like Greg Inglis? Ahhh - I think we have found it....

No, it's relevent that bellamy selected an extremely troubled foreigner ahead of Inglis at pivot. But ignore the rest of the post - hard to grasp two concepts with only one brain cell.

Anyway - to answer your question... read my post above again. Slowly this time. Let the words and concepts wash over you. Inglis is more effective running wider as he has more opportunity to break the line and score tries. Thats pretty simple and obvious to most. It does not mean Finch is a better stand off in the least.

And Bellamy suddenly realised this when he signed Finch? So how come Inglis was never a centre in the first place? BECAUSE THEY NEVER HAD A DECENT PIVOT!!!!!!!!! Then Finch came along, and Bellamy decided that a bloke punted by Parra was a better option than Inglis. I know you won't believe that in your chronic Inglis masturbating fest, but it's the truth.

I am guessing you do not get to univeristy or do well there because the ability to grasp analogy seems to be well beyond you.

What is it Antibrain? I either do or don't get to uni?

I only made that argument for your benefit so that you may understand. Clearly you now think "straw manning" will help you save face. It won't.

Any argument that proves a player is good because you can choose him anywhere you like in a kiddies computer game is flawed to the extreme.

I got two Tommy Raudonikis in my Wests 1977 footy card selection, because he's twice as good. Is that how I should think in your fantasy world?

Offiah was a nuffy. Jason Robinson was a far superior player

.:lol::lol: Ladies and Gentlemen, if that quote alone is not proof that Antilag is seriously a few plums short of a full pudding, watch with mirth at the following pieces of classic gibber:

What does Offiah have to do with anything here? Are you suggesting Offiah is a better player than Inglis?

Grothe Snr - great player - but I doubt his style of play would be as succesful today as it was then. He is not Taniela Tuiaki - even with all the conditioning in the world.

I fail to see the relevance - Inglis Manly, Tuquri and Boyd do not play in the pack. They have pace. You are a fool.

Oh dear. The Village is missing it's idiot. He's over here guys - with the Inglis magazine that's got it's pages stuck together.

I used PS3 as an analogy so that you could benefit the understanding that notwithstanding Inglis is a better standoff than Finch it was better for the team to have Inglis running wider. I used PS3 as obviously you cannot have two GI's on the field - but if you could then you would.

I'd prefer to have 4 Greame Langlands, a Brett Kenny, 3 Ron Cootes and 16 Mick Liubinskas' in my team.

No - Noa Nandruku, Steve Rogers, I mean NSW and Qld been doing obscure rep selections since origin started.

How the f*ck was Steve Rogers and obscure rep selection for NSW?

Loudstrat its not too late to get an education. Plenty of adults now go back to school. I think you could do with taking some philosohpy or basic logic papers should you get the chance. You clearly have a lot of knowledge - its just a waste when your critical thinking skills are inept.

Good luck!

Good advice. When you become an adult you'll need to follow it, because the current one if well and truly stuffed. You think Steve Rogers was a Queenslander, Martin Offiah was crap, Saints choked when they won the GF, and you can have 3 Inglis's at once.

Have you worked out that this is a forum yet? :lol::lol:

 

[ANTiLAG]

You have spent all thread bagging Gasnier an the Dragons - I'm not to kno that your medication has suddenly kicked in and you are temporarily relieved of your "Big Red V Paranoia" syndrome.

Gasnier was not influential and actually a disapointment comming back from France. However, I quit elike the Dragons and do not remember bagging them.

Easy. I'll start with Mark Geyer from 91, Allan Langer from 92 Tunza Carrol or Luke Phillips from 2000, Ben Kennedy from 2001, Billy Slater from 06, Fiu Fiu Moi Moi from last year, and Dean Young, or Jason Nightingale from this year with the players.

Sorry - I think you foolishly missed the point AGAIN. The point was to tell players and admin that the dally m's are bogey and meaningless. Clearly your comprehension fails you. But Ill play your game and see that you have come up with a couple of examples that you subjectively disagree with the outcome. So you tell Ben Hannant his award in 2009 means nothing - I mean that is the year Price and Petero both said he was the best prop in the game. But you clearly think it was Fui. Guess it was close call. But seriously you have lost all creditibaility suggesting Nightingale deserves winger of the year this year. Akila and Manu are light years are generally accepted to be light years ahead of him.

Smarter than you thinking someone is a school kid and a salary earner at the same time.

I worked when I was at school (most kids did) and I never mentioned the word salary - could be employed for wages. You're an idiot. However, you missed the point AGAIN. I never inferred you were doing both at the same time. I am saying you think you're smart but I doubt your PAST teachers and PAST employers agreed. See how the tense was moved into past tense with the word "DID" as opposed to "DO". So there we have it - you have clearly shown you lack comprehension.

The people selecting the CC also once thought it a good idea to put Trent Waterhouse in the centres.

OMG - they experimented - what idiots?! Oh dear Loudstrat - you are a fool.

And in case your brain cells haven't developed enough, the CC medal is usually awarded to a member of a winning team - and the Storm cheated and were stripped - ruled ineligible to compete. You cannot claim a MOM award for a game that is ruled null and void. If you can tell me who was the MOM in the 1909 decider???

Yes you can claim MOM for the match as the match was not null and void. The premiership win was. You idiot. The NRL has said the individual awards remain and stand. You absolute clown. According to wiki there was no match played in 1909 and thus no MOM awarded, totally unlike 2007 when a match was played and the premiership was later stripped. YOU IDIOT.

You are a dumb f*ckwit if you cannot see the parallel. Well, you are a dumb f*wit anyway.

Mate, creating and analysisng arguments is my life.
The "parrallel" is non existent because the two situations are completely inconsistant. They are not on "all fours". I cannot be bothered explaining this one to you any further, if you need further ellaboration ask Bunniesman - he clearly gets it. All I'll say is that it is because people like you exist that Jury trials faulty!

Ahem. On post 1655 you wrote:

The dawn of time was not in 1985, sunshine!

Well that would be someone's dawn of time for their lifetime if they were born in 1985. YOU'RE AN ASBSOLUTE MORON. Lifetime is not from the dawn of time. It used to be used for 60 years give or take and now probably means 75 years... I cannot believe you do not get this stuff. You're a fool. Now I said "if not" - which means I am only asserting once in a generation but submit the possibility of once in a lifetime. Do you read books? Or is just comprehension that fails you?

OK. I'll ask one.

ME - Loudy, what do you think of Inglis 06-10
ME - What Loudy, when he suddenly looked good playing outside Thurston who was having blinders?
ME - Well, yeah.
ME - Well, I think he only looked good because he was playing outside Thurston who noticed that Steve Turner couldn't tackle in a fishing shop, and aimed Inglis at him.
ME - That's what I thought.

Well you ask an idiot a question you'll get an idiotic answer. Perhaps you should inform that person that Steve Turner only played against Inglis once. Inglis has dominated all those in fornt of him (Turner included for his one game) and no doubt will conitnue to do so. You absolute FOOL.

No, it's relevent that bellamy selected an extremely troubled foreigner ahead of Inglis at pivot. But ignore the rest of the post - hard to grasp two concepts with only one brain cell.

Well clearly you are not someone to assess someone else's intelligence. You have a tough enough time with defintion of words let alone processing analogies. Inglis out wide = better for the team result as more line breaks. Got it? Good if you do - but I doubt it.

And Bellamy suddenly realised this when he signed Finch? So how come Inglis was never a centre in the first place? BECAUSE THEY NEVER HAD A DECENT PIVOT!!!!!!!!! Then Finch came along, and Bellamy decided that a bloke punted by Parra was a better option than Inglis. I know you won't believe that in your chronic Inglis masturbating fest, but it's the truth.

Even if Finch is a better pivot - Gasnier was a horrible stand off. Inglis was a Clive Churchill and Dally M medalist there. Got it now? GI > Gas, not only at centre but also at five eigth. However, notwtihstanding that I think most people would agree that GI is a better five eigth than Finch.

What is it Antibrain? I either do or don't get to uni?Any argument that proves a player is good because you can choose him anywhere you like in a kiddies computer game is flawed to the extreme.

You're still missing the point. I cannot break it down any more for you. I think you may actually suffer from some form of geniusation. However, all I am saying is - if you did goto Uni I doubt you did well there, but I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't get that far to begin with. The rationale for this is because you cannot comprehend analogies. Now it seems you;re struggling with basic defintions of terms such as lifetime and dawn of time. Oh dear.

I got two Tommy Raudonikis in my Wests 1977 footy card selection, because he's twice as good. Is that how I should think in your fantasy world?

No - that just shows you still do not understand the point because you are fool.

How the f*ck was Steve Rogers and obscure rep selection for NSW?

Sorry, are you conceding Noa Nandruku? Guess GI's selection is not all that obscure. Hah.

Good advice. When you become an adult you'll need to follow it, because the current one if well and truly stuffed. You think Steve Rogers was a Queenslander, Martin Offiah was crap, Saints choked when they won the GF, and you can have 3 Inglis's at once.

Well the only thing in that list I actually said was Offiah was a nuffie. And I stand by that when compared to Jason Robison, which is what I did. As for the rest of it Loudstrat - it just shows you do not read the words put in frtont of you but you somehow imagine what the other person is saying.

Thanks for trying dear but you are so far out of your intellectual league its not funny.

 

[Loudstrat]

Gasnier was not influential and actually a disapointment comming back from France. However, I quit elike the Dragons and do not remember bagging them.

You were carrying on about them many pages before you and I crosed swords

Sorry - I think you foolishly missed the point AGAIN. The point was to tell players and admin that the dally m's are bogey and meaningless. Clearly your comprehension fails you. But Ill play your game and see that you have come up with a couple of examples that you subjectively disagree with the outcome. So you tell Ben Hannant his award in 2009 means nothing - I mean that is the year Price and Petero both said he was the best prop in the game. But you clearly think it was Fui. Guess it was close call. But seriously you have lost all creditibaility suggesting Nightingale deserves winger of the year this year. Akila and Manu are light years are generally accepted to be light years ahead of him.

Well you got me there - I thought you meant the CC.

But if you are talking Dally M's, I would suggest that the fact that Bert or Wally never got one gives you a bit of a clue. Usually the positional player of the year doesn't get the most points compared to another in the same position - so there's your cred.

Price and Petero sticking up for their QLD teammate is hardly impartial. Besides, when they met in the PF Hannant was fired up for Fui, and became roadkill.

I worked when I was at school (most kids did) and I never mentioned the word salary - could be employed for wages. You're an idiot. However, you missed the point AGAIN. I never inferred you were doing both at the same time. I am saying you think you're smart but I doubt your PAST teachers and PAST employers agreed. See how the tense was moved into past tense with the word "DID" as opposed to "DO". So there we have it - you have clearly shown you lack comprehension.

If Smart means that Offiah and Grothe were crap, Inglis was the best pivot ever and picking Inglis twice in the same team is a fantastic idea, then I aint smart. Thankfully.

OMG - they experimented - what idiots?! Oh dear Loudstrat - you are a fool.

So Trent Waterhouse in the centres of a tri nations final was a brilliant idea? You are showing your f*cking stupidity if Trent Waterhouse was one of the two best centres in Australia in November 2005. BTW, Where was Inglis?

I suppose Waterhouse was a better threequarter than Offiah ever could be?:lol:

Yes you can claim MOM for the match as the match was not null and void. The premiership win was. You idiot. The NRL has said the individual awards remain and stand. You absolute clown. According to wiki there was no match played in 1909 and thus no MOM awarded, totally unlike 2007 when a match was played and the premiership was later stripped. YOU IDIOT.

If no match was played how come Souffs won?

And Wiki - that has cred doesn't it! Waterhouse the best centre - did that come from Wiki too?

Mate, creating and analysisng arguments is my life.

Clearly you must be unemployed then!

The "parrallel" is non existent because the two situations are completely inconsistant. They are not on "all fours". I cannot be bothered explaining this one to you any further, if you need further ellaboration ask Bunniesman - he clearly gets it. All I'll say is that it is because people like you exist that Jury trials faulty!

In terms of getting rewards from an unlawful situation, they are not. If Melbourne were missing the players that put them over the cap, they would possibly have not even made the finals.

Anyway - moot point. Inglis has it - but it aint proof that he's the best ever.

Well that would be someone's dawn of time for their lifetime if they were born in 1985. YOU'RE AN ASBSOLUTE MORON. Lifetime is not from the dawn of time. It used to be used for 60 years give or take and now probably means 75 years... I cannot believe you do not get this stuff. You're a fool. Now I said "if not" - which means I am only asserting once in a generation but submit the possibility of once in a lifetime. Do you read books? Or is just comprehension that fails you?

75 years huh (clue - the average lifespan for Aussies is 82 years). 2010-75=1935. So if you were born before 1st May 1935 that includes a bloke called Dave Brown, who, in May, 1935, scored 5 tries, and gave the final pass for another 8, and kicked 15 goals in a club game against Canterbury.

Lifetime means from the point of birth to the point of death. Not since 1985 you absolute moron.

You are asserting that Inglis is better than Dave Brown and Reg Gasnier, by saying he is the best player in a lifetime. You said it - a once in a lifetime player. "Best player centre in 30 years" would probably be acceptable for someone with a massive crush on him. having rubbished any comparisons I have given clearly indicated the hardness of your knob increases when thinking about Inglis.

Well you ask an idiot a question you'll get an idiotic answer. Perhaps you should inform that person that Steve Turner only played against Inglis once. Inglis has dominated all those in fornt of him (Turner included for his one game) and no doubt will conitnue to do so. You absolute FOOL.

Domination is doubtful, but if you reckon Thurston played no part in INglis origin form that's like saying Martin Offiah played no part in Wigan or GB winning. Oh...wait......

Well clearly you are not someone to assess someone else's intelligence. You have a tough enough time with defintion of words let alone processing analogies. Inglis out wide = better for the team result as more line breaks. Got it? Good if you do - but I doubt it.

No problem. So why was GI at pivot in the first place if he was the worlds best centre? If Finch is so hopeless, why wait until they sign him to move him wide? I agree, Centre is his best spot by a country mile. But if he was the best pivot in the NRL - why did they so desperately seek to manufacture/buy a pivot and not a centre? Will Chambers not good enough?

Even if Finch is a better pivot - Gasnier was a horrible stand off. Inglis was a Clive Churchill and Dally M medalist there. Got it now? GI > Gas, not only at centre but also at five eigth. However, notwtihstanding that I think most people would agree that GI is a better five eigth than Finch.

Gaz was a crap pivot - as was Hayne. Which means, after what 5 games as pivot you aint gunna be Bob Fulton. And after about 5 games Hayne was equal to Finch, which just proves that Finch is sh*t.

And Bellamy preferred him at pivot to Inglis. I cannot remember an award winning pivot moved with to accommodate a nuffy thrown out of his second club! Never hapened to Adam Dykes, Cliffy Lyons, Terry Lamb, Jamie Soward....

You're still missing the point. I cannot break it down any more for you. I think you may actually suffer from some form of geniusation. However, all I am saying is - if you did goto Uni I doubt you did well there, but I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't get that far to begin with. The rationale for this is because you cannot comprehend analogies. Now it seems you;re struggling with basic defintions of terms such as lifetime and dawn of time. Oh dear.

Lifetime - period of time between birth and death. Not 65 years, or since 1985.

Dawn of time - point of reference to the incalculable and possibly abstract point where time began. Not 1985.

genius - derogatory term referring to a person who suffers from a disability in the area of mental capacity and brain function. Also may refer to someone ho reckons Offiah was crap, the Dally M's are anointed by God and gilded in truth, and that the production of sperm in males is solely for depositing on the image of Greg Inglis in glossy magazines.

No - that just shows you still do not understand the point because you are fool.

"I can pck 2 Inglises in my computer game which proves he is the best player ever" - nope - THAT is the statement of a fool.

Sorry, are you conceding Noa Nandruku? Guess GI's selection is not all that obscure. Hah.

Yes. Noa is obscure. So f*cking obscure that no one has any knowledge of him ever playing for NSW!!!!. I picked up on Rogers wondering how the hell a Cronulla captain who was born in Sydney is obscure?

Well the only thing in that list I actually said was Offiah was a nuffie. And I stand by that when compared to Jason Robison, which is what I did. As for the rest of it Loudstrat - it just shows you do not read the words put in frtont of you but you somehow imagine what the other person is saying.

Jason Robinson - the crab that went to Union. That comment shows about your cred and intelligence in this field.

Offiah was a nuffie

Your words. Proof. End of story.

Thanks for trying dear but you are so far out of your intellectual league its not funny.

And you are the judge of intelligence??????

That's like Inglis being in charge of a loyalty program.

You spend so much time trying to unravel your own stupid words............Must be hard with an extra finger on each hand.

 

[Willow]

'Fool' - Antulube's favourite word.

10 times on this page alone. lol