Meet the Skanks

[fatshark]

If the individual player learns to control his alcohol intake and public behaviour

tea anyone?

If the individual player learns to control his alcohol intake and public behaviour, there is no footage to speak about. Simple as that... but everyone loves a convenient scapegoat.

so you have never stumbled or been blind at all
Tea anyone?

 

[bartman]

tea anyone?

Nah, just stop at say 8 drinks, hey? Instead of 16... Pretty easy to do when it's effecting your ability to work.

so you have never stumbled or been blind at all
Tea anyone?

Plenty of times. But it never resulted in a loss of revenue or public image for my employer or industry, unlike Seymour's case.

No tea needed, just for these highly paid professional athletes lol to realise that they need to save the bender for Mad Monday, and just stick to maybe 4 drinks in a session while the season is on, or do it behind closed doors at a mates place. It's the sacrifice they need to make to work in this industry and earn this type of money - it's not rocket science.

 

[PJ]

Pretty easy to do when it's effecting your ability to work

How exactly did it affect his ability to work? Could easily have been sober and one of the lucky ones who don't get hangovers.

 

[bartman]

How exactly did it affect his ability to work?

Um, he's on the sidelines now isn't he?

His work is not just the onfield 80mins... it also involves providing a good image of his employer at all times, and being an ambassador for the industry/game - or at least so much as to not cost it $80,000 through his own actions.

Again, I applaud Zappia for his consistent stance, and the sooner the rest of our clubs get serious, the sooner we will have the positive public image that Union seems to (rightfully or wrongfully) get automatically. And that will equal dollars for our game, with the tiniest of sacrifices by some of these dunces of players.

 

[Kiki]

well i think it's a really low act but do we have to call her a 'skank'?? its more like shes greedy and sneaky than anything else. i don't see why it makes her a 'skank'.

what about those guys that set up Benji Marshall in the cross last year?? this isn't just women 'entrapping' footy players. i think we should be very careful about putting that opinion out there. it's very dangerous.

and also...Brett Seymour made the choice to drink. i don't think she held him down and poured bourbon down his throat. don't get me wrong...i think it's ridiculous that anyone is fined for simply getting drunk. but let's not off the blame onto other people.

 

[myanonymoususername]

as opposed to the attitude of the hooterette?

if you find the thread disturbing, maybe you should not read it - simple stuff really

and you infer, because there is content you find disturbing, it is from young kids - lol

The thing I find disturbing is the branding of the women who offended you by wronging one of your footy heroes as skanks, s**ts, whores etc. They may well be, but taking a video of a drunken idiot does not make them such. As I said before, both they and Seymour are idiots.

And the reason for thinking that the comments are from 12 year olds is not because I find it disturbing, its because I'm giving people who hold these sort of attitudes the benefit of the doubt in that they still have time to grow up.

 

[spider]

The thing I find disturbing is the branding of the women who offended you by wronging one of your footy heroes as skanks, s**ts, whores etc.

show me where i used these terms toward the women

if not, the decent thing would be to retract

They may well be, but taking a video of a drunken idiot does not make them such. As I said before, both they and Seymour are idiots.

thats your opinion - i dont have a problem with that, but you have a problem with mine

And the reason for thinking that the comments are from 12 year olds is not because I find it disturbing, its because I'm giving people who hold these sort of attitudes the benefit of the doubt in that they still have time to grow up.

i refer to drink drivers as selfish f**ks - does that disturb you and mean im young of age

then again, there is no sexist edge on that statement...

 

[myanonymoususername]

show me where i used these terms toward the women

if not, the decent thing would be to retract

Spider - I wasn't specifically taking aim at your comments, I meant it more generally, about some of the earlier comments. Sorry if you took it as attacking you.

The guilty parties specifically are: maxpower 3000, woodyk2, matt, PJ, vossy, Cloud9, Noa and BWNB.

 

[myanonymoususername]

Look out, its Pastor myanonymoususername come to preach to us again.

Kneel down and repent all LU sinners.

Don't forget to leave large amounts of cash in the collection plate, too. :lol:

 

[squiddy]

How exactly did it affect his ability to work? .

Thats just it , it didnt , Buster attended training at 9.00 AM that morning and completed the session .

BTW I know someone that knows those lovely girls and he indicated that the 3K they received may not have covered their night out last Saturday.

 

[adamkungl]

What are people intending when they call any woman those names?

Is it a cute nickname or a way to degrade her and her character?

If they are fine to use I would ask you to use them when talking to a female police officer. I am sure she will take it in a good light it is intended.

You've lost the plot, as usual. Of course its a way to degrade her character. What else is the point of an insult.

For future reference, when insulting a woman, what would you deem appropriate?

As for the stupid bitch, I hope she cops crap every time she steps in a pub. Skank.

 

[adamkungl]

well i think it's a really low act but do we have to call her a 'skank'?? its more like shes greedy and sneaky than anything else. i don't see why it makes her a 'skank'.

People have to stop taking the sexist angle with this. Its just an insult. No one on here knows a thing about her sex life. The only reason this has been mentioned is because she's female. If it was a bloke and everyone was calling him a wanker, there would be no one going "Do we really have to call him a wanker....just because he sold out a Rugby League player it doesn' mean he likes a good toss three times a day...."

 

[bartman]

The sexist angle :lol:. In this thread that's funny on more levels than you intended it....

 

[sass]

People have to stop taking the sexist angle with this. Its just an insult. No one on here knows a thing about her sex life. The only reason this has been mentioned is because she's female. If it was a bloke and everyone was calling him a wanker, there would be no one going "Do we really have to call him a wanker....just because he sold out a Rugby League player it doesn' mean he likes a good toss three times a day...."

so just cause you don't find it offensive means it isn't?

I agree that someone's sex life has nothing to do with anything, and it pisses me off that that's the word used. the same way it pisses me off when a guy who's been turned down calls a girl a stupid s**t or a skank. it's laaaame.

 

[Miller was a legend]

Look, from a Sharks fan perspective. It is disappointing that we have lost our Half back for a couple of games. I think the loss of games is a little harsh, when fines and counselling would have sufficed, but Zaps made it clear last year through the Bird incident that the Sharks were not going to tolerate anymore breaches of IT'S OWN, player code of conduct. Brett will benefit from this incident. Yes he has a FINAL warning and WILL be gone if he gets done again. If he wants to save his career, the club has stood by him to achieve that by offering assistance with counselling, he has accepted (unlike Carney at raiders). If this incident helps to mould him into a better man and player then good. Ricky invited him back to training last week, he attended and he has the support to get through his drinking problem from his club, coach and fellow players. Maybe the guy needed this to happen to get the support he really needed. IMO Seymour deserves credit for being man enough to ADMIT his problem and not sway from his responsibility to the club, by taking the fine and ban on the chin.

Good for you Brett Seymour.

As for those women, Their actions were coniving and deliberate. they sought only to prosper from the situation and were never being good citizens assisting Seymour in anyway. I am certainly pleased their identity is now known throughout the Shire, not for retribution, but so that they can share in the shame that Brett Seymour must now endure.

Shame ladies (not that they desrve to be called ladies), Shame!

 

[BWNB]

People have to stop taking the sexist angle with this. Its just an insult. No one on here knows a thing about her sex life. The only reason this has been mentioned is because she's female. If it was a bloke and everyone was calling him a wanker, there would be no one going "Do we really have to call him a wanker....just because he sold out a Rugby League player it doesn' mean he likes a good toss three times a day...."

 

[sass]

well I'll say one thing miller - if seymour's got no privacy in the street then it's only fair it cuts both ways. if footy players have to take responsibility for what they do then everyone should.

 

[adamkungl]

so just cause you don't find it offensive means it isn't?

I agree that someone's sex life has nothing to do with anything, and it pisses me off that that's the word used. the same way it pisses me off when a guy who's been turned down calls a girl a stupid s**t or a skank. it's laaaame.

Its SUPPOSED to be offensive. Its an insult. This is my point. As I asked someone else, when insulting a woman, what would you deem appropriate?

 

[sass]

do you seriously not get it? why don't you use a word that doesn't imply that when women have sex it's a bad and whorey and shameful thing.

call her anything - deceitful, hateful, a bitch, an opportunist, a mercenary, a f**kwit, a vulture, a whatever you like.

do you want me to send you a dictionary?

 

[Miller was a legend]

well I'll say one thing miller - if seymour's got no privacy in the street then it's only fair it cuts both ways. if footy players have to take responsibility for what they do then everyone should.

None of us may like the idea that players have a different standard these days then the rest of us, given the effect upon the sponsorship dollar, but how it is, is how it is.

Unfortunately the line in the sand now dictates that to be a successful RL player in the NRL, you cannot get drunk in a public place.

Kids coming through watching this all take place will have to think twice about their social activities for fear of what may happen to their future in the game.

I am not saying I support what is going on. I do and I don't. I think each case needs to be looked at in isolation and not be driven by incidents with other players. Perhaps an independent body is the way to go. In Brett's case, he did nothing wrong, what hurt him was his past, a DUI and the Bronco's incident.