Pride of the League & Arizona

[souths_pride]

Cause and effect you moron.

Slow down the ruck to set the defense to better handle the offense and reduce the other teams ability to catch you on the backfoot and open the game up to allow for more ball movement to increase their chances of scoring tries and scoring tries gives you 4 points and an opportunity to have a kick and score another 2 which would give you 6 and these points from tries and kicks accumulate and whoever accumulates more in 80 minutes wins the game. Winning is good.

If you woke up today with the goal of ... nevermind you'd never figure out how to get to the end point.

No shit!!! LOL! Your missing my point! Wrestling is just a way of 'controlling the ruck'. The thing you need to realise is that if we banned that, so other innovative coach is going to come along and thing of another way of controlling the ruck! Like you said "Cause and effect!" The thing is people don't like 'wrestling' because they haven't found a way to get around it. That is why I have nothing against Craig Bellamy and the Storm and the way they play their footy.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Here's hoping Sutto can speak French.

 

[muzby]

Let me give you a scenario.
1. Auva'a pleads guilty over the incident
2. Souths sack Auva'a
3. New evidence comes to light, the girl changes her story, Auva'a changes his plea to not-guilty, the case is thrown out of court, i.e. something along those lines or similar
4. Auva'a is now upset about losing his contract at Souths, his career and name being tarnished, wants to take legal action.

Where does that leave Souths?
Basically, you can't just make up laws and legal procedures how you see fit. Clubs and the NRL have to respect the legal system and the rights that an individual has. Like David Smith has just come out and said - the NRL is not a police unit or a court and we need to stop thinking like that.

 

[souths_pride]

You need to go back a read my question again.
I never said played.

Your back peddling is popcorn worthy.

Either way, your question was still poorly phrased. I named you a player who bashed a woman while under contract for Cronulla. I answered your question. If you wanted one who got sacked, you should have mentioned that. I also pointed out that your club are no angels in their conduct towards women, so how can you sit there and judge souths.

You haven't answered my questions that I posted in my reply to your last post about what Souths should have done?

 

[souths_pride]

Whats your point? Instead of posting stupid crap, how about you offer something intelligent!

 

[The Mad Hatter]

I don't think Souths could take any moral high ground, at least since 1998, when you consider Schlossy's Shoe and a certain Julian O'Neill.

 

[thorson1987]

Either way, your question was still poorly phrased. I named you a player who bashed a woman while under contract for Cronulla. I answered your question. If you wanted one who got sacked, you should have mentioned that. I also pointed out that your club are no angels in their conduct towards women, so how can you sit there and judge souths.

You haven't answered my questions that I posted in my reply to your last post about what Souths should have done?

It wasn't that his post was poorly worded, it's just that you're an idiot of epic proportions.

 

[bottle]

Whats your point? Instead of posting stupid crap, how about you offer something intelligent!

Why? You don't.

 

[souths_pride]

Why? You don't.

I do mate. Grab your glasses, turn your brain on and you might understand a few things.

 

[thorson1987]

Whats your point? Instead of posting stupid crap, how about you offer something intelligent!

 

[muzby]

Whats your point? Instead of posting stupid crap, how about you offer something intelligent!

your legal knowledge makes miguel sanchez seem intelligent...

with reference to your hypothetical scenario, the minute a'va (or should he be called a'vo?) pled guilty he was admitting he was at fault.

so any actions souffs take post then is based on his admission of guilt, and ergo their actions are based on his actions.

so should 'new evidence' come to light, and the girl change her story, his case for consequential loss would be directed towards the girl, and potentially the police for their handling of the evidence.

if he took souffs to court seeking damages based on his admission of guilt, he'd be laughed out by the judge.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

I'm guessing now Au'vva has been excised from the promo ads, Sutton's a goner too.

I got an email to tell me I have to return all my GF DVD's so they can send me an edited version without him holding the mug/cup/trophy aloft.

 

[Miller was a legend]

I'm aware of that dickhead! I was giving him an example of a player who played for Cronulla that bashed a woman - like he asked for!

He didn't ask that you twit.

He said name one "playing" for Cronulla.

Bloody education system, get better teachers in Redfern FFS

 

[souths_pride]

It wasn't that his post was poorly worded, it's just that you're an idiot of epic proportions.

I answered his question and gave him an example. Like I said, the Sharks and their supporters can hardly start preaching about ethical and behavioral conduct given the amount of incidents they have being embroiled in over the last few years. Its just that he is a bit bitter about it, probably feels a bit hard done by (which I would do too if I was a sharks supporter) and as result, takes out his anger on other clubs and supporters.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Souths_pride,

I don't really think there's much to be gained from a game of one-downmanship and name calling as to which club handled a grub player better.

 

[bottle]

This bloke will disappear up his own aresehole shortly and the world will return to normality.

 

[bottle]

I'm guessing now Au'vva has been excised from the promo ads, Sutton's a goner too.

I got an email to tell me I have to return all my GF DVD's so they can send me an edited version without him holding the mug/cup/trophy aloft.

Well the upside is that the victory speech will be edited into something intelligible.

 

[ek999]

Either way, your question was still poorly phrased. I named you a player who bashed a woman while under contract for Cronulla. I answered your question. If you wanted one who got sacked, you should have mentioned that. I also pointed out that your club are no angels in their conduct towards women, so how can you sit there and judge souths.

You haven't answered my questions that I posted in my reply to your last post about what Souths should have done?

Because you can't criticise the Sharks for signing Latu based on his behaviour after joining the Sharks unless they could see into the future. So unless you can provide the Sharks with a time machine so they can look into the future before signing anyone, all you can do is congratulate them on taking firm and immediate action which had Latu out the door within 24 hours.

If you do have a time machine, you could then go back in time and stop yourself from creating an account here so you don't look so stupid

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Well the upside is that the victory speech will be edited into something intelligible.

Could it? I very much doubt it. Cringe much?

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Because you can't criticise the Sharks for signing Latu based on his behaviour after joining the Sharks unless they could see into the future. So unless you can provide the Sharks with a time machine so they can look into the future before signing anyone, all you can do is congratulate them on taking firm and immediate action which had Latu out the door within 24 hours.

If you do have a time machine, you could then go back in time and stop yourself from creating an account here so you don't look so stupid

Surely there is a DNA test NRL clubs can do predetermining future player behaviour?

I'm quite certain David Smith is looking in to it right now...