The Swamp I

[dragondad]

Bull.

You can hit a man not in posession IF you think he will recieve the ball, as far as I know from the new and improved rules.

Considering Creagh was 1mtre from the man with the ball who dummied to him, id say the hit was more than legal. Afterall it was a headclash.


And Dillow you are a nice person mate, deleting my original post. What was I right AGAIN????

Man up, you fagggggggggggggon.

:lol::lol:

HAHAHA you find me where in the rules it says you can hit a player on suspicion without the ball Mr Referee.

 

[STSAE]

Hahaha I find these Roosters supporters hilarious .. They think theyre all tough after their 10-0 defeat of Saints.

They won't get past week 2 though.Damm I hope Broncs,Raiders and Saints win...

Who was the terry towelling tough guy who turned up at the oppositions forum talking sh*t???

Easts have been criticised for playing soft for the last few weeks, fairly too in many cases, so when they aim up and hammer another top 8 team, you dont think thats a positive??? So had you won youd be sad or think your teams goorrnnee????:crazy:

Now all the bravados back. You lost and you think HOPING other teams win will work???? Youre a nutjob.

BTW 1 top 8 team lost this weekend, who was that again???

:lol::lol:

 

[Ribs]

There was never any doubt that you'd show up here dickhead. You've just had to wait a very long time to do it.

All the noise from the east will stop in a week, unless pill popper can create a backline.

 

[STSAE]

HAHAHA you find me where in the rules it says you can hit a player on suspicion without the ball Mr Referee.

No I ASKED a few times on various posts was this a rule, I am not sure, thats why I ended the line with "as far as I know". No one was able to deny it though, Willow went as far as semi-agreeing and changing the argument to support player/decoy.

Does a defender have to move if the opposition is running at them??? Can they brace for the coliusion??? Are head clashes Illegal???

2 touchies, 1 reff and 1 video reff ALL agreed after several looks it was just part of the game.

Its "The Prowler" all over again. Lets change the fabric of the game 1 week out from the semis. Its nice to see its not only NewsRL who over react to a concussion.

:lol::lol:

 

[Willow]

No I ASKED a few times on various posts was this a rule, I am not sure.

Pfft! You seemed pretty sure a moment ago.

You said: "You can hit a man not in posession IF you think he will recieve the ball, as far as I know from the new and improved rules.

Considering Creagh was 1mtre from the man with the ball who dummied to him, id say the hit was more than legal."

thats why I ended the line with "as far as I know".

:lol: Look.... the troll is back peddling.

No one was able to deny it though, Willow went as far as semi-agreeing and changing the argument to support player/decoy.

Now you're just telling outright lies. It was you that brought up the decoy thing. I dismissed it as a lame excuse.

I made a truckload of posts saying that it is illegal to tackle a man without the ball.

Does a defender have to move if the opposition is running at them???

Sa ran at Creagh. And you're still a dope.

 

[STSAE]

Pfft! You seemed pretty sure a moment ago.

You said: "You can hit a man not in posession IF you think he will recieve the ball, as far as I know from the new and improved rules.

Considering Creagh was 1mtre from the man with the ball who dummied to him, id say the hit was more than legal."

:lol: Look.... the troll is back peddling.Now you're just telling outright lies. It was you that brought up the decoy thing. I dismissed it as a lame excuse.

I made a truckload of posts saying that it is illegal to tackle a man without the ball.

Sa ran at Creagh. And you're still a dope.

ROFLOL.

You and me both know the score mate.:sarcasm:

You aint worth my time scrolling back thru your dribble. Its easier this way, cos I know you will spew.

Will I get banned again now, please dont Mother Abigail???

:lol::lol:

 

[STSAE]

There was never any doubt that you'd show up here dickhead. You've just had to wait a very long time to do it.

All the noise from the east will stop in a week, unless pill popper can create a backline.

I was dying for years now to relive my fractured fairytale. Im obsessed with you blokes, its jealousy cos Gomer is the man, I dig.:lol:

See you next year, when the Groundhog Day is on again. Till then have one on me

:lol::lol:

 

[STSAE]

I vote for Dragoonmum, she sure knows her stuff.

:lol::lol:

 

[Willow]

You aint worth my time scrolling back thru your dribble.

Well that's convenient. So we can assume that you've been owned again.

But let me do it for you. You said Creagh was a decoy and I replied by saying, "Wasn't a decoy. A player was tackled without the ball."

There you go, you were talking bullsh*t... again. No surprises there.

You don't know the rules of the game. You don't even know the difference between a decoy and a support.

You must see rugby league as this this big colourful storybook with lots of pictures.

 

[Ribs]

There is actually only one thing worse than trolls who go to other teams forums before games, and that's the ones that come into the forums only after their team wins.

See, those trolls are the ones with no balls whatsover and they are also the ones who can never give up......... you'll be sniffing around here for a week because your light ego wont let you walk away without a pissweak emoticon response.

Which is all you'll have in response to this too. Pissweak troll.

 

[Ribs]

I vote for Dragoonmum, she sure knows her stuff.

:lol::lol:

Strewth.

Give me attention, give me attention!

 

[Saintsman]

Dragons fans have to consider. You guys had 60% of the ball. The Roosetrs defense on their own line was unbelieveable. Both sides made plenty of errors due to the wet conditions. Defense won the day. When players like Soliola scare the f**k out of players like Gasnier, forcing errors, you know who has the mental edge. The better team won, and both sides now have a huge challenge fscing them in the first week of the semis. ROosters V Broncois, and St George's nemesis - Melbourne by the looks of things.

We held you off for the first half an hour pretty much too. You have to admit the defence by both teams was fantastic and your two tries werent mistakes in our defence.

 

[adamkungl]

saints will be goooorn week 1. Enjoy mad monday ladies.

 

[Cagey Mac]

Saints will play the Rorters in Wk 2 of the finals
Manly will play the Broncos
The fat lady hasn't sung yet
One of them just got off with 56 points for a careless high tackle on Ryles however
and when Freddy calls for someone to do another cheap shot, the call will come from the lowest part of the team
Yes Sa, Yes Sa three bags full Sa!
Riley will be standing at the back with a confused look eating chicken wings

 

[dragondad]

When a penalty for foul play is awarded in a game,it does not always result in suspension.

 

[STSAE]

When a penalty for foul play is awarded in a game,it does not always result in suspension.

WHAT penalty for FOUL play???

There was no foul play, the 2 touchies, the reff, the video reff and the match review all AGREE.

You were all WRONG.

I dont expect a retraction.

I expect to be banned, thats the usual mode ive found when I get some joy from the FACT you all look like wenches.:sarcasm:

:lol::lol:

 

[dragondad]

You fool,stop trying to twist my words you halfwit.

What I am saying is that you think that because he was not cited by the judiciary,then therefore there was no foul play in the incident.

But in matches throughout every weekend,there are penalties which occur alot for foul play which dont result in suspensions.

Now,which language would you like next,Francais or Italiano?

 

[STSAE]

There is actually only one thing worse than trolls who go to other teams forums before games, and that's the ones that come into the forums only after their team wins.

See, those trolls are the ones with no balls whatsover and they are also the ones who can never give up......... you'll be sniffing around here for a week because your light ego wont let you walk away without a pissweak emoticon response.

Which is all you'll have in response to this too. Pissweak troll.

LMFAO.

Thats the most Fagoon reply ive ever seen, a new emotion is in order here.:-({|=

Manup you deadset gaylord, I reckon you just cracked another ribb.

:lol::lol:

 

[Ribs]

You question me then call me a gaylord?

A gaylord? What are you, three years old?

Gaylord ha ha ha ha. I would f**king hammer you mate, keyboard hero as it might sound. You are a waste of oxygen.

Funny that it was true though hey dickhead, you had to respond and you will continue to do so, trolls are all the same.

 

[STSAE]

You fool,stop trying to twist my words you halfwit.

What I am saying is that you think that because he was not cited by the judiciary,then therefore there was no foul play in the incident.

But in matches throughout every weekend,there are penalties which occur alot for foul play which dont result in suspensions.

Now,which language would you like next,Francais or Italiano?

Only a sadist would call someone a fool and then proceed to argue with said fool.:lol:

If its not cited by the judiciary, not penalised or put on report its cos there is NO FOUL PLAY.

Farrrrrk me you have NFI. I gather your a reff??? Man that explains ALOT.

:lol::lol: