- Messages
- 20,228
Timmah said:Then you're wrong. Not that it even matters.
So if Mason or SBW bit someone (probably a 2-3 week offence), you'd endorse them being sacked from the team??
Get real.
Timmah said:Then you're wrong. Not that it even matters.
Southernsaint said:So if Mason or SBW bit someone (probably a 2-3 week offence), you'd endorse them being sacked from the team??
Get real.
salivor said:No that'd be what we refer to in the paranoid tinfoil hat wearing business as a media beat up. It wouldn't be their go.
kav said:My question is do they eye test touch judges?
The verification of the bite mark was a hoot.
Kav
:crazy:Timmah said:Tahu carried on in the tackle
Timmah said:Tahu carried on in the tackle, and retaliated to the bite.
You still won anyway :sleeper:
No Moron carried on in the tackle, he bit someone remember Tahu's tackle was just a good strong piece of defense.Timmah said:Tahu carried on in the tackle, and retaliated to the bite.
You still won anyway :sleeper:
As i said earlier, would you just let someone bite you and do nothing about it????????Timmah said:Show me in the rule book where retaliation is acceptable?
I'm not trying to dismiss Morrin's action - he's a filthy grub no doubt about it - but Hampstead wouldn't have blown the penalty to the Dogs without reason.
But really, if we want to talk about Hampstead, I can give you several examples of his poor decisions in the ruck that seemed to continually cost us scoring opportunities and field position last night. Just a pity we weren't good enough when we did have the ball I suppose.
Timmah said:Show me in the rulebook where retaliation is acceptable?
Can't answer the question ;-) Meow.Timmah said:I've said what I need to say. You need to continue interpreting that statement ;-)
Timmah said:Tahu carried on in the tackle, and retaliated to the bite.