redandblack wrote:Oh, my apologies. I didn't realise you're allowed to dish it out, but it's poor form to respond in kind.![]()
Toughen up, ML.
Pot. Kettle. Black.

by The Sleeping Giant » Tue May 19, 2009 7:00 pm
redandblack wrote:Oh, my apologies. I didn't realise you're allowed to dish it out, but it's poor form to respond in kind.![]()
Toughen up, ML.
by MagareyLegend » Tue May 19, 2009 10:13 pm
by Wedgie » Tue May 19, 2009 10:16 pm
MagareyLegend wrote:sticks and stones - who cares?
on a lighter note Andy Collins is famous himself for injurying a player on a tackle - anyone know the famous answer?
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
by am Bays » Tue May 19, 2009 10:17 pm
by MagareyLegend » Tue May 19, 2009 10:24 pm
by redden whites » Tue May 19, 2009 10:29 pm
MagareyLegend wrote:Correct Wedgie - nothing sinister in though - unlike another cowardly tackle on another great SA champ by a Hawthorn player.
Lest we (North Adelaide supporters) forget.
by MagareyLegend » Tue May 19, 2009 10:32 pm
by redden whites » Tue May 19, 2009 10:56 pm
MagareyLegend wrote:Collins tackle - just run him down from behind and dragged him down in muddy MCG conditions in 1989 State game IIRC
the other one - late, blind-sided, cowardly .... and worst of all non-apologetic (every dog [Hawk] has their day).
by bayman » Tue May 19, 2009 11:09 pm
Grahaml wrote:
And Bayman, you are an idiot. You're trying to say that wanting to have an uncompromised legal process is akin to living in a repressive communist regime? Do you know anything at all? The sort of society you are trying to claim this makes up part of would allow anyone and everyone to pass judgement without knowing the facts. Your willingness to allow anyone to say whatever they like indicates you'd be happy to let the mob decide his fate. "The truth" in this matter is up to the trinunal to decide, not you. Thank goodness.
by matt1 » Tue May 19, 2009 11:11 pm
bayman wrote:Grahaml wrote:
And Bayman, you are an idiot. You're trying to say that wanting to have an uncompromised legal process is akin to living in a repressive communist regime? Do you know anything at all? The sort of society you are trying to claim this makes up part of would allow anyone and everyone to pass judgement without knowing the facts. Your willingness to allow anyone to say whatever they like indicates you'd be happy to let the mob decide his fate. "The truth" in this matter is up to the trinunal to decide, not you. Thank goodness.
firstly, it was a throw away line trying to add a bit of humour
2nd, why can't we (including you) have a say/comment on what we see
3rd, i don't know what a 'trinunal' is
4th, get a life
by Dirko » Tue May 19, 2009 11:15 pm
matt1 wrote:It's 10:11pm and the SANFL still haven't posted the results of the two hearings... Surely they aren't still going????? C'mon SANFL.............
by redandblack » Tue May 19, 2009 11:17 pm
by CoverKing » Tue May 19, 2009 11:28 pm
redandblack wrote:One hearing.
I think Lokan's was withdrawn.
by Blacky » Wed May 20, 2009 9:35 am
by dedja » Wed May 20, 2009 10:46 am
by Pseudo » Wed May 20, 2009 11:24 am
redandblack wrote:It's a bit hard to let it go
by bayman » Wed May 20, 2009 12:18 pm
PhilH wrote:Found not guilty
by Wedgie » Wed May 20, 2009 12:34 pm
bayman wrote:PhilH wrote:Found not guilty
correct decision because forget all this legal garbage i've read you can not (in life) get in trouble for telling the truth (barring criminals who admit guilt)
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
by MagareyLegend » Wed May 20, 2009 1:04 pm
dedja wrote:ML, NN, RandB ... where are you???
I'm missing my pointless legal argument fix this morning.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |