Talking Footy

Xman wrote:

Cracker wrote:

Xman wrote:

I can't straighten out opinions, theyre entitled to have them, even if theyre wrong. I'd suggest you ignore it because you know youre right just like I know youre right. There's a fair chance cracker is simply trolling

No. I repudiate the accusation.

And I maintain, Xman, that you are wrong. You are entitled to that opinion if you wish, but you can't change the view that AFLcrap1 is refusing to admit that in the process of making the statement that he made he left himself open for the correct accusation of insinuating that the NRL looked after their players in a job sense and financial sense than the AFL. The insinuation lies in the fact that he was by his own admission responding to a post where the NRL was being rightly attacked. The manner in which AFLcrap1 responded could only have been anti AFL. He could not avoid the insinuation. He could only avoid actually saying it (which he did). If he wanted to avoid the insinuation, there was only one way to do. Say nothing at all.

As AFLcrap1 won't admit to the issue it should now be considered closed under the auspices of "agreeing to disagree".

AFLcs claim was under attack by AFL fans, not the AFL. His response was against AFL fans, not the AFLs approach. Proof of this is he never mentioned AFL, only replied to AFL fans on this site.

The fact is AFLc knows the intention of his post, you're merely guessing. You got it wrong as shown by AFLcs subsequent explanation. You need to accept his explanation and apologise for jumping the gun and putting your own incorrect interpretation on his comment

Cracker wrote:

Xman wrote:

Cracker wrote:

Xman wrote:

I can't straighten out opinions, theyre entitled to have them, even if theyre wrong. I'd suggest you ignore it because you know youre right just like I know youre right. There's a fair chance cracker is simply trolling

No. I repudiate the accusation.

And I maintain, Xman, that you are wrong. You are entitled to that opinion if you wish, but you can't change the view that AFLcrap1 is refusing to admit that in the process of making the statement that he made he left himself open for the correct accusation of insinuating that the NRL looked after their players in a job sense and financial sense than the AFL. The insinuation lies in the fact that he was by his own admission responding to a post where the NRL was being rightly attacked. The manner in which AFLcrap1 responded could only have been anti AFL. He could not avoid the insinuation. He could only avoid actually saying it (which he did). If he wanted to avoid the insinuation, there was only one way to do. Say nothing at all.

As AFLcrap1 won't admit to the issue it should now be considered closed under the auspices of "agreeing to disagree".

AFLcs claim was under attack by AFL fans, not the AFL. His response was against AFL fans, not the AFLs approach. Proof of this is he never mentioned AFL, only replied to AFL fans on this site.

The fact is AFLc knows the intention of his post, you're merely guessing. You got it wrong as shown by AFLcs subsequent explanation. You need to accept his explanation and apologise for jumping the gun and putting your own incorrect interpretation on his comment

He is not telling the truth. His "explanation" was a back away from his original thought pattern. As NRLCrap1 indicated I was not the only one to make this connection, so I did not "jump the gun". My assertion forced him to behave like a politician and try to wrangle a way out of his clear predicament. You may accept this. I do not and I believe I have this right.