Talking Footy

Can't come up with a response, Mark? Thought so.

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Can't come up with a response, Mark? Thought so.

Refresh my memory what part of your idiotic ramblings am I meant to be replying to that I haven't done so already?

You claimed that a rectangular stadium is better for the RLWC than an oval. I'm still waiting for you explain how that works when a FIFA world cup qualifier can draw 85,000 at an OVAL! On a rectangular field of play!

Repeated only because I'm dealing with another fricking goose!

You FAIL again Dumbo, somebody might have claimed the bit about the rectangular stadium but it wasn't me.

I think you take the game where the spectators are if you have a suitable oval. Stadium shape is preferable in some codes but in the end if you have sports mad Melbourne that will turn out to see anything (particularly an international) why wouldn't you put it on the wrong shaped stadium.

Just check before you accuse Dumbo. Who is the goose now?

You are, because you just did the biggest back flip of all time!! 10 out of 10 and a gold medal for that one!!

Hey, mount panorama can hold more than the G, maybe we should hold the game on Hells corner for effect huh?

During the race, it can be RL's version of a fumbleball international where you mix and match differing parts of various non played anywhere else games.

Hmmmm, truly a new world crashball phenomenon.

NRLCrap1 wrote:

You claimed that a rectangular stadium is better for the RLWC than an oval. I'm still waiting for you explain how that works when a FIFA world cup qualifier can draw 85,000 at an OVAL! On a rectangular field of play!

Repeated only because I'm dealing with another fricking goose!

So Dumbo, show me where I have said that "a rectangular stadium is better for the RLWC than an oval". You can't because I didn't. MASSIVE FAIL on your part, again.

Just admit you made a mistake it isn't hard, I am suspect you have made mistakes in the past and have owned up to it. Are you man enough?

NRLCrap1 wrote:

You are, because you just did the biggest back flip of all time!! 10 out of 10 and a gold medal for that one!!

How about it show me where I have said one thing then back flipped and said another.

MarkZZZ wrote:

NRLCrap1 wrote:

You are, because you just did the biggest back flip of all time!! 10 out of 10 and a gold medal for that one!!

How about it show me where I have said one thing then back flipped and said another.

Don't hold your breath waiting.
Proof is not something that fumblefans are good at.
Accusations ,they excell at.

You were dissing the MCG as a venue ("wasn't packed out") and then you back flipped and supported it ("sports mad Melbourne that will turn out to see anything"). You didn't have to actually say the reason. The subject at the time was rectangle v oval and you never distanced yourself from that. Hell you never even dissed Suncorp as a venue for the final!

Well?

Thought as much......

NRLCrap1 wrote:

You were dissing the MCG as a venue ("wasn't packed out") and then you back flipped and supported it ("sports mad Melbourne that will turn out to see anything"). You didn't have to actually say the reason. The subject at the time was rectangle v oval and you never distanced yourself from that. Hell you never even dissed Suncorp as a venue for the final!

Well?

Thought as much......

NRLCrap1 wrote:

You were dissing the MCG as a venue ("wasn't packed out") and then you back flipped and supported it ("sports mad Melbourne that will turn out to see anything"). You didn't have to actually say the reason. The subject at the time was rectangle v oval and you never distanced yourself from that. Hell you never even dissed Suncorp as a venue for the final!

Well?

Thought as much......

Your problem is you assume too much, you know what they say about when you assume, don't you?

I don't get how saying that 85,000 out of a possible 100,000 isn't packed is dissing a sporting oval. I didn't even know the MCG would get upset if I said 85% full isn't packed. You my friend are weird. What I was saying had nothing to do about the rectangle V oval. How can you get things so wrong.

Man up and say you got it wrong. Your failure to do so only shows how immature you really are. Oh well, like I said previously, we don't expect too much from the AFL types in here.

Guess we are going to here more because you just can't even be truthful to yourself, can you?

MarkZZZ wrote:

NRLCrap1 wrote:

You were dissing the MCG as a venue ("wasn't packed out") and then you back flipped and supported it ("sports mad Melbourne that will turn out to see anything"). You didn't have to actually say the reason. The subject at the time was rectangle v oval and you never distanced yourself from that. Hell you never even dissed Suncorp as a venue for the final!

Well?

Thought as much......

Your problem is you assume too much, you know what they say about when you assume, don't you?

I don't get how saying that 85,000 out of a possible 100,000 isn't packed is dissing a sporting oval.

NRLCrap1 wrote:

MarkZZZ wrote:

NRLCrap1 wrote:

You were dissing the MCG as a venue ("wasn't packed out") and then you back flipped and supported it ("sports mad Melbourne that will turn out to see anything"). You didn't have to actually say the reason. The subject at the time was rectangle v oval and you never distanced yourself from that. Hell you never even dissed Suncorp as a venue for the final!

Well?

Thought as much......

Your problem is you assume too much, you know what they say about when you assume, don't you?

I don't get how saying that 85,000 out of a possible 100,000 isn't packed is dissing a sporting oval.

Just as I thought. You've got nothing.