www.talkingfooty.com
https://www.talkingfooty.com/forums/
HAHA Dunce. It was Football clubs were using leagues club memberships in there membership numbers.NSWAFL wrote:"Prove the Leagues clubs include football memberships in their leagues clubs tally's "
Hello, imbecile! Look at what cooee said! There's your proof of that statement right there!
exactly .. telling its football club members to join their Leagues club so as to add another form of supportcooee wrote:HAHA Dunce. It was Football clubs were using leagues club memberships in there membership numbers.NSWAFL wrote:"Prove the Leagues clubs include football memberships in their leagues clubs tally's "
Hello, imbecile! Look at what cooee said! There's your proof of that statement right there!
NSWAFL wrote:Double dunce! I was calling Dave out on an obvious faux pas!
You are a mixed up little boy, Dave! Get the question right if you want an answer!Prove the Leagues clubs include football memberships in their leagues clubs tally's
am I ?NSWAFL wrote:What faux pas???
You are a mixed up little boy, Dave! Get the question right if you want an answer!Prove the Leagues clubs include football memberships in their club tally's
NSWAFL wrote:What faux pas???
You are a mixed up little boy, Dave! Get the question right if you want an answer!Prove the Leagues clubs include football memberships in their clubs tally's
NSWAFL wrote:What faux pas???
You are a mixed up little boy, Dave! Get the question right if you want an answer!Prove the Leagues clubs include football memberships in their clubs tally's
I think that's enough to say, prove him wrong! And with more than just what you've already put because that as I have already said myself is suspect.I have already stated my case about the Leagues Club situation in my signature. It's a part of their elaborate lie that is proven by the recorded instances of their altering crowd numbers at games. In addition, it is wedged in RL history that the clubs rely on the LC's for their revenue stream. That's their traditional community base since God knows when, and nothing has changed. Why do you think RL people got all upset and angry at the government cap threat on pokies? Because they knew that their sole revenue stream outside of the gates at games was under threat. If they had club memberships they wouldn't be so antsy. I think that's a perfectly reasonable view to hold on the evidence I have presented and therefore not defamatory.
he made the statement .. you repeated itNSWAFL wrote:Aha! I found Topper's explanation! And it's also speculation the way I'm reading it;
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2636&p=29363#p29303
(Third paragraph)
I think that's enough to say, prove him wrong! And with more than just what you've already put because that as I have already said myself is suspect.I have already stated my case about the Leagues Club situation in my signature. It's a part of their elaborate lie that is proven by the recorded instances of their altering crowd numbers at games. In addition, it is wedged in RL history that the clubs rely on the LC's for their revenue stream. That's their traditional community base since God knows when, and nothing has changed. Why do you think RL people got all upset and angry at the government cap threat on pokies? Because they knew that their sole revenue stream outside of the gates at games was under threat. If they had club memberships they wouldn't be so antsy. I think that's a perfectly reasonable view to hold on the evidence I have presented and therefore not defamatory.
It's up to you lot to allay all suspicions.
