Talking Footy

Xman wrote:

All very interesting boys. Where did Beaussie mention Rugby League in his claim? He mentioned the Storm.

I said he tarred our code
saying the Storm copied something ... that OUR code of which they are a part .... has done for 70 years longer then AFL
so how could thy have copied anything when the idea belongs to RL in the first place

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

I won, Bea knew and was too gutless to answer.

I want the points.

And here is the truth.

The claim Beaussie made was about the Storm and the AFL ANZAC day games.

You admit above that he never answered your question about the RL and AFL ANZAC day games.

How can you then challenge a claim he never made?

Once and for all: is your challenge of BS about Beaussies original statement relating to the NRL copying the AFLs ANZAC day format with a storm warriors game, or about the RL and AFL ANZAC day games?

beaussie inferred through the storm that we did infact copy the AFL
we did not , & infact the opposite is true

Oi dopey, what do you think Parra is inferring with the following.

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

It was planned for a while and since people kicked up a stink about playing Australia vs NZ in a Test, the next best (same result) was the Storm vs Warriors.

Yes, the game down there is to help build the Storms profile

I interpret that as the NRL/Storm copying the successful AFL tradition built in Melbourne by scheduling a game on ANZAC Day after the AFL. If that wasn't the case, why didn't the NRL stick with the ANZAC Day game in Sydney or continue with the Australia vs NZ test match? Put simply, the NRL/Storm tried to copy the success the AFL had in Melbourne on the day. They failed miserably btw if crowds are anything to go by.

Again this has nothing to do with which code scheduled games on ANZAC Day first. This is about what happened in Melbourne with the Storm vs Warriors game and how that came about. Comprendhe

Beaussie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

And here is the truth.

The claim Beaussie made was about the Storm and the AFL ANZAC day games.

You admit above that he never answered your question about the RL and AFL ANZAC day games.

How can you then challenge a claim he never made?

Once and for all: is your challenge of BS about Beaussies original statement relating to the NRL copying the AFLs ANZAC day format with a storm warriors game, or about the RL and AFL ANZAC day games?

beaussie inferred through the storm that we did infact copy the AFL
we did not , & infact the opposite is true

Oi dopey, what do you think Parra is inferring with the following.

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

It was planned for a while and since people kicked up a stink about playing Australia vs NZ in a Test, the next best (same result) was the Storm vs Warriors.

Yes, the game down there is to help build the Storms profile

I interpret that as the NRL/Storm copying the successful AFL tradition built in Melbourne by scheduling a game on ANZAC Day after the AFL. If that wasn't the case, why didn't the NRL stick with the ANZAC Day game in Sydney or continue with the Australia vs NZ test match? Put simply, the NRL/Storm tried to copy the success the AFL had in Melbourne on the day. They failed miserably btw if crowds are anything to go by.

Again this has nothing to do with which code scheduled games on ANZAC Day first. This is about what happened in Melbourne with the Storm vs Warriors game and how that came about. Comprendhe

the Storm game has nothing to do with the giggleball game
as I have said
how can we copy something from another sport ...... that we did first ?
the only thing the Storm is copying is the Dragons Roosters game in Sydney ..

the Idea of playing Club Football on ANZAC day belongs to RL

the only ones copying here
is the AFL

get an original idea for once you singlet wearing ponces

King-Eliagh wrote:

You didnt mention the storm in the title of this file though Xman, are you BS'ing us all as well now?

LOL. the entire claim didnt fit in the title cell. I had to cut it down to size so it atleast resembled the claim.

Fail again

If its about the melbourne storm, surely one would put the melbourne storm in the title.

Members I'd like to call for some kind of monitoring of Xman's address of BS claims. Its clearly been a debacle and he may not be the best person for the job of writing these claims up in a clear and legible manner. Its early days so we should go easy on him but its very important to get it right in the early days to sert a good path and example for the future. Seems as though the jobs just too big for our Xman at the moment and I'm happy to assist him if the members are happy

King-Eliagh wrote:

If its about the melbourne storm, surely one would put the melbourne storm in the title.

Members I'd like to call for some kind of monitoring of Xman's address of BS claims. Its clearly been a debacle and he may not be the best person for the job of writing these claims up in a clear and legible manner. Its early days so we should go easy on him but its very important to get it right in the early days to sert a good path and example for the future. Seems as though the jobs just too big for our Xman at the moment and I'm happy to assist him if the members are happy

well yeah ... you'd think wouldn't you

the NRL hasn't copied anything

" well we didn't say the NRL did we ?"

yeah you did .. its in the title of the thread

" well we meant the Storm "

we how bout you say that then .. you **** f wits

I mean ... seriously

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

All very interesting boys. Where did Beaussie mention Rugby League in his claim? He mentioned the Storm.

I said he tarred our code
saying the Storm copied something ... that OUR code of which they are a part ....

But it is clearly NOT about code. The title says nrl. There is no mention of rl.
The VFL had the ANZAC Day concept which followed seamlessly into the AFL.
Since the nrl followed the AFL in formation logically the nrl must have followed the AFL.
Case closed

cos789 wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

All very interesting boys. Where did Beaussie mention Rugby League in his claim? He mentioned the Storm.

I said he tarred our code
saying the Storm copied something ... that OUR code of which they are a part ....

But it is clearly NOT about code. The title says nrl. There is no mention of rl.
The VFL had the ANZAC Day concept which followed seamlessly into the AFL.
Since the nrl followed the AFL in formation logically the nrl must have followed the AFL.
Case closed

ah..... twas it not your dribbling self that said

AFL was interchangable for AR
lets apply the same to NRL .. & RL here

shall we

Raiderdave wrote:

cos789 wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

I said he tarred our code
saying the Storm copied something ... that OUR code of which they are a part ....

But it is clearly NOT about code. The title says nrl. There is no mention of rl.
The VFL had the ANZAC Day concept which followed seamlessly into the AFL.
Since the nrl followed the AFL in formation logically the nrl must have followed the AFL.
Case closed

ah..... twas it not your dribbling self that said

AFL was interchangable for AR
lets apply the same to NRL .. & RL here

shall we

Precisely, these jungle jills can't even abide by their own rules. Hilarious watching them change the rules to suit over and over.

King-Eliagh wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

cos789 wrote:

But it is clearly NOT about code. The title says nrl. There is no mention of rl.
The VFL had the ANZAC Day concept which followed seamlessly into the AFL.
Since the nrl followed the AFL in formation logically the nrl must have followed the AFL.
Case closed

ah..... twas it not your dribbling self that said

AFL was interchangable for AR
lets apply the same to NRL .. & RL here

shall we

Precisely, these jungle jills can't even abide by their own rules.

Just because AFL is interchangeble in some people's mind does not mean it applies to others.
Just because a sport was played on ANZAC day doesn't mean that sport had an ANZAC Day "concept".
To prove a sport had an ANZAC Day "concept" would mean posting links of advertising or attendances figures etc.

Bahahahaha, RL fans with 4 wins already, the whole AFL forum together 0.

In 2 days lol.

King-Eliagh wrote:

If its about the melbourne storm, surely one would put the melbourne storm in the title.

Members I'd like to call for some kind of monitoring of Xman's address of BS claims. Its clearly been a debacle and he may not be the best person for the job of writing these claims up in a clear and legible manner. Its early days so we should go easy on him but its very important to get it right in the early days to sert a good path and example for the future. Seems as though the jobs just too big for our Xman at the moment and I'm happy to assist him if the members are happy

I didnt make the claim did i?

Did Beaussie mention the storm or not?

You organised the file yes?

King-Eliagh wrote:

You organised the file yes?

I created the file and substituted Melbourne storm for NRL to fit the meaning of the claim in the title. I didn't realize it would be such an issue since the claim is detailed in the thread.

Look at some of the other BS file headings. They are brief summaries and hardly comprehensive.