Page 4 of 6
Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Sun May 10, 2015 10:02 pm
by Xman
AFLsforPussies wrote:Basketball is played all around the world unlike your little half nation fumble abortion no other nation wants to play
How is that relevant to the ease of scoring?
If you hit a backboard in basketball it doesn't automatically mean you get a point. If you miss a shot in AFL it is GUARANTEED that you get a point.
If you miss the ring and hit the backboard the ball can still go through the hoop and a goal scored. FACT. Scoring a point in the AFL is not the aim so claiming it is makes you look stupid. In fact in many cases a team would prefer to miss entirely than score a point because it gives possession back to the opposition for little reward. It therefore doesnt become a reward
What is harder if you kick from the same distance a Rugby League Field Goal or an AFL goal??
errr, in RL 99% of your shots at goal are a set shot from 20m away. In the AFL only a proportion are set shots, many are under time pressure, while running, while being tackled, and distances away from goal up to 70m. There is no comparison, the NRL goal scoring is 1 dimensional and very simple in comparison
Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Sun May 10, 2015 10:04 pm
by Xman
AFLsforPussies wrote:Xman wrote:LOL. No, it shows it is easy to score. Most test cricket scores are in the hundreds. Again, easy to score. According to AFLforpussies this means no skill
Such staggering logic
Footy codes are different to cricket and AFL is easiest football code ever to get points.
Correct. Aussie rules is higher scoring and therefore easier to score than other football codes. Why does that make it a better or worse game? Are you suggesting a lower scoring game is better? If that were the case then soccer is the best game in the world
Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Sat May 16, 2015 10:33 am
by AFLsforPussies
It makes it a less skilled scoring game, pretty simple

Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 12:11 am
by leagueiscrap
AFLsforPussies wrote:It makes it a less skilled scoring game, pretty simple

running in a straight line with the ball tucked under your arm running like a ******, catching it from a 6 meter pass from a sideways throw takes pure skill!
sticking your head up another mans arse, takes guts and guts! but also show how mentally deficient you are
wow what a code League is

Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 8:15 am
by Swans4ever
Don't you have 68 meters to touch a ball on the ground within 11 meters? Like that's not using your foot but your hand - there's no need to judge distance, wind speed or angle of attack! So really this is a dumb argument your comparing apples with oranges again
Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 12:31 pm
by Raiderdave
Swans4ever wrote:Don't you have 68 meters to touch a ball on the ground within 11 meters? Like that's not using your foot but your hand - there's no need to judge distance, wind speed or angle of attack! So really this is a dumb argument your comparing apples with oranges again
You havent got any smarter since I forced you outta here have u pretend GI joe ?? :_<>
Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 12:46 pm
by King-Eliagh

jebus, is swines on acid? Wtf are you on about swines?

Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 12:50 pm
by Swans4ever
Raiderdave wrote:Swans4ever wrote:Don't you have 68 meters to touch a ball on the ground within 11 meters? Like that's not using your foot but your hand - there's no need to judge distance, wind speed or angle of attack! So really this is a dumb argument your comparing apples with oranges again
You havent got any smarter since I forced you outta here have u pretend GI joe ?? :_<>
Hahaha yeah whatever - I unlike you have a job which comes 1st! You have obviously gotten more bitter, more desperate and more delusional than ever - how's the Raiders going??
Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 12:52 pm
by Swans4ever
King-Eliagh wrote:
jebus, is swines on acid? Wtf are you on about swines?

Correct me if I'm wrong but the try line on a RL field is 68 meters long and 11 meters deep didn't know it was such a secrete?
Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 1:15 pm
by King-Eliagh

a secrete ?
Swines I don't wanna tell people to pickup their games so soon after they've returned to the joint after a hissy fit inspired layoff but seriously dude, pick it up a few notches will yA?
The dimensions are irrelevant, your discussion around them sounded not dissimilar to a crackheads ramblings. Please, revise and make your points clear for the membership from now on otherwise I'll inform wookie to deal with it...and hes shown himself to be a no nonsense tho fairly ignorant man.
Ok swines?
Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 1:18 pm
by King-Eliagh
And back on topic. How would that Geelong boofhead, what's his name the forward who people think is big and strong. How would he fare in terms of toughness if he was to lineup in origin tonight?

Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 5:19 pm
by Raiderdave
Swans4ever wrote:Raiderdave wrote:Swans4ever wrote:Don't you have 68 meters to touch a ball on the ground within 11 meters? Like that's not using your foot but your hand - there's no need to judge distance, wind speed or angle of attack! So really this is a dumb argument your comparing apples with oranges again
You havent got any smarter since I forced you outta here have u pretend GI joe ?? :_<>
Hahaha yeah whatever - I unlike you have a job which comes 1st! You have obviously gotten more bitter, more desperate and more delusional than ever - how's the Raiders going??

:_<>
Marching outside the special needs facility with yr pretend bang bang
Is not a job
Raiders are going very well... were 5th last week before losing to the Bulldogs in the game of the season
Thanks for asking rambo

Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 5:28 pm
by Raiderdave
Swans4ever wrote:King-Eliagh wrote:
jebus, is swines on acid? Wtf are you on about swines?

Correct me if I'm wrong but the try line on a RL field is 68 meters long and 11 meters deep didn't know it was such a secrete?
8m deep pretend GI joe
& theres an issue with your theory that would embarras a ******
Theres 13 defenders stopping u from getting to the tryline & forcing the ball on or beyond it for that try.
Just try n get to it son
Just try
Weedy fumblers would shit their pantaloons
Jump the fence n run rather then face an NRL defence line

Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 5:42 pm
by pussycat
If you get tackled 5 yards out from the try line they don't give you points for being close - trying hard. What a ridiculous pathetic sport you people have!......is it the tight shorts that attract you people? The tape they wear to make there muscles stick-out - What about a sock down there shorts? It all sounds very Freddie Mercury - ish .
Re: More evidence for the toughest code
Posted: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm
by Xman
pussycat wrote:If you get tackled 5 yards out from the try line they don't give you points for being close - trying hard. What a ridiculous pathetic sport you people have!......is it the tight shorts that attract you people? The tape they wear to make there muscles stick-out - What about a sock down there shorts? It all sounds very Freddie Mercury - ish .
what other soort penalises you for fumbling the ball forward but allows you to fumble it backwards?
in what other sport can you literally fall over flat on your face and still score?

>
what other sport allows you to run head on into the opposition , get completely owned, yet still get possession of the ball, not once but 5 times :_<>