Talking Footy

NSWAFL wrote:

Scroll down the page and you'll see 1800 mentioned in the details, and no sign of 1900.

I've added a fact tag to the claim, and I expect it to be changed to 1800 to 1899 unless a citation is added.

you still claiming the 19th century goes from 1800 to 1899 eh

tell me
when did the 1st century begin

what year ?

NSWAFL wrote:

1895 is the 19th century. Prove they were paid then. That is what I meant, and deep down you know it.

1900 is too
& he has already proved payments then..................

you are wrong .. for the 49th time in 2 days .. congrats thats a record that blows tipsy & TPLG outta the water

Parra's posts... stay as is

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for proof that players were being paid and just to avoid this stupid shit, paid in the 1800's!

1800's lol.

I'll get back to you when you learn to read and understand comprehension

Look who's talking! Get the evidence out there and don't make excuses.

I already did, I said after not long after RL had started you dope and one link I put in was from 1901, yes, a massive 6 years after the code started ffs.

DERP!

1901 isn't the 1800's! DERP!

Give!

I never mentioned the 1800's and I proved that already you dopey ******, you dragged it up when you were beaten again.

You mentioned 1895, "derp"! GIVE!

rl still living in the past I see.

Yes, want some scores for todays games dumbarse?

That's still 2012, dummy.

Nobody cares about the pathetic state of rl in internationally.
At best they stammer out something from a Tourette's patient in defense.

Stammer is right, Cos!

Bump, should have a few scores in the next couple of hours, how them AFL games going?