Talking Footy

King-Eliagh wrote:

Xman wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

"our club is plus one by not having Israel"

Perhaps me and Ricky Stuart see eye to eye on this one for a change. You see the bigger picture yet Xman?

Amazing how you left out the word culture....

"I know it's an easy throwaway line, but success is built on culture and our club is plus one in culture by not having Israel."

They've cracked the sooks about missing out and are now saying he would have affected their culture because of his financial focus.

fail KE fail

Amazing how i left out the word culture? That was me dumbing it down for you Xman! It means the same thing you silly bimbo. Now we know your business credentials arent too crash hot but I wouldve thought you'd understand that its fine to be dismayed at someone who wastes your time asking for a price that they're not worth.

King-Eliagh wrote:

Your post above is very TLPGesque/lalalandesque. You ok Xman?

Tell me what part of "plus one in culture for not having Israel" is not "plus one for not having Israel"? I was right in dumbing it down for you but it looks as though I didnt dumb it down enough

Sorry buddy!

King-Eliagh wrote:

Xman wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

So your attitude. Not signing someone who's primary employment motivation is money is a massive loss.

The NRL have simply stuck to their moral and ethical guns. Sure if we got him there was the opportunity to enjoy the gloating. But to sign a bloke who hasnt played for 2 years, who's lost 17 odd kilos, for the money a superstar deserves? That's consistent with what the AFL did and found out it was a failure. Your simplistic views know no bounds Xman. Yeah the NRL lost out big time

Massive loss because they bragged about what a great signing he would be because of the negative impact on the AFL.

In a huge blow for rugby league and an embarrassment for the administration

Emo media articles is all you're going on here. The NRL simply stuck to their guns and know there's numerous other 'Folous' and better in every age group coming through... :

Xman wrote:

Oh yeah, the nRL would never stoop to such disingenuous behaviour as salary cap rorting!

http://www.nrl.com/tabid/10874/newsId/5 ... fault.aspx

But this site shows pre 2009 theyve had approximately 80 breaches.......

Oh Dave, youre on a role mate! Keep it up, its very entertaining!

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Oh yeah, the nRL would never stoop to such disingenuous behaviour as salary cap rorting!

http://www.nrl.com/tabid/10874/newsId/5 ... fault.aspx

But this site shows pre 2009 theyve had approximately 80 breaches.......

Oh Dave, youre on a role mate! Keep it up, its very entertaining!

every breach addressed appropriately

the Swines have spent more in the VFL salary cap then all other clubs ... 31 times
their punishment
2 premierships

wot a joke of a sport

piesman2011 wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

I can see the comedy in that. But any insinuation that the NRL have actually lost out here is simply dumb. Young Folau has simply been corrupted by a corrupted organisation, it's little surprise he's lost his morals after being used solely as a marketing tool, albeit unsuccessfully, for 2 pivotal years of his sporting career.

The only real loss for the NRL was a loss of face. I dont know him or anything but I feel that if he could he would have played for Parra but the deal just couldnt get done (was there a time factor in this for him to be signed to play next year?). His only option in the end might have been to sign with Union otherwise he would be playing in some local league for peanuts next year.

Striker wrote:

piesman2011 wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

I can see the comedy in that. But any insinuation that the NRL have actually lost out here is simply dumb. Young Folau has simply been corrupted by a corrupted organisation, it's little surprise he's lost his morals after being used solely as a marketing tool, albeit unsuccessfully, for 2 pivotal years of his sporting career.

The only real loss for the NRL was a loss of face. I dont know him or anything but I feel that if he could he would have played for Parra but the deal just couldnt get done (was there a time factor in this for him to be signed to play next year?). His only option in the end might have been to sign with Union otherwise he would be playing in some local league for peanuts next year.

The AFL lost face because they lost a poster boy for the Giants, and they wrecked Izzy in the process. The NRL didn't lose anything in the end except maybe the chance to kick some sand in the AFL's face. But then as El rightly said, he's lost 17 kgs so he couldn't be as good as he was anyway.

Striker wrote:

From the Sydney media keen to see the AFL get the sand in their face. If they did their homework they'd be singing a different tune.

Striker wrote:

Well I was one until I heard about Izzy's weight from El. I admit that and I have now changed. We don't want him because he can't play anymore.

Striker wrote:

Not at such short notice, no.