View Full Version : The Official Warne Verdict Thread
When the result of the hearing comes through, please post it here rather than twenty people starting twenty different threads for it.
Thanks. :)
Channel 7 reporting that they have just seen Warne "a forlorn figure being consoled by wife Simone", but no official word on the verdict yet. Could mean something, could mean nothing.
Moomba
mattyc2422
22 Feb 2003, 11:02
I've planted myself infront of Sky News for the past hour and half and there hasn't been much newsworthy stuff besides a hell of a lot of reporters.
Groucho
22 Feb 2003, 11:03
12 months
Grave Danger
22 Feb 2003, 11:04
1 year from 10 Feb 2003.
RoosLuver
22 Feb 2003, 11:04
He has been banned for 12 months, saw it on Sky News
mattyc2422
22 Feb 2003, 11:04
Just in.
12 month ban.
I think that is a fair penalty.
There'll be plenty of people who say it's too hard, and plenty will say it's too soft. So that probably means it's about right.
lamby29
22 Feb 2003, 11:07
Fair enough verdict.
mattyc2422
22 Feb 2003, 11:09
I thought 6 months would be suitable - but so be it, 12 months.
mellowyellow
22 Feb 2003, 11:11
I'm not sure whether its a fair verdict but its no suprise really.
Does this mean the end of his career, or is the penalty short enough for him to come back.
Moomba
wagstaff
22 Feb 2003, 11:16
So effectively he's out of cricket until the end of the 2003/04 Australian summer. And considering this is a ban from all cricket (I presume), he couldn't be ready for any tour immediately afterwards, it's effectively a 15 to 18 month ban.
Warne will take this particularly hard, as from his inital press conference in South Africa he didn't think he had done anything wrong. According to David Hookes, apparently before the hearing began Warne thought he would get off and go straight back to the WC, at the end of last night he thought he would get 6 months.
I wonder if this will be the end for him.
In my mind, considering that he was found guilty of the most serious charge, he should've got 2 years.
Bomber Spirit
22 Feb 2003, 11:20
He took a banned substance - he admitted it. A guilty verdict was the only result that could have been made. It was all so preventable - all it would have taken was a phone call to check what was in the thing.
Even if he comes back, he'll wear the stigma of being a drug cheat for the rest of his career.:( It'll never be the same again.:( :(
mattyc2422
22 Feb 2003, 11:34
I firmly believe he will be back.
mellowyellow
22 Feb 2003, 11:40
It will be interesting to see whether warne lodges an appeal, has a week in which he can.Given the time he will spend out of the game it would'nt suprise me if he didnt.
He would want to be careful, an appeal could up the sentence just as easily as reduce or cancel it.
Maybe if he thinks it's a case of appeal or retire, but I suspect if he thinks he can come back in 2004 he will serve his time.
Moomba
campbell
22 Feb 2003, 11:46
If, as reported, he feels he has done nothing wrong then he will appeal. He is a disgrace to every other hard working sports person in our country. He admitted guilt.The circumstances are irrelevant.He should have been banned for the minumum of 2 years.Apparently the ASC, can charge him if they feel his sentence is light.Which would set the cat amongst the pigeons.
wagstaff
22 Feb 2003, 11:59
Originally posted by campbell
He should have been banned for the minumum of 2 years..
2 years was the maxium he could've been punished, not the minimum.
campbell
22 Feb 2003, 12:06
Sorry about that. I had read and heard that it was the minimum.
CharlieG
22 Feb 2003, 12:24
I think the ban on him playing any form of organised cricket is very harsh. A year would have been fair, if he was at least allowed to play grade cricket. Would have given him half a chance at making a comeback, but he'll be a very rusty 34 year old in a year.
Charlie
mellowyellow
22 Feb 2003, 12:45
He will appeal
lamby29
22 Feb 2003, 12:48
I hope this doesn't mean we can't send a replacement to South Africa until the appeal is over...
Macca19
22 Feb 2003, 12:49
Originally posted by mellowyellow
He will appeal
He has appealed. Just showed his press conference on the tv. He isnt happy.
Grave Danger
22 Feb 2003, 12:54
Originally posted by Macca19
He has appealed. Just showed his press conference on the tv. He isnt happy.
He's still displaying his dumbness - he now says he's "a victim of anti-doping hysteria". No contrition shown at all. Who does he appeal to - WADA? He might be lucky if they just confirm the sentence handed down.
mellowyellow
22 Feb 2003, 12:57
Originally posted by wagstaff
So effectively he's out of cricket until the end of the 2003/04 Australian summer. And considering this is a ban from all cricket (I presume), he couldn't be ready for any tour immediately afterwards, it's effectively a 15 to 18 month ban.
He'll end up being ruster than a panamanian ship of convenience and unless his appeal is successful it would be hard to see him coming back from what effectively is a career ending period.
Bombers 2003
22 Feb 2003, 13:05
Originally posted by Grave Danger
He's still displaying his dumbness - he now says he's "a victim of anti-doping hysteria". No contrition shown at all. Who does he appeal to - WADA? He might be lucky if they just confirm the sentence handed down. Couldnt agree more. Now we need S Waugh to GO and Australian Cricket will be in good hands with "Punter".
jerry springer
22 Feb 2003, 13:11
Originally posted by Bombers 2003
. Now we need S Waugh to GO and Australian Cricket will be in good hands with "Punter".
?????????
Please Explain.......:confused:
Originally posted by Grave Danger
He's still displaying his dumbness - he now says he's "a victim of anti-doping hysteria". No contrition shown at all. Who does he appeal to - WADA? He might be lucky if they just confirm the sentence handed down.
He always blames others for his stupidity.Maybe his appeal will backfire and the suspension will be lengthened.That might teach him a lesson.
The Victorian team should immediately sack him as captain.
Have the Poms got the ultimate revenge for Warne destroying them so often ?
Warne took the pill to look good for his announcement of his ODI retirement.We all know he was really retiring from ODI so he could play for Hampshire in England.If he wasn't playing in England he wouldn't be retiring from ODI,which means he wouldn't have had a press conference,which means he wouldn't have had totake a pill to look good for his mummy. :D
It's a longshot. :p
ScouseCat
22 Feb 2003, 14:41
I am really disappointed that Shane Warne has been suspended for a year. I know he did the wrong thing and I understand that if you do the crime, you must do the time.... it's just sad to see such a great cricketer end on this note. (should he retire)
Bombers 2003
22 Feb 2003, 15:10
Originally posted by jerry springer
?????????
Please Explain.......:confused: Young Steven has lately NOT shown that he has Australia's cricketing interests anymore.No longer hasa the "Killer Instinct","Punter has.As Mark Taylor said retirement will be good for Waugh.
I'd like to read the reasoning behind the decision and the facts presented because at the moment it doesn't add up. I can't see how it's appropriate - it's either harsh or lenient.
They either believe he made a stupid mistake as he claims in which case it's harsh.
Or they believe he was using it to mask something in which case the sentence is lenient.
I tend towards believing it's harsh because there's no information publically available that disputes his story. That, and the fact that I want to believe his story.
Kenny_01
22 Feb 2003, 15:18
As sad as this news is, I guess it's a pretty fair penalty. I hope he returns though to get 500 test wickets, which he thoroughly deserves.
St-KriS
22 Feb 2003, 15:56
Originally posted by lamby29
I hope this doesn't mean we can't send a replacement to South Africa until the appeal is over...
Yeah, does anyone know if that will interfer with sending a replacement to SA?
Tangodown
22 Feb 2003, 16:28
I wonder if it was Warnes mum who was involved in the betting scandal ?
goal_umpire
22 Feb 2003, 16:36
Originally posted by St-KriS
Yeah, does anyone know if that will interfer with sending a replacement to SA? The ACB were given permission to send a replacement. They are looking into it and will give a decision ASAP.
Tangodown
22 Feb 2003, 16:38
I also wonder if it was 'Shanes MUM' who bombarded an english nurse with SMS messages !!!
I also wonder if 'Shanes MUM' had any part in accepting the '$11,000k ' from an Indian bookie for pitch reports !!!
Never forget Shayne lost the Vice Captains position over this outrageous conduct..
Shane.........I just dont believe anything you say........
Is it coincidence that SHANE rymes with errr WAYNE ???
dr nick
22 Feb 2003, 16:54
he will appeal and it will be in front of a different panel. given that i think he is extremely lucky to get 12 months, it's a fair risk taking it to another hearing. as it is he probably has no option. i think it would be almost impossible with no cricket for 12 months for selectors to pick him. when he comes back he'll either have to play county cricket to show some form to the selectors, or wait for the domestic season later in 2004.
dr nick
22 Feb 2003, 16:55
from what i gather, the suspension means that the ACB is not able to employ him for the period. i'm not sure whether he will be able to commentate though.
red+black
22 Feb 2003, 17:15
Originally posted by campbell
Sorry about that. I had read and heard that it was the minimum.
i've heard that too, a reporter definately said minimum not maximum. just what i heard.
dr nick
22 Feb 2003, 17:19
Originally posted by red+black
i've heard that too, a reporter definately said minimum not maximum. just what i heard.
90% of sources have been saying minimum. only a few have said maximum, and they have tended to come from journo's i would rate as having dubious records in regards to what is fact. so i was surprised to learn there was a sentence between 3 and 24 months.
having said that, one of the reporters asked james sutherland for what possible reason, under the charge of 'prohibited method', was he given less than 2 years... which leads me to believe that there may be extenuating circumstances that the media is not aware of yet.
dr nick
22 Feb 2003, 18:51
infact after today i'm probably inclined to believe warne's version of events moreso than i did before, only because some of the comments he made today made me think.... maybe he is that stupid that he'd take some prescription drug without worrying what was in it.
the basis for the appeal "i dont deserve 12 months for making a mistake" and "victim of dope test histeria" were pearlers.
does he really think that the next panel will let him off because he said he made a mistake? whats stopping any future athlete from overloading on diuretics, then getting off because they claim they made a silly mistake?
mattyc2422
22 Feb 2003, 18:52
Originally posted by Bombers 2003
Young Steven has lately NOT shown that he has Australia's cricketing interests anymore.No longer hasa the "Killer Instinct","Punter has.As Mark Taylor said retirement will be good for Waugh.
Mark Taylor denies that he made those statements.
A replacement is due to be named tomorrow.
campbell
22 Feb 2003, 20:25
Its a real shame to watch icons of Australian sport embarrass themselves. One would hope that in the cold light of day he rethinks his statement and foolish comments. But then again, this guy is over 30 and needs to take responsiblilty for his actions. He is not setting a good example for the nations young cricketers, let alone his own children.Fair enough, if one believes that it was an accident, he still has to say,oops, I am sorry, I didn't ring and check as I know that I am supposed to.
Also,re his contract, I heard all his contracts were suspended at 11am this morning.So,I am assuming there is some clause in it relating to the taking of probhibited substances.
fabulousphil
22 Feb 2003, 21:43
Its a real disgrace......... IMO Warnes made a mistake, but there is no evidence hes done anything wrong, he should be made to eat some pizza and KFC as a punishment.
The panel hearing his case should be dragged naked through the streets if OZ loses the world cup and pelted with baked beans.
GhostofJimJess
22 Feb 2003, 21:45
Originally posted by nicko18
.... maybe he is that stupid that he'd take some prescription drug without worrying what was in it.
There's no doubt he's stupid enough, Nicko.
Originally posted by St Kris
[B]Yeah, does anyone know if that will interfer with sending a replacement to SA?[B]
Kris, I reckon we could send Warne's mum over there to come on second change and the Aussies would still bring home that friggin' Cup.
TheMase
22 Feb 2003, 22:00
Originally posted by K9-54
I'd like to read the reasoning behind the decision and the facts presented because at the moment it doesn't add up. I can't see how it's appropriate - it's either harsh or lenient.
They either believe he made a stupid mistake as he claims in which case it's harsh.
Or they believe he was using it to mask something in which case the sentence is lenient.
I tend towards believing it's harsh because there's no information publically available that disputes his story. That, and the fact that I want to believe his story.
He took a banned substance. He deserves it whehter it was a mistake or not.
fabulousphil
22 Feb 2003, 22:46
Originally posted by TheMase
He took a banned substance. He deserves it whehter it was a mistake or not.
I think not......... he has made a stupid mistake, he is just a bit of a lad...... thats all.
The guy took a diet pill FFS, why would you expect it to be a banned substance, or to make you bowl better flippers....... given to him by his mother.
Everyone calling for a ban is a useless frigging loser....... probably jealous as well.
Send him back to the World Cup.................NOW.
Originally posted by GhostofJimJess
Kris, I reckon we could send Warne's mum over there to come on second change and the Aussies would still bring home that friggin' Cup.
Nah, she'd test positive and say she was taking pills for a diet or something...:p
How many off the 12 odd kilos will Warney put back on when he's suspended.
the adjudacating panel seems to have gone for a 'safe' ban of 12 months, not really harsh or lenient.
Groucho
23 Feb 2003, 09:17
Originally posted by TheMase
He took a banned substance. He deserves it whehter it was a mistake or not.
I think you're missing the point of what K9-54 was saying. This is a stupid and nonsensical decision. If they didn't believe his story then he should have got 2 years,if they did believe his story then 3-6 months for stupidity is plenty. Nobody's denying his guilt but there was simply no room for any middle ground here.
dr nick
23 Feb 2003, 10:57
Originally posted by fabulousphil
I think not......... he has made a stupid mistake, he is just a bit of a lad...... thats all.
The guy took a diet pill FFS, why would you expect it to be a banned substance, or to make you bowl better flippers....... given to him by his mother.
Everyone calling for a ban is a useless frigging loser....... probably jealous as well.
Send him back to the World Cup.................NOW.
pfft, you are the one who is a friggin loser. how do you expect anybody to be punished for using masking agents if you think warne should get off scott free. amazingly, every athlete who ever got caught with masking agents has claimed its some terrible mistake. are you vouching that all those athletes should be taken on their word??
maybe we should just take diuretics off the banned substance list :rolleyes:
on a further note, i wonder if brigitte (read 'the scapegoat') will be charged for supplying prescription medication.
dr nick
23 Feb 2003, 10:59
Originally posted by fabulousphil
Its a real disgrace......... IMO Warnes made a mistake, but there is no evidence hes done anything wrong.
there is never any evidence that anybody has done anything wrong if they are caught with masking agents in their urine.
fabulousphil
23 Feb 2003, 11:09
Originally posted by nicko18
pfft, you are the one who is a friggin loser. how do you expect anybody to be punished for using masking agents if you think warne should get off scott free. amazingly, every athlete who ever got caught with masking agents has claimed its some terrible mistake. are you vouching that all those athletes should be taken on their word??
maybe we should just take diuretics off the banned substance list :rolleyes:
It should be one or the other, full sentence or nothing, if they suspect or have evidence that he has been using steroids etc, then full sentence, if, on the other hand they suspect he hasnt..... then slap his hand.
IMO he hasnt used illegal drugs, just a silly boy.
Wasn't it Samantha Riley who got suspended for taking a head ache pill, and some other guy thrown out of the Olympics for drinking to much coffee.
FFS grow up.
dr nick
23 Feb 2003, 11:12
FFS you are the one who needs to grow up, get that chip off your shoulder and stop letting your burning admiration of warney cloud any judgement you might have.
fabulousphil
23 Feb 2003, 11:17
Originally posted by nicko18
FFS you are the one who needs to grow up, get that chip off your shoulder and stop letting your burning admiration of warney cloud any judgement you might have.
I reckon Warney's a great cricketer Nicko, but i dont have a burning admiration of him, IMO he's been ripped off thats all.
Cheers.
By the way he's a Vic, which significantly lowers him in my eyes.:D
I cannot nuderstand why this ****er is imortalised. He is in the ranks of Mark Geyer, the Dokic family, Anthony Mundine and John Hopoate as morons of Australian sport. It is an offront to all the gifted scientists, business people, musicians, artists and writers that this country produces by the bucketload to hold a spastic like Warne above them as a national hero.
This chronology of Warnes pathetic mouth comes from the SMH:
1994: Send-off of South African batsman Andrew Hudson. Warne could have said: I screwed up under pressure. Warne did say: The South African crowd pushed me over the edge.
1997: Obscene gestures. Warne could have said: I was having fun but went too far. Warne did say: They can't take a joke.
1997: Fat tanty. Warne could have said: I was upset and sensitive about my weight. Warne did say: I get picked on.
1998: Bookies: Warne could have said: I covered it up for four years then grudgingly admitted I was naive and stupid. But it was all the media's fault for dredging it up. Warne did say: I was naive and stupid.
1999: Cigarettes. Warne could have said: I wasn't able to give up. Warne did say: They sprung me unfairly on my first smoke.
1999: Muller. Warne could have said: I was frustrated with a teammate who I didn't think was up to Test cricket. Warne did say: I didn't do it, it was Joe.
2000: Sex. Warne could have said: Girls are one of the perks of the job and I'm only human. Warne did say: I was set up by a newspaper that paid her.
2000: Sledging Zimbabweans. Warne could have said: All's fair on the field, this is part of my method. Warne did say: It's unfair microphones are out there.
2001: Boys and Cameras. Warne could have said: I lost my temper. Warne did say: They tried to set me up.
2002: Harassing girls in car. Warne could have said: I was having fun and did something inappropriate. Warne did say: They tried to blackmail me.
2003: Drugs. Warne could have said: I was trying to get fit for one last World Cup, took a gamble and lost. Warne did say: Mum gave me a slimming pill.
I live for the day when we idolise worthy people, and not just dumb blondes wo have never raised a sweat in anything.
he's a reason why i dont care too much for aussie cricket anymore.
he's had his time, i think the aussie team would be just as good if macgill was number one, or some of the others. its definately not a one man team.
why is warnie a ****er ?
joe the cameraman
shakin his ass with a stump over his head and giving the english the finger during the ashes a few years back
phone sex with that chick during the ashes, which he denied, when it was so proved through phone records.
his treatment of those two kids in new zealand who accidently took the shot of him smoking.
he's a dead set ****er. he's made his own bad press and only he is responsible for people like me, who think he's a ****er
i hope he appeals, then gets banned for 2 years, making excuses saying its his mum. shoulda blamed joe the cameraman
as for the joe the cameraman debacle, another pathetic arrogant, pig headed "i'm top 5hit" attitude of shane warne.
The more I read into this, the more I'm convinced that Warne's mum has been used for an excuse, rather than the truth... Especially with this line:
"But there was scope for Warne to be given a lesser sentence or even escape penalty under an "exceptional circumstance" clause in the ACB's anti-doping policy."
Of course his darling mother would say or do anything to protect her precious little boy's career and reputation...
I don't think either of them were naive or stupid... I think it was a stupid plan to use his poor mother as the integater, instead of owning up to drug taking in the first place. He would have been seen as more of a man, if he had of just told the truth and accepted the punishment in the first place. Rather than using his poor old mother... I'm sure she's been put up on the witness stand to lie for him...
Pessimistic
25 Feb 2003, 09:44
I suppose the fred the cameraman stroy is relevant here.
Final words? Can't bat, Can't bowl.... for 12 months !
Originally posted by syphon
The more I read into this, the more I'm convinced that Warne's mum has been used for an excuse, rather than the truth... Especially with this line:
"But there was scope for Warne to be given a lesser sentence or even escape penalty under an "exceptional circumstance" clause in the ACB's anti-doping policy."
Of course his darling mother would say or do anything to protect her precious little boy's career and reputation...
I don't think either of them were naive or stupid... I think it was a stupid plan to use his poor mother as the integater, instead of owning up to drug taking in the first place. He would have been seen as more of a man, if he had of just told the truth and accepted the punishment in the first place. Rather than using his poor old mother... I'm sure she's been put up on the witness stand to lie for him...
Warne has now admitted (just on the TV) that he has taken the diuretic more than once. I wonder if the impending release of the tribunals findings this morning have anything to do with him coming clean.
The way I see it, Warne will say anything and do anything, just to make himself look better. I would not believe a word that he says.
Moomba
Jars458
26 Feb 2003, 11:02
"Much of Warne's evidence on these issues was unsatisfactory and the committee does not accept he was entirely truthful in his responses to questions about his knowledge of the the ACB anti-doping policy. COupled wiht this is his vague unsatisfactory and inconsistent evidnce about the extent of using a Moduretic."
This from the judgment of the tribunal.
He took another in December but he doesn't seem to remember when.
The judgment also says taht his shoulder recoeved in normal times and there is no way that anabolic steroids would have helped his recovery.
Its seems clear that Warne didn't take steroids but was merely dumb in taking these tablets and was less than forthcoming about how many had taken at the hearing
Given that the use of a maksing agent makes it impossible to tell whether steroids have been taken the committee had no choice but to ban him.
It all seems fair to me.
Grave Danger
26 Feb 2003, 11:46
Yes, the only thing in question is the extent of the penalty. They already used their discretion to halve the ban from the standard minimum penalty - it's a matter of debate whether one year is still too harsh for what looks like just a dumb act.
Maybe if he'd shown a bit more contrition and more respect for his contractual obligations they might have been more lenient.
It is a stiff penalty, but the ACB were under pressure to be seen not to be favouring their own.
Originally posted by Jars458
"Much of Warne's evidence on these issues was unsatisfactory and the committee does not accept he was entirely truthful in his responses to questions about his knowledge of the the ACB anti-doping policy. COupled wiht this is his vague unsatisfactory and inconsistent evidnce about the extent of using a Moduretic."
This from the judgment of the tribunal.
He took another in December but he doesn't seem to remember when.
The judgment also says taht his shoulder recoeved in normal times and there is no way that anabolic steroids would have helped his recovery.
Its seems clear that Warne didn't take steroids but was merely dumb in taking these tablets and was less than forthcoming about how many had taken at the hearing
Given that the use of a maksing agent makes it impossible to tell whether steroids have been taken the committee had no choice but to ban him.
It all seems fair to me.
so despite quite possibly being on a prolonged diet of these pills, you think he should get off easier than if he were caught using steroids.
why would he try to hide the fact that he has taken these pills in the past?? has he been using steroids for a while? was he just lucky that he was tested a few days after taking one in early december?
that excuse that he was taking a fluid tablet to get rid of the wine is utter bullsh*t. wine itself is a diuretic. you dont take diuretics to get rid of diuretics. he takes the australian public for halfwits.
Beausgirl43
26 Feb 2003, 12:14
The only halfwit is him.
He was let off lightly I reakon, should've been banned for 10 years.
Nobody else to blame but yourself.
Your finished Warne, get over it. :mad:
cheers ... Kaz
Macca19
26 Feb 2003, 15:08
Originally posted by moomba
Warne has now admitted (just on the TV) that he has taken the diuretic more than once.
Well thats a shock :rolleyes:
Are you at all surprised he lied to the Australian public to try and save his arse again?
Originally posted by Macca19
Are you at all surprised he lied to the Australian public to try and save his arse again?
And still lying IMO, or incredibly stupid. One diuretic tablet will not help you lose a double chin, any benefit you get from it will be lost as soon as you stop taking the tablet. Taking one every couple of months is next to useless.
Moomba
dr nick
27 Feb 2003, 09:30
Shane Warne had given "vague, inconsistent and unsatisfactory" evidence to the Australian Cricket Board's anti-doping committee and it could not "categorically" rule out the use of such substances as steroids by the Test bowler.
The three-man panel said it had "grave doubt that it has the full information on his use of Moduretic". It said Warne had initially referred to "only taking that one tablet" but later admitted he had been given "sheets of tablets" by his mother. It said he had taken at least two.
The ban was reduced from two years because the ACB's medical officer, Dr Peter Harcourt, said there was no direct evidence of steroid use. But the panel found that because diuretics could be used to mask steroid use "one cannot say categorically that no such substance was used".
Warne said last night he was disappointed that the committee had doubted the truth of his and his mother's evidence. "Both my mother and I gave honest accounts under oath to the best of our recollections. The fact that this has been brought into question is unfair."
In its 12-page judgement, the committee said it doubted Warne's testimony in three crucial areas: the extent of his diuretic use, the availability of warnings on the packaging, and his awareness of the ACB's doping policy.
Warne also told the panel he could not read the warnings on the Moduretic packaging because of "torn flaps".
The panel said: "Clearly that would not be so. The names were clearly there if he chose to look."
It was also disdainful of his testimony that he was unaware he could contact Australia Sports Drug Agency and was "not generally aware of the consequences of cricketers having prohibited substances in their bodies".
"His evidence on these issues was unsatisfactory and the committee does not accept he was entirely truthful."
PUHLEASE.............he didn't know that a fluid tablet was a diuretic ??? :rolleyes:
He should be ashamed of himself for portraying himself as such a dimwitted moron.
Will we ever see him take sole responsibility for his own mistakes, stop blaming others, and quit the poor victim act ? No, I don't think so. If he hasn't done it by now, he never will.
Perpetual victim with a spoilt child mentality.........."Why so many people are unkind? I'm me and I'm a sporting hero.........why don't you all just love me and set me free?
BLAH.......BLAH.......BLAH.......
Give it up Warnie. You stuffed up.........for once in your life take your punishment like a man instead of a bloody mouse.