It's a lonely place when you are engulfed by darkness, and one that is very difficult to navigate your way out of.
Some are able to, sadly many are not. My father being just one of many examples of the latter.
I weep for Cam that he lost his battle and I feel for those he left behind, who must...
So do I, but that was 50 or so years ago.
There was nowhere near the amount of scrutiny back then, so there was nowhere near the amount of controversy.
NRL Captain's Challenge.
It's not the first dissent ruling I've seen this season.
There was another I recall seeing (can't remember the game) when the player told the umpire to look at the replay, and copped a 50 which took his opponent's shot for goal to the goal line.
It's how recording the history of sporting leagues or competitions works though. Achievements from back in the day still count, and are given equal weighting, despite the nature or quality of the competition changing.
It's why Test cricket records go back to 1877. Or Wimbledon records back to...
Ideally, a club should recognize all flags it has won - across all competitions. But if it chooses not to, or chooses to give different flags different weightings, that's fine too. It's the club's history, it can record it however it sees fit.
A competition/league should be recognizing all...
Here you go, buy yourself a sticker or three.
Consider it a thank you for your premiership captain (and the three other Tassies in your premiership side).
:)
https://membership.tasmaniafc.com/products/membership-package
I'm not.
But I'm a native Tasmanian. There's a lot of us who aren't in Tassie any more. Like my school mate who also bought a foundation membership. He lives in California. :)
When the subject is aboriginal affairs, I'd give far more weight and validity to the opinions of an actual aboriginal person. They've experienced life as an aboriginal, the vast majority here haven't.
If only those damned Aboriginals would just keep quiet, right?
South of the Yarra is anything but sanctimonious, the key is actually listening to him - and with an open mind.
You are strongly suggesting racism towards Jim Krakouer couldn't have occurred because of his character.
Which is rubbish.
Why? Because there is sufficient anecdotal evidence from the time to give his claims credibility. Also, because his brother (who you can't similarly attack on character...
The fact that his life has been tumultuous and has gone off the rails doesn't invalidate his claims.
Attacking the alleged victim of racism isn't really a smart approach.
Do you think the tribunal gets it right every single time? Of course you don't.
As I've pointed out to another Collingwood poster, the only reason you are treating the tribunal as the beacon of truth in this instance is because it is your player who got the benefit of their decision.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.