Remove this Banner Ad

smug git

  • Thread starter Thread starter noodnuts
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

N

noodnuts

Team Captain
Suspended
Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2003
Posts
595
Reaction score
0
Location
adelaide
watching 'media watch' on the abc last night when that david marr chap made a derogatory reference about rl......'back in the 60's when rugby league still mattered'.....i would like to add david to the list of union's trained media monkies.

i hate this chap, he looks like a smarmy private school educated, leafy suburbs elitist. and why should he be allowed to say biggoted crap on the abc....a tax payer funded organisation?
 
Truth hurts numbnuts??

I imagine back in the 60's that RL players had pride in playing for their country..also in the 60's there was genuine international competition, in the 60's the Ashes tests were genuine contests..and don't give me that bollocks about the upcoming series as well...

And on that: The Ashes...that's what the cricket series is called...stop riding on the back of other sports....in the 60's it was a contest, now it's not and to try and build up the upcoming series as "the ashes"..now that's just poor form.

In the 60's, 70's and even the 80's, crowds were great, now they suck.
 
I agree with noodnuts (gasp!) David Marr is one of those 'oh so superior' leftist pratts that unfortunately many people believe.
Perhaps a comparison of crowds in the respective local comps would show him wrong. Not that turds like that ever let facts get in their elitist ways.
 
Originally posted by Pantsless
Truth hurts numbnuts??

I imagine back in the 60's that RL players had pride in playing for their country..also in the 60's there was genuine international competition, in the 60's the Ashes tests were genuine contests..and don't give me that bollocks about the upcoming series as well...

And on that: The Ashes...that's what the cricket series is called...stop riding on the back of other sports....in the 60's it was a contest, now it's not and to try and build up the upcoming series as "the ashes"..now that's just poor form.

In the 60's, 70's and even the 80's, crowds were great, now they suck.
Click to expand...

Settle Pants.

In responce, I dont believe your in a position to comment on wheather players' pride in the jersey exists and niether am I, so lets leave it at that.

The Ashes Tests years ago were alot closer, I agree. There were also times when England would smash us regularly - now we are in that situation. The Kangaroos and Australian Rugby League is played in a far superior level of intesity and quality than European competitions, most particularly the ESL. So what? Thats the nature of this game in 2003 and Im not complaining. The others will have their eras no doubt, but for now, Australia is head, shoulders and knees above everyone else and quite frankly it doesnt matter to me, becuase each year the NRL players raise the bar in how good this game can be played - and when (even though it seems along way away) the rest catch up, what an international competition we will have then. In responce to your statement about the 'Ashes' - alot of sporting contests between Australia and England light-heartedly refer to their games as the 'Ashes'. Of course its cricket's thing, with the ashes of the bails and all. But from that, sports between Aus and Eng adopt that name. Hell, I even remember seeing an 'Ashes' Lawn Bowls comp on telly once. No ones trying to 'steel' anything Pants, its ok, its just become a thing between our 2 nations in sport, so dont go taking pot shots at one game. Oh, and finally, crowds. What is the obsession with many people in these forums and how their lives depend on how many other people take the option of attending matches live?

You see Pants, all that bloke said was 'back in the 60s when Rugby League mattered'. Thats all he said. He said nothing of Roo Tours and International games and what not. He simply said 'back in the 60s when Rugby League mattered'. Noodnuts, as a League supporter, retaliated in a manner he was entitled to. League does matter now, if it didnt, it would barely exist in this country, which is not true of course. Your outburst about International competitivness and pride in response to him was somewhat un-called for in my opinion.

Cheers,

Hicham.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

also this david marr chap works for the sydney morning herald which is the propaganda arm of the aru. john o'neil as spent millions buying good press coverage from the media in the past 6 years and the smh is the leading pro union/anti league newspaper in australia.

given that marr works for the smh which receives millions from the aru... shouldn't he have disclosed this fact to his audience before he slagged off league.... the main rival of union. he is guilty of the same thing that he constantly charges other media celebrities like john laws and alan jones of.....CASH FOR COMMENT!!!!! :mad:
 
Originally posted by Pantsless
Truth hurts numbnuts??

I imagine back in the 60's that RL players had pride in playing for their country..also in the 60's there was genuine international competition, in the 60's the Ashes tests were genuine contests..and don't give me that bollocks about the upcoming series as well...

And on that: The Ashes...that's what the cricket series is called...stop riding on the back of other sports....in the 60's it was a contest, now it's not and to try and build up the upcoming series as "the ashes"..now that's just poor form.

In the 60's, 70's and even the 80's, crowds were great, now they suck.
Click to expand...
Its funny how you show confidence although you don't have a clue. Your opinion is yours in regards to the international game, you obviously haven't read any of my recent posts on the international game. Anyway, atleast it's a legit sport, not some half-assed game with hybrid rules that no one except the players know, engulfing a massive interest of a few AFL fans who are curious.
You certainly will have egg on your face if the Lions beat Australia who have narrowly beat England 'A' (Yes, Englands 2nd team) 26-22 and a French 2nd string team 34-10.
The comment about the crowds just show you say what you have no idea about. The games have sold-out very early and show that rugby league is back on the rise in England, the games may be at 30,000 seaters, but I believe this was a mistake by the RLIF as all games would have attracted more then that figure, especially if the Lions win.
I have a some good advice that I recommend you take, "if you don't know what the **** you are talking about, keep your mouth shut". I don't pretend to know anything about your sport so don't try and feed us your crap.

Wheres the love, Pantsless? Give me some.
 
Originally posted by Tutaki
The games have sold-out very early and show that rugby league is back on the rise in England, the games may be at 30,000 seaters, but I believe this was a mistake by the RLIF as all games would have attracted more then that figure, especially if the Lions win.
Click to expand...

None of the grounds are bigger than 26,000 and I agree it was a mistake, but I would think the RLIF took the view thats its better to have full houses rather than half empty Stadiums. I would of kept the Test in Wigan at the JJB Stadium, because that is a great Stadium, but I would of had the other Tests at Elland Road in Leeds and the New, City of Manchester Stadium in Manchester (I think playing a test at Old Trafford would of been 3/4 full so it would be better having the Test at the smaller Stadium which is still over 40,000 but most importantly FULL)

Those Stadiums would of been full. Still at least you've got 75,000 going to matches.
 
Originally posted by noodnuts
watching 'media watch' on the abc last night when that david marr chap made a derogatory reference about rl......'back in the 60's when rugby league still mattered'.....i would like to add david to the list of union's trained media monkies.

i hate this chap, he looks like a smarmy private school educated, leafy suburbs elitist. and why should he be allowed to say biggoted crap on the abc....a tax payer funded organisation?
Click to expand...

He's Mike Carlton's mate - what do you expect? Both sport-haters overall, but because they went to private schools, show their love for the rah.

cr.
 
Originally posted by Pantsless
Truth hurts numbnuts??

I imagine back in the 60's that RL players had pride in playing for their country..also in the 60's there was genuine international competition, in the 60's the Ashes tests were genuine contests..and don't give me that bollocks about the upcoming series as well...

And on that: The Ashes...that's what the cricket series is called...stop riding on the back of other sports....in the 60's it was a contest, now it's not and to try and build up the upcoming series as "the ashes"..now that's just poor form.

In the 60's, 70's and even the 80's, crowds were great, now they suck.
Click to expand...

What about 1992 when 10,000 pommies (the original balmy army) banded together to support their league team? Sell-out games at all venues including Princess Park in Melbourne. Not too long ago really.

Super League ruined the tradition and a 1996 pom tour, but it is slowly clawing its way back as the Poms improve their standard.

It still matters.

cr.
 
Originally posted by robbieando
Gee real hard to sell out 3 - 25,000 seater stadiums.
Click to expand...

Still a good response though. They would have used Old Trafford which has been good for 40,000 plus crowds in the past for such Tests, but there were major problems with Man U. No Wembley anymore either, so they've stuck local with league-friendly stadia.

Can't wait for kick-off! Get it on lads!!!
cr.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

You certainly will have egg on your face if the Lions beat Australia who have narrowly beat England 'A' (Yes, Englands 2nd team) 26-22 and a French 2nd string team 34-10.
Click to expand...

Why would I have egg on my face? C'Mon..you're trying to tell me that if GB beat our 2nd/3rd string side that I'll look stupid?

If we do get rolled by GB in this series, I know the people on this board will go, great result, well done GB, but there will be many more people saying, "if we had our full side in we would've won."

I would like to see two full strength sides going at each other, but when one team is filled with players who probably wouldn't get a look in otherwise, it won't be seen for the achievement it should be.
 
Originally posted by Ms.Storm
Nevertheless its still sold out......and who knows, if a bigger stadium was available, how many more people would get to games.

Give credit where its due.:)
Click to expand...

Dimwit, you didn't read my next post on the issue and I gave credit and some suggestions on bigger stadium's

"None of the grounds are bigger than 26,000 and I agree it was a mistake, but I would think the RLIF took the view thats its better to have full houses rather than half empty Stadiums. I would of kept the Test in Wigan at the JJB Stadium, because that is a great Stadium, but I would of had the other Tests at Elland Road in Leeds and the New, City of Manchester Stadium in Manchester (I think playing a test at Old Trafford would of been 3/4 full so it would be better having the Test at the smaller Stadium which is still over 40,000 but most importantly FULL)

Those Stadiums would of been full. Still at least you've got 75,000 going to matches."
 
Originally posted by Pantsless
Why would I have egg on my face? C'Mon..you're trying to tell me that if GB beat our 2nd/3rd string side that I'll look stupid?

If we do get rolled by GB in this series, I know the people on this board will go, great result, well done GB, but there will be many more people saying, "if we had our full side in we would've won."

I would like to see two full strength sides going at each other, but when one team is filled with players who probably wouldn't get a look in otherwise, it won't be seen for the achievement it should be.
Click to expand...
I will tell you why, the last 5 games Australia has played Great Britain the Poms have had players such as Sean Long, Keiron Cunningham, Paul Sculthorpe, Andrew Farrell, Barrie McDermott, Paul Radlinski, Paul Wellens the list goes on. Us Kangaroos were playing their second strength team and we lost the first test before winning the second and scrapping home in the 3rd and deciding test. We had a full-strength team, they had their second string team. We will be doing unbelievably well if we can win the series or even get close. The Poms have improved big-time and I believe the Roos are coming to the end of an extremely successful era, in some ways this is good but I'd probably rather it stayed.
 
As much as I bag Int RL, it's only because of the apparent gulf in standards between Oz and the rest of the world.

If that's changing then great! I love sport, but I love contests, not walkovers.
 
People are mistaken if they think the Kangaroos will be trotting out a second or third-string side.

Wing, Buderus, Lockyer, Webcke, Sing, Ricko, Fitzgibbon and probably that afro git would've all been there even without the drop outs.

cr.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Originally posted by Pantsless

And on that: The Ashes...that's what the cricket series is called...stop riding on the back of other sports....in the 60's it was a contest, now it's not and to try and build up the upcoming series as "the ashes"..now that's just poor form.
Click to expand...


Hey mate I just read the following letter in today's Daily Telegraph here in England & it throws some light on the ashes thing, personally I've never called any other sport appart from the cricket the Ashes (Bloody Hell I can still rememebr about 10-15 years ago when they even tried to start up an Ashes golf series between Britan & Australia).

Sir
Mr Garrett is wrong when he says that cricket has the exclusive use of the word Ashes to describe a series between England/GB & Australia.
The Rugby League Ashes Trophy was first presented to rugby league's British Lions after their triumphant 1928 tour.The silver cup was presented by the City Tattersal's club in Sydney with the citation "It is to be distnctly understood the Cup in question will be known as 'The Ashes', to be completed for in the International League football League Tests in the future between England & Australia...the Commitee feel, in doing this, they are helping to perpetuate the true sporting spirit which is charcteristic of all Sporting Bodies in the British Empire"
There would have been many cricketing menbers of Tattersall's at the time, and as they clearly supported the creation of an ashes trophy in Rugby League I can't see why Mr Garrett should, 75 years later be so upset by their actions.
 
Originally posted by noodnuts
also this david marr chap works for the sydney morning herald which is the propaganda arm of the aru. john o'neil as spent millions buying good press coverage from the media in the past 6 years and the smh is the leading pro union/anti league newspaper in australia.

given that marr works for the smh which receives millions from the aru... shouldn't he have disclosed this fact to his audience before he slagged off league.... the main rival of union. he is guilty of the same thing that he constantly charges other media celebrities like john laws and alan jones of.....CASH FOR COMMENT!!!!! :mad:
Click to expand...

So is any news limited newspaper any different? You wouldn't happen to be dogs supporter would you? :D Just kidding.

I don't have any problem with SMH coverage of league - sure it's sometimes negative, but it's better than news limited's "propaganda". Some may say that they have a fair bit of "interest" in the NRL..:eek:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom