Then don't defend them then when they make clear errors.The_Dud wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:11pmNo, as I'm not obsessed with umpires.CURLY wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 2:56pmHave you started a umpires forum?The_Dud wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 2:52pmJust pointing out that many would find that extremely annoying, and therefore it’s not allowed.roskilde wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 10:29amWell as long as they've bathed why not?
Seriously though is this an allegation? That they're infiltrators or something?
If so I think some other commenters have it right just pay them no mind.
On match day if you want to talk about St Kilda go to a St Kilda forum, if you want to talk about Collingwood go to a Collingwood forum, if you want to talk about umpires go to an umpires forum.
That’s all many of us are saying.
Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10134
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 145 times
- Been thanked: 1299 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
- roskilde
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2409
- Joined: Sat 11 Jun 2011 7:32pm
- Location: Canberra
- Has thanked: 265 times
- Been thanked: 336 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
I don't think the Collingwood comparison is that apt Dud because Umpires are just a permanent part of the game and some people have opinions about them.
Personally I feel like Saints do complain a bit too much about the Umpires rather than demanding we have a team who is good enough to beat anyone even when the fluro bastards are ruling against us and it can become a crutch but still we're talking about opinions about parts of the game that involve things of relevance to Saints fans. I really can't see the problem even if you disagree with them.
Personally I feel like Saints do complain a bit too much about the Umpires rather than demanding we have a team who is good enough to beat anyone even when the fluro bastards are ruling against us and it can become a crutch but still we're talking about opinions about parts of the game that involve things of relevance to Saints fans. I really can't see the problem even if you disagree with them.
This was my father's belief
And this is also mine:
Let the corn be all one sheaf--
And the grapes be all one vine,
Ere our children's teeth are set on edge
By bitter bread and wine.
And this is also mine:
Let the corn be all one sheaf--
And the grapes be all one vine,
Ere our children's teeth are set on edge
By bitter bread and wine.
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13782
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1313 times
- Been thanked: 2053 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
Yeah but there's a difference between saying if there happens to be a really bad decision "bloody umpires missed that one", which would be fine, and posting (spamming) multiple times EVERY match thread about EVERY decision that goes against us (most 100% correct decisions mind you) and then weaving it into some kind of grand AFL/umpire conspiracy against us, all while conveniently ignoring the multiple bad decision that go our way. And every loss isn't our clubs fault, its all on the umpires/AFL/fixture etc.roskilde wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:20pm I don't think the Collingwood comparison is that apt Dud because Umpires are just a permanent part of the game and some people have opinions about them.
Personally I feel like Saints do complain a bit too much about the Umpires rather than demanding we have a team who is good enough to beat anyone even when the fluro bastards are ruling against us and it can become a crutch but still we're talking about opinions about parts of the game that involve things of relevance to Saints fans. I really can't see the problem even if you disagree with them.
It would be like bagging out a player every single game, for every single thing they do, whether good or bad, just bagging them. People would grow tired of that quick smart.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
- asiu
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10313
- Joined: Thu 08 Apr 2010 8:11pm
- Has thanked: 1327 times
- Been thanked: 932 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
![Razz :P](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif)
she’d be quiet around here with a no whinging rule
the noddys would need to be paid
![Image](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_iUpoNBZyaBc/R0zVk-1LCZI/AAAAAAAAAg0/9eeT7D6cnaA/s320/compass-blu-265x220.gif)
.name the ways , thought manipulates the State of Presence away.
.tipara waranta kani nina-tu.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10134
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 145 times
- Been thanked: 1299 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
Lol most 100% correct you really have no clue.The_Dud wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:39pmYeah but there's a difference between saying if there happens to be a really bad decision "bloody umpires missed that one", which would be fine, and posting (spamming) multiple times EVERY match thread about EVERY decision that goes against us (most 100% correct decisions mind you) and then weaving it into some kind of grand AFL/umpire conspiracy against us, all while conveniently ignoring the multiple bad decision that go our way. And every loss isn't our clubs fault, its all on the umpires/AFL/fixture etc.roskilde wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:20pm I don't think the Collingwood comparison is that apt Dud because Umpires are just a permanent part of the game and some people have opinions about them.
Personally I feel like Saints do complain a bit too much about the Umpires rather than demanding we have a team who is good enough to beat anyone even when the fluro bastards are ruling against us and it can become a crutch but still we're talking about opinions about parts of the game that involve things of relevance to Saints fans. I really can't see the problem even if you disagree with them.
It would be like bagging out a player every single game, for every single thing they do, whether good or bad, just bagging them. People would grow tired of that quick smart.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23020
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8912 times
- Been thanked: 3884 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
You are 100% there.CURLY wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:47pmLol most 100% correct you really have no clue.The_Dud wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:39pmYeah but there's a difference between saying if there happens to be a really bad decision "bloody umpires missed that one", which would be fine, and posting (spamming) multiple times EVERY match thread about EVERY decision that goes against us (most 100% correct decisions mind you) and then weaving it into some kind of grand AFL/umpire conspiracy against us, all while conveniently ignoring the multiple bad decision that go our way. And every loss isn't our clubs fault, its all on the umpires/AFL/fixture etc.roskilde wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:20pm I don't think the Collingwood comparison is that apt Dud because Umpires are just a permanent part of the game and some people have opinions about them.
Personally I feel like Saints do complain a bit too much about the Umpires rather than demanding we have a team who is good enough to beat anyone even when the fluro bastards are ruling against us and it can become a crutch but still we're talking about opinions about parts of the game that involve things of relevance to Saints fans. I really can't see the problem even if you disagree with them.
It would be like bagging out a player every single game, for every single thing they do, whether good or bad, just bagging them. People would grow tired of that quick smart.
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
- asiu
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10313
- Joined: Thu 08 Apr 2010 8:11pm
- Has thanked: 1327 times
- Been thanked: 932 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
... most importantly there is not a rule that states that posters must always post opinions that align perfectly with what Joffa Burns thinks.
Perhaps that's a rule you could consider implementing.
![Razz :P](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif)
ummmmm
i can help here boys
... slight name change and that rule has promise
![Image](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_iUpoNBZyaBc/R0zVk-1LCZI/AAAAAAAAAg0/9eeT7D6cnaA/s320/compass-blu-265x220.gif)
.name the ways , thought manipulates the State of Presence away.
.tipara waranta kani nina-tu.
- Joffa Burns
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7081
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 5:48pm
- Has thanked: 1871 times
- Been thanked: 1570 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
Nope, name and rule will do just fine as listed thanks.asiu wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:51pm... most importantly there is not a rule that states that posters must always post opinions that align perfectly with what Joffa Burns thinks.
Perhaps that's a rule you could consider implementing.![]()
ummmmm
i can help here boys
... slight name change and that rule has promise
In fact it could be a watershed moment for the forum when that rule is introduced.
One only hopes it is adjudicated with unrelenting vigor and commitment.
Proudly assuming the title of forum Oracle and serving as the inaugural Saintsational ‘weak as piss brigade’ President.
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13782
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1313 times
- Been thanked: 2053 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
Exactly, they are human, which means they make mistakes, for and against us, and have biases, for and against us.saynta wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:51pmYou are 100% there.CURLY wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:47pmLol most 100% correct you really have no clue.The_Dud wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:39pmYeah but there's a difference between saying if there happens to be a really bad decision "bloody umpires missed that one", which would be fine, and posting (spamming) multiple times EVERY match thread about EVERY decision that goes against us (most 100% correct decisions mind you) and then weaving it into some kind of grand AFL/umpire conspiracy against us, all while conveniently ignoring the multiple bad decision that go our way. And every loss isn't our clubs fault, its all on the umpires/AFL/fixture etc.roskilde wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 3:20pm I don't think the Collingwood comparison is that apt Dud because Umpires are just a permanent part of the game and some people have opinions about them.
Personally I feel like Saints do complain a bit too much about the Umpires rather than demanding we have a team who is good enough to beat anyone even when the fluro bastards are ruling against us and it can become a crutch but still we're talking about opinions about parts of the game that involve things of relevance to Saints fans. I really can't see the problem even if you disagree with them.
It would be like bagging out a player every single game, for every single thing they do, whether good or bad, just bagging them. People would grow tired of that quick smart.![]()
![]()
Personally, I would ban the posters who can't ever admit that the maggots are human and therefore have their biases and prejudices.
It's a two way street, some lack the ability to acknowledge this.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8581
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 526 times
- Been thanked: 1527 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
So what you’re saying is posts like this should not be allowed because they refer to the opposition.The_Dud wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 2:52pmJust pointing out that many would find that extremely annoying, and therefore it’s not allowed.roskilde wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 10:29amWell as long as they've bathed why not?
Seriously though is this an allegation? That they're infiltrators or something?
If so I think some other commenters have it right just pay them no mind.
On match day if you want to talk about St Kilda go to a St Kilda forum, if you want to talk about Collingwood go to a Collingwood forum, if you want to talk about umpires go to an umpires forum.
That’s all many of us are saying.
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13782
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1313 times
- Been thanked: 2053 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
When did I ever say you couldn't refer to the opposition, especially when using them to make a point of how we're going?kosifantutti wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 5:42pmSo what you’re saying is posts like this should not be allowed because they refer to the opposition.The_Dud wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 2:52pmJust pointing out that many would find that extremely annoying, and therefore it’s not allowed.roskilde wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 10:29amWell as long as they've bathed why not?
Seriously though is this an allegation? That they're infiltrators or something?
If so I think some other commenters have it right just pay them no mind.
On match day if you want to talk about St Kilda go to a St Kilda forum, if you want to talk about Collingwood go to a Collingwood forum, if you want to talk about umpires go to an umpires forum.
That’s all many of us are saying.
Nice try though.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8581
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 526 times
- Been thanked: 1527 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
The_Dud wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 5:58pmWhen did I ever say you couldn't refer to the opposition, especially when using them to make a point of how we're going?kosifantutti wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 5:42pmSo what you’re saying is posts like this should not be allowed because they refer to the opposition.The_Dud wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 2:52pmJust pointing out that many would find that extremely annoying, and therefore it’s not allowed.roskilde wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 10:29amWell as long as they've bathed why not?
Seriously though is this an allegation? That they're infiltrators or something?
If so I think some other commenters have it right just pay them no mind.
On match day if you want to talk about St Kilda go to a St Kilda forum, if you want to talk about Collingwood go to a Collingwood forum, if you want to talk about umpires go to an umpires forum.
That’s all many of us are saying.
Nice try though.
“On match day if you want to talk about St Kilda go to a St Kilda forum, if you want to talk about Collingwood go to a Collingwood forum, if you want to talk about umpires go to an umpires forum. “
The umpires and decisions they make are part of the game. Why wouldn’t they be in the match day thread?
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
- asiu
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10313
- Joined: Thu 08 Apr 2010 8:11pm
- Has thanked: 1327 times
- Been thanked: 932 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
how funny it all is
ahhhh
go us.
ahhhh
go us.
![Image](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_iUpoNBZyaBc/R0zVk-1LCZI/AAAAAAAAAg0/9eeT7D6cnaA/s320/compass-blu-265x220.gif)
.name the ways , thought manipulates the State of Presence away.
.tipara waranta kani nina-tu.
- ace
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10734
- Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 30 times
- Been thanked: 819 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
Let us know his reply.Devilhead wrote: ↑Mon 15 Jun 2020 12:28amhttps://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-20 ... fdbeb4f231magnifisaint wrote: ↑Mon 15 Jun 2020 12:23amBe my guest. What did he say against the Saints?
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8376
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 1169 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
So you are allowed to make reference to the opposition when using them to make a point of how we're going
BUT
Umpires are a no go area??
Sorry Dud but if Curly or anyone as a ST KILDA supporter on this ST KILDA forum for that matter want to rail against the refs when they make borderline decisions that gift the opposition shots at goal then I and many others don't see a problem.
Not that anyone doesn't appreciate your PoV but IMO you are getting all hot under the collar about a poster and posts most of us can relate to and laugh about - just like many dyed in the wool Saints supporters yelling out at a game about the umpires - you may not want not be sitting next to them but you sure can relate to their pain
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
If you want fair commentary about umpiring go to the generic BF gameday thread and hang out with all of the other neutral opposition supporters who look for a chance to bag out the Saints at any given opportunity
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8376
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 1169 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
Nothing as yet but I can only assume he is too busy crapping his overfilled ego pants about how his insipid Doggies are currently goingace wrote: ↑Tue 16 Jun 2020 9:37pmLet us know his reply.Devilhead wrote: ↑Mon 15 Jun 2020 12:28amhttps://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-20 ... fdbeb4f231magnifisaint wrote: ↑Mon 15 Jun 2020 12:23amBe my guest. What did he say against the Saints?
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
- samuraisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5873
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2011 3:23pm
- Location: M32
- Has thanked: 837 times
- Been thanked: 785 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
To be honest I thought the umps were fine on Sunday - perfectly fair.
And I thought we got the rub of the green from them against North in Round 1 as well.
Just sayin'.
And I thought we got the rub of the green from them against North in Round 1 as well.
Just sayin'.
Your friendly neighbourhood samurai.
- ace
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10734
- Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 30 times
- Been thanked: 819 times
Re: Match Thread Saints v Dogs Round 2 2020
Is that the same law firm called Slimey and Grimey.Enrico_Misso wrote: ↑Mon 15 Jun 2020 12:24pmPeter Gordon is a blood-sucking parasite!Devilhead wrote: ↑Mon 15 Jun 2020 12:28amhttps://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-20 ... fdbeb4f231magnifisaint wrote: ↑Mon 15 Jun 2020 12:23amBe my guest. What did he say against the Saints?
The original "Ambulance Chaser".
A"Bottom Dweller".
Let's hope the Dogs nearly go bankrupt like Slater and Gordon almost did due to their big headedness!
Slimey and Grimey share price fell to 6.8cents.
Then a scheme of arrangement increased the number of shares 20 fold and gave then to the lenders.
Shareholders then owned only 5% of the company.
The shares that were once worth $2.8 billion fell to $24.2 million.
The rescue plan valued Slater and Gordon's shares at between 0.3 cents or 1.1 cents each, meaning the shares were worth between $1.05 million and $3.87 million.
Shareholders market cap of $2.8 bill became $24.2 mill then became $1.05 to 3.87 mill
This compares to the $15.5 million in fees Slater and Gordon's legal and financial advisers received for completing the deal.
That means shareholders lost 99.9% of their money.
But the lawyers got to keep their jobs.
And the partners that sold out early made a killing.
Don't be fooled by today's share price.
They had a 100 to 1 share consolidation.
100 shares suddenly become 1 shares worth 100 times as much.
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA