Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
saintsRrising wrote:
Gardy by contrast pulled in his head and ego (and while naturally still a lair) and did all that the club asked....and importantly was appreciative to be given a second chance by the Saints.
the lies and nonsense spoken by SrR about Gardiner are mystifiying.
Hey Rodg ...Can't really say whether I know enough about Gardiner to say whether I agree or disagree with SrR's comments
So can you please clarify your side of the story with regards to Gardiner and why you think SrR is lying and why his comments are nonsensical and mystifying
Thanks mate ... much appreciated
The story I got from a NM scout was that they did not believe MG was doing all he could to get back on track...
Certainly from looking at him in '08 he doesnt look fit. King would run rings round him
rodgerfox wrote:
The Cousins decision is a healthy debate, however the lies and nonsense spoken by SrR about Gardiner are mystifiying.
The Planet Common Sense must be an odd place. A place where truth doesn't exist, and make believe dictates the history books.
Groundhog Day again I see.
The ole Rodger will call sRr a liar and see what reaction he can get.
Rodger don't you ever tire of your petty behaviour?
You really are a very petty person.
Feel free though to post FACTS of why I am a liar. Otherwise once again you will be exposed for the petty stirrer that you are.
What a shallow life you lead where the highlight of your day is to come onto a football forum not to discuss football, but to bait other foumites and to see what mischief you can create.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
rodgerfox wrote:
The Cousins decision is a healthy debate, however the lies and nonsense spoken by SrR about Gardiner are mystifiying.
The Planet Common Sense must be an odd place. A place where truth doesn't exist, and make believe dictates the history books.
Groundhog Day again I see.
The ole Rodger will call sRr a liar and see what reaction he can get.
It is Groundhog Day.
SrR making up stories again to support his incorrect arguments.
It's Ok to say you were wrong. This may be hard for you to fathom, but it's actually far better than making stuff up to try to kid everyone that you were right all along.
Here's a quick fix to stop me from calling you on your lies - stop making stuff up.
rodgerfox wrote:
The Cousins decision is a healthy debate, however the lies and nonsense spoken by SrR about Gardiner are mystifiying.
The Planet Common Sense must be an odd place. A place where truth doesn't exist, and make believe dictates the history books.
Groundhog Day again I see.
The ole Rodger will call sRr a liar and see what reaction he can get.
It is Groundhog Day.
SrR making up stories again to support his incorrect arguments.
It's Ok to say you were wrong. This may be hard for you to fathom, but it's actually far better than making stuff up to try to kid everyone that you were right all along.
Here's a quick fix to stop me from calling you on your lies - stop making stuff up.
Simple.
Rodg seriously is it that hard???
You have called SrR a liar and said that he is making up stories yet you have failed to put forth any scrap of evidence to back up your argument
In fact you have very clearly and embarrasingly completely avoided the subject by posting another useless rambling response that only strengthens SrR's pov
rodgerfox wrote:
The Cousins decision is a healthy debate, however the lies and nonsense spoken by SrR about Gardiner are mystifiying.
The Planet Common Sense must be an odd place. A place where truth doesn't exist, and make believe dictates the history books.
Groundhog Day again I see.
The ole Rodger will call sRr a liar and see what reaction he can get.
It is Groundhog Day.
SrR making up stories again to support his incorrect arguments.
It's Ok to say you were wrong. This may be hard for you to fathom, but it's actually far better than making stuff up to try to kid everyone that you were right all along.
Here's a quick fix to stop me from calling you on your lies - stop making stuff up.
Simple.
Rodg seriously is it that hard???
You have called SrR a liar and said that he is making up stories yet you have failed to put forth any scrap of evidence to back up your argument
In fact you have very clearly and embarrasingly completely avoided the subject by posting another useless rambling response that only strengthens SrR's pov
Simple
I've called SrR a liar plenty of time.
The reason I would have thought was quite obvious - because he is.
The comments about Gardiner aren't SrR's POV - if they were he would have said that.
But he didn't.
He stated them as fact.
They're not fact. They'e untrue.
So he's not telling the truth. Therefore, he's lying.
rodgerfox wrote:
The Cousins decision is a healthy debate, however the lies and nonsense spoken by SrR about Gardiner are mystifiying.
The Planet Common Sense must be an odd place. A place where truth doesn't exist, and make believe dictates the history books.
Groundhog Day again I see.
The ole Rodger will call sRr a liar and see what reaction he can get.
It is Groundhog Day.
SrR making up stories again to support his incorrect arguments.
It's Ok to say you were wrong. This may be hard for you to fathom, but it's actually far better than making stuff up to try to kid everyone that you were right all along.
Here's a quick fix to stop me from calling you on your lies - stop making stuff up.
Simple.
Rodg seriously is it that hard???
You have called SrR a liar and said that he is making up stories yet you have failed to put forth any scrap of evidence to back up your argument
In fact you have very clearly and embarrasingly completely avoided the subject by posting another useless rambling response that only strengthens SrR's pov
Simple
I've called SrR a liar plenty of time.
The reason I would have thought was quite obvious - because he is.
The comments about Gardiner aren't SrR's POV - if they were he would have said that.
But he didn't.
He stated them as fact.
They're not fact. They'e untrue.
So he's not telling the truth. Therefore, he's lying.
So....wait for it...he's a liar.
Simple.
If I accept your premise (he stated them as fact) as being correct, which I don't necessarily,
how do you know what he posted is not a fact and therefore untrue?
Just because you state they are untrue doesn't mean they actually are untrue.
Please show us all the facts as to where Gardiner has not acted/behaved in the manner as described by sRr.
BigMart wrote:We took Michael Gardner in 2006 who had played a handful of games since 2003 and has a F***ed body. and had serious off-field issues and used DP#43 to do so.
Yet
Denied the 2005 Browlnow medallist, whose body is as fit as any player who has ever played. Cousins was in rare touch as late as 2007 averaging 25 possessions a game..
This decision is disgraceful, and goes against the want of the members and coaches and players......and AFL community...
it happens when a bunch of suits try to make decisions about sport, when they have zero fu**ing idea....really football matters should be left to those who know something about the game....i want to win, and seriously could not give a rats about upholding bullsh*t values.
Football First........seriously, besides two, who in that group actually understands the game......especially not a scottish git, whose every decision seem to be a massive F*** up.
I will seriously consider my position in supporting a basket case.....tonight will be remembered as the night our club made another poor decision and let a golden opportunity (risk albeit) slip......how often do you get the chance to take a brownlow medallist?????
F*** heads
Agree 100%
Cousins might actually be the one player who could make a difference in our midfield and this decision made by a board who should have been kicked out yesterday, might actually cost us a premiership!
Who knows, but it is very possible, that in 2009 with Cousins, potentially we were going to be a much bigger threat to any opposition club.
As for footy first, those f****** had better be ready when the AGM comes around!
FAIR DINKUM
Glad to see you are up to your usual standard of bullsh1t barks!
BigMart wrote:We took Michael Gardner in 2006 who had played a handful of games since 2003 and has a F***ed body. and had serious off-field issues and used DP#43 to do so.
Yet
Denied the 2005 Browlnow medallist, whose body is as fit as any player who has ever played. Cousins was in rare touch as late as 2007 averaging 25 possessions a game..
This decision is disgraceful, and goes against the want of the members and coaches and players......and AFL community...
it happens when a bunch of suits try to make decisions about sport, when they have zero fu**ing idea....really football matters should be left to those who know something about the game....i want to win, and seriously could not give a rats about upholding bullsh*t values.
Football First........seriously, besides two, who in that group actually understands the game......especially not a scottish git, whose every decision seem to be a massive F*** up.
I will seriously consider my position in supporting a basket case.....tonight will be remembered as the night our club made another poor decision and let a golden opportunity (risk albeit) slip......how often do you get the chance to take a brownlow medallist?????
F*** heads
Agree 100%
Cousins might actually be the one player who could make a difference in our midfield and this decision made by a board who should have been kicked out yesterday, might actually cost us a premiership!
Who knows, but it is very possible, that in 2009 with Cousins, potentially we were going to be a much bigger threat to any opposition club.
As for footy first, those f****** had better be ready when the AGM comes around!
FAIR DINKUM
Glad to see you are up to your usual standard of bullsh1t barks!
Have you not already ripped up your membership, refused to buy another one, pledging allegiance to the Melbourne Storm as a form of protest against the current board, for introducing compulsory social club status to level two seating?
I swear I remember reading that somehwere!
and you reckon I post bullshyte...............pffft
saintsRrising wrote:.....Gardy by contrast pulled in his head and ego (and while naturally still a lair) and did all that the club asked....
Just wondering where you got this from - that Gardiner is 'naturally still a lair'
Are you suggesting that 'lair' was a spelling mistake and should be 'liar'?
That's quite possible - I didn't think he was a 'lair' either though
There I've edited just in case...
Yes that is lair L A I R ...as in when you might describe someone as a "a bit of a lair"...
Yes IMO Gardi from what I have read has alway been a bit of a lair.
Nothing wrong with that though as long as you do not go over the top.
Again from what one reads and also hears via rumour Gardi when at the Eagles, and before then exhibited shall we say what society would deem to be unacceptable bahaviour too often.
From what I have seen and read Gardi has significantly and positively amended his bevahiour since joining the Saints.
And while still not a perfect 'saint'...one does not need to be.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
rodgerfox wrote:The comments about Gardiner aren't SrR's POV - if they were he would have said that.
But he didn't.
He stated them as fact.
Breathtaking Rodger. When I read stuff on here I automatically assume that everything written by a poster unless specifically claimed otherwise is their opinion.
(Ultimately all "facts" are actually opinions anyway, but this isn't an epistemological forum it's a footy forum!)
That is surely a basic tenet of an internet forum....... perhaps you disagree..... or perhaps it's because you have something against the one particular poster.... I notice you didn't pick up on any other poster for voicing similar views.......
Hird... The unflushable one is now... just a turd...
rodgerfox wrote:The comments about Gardiner aren't SrR's POV - if they were he would have said that.
But he didn't.
He stated them as fact.
Breathtaking Rodger. When I read stuff on here I automatically assume that everything written by a poster unless specifically claimed otherwise is their opinion.
(Ultimately all "facts" are actually opinions anyway, but this isn't an epistemological forum it's a footy forum!)
That is surely a basic tenet of an internet forum....... perhaps you disagree..... or perhaps it's because you have something against the one particular poster.... I notice you didn't pick up on any other poster for voicing similar views.......
No, I disagree.
It's usually very clear if it's someone view or opinion. I ignore these as they don't count for shiit.
I look for facts. To see if someone knows something. People's opinions bore me.
If I read 'he has done everything the club has asked of him' I take that as a statement of fact.
It it's not true however, it's a lie.
When I pick up a newspaper it's the same. If in the first sentence or paragraph I realise it's an opinion piece, then I don't bother reading.
If it's factual, or gossip from what's considered to be a good source, then I'm interested.
I just can't stand floggers who rate their opinion so highly that they state it as fact.
