Eames Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Spot on, petty point scoring. Usual suspects I'm afraid . Bit sad a mod is getting off on it too.Calling it a little sanctimonious and hypocritical for a self-confessed gambler to have a problem with a gambling firm on the shirt is not point scoring. It's merely pointing out something that I thought was more than a little amusing. Now, carry on. Except he wasn't self confessed..... He was outed for the massive hypocrite he is. The very image of posting for effect and Internet ****-wittery. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 And by the way I do see a difference between playing the lottery, betting in the National etc and online gambling straight to your smartphone, and in play seduction. Totally on another level now. You can play the lottery on your smart phone you know.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Spot on, petty point scoring. Usual suspects I'm afraid . Bit sad a mod is getting off on it too.Calling it a little sanctimonious and hypocritical for a self-confessed gambler to have a problem with a gambling firm on the shirt is not point scoring. It's merely pointing out something that I thought was more than a little amusing. Now, carry on. Except he wasn't self confessed..... He was outed for the massive hypocrite he is. The very image of posting for effect and Internet ****-wittery. Out and out abuse keyboard warrior. I expect this to moderated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie09 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 (edited) Pot, Kettle, Black. I wish we still had Acorns, but football and morals have long since been separated. Edited June 12, 2013 by Robbie09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 No they weren't were they, you described the deal as "ok" and even "decent" no mention of ethics from you, no sign of objection. Your only complaint was it wasn't enough money to keep pace with Spurs. And no we weren't debating purely on Faulkner, the first quote of yours was in the thread about McLeish going. I said "ok ?" And we were Debating Faulkners commercial skills. Nothing about ethics. Like I said pls put the whole thread up pls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBM Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 im assuming this new sponsor will be aware that their logo cant go on childrens clothing? so with this in mind, wouldnt it be worth the club looking for a 'second' sponsor or extra income and something more suitable for the childrens line, like fruit shoots or duplo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 im assuming this new sponsor will be aware that their logo cant go on childrens clothing? so with this in mind, wouldnt it be worth the club looking for a 'second' sponsor or extra income and something more suitable for the childrens line, like fruit shoots or duplo? I doubt they're aware of that. I expect they won't be too pleased when they find out most of our players will have to wear sponsorless shirts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted June 12, 2013 Moderator Share Posted June 12, 2013 No they weren't were they, you described the deal as "ok" and even "decent" no mention of ethics from you, no sign of objection. Your only complaint was it wasn't enough money to keep pace with Spurs. And no we weren't debating purely on Faulkner, the first quote of yours was in the thread about McLeish going. I said "ok ?" And we were Debating Faulkners commercial skills. Nothing about ethics. Like I said pls put the whole thread up pls Yes, remember I provided the quote for you a short while ago and as I said it wasn't in a thread about Faulkner you are repeating yourself, I'm not going to keep doing. I've asked you to explain your change of stance, you've avoided the question, you can't do it. Nothing else I need to say. And I can't quote a whole thread can I and there really is no need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Why can we not be sponsored by Gemma Merna's vagina ? Someday Carl ... Someday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Gemma Merna's vagina ruins lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Ingram85 Posted June 12, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted June 12, 2013 Spot on, petty point scoring. Usual suspects I'm afraid . Bit sad a mod is getting off on it too. Calling it a little sanctimonious and hypocritical for a self-confessed gambler to have a problem with a gambling firm on the shirt is not point scoring. It's merely pointing out something that I thought was more than a little amusing. Now, carry on. Except he wasn't self confessed..... He was outed for the massive hypocrite he is. The very image of posting for effect and Internet ****-wittery. Out and out abuse keyboard warrior. I expect this to moderated How ****ing pathetic. You've been caught out for the pathetic wind up you are. Not very nice being on the receiving end of the mods is it as normally your silly games get others in trouble for calling you out. ****ing deal with it. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Ingram85 Posted June 12, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted June 12, 2013 (edited) Oh and that wasn't point scoring, i meant it, it will be modded as I meant every word but I want you to know how EVERYONE else who isnt a wind up on this site truly feels but are too scared of the mods to say it. Edited June 12, 2013 by Ingram85 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Spot on, petty point scoring. Usual suspects I'm afraid . Bit sad a mod is getting off on it too. Calling it a little sanctimonious and hypocritical for a self-confessed gambler to have a problem with a gambling firm on the shirt is not point scoring. It's merely pointing out something that I thought was more than a little amusing. Now, carry on. Except he wasn't self confessed..... He was outed for the massive hypocrite he is. The very image of posting for effect and Internet ****-wittery. Out and out abuse keyboard warrior. I expect this to moderated How ****ing pathetic. You've been caught out for the pathetic wind up you are. Not very nice being on the receiving end of the mods is it as normally your silly games get others in trouble for calling you out. ****ing deal with it. Oh hello ? Who are you ? Part of the "gang" . What a pathetic attempt to join in ? Can I suggest you calm down a bit. Oh and that wasn't point scoring, i meant it, it will be modded as I meant every word but I want you to know how EVERYONE else who isnt a wind up on this site truly feels but are too scared of the mods to say it. Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram85 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Haha, gang? What gang? Quit with the self pitying "get 'em mods, they're picking on me" tone. Oh look, as bloody usual you side step any criticism and avoid the point at hand. Why is it you can never answer ANY counter point when its stated in the clearest terms possible without crying to the mods? Why do you always change the subject when your questioned? Being shown up for what you are not fit in with your 'innocent poster' agenda? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Alan Shearer is asian sports ambassador for Defabet. If Alan likes em i like em! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 You really need to calm down. I'm not even sure why you're questioning ? What have you personally asked ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 No they weren't were they, you described the deal as "ok" and even "decent" no mention of ethics from you, no sign of objection. Your only complaint was it wasn't enough money to keep pace with Spurs. And no we weren't debating purely on Faulkner, the first quote of yours was in the thread about McLeish going. I said "ok ?" And we were Debating Faulkners commercial skills. Nothing about ethics. Like I said pls put the whole thread up pls Yes, remember I provided the quote for you a short while ago and as I said it wasn't in a thread about Faulkner you are repeating yourself, I'm not going to keep doing. I've asked you to explain your change of stance, you've avoided the question, you can't do it. Nothing else I need to say. And I can't quote a whole thread can I and there really is no need. Actually there is. You have been selective to manipulate your own agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram85 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Passive aggressiveness. Nice. Thats original, not seen that before Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LockStockVilla Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swerbs Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts