Swans - back to back?

[teams]

Hang in there Nicky. It was a genuine win. South/Sydney forced themselves to win this flag. It was pure spirit. As far as next year goes, the fact that an 8 goal premiership isn't taken seriously by all is going to feed into the pride of the 2005 win. Personally not going to be surprised if they do justice to the 'reigning premier' title come next September. You think of Kirk in particular, letting it rest at this is not the preferred option.

 

[bunsen burner]

Feel for you. Living in a city that just won the flag against your team.

Not an issue for me. Have always wanted Sydney to win a flag because League sh its me.

As well West Coast is looming as the new Collingwood of the modern era. Losing a close grand final and then never quite making it. All the best with that. You may jag one with Woosha.

Not an issue yet. The GF loss will not hur if we win one with this group. But will hurt if we don't. Jury is still out.

With respect of your argument with Sydney supporters, you need to state the little thing that went wrong for West Coast.

Not relavent. Has nothing to do with this debate.

They rose above them, rather like Brisbane in 2003.

Which is what I clearly stated. For some reason you have wrongly assumed that this means I don't think the Swans deserved it? Not sure how you came to that conclusion after I stated numerous times that the Swans deserved the flag?

You seem to say it and think it's fine but when I say you seem to have a problem with it. Why?

It was Banfield hitting the post for mine but you may have another view.

Don't recall ever discussing what won or lost the game in the actual GF. Was talking generally about the season as a whole.

 

[bunsen burner]

yes it is appropriate behaviour... you were saying the swans are not a good team

No I didn't. I said they weren't yet on the same level as other back to back flag sides such as Brisbane and Hawthorn.

and you went on to say that you guys were hit with injuries...

No I didn't. I said the Swans had a good injury run, the Eagles had a normal injury run, and the Saints had a bad injury run. I also said that the Eagles could not adequately cover their injuries in the latter part of the season.

At no stage did I use this as an excuse. I clearly said on numerous occasions that the Swans were the best team for the year and deserved to win.

Time to stop lying and face reality.

 

[bunsen burner]

you do realise that everyone can see that you're lying, i was replying to you saying the swans aren't good and we only won b/c of a dream injury run... it's all there you t**t. Add lying fool to the list

you insecure little slime, i cannot believe you yourself know you haven't a leg to stand on so you are now making stuff up.! you're only lying to yourself now

So you're saying those quotes don't exist?

QUite confident everyone knows you're a) full of it, b) dumb for thinking people would buy your lies, c) arrogant, and d) obnoxious.

Are you not satisfied with your win? Even when an opposition supporter says kind words about the Swans must you start abusing them?

You're pretty low.

 

[nicky]

So you're saying those quotes don't exist?

QUite confident everyone knows you're a) full of it, b) dumb for thinking people would buy your lies, c) arrogant, and d) obnoxious.

Are you not satisfied with your win? Even when an opposition supporter says kind words about the Swans must you start abusing them?

You're pretty low.

when quoting me why don't you use the actual quotes i was responding to.

more insults from you (see bold)

i find it weird that you will insult yet are offended when someone insults you back... GROW UP you fool... i'm now beginning to think this is your pathetic passive agressive way of giving me grief b/c my team beat yours in the GF.! seriously you are weird and i've indulged you enough.

and on that note GO SWANS 2006

 

[nicky]

Hang in there Nicky. It was a genuine win. South/Sydney forced themselves to win this flag. It was pure spirit. As far as next year goes, the fact that an 8 goal premiership isn't taken seriously by all is going to feed into the pride of the 2005 win. Personally not going to be surprised if they do justice to the 'reigning premier' title come next September. You think of Kirk in particular, letting it rest at this is not the preferred option.

thanks teams i thought it was a great win against all odds as well and i had waited a long time for that flag... Good luck with the bombers next year

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Hi Nicky. Obviously you have missed the news that North acquired Jade Mother ********ing Rawlings in the trade today. Everybody else is now playing for second place.

 

[nicky]

Hi Nicky. Obviously you have missed the news that North acquired Jade Mother ********ing Rawlings in the trade today. Everybody else is now playing for second place.

how are you going funky? have you had a good week?

 

[teams]

Not relavent. Has nothing to do with this debate.

Sorry. Has. Back to back in this case involves 2005 as well as 2006. If you say 2005 is due to everything going right for Sydney, you imply some small thing in a four point outcome went astray for West Coast.

What was it. This is where you have upset Sydney supporters. You have implied it was just luck. When they see the blood sweat and tears of their club over 70 years of premiership endeavour, it detracts from the chartacter of their club when they did get across the line this year.

Which is what I clearly stated. For some reason you have wrongly assumed that this means I don't think the Swans deserved it? Not sure how you came to that conclusion after I stated numerous times that the Swans deserved the flag?

No. When you go the 'everything went right' line for Sydney you question whether they are deserving or just had more luck.

You seem to say it and think it's fine but when I say you seem to have a problem with it. Why?

You don't say it. Your line is Sydney no injuries. WC and Stkilda heaps of.

Don't recall ever discussing what won or lost the game in the actual GF. Was talking generally about the season as a whole.

That's where your trouble begins, I guess. When you went with 'everything went right for Sydney'. Inference is something went a little wrong for your mob. What was it. If Banfield had not hit the post or what? Could have gone on the point side anyway. ********ing rain here.

 

[teams]

thanks teams i thought it was a great win against all odds as well and i had waited a long time for that flag... Good luck with the bombers next year

Round one.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

how are you going funky? have you had a good week?

great dear. How is you settling in? Got those Ashes back yet? I aint waiting till next summer till i see em again. Has the news of North's acquistion of Big Jade Rawlings crossed the Atlantic yet?

 

[nicky]

Sorry. Has. Back to back in this case involves 2005 as well as 2006. If you say 2005 is due to everything going right for Sydney, you imply some small thing in a four point outcome went astray for West Coast.

What was it. This is where you have upset Sydney supporters. You have implied it was just luck. When they see the blood sweat and tears of their club over 70 years of premiership endeavour, it detracts from the chartacter of their club when they did get across the line this year.





No. When you go the 'everything went right' line for Sydney you question whether they are deserving or just had more luck.



You don't say it. Your line is Sydney no injuries. WC and Stkilda heaps of.



That's where your trouble begins, I guess. When you went with 'everything went right for Sydney'. Inference is something went a little wrong for your mob. What was it. If Banfield had not hit the post or what? Could have gone on the point side anyway. ********ing rain here.

well said teams

 

[nicky]

great dear. How is you settling in? Got those Ashes back yet? I aint waiting till next summer till i see em again. Has the news of North's acquistion of Big Jade Rawlings crossed the Atlantic yet?

this is the first i've heard of it

i'm working on the ashes... give me some time

 

[bunsen burner]

Sorry. Has. Back to back in this case involves 2005 as well as 2006. If you say 2005 is due to everything going right for Sydney, you imply some small thing in a four point outcome went astray for West Coast.

Incorrect.

This is where you have upset Sydney supporters. You have implied it was just luck.

No I haven't. Just an incorrect assumption you have made.

Every flag team has things that go right for them. Most flag teams have a low injury count during the season. Stuff has to go right to win a flag.

That's a general consensus. Does not imply in any way that the Swans didn't deserve their flag. And when you interlace it with (for the 100th time):

You were deserving winners
the Swans deserved to win the flag
Like all flag teams they deserved it
The Swans were the best this year

there is no excuse for interpreting me as saying or implying I don't think the Swans won the flag. I'm not quite sure why you're having a problem grasping this. Nicky is the only tosser who has a problem with it. And it's not because he doesn't get it, but rather he's using it as an excuse to have a gloat.

When they see the blood sweat and tears of their club over 70 years of premiership endeavour, it detracts from the chartacter of their club when they did get across the line this year.

I repeat: all flag teams need an ounce of luck and for things to go right. This does not denounce from their character.

No. When you go the 'everything went right' line for Sydney you question whether they are deserving or just had more luck.

you're getting boring. You're wrong.

You don't say it. Your line is Sydney no injuries. WC and Stkilda heaps of.

Making stuff up now.

That's where your trouble begins, I guess. When you went with 'everything went right for Sydney'.

Because it pretty much did. Low injury toll, players played to their peak, etc. Very hard to do twice in a row.

This is not an insult. Still not sure why you don't get it? I've said it 10 times but you insist I'm saying something else? Why?

Inference is something went a little wrong for your mob.

Wrong again. You don't know what you're talking about. I've clearly said the Eagles weren't up to it. SO why do you insist I was referring to something else?

What was it. If Banfield had not hit the post or what? Could have gone on the point side anyway. ********ing rain here.

You're just being a knob.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Incorrect.


No I haven't. Just an incorrect assumption you have made.

Every flag team has things that go right for them. Most flag teams have a low injury count during the season. Stuff has to go right to win a flag.

That's a general consensus. Does not imply in any way that the Swans didn't deserve their flag. And when you interlace it with (for the 100th time):

You were deserving winners
the Swans deserved to win the flag
Like all flag teams they deserved it
The Swans were the best this year

there is no excuse for interpreting me as saying or implying I don't think the Swans won the flag. I'm not quite sure why you're having a problem grasping this. Nicky is the only tosser who has a problem with it. And it's not because he doesn't get it, but rather he's using it as an excuse to have a gloat.


I repeat: all flag teams need an ounce of luck and for things to go right. This does not denounce from their character.

you're getting boring. You're wrong.



Making stuff up now.

Because it pretty much did. Low injury toll, players played to their peak, etc. Very hard to do twice in a row.

This is not an insult. Still not sure why you don't get it? I've said it 10 times but you insist I'm saying something else? Why?

Wrong again. You don't know what you're talking about. I've clearly said the Eagles weren't up to it. SO why do you insist I was referring to something else?

You're just being a knob.

Waaaaaaaaay too much effort for this time effort. You'd better have an excuse relating to timezones or something ultra legitimate like that. Ultra

 

[bunsen burner]

You don't say it. .

Forget all the individual quoting. Answer these questions:

1. have I ever said Sydney didn't deserve to win?
2. Have I ever made excuses for the Eagles?
3. Have I said that the Swans deserved it on numerous occasions?
4. have I said that the Eagles weren't up to it?
5. So why do you insist on trying to say I'm implying something different to what I've been saying? What's your problem?

 

[bunsen burner]

Waaaaaaaaay too much effort for this time effort. You'd better have an excuse relating to timezones or something ultra legitimate like that. Ultra

It gets annoying when you are complimentary of the Swans only to have knobs run around and accuse you of saying different.

In 1998, after the Crows won, if you'd gone up to a Crows supporter and said, "well done, you guys deserved to win" only for them to turn around and say, "suck sh it you kanga scrubber, we won, ha ha ha!", what would you do?

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

It gets annoying when you are complimentary of the Swans only to have knobs run around and accuse you of saying different.

In 1998, after the Crows won, if you'd gone up to a Crows supporter and said, "well done, you guys deserved to win" only for them to turn around and say, "suck sh it you kanga scrubber, we won, ha ha ha!", what would you do?

No dude I agree with you. But all those syllables you used at this time of note has made my brain liquify. For the record I really respect the swannies

 

[nicky]

Incorrect.


No I haven't. Just an incorrect assumption you have made.

Every flag team has things that go right for them. Most flag teams have a low injury count during the season. Stuff has to go right to win a flag.

That's a general consensus. Does not imply in any way that the Swans didn't deserve their flag. And when you interlace it with (for the 100th time):

You were deserving winners
the Swans deserved to win the flag
Like all flag teams they deserved it
The Swans were the best this year

there is no excuse for interpreting me as saying or implying I don't think the Swans won the flag. I'm not quite sure why you're having a problem grasping this. Nicky is the only tosser who has a problem with it. And it's not because he doesn't get it, but rather he's using it as an excuse to have a gloat.


I repeat: all flag teams need an ounce of luck and for things to go right. This does not denounce from their character.

you're getting boring. You're wrong.



Making stuff up now.

Because it pretty much did. Low injury toll, players played to their peak, etc. Very hard to do twice in a row.

This is not an insult. Still not sure why you don't get it? I've said it 10 times but you insist I'm saying something else? Why?

Wrong again. You don't know what you're talking about. I've clearly said the Eagles weren't up to it. SO why do you insist I was referring to something else?

You're just being a knob.

you keep saying that i'm gloating, maybe you're just too sensitive. This whole argument has been about you saying i'm young, i know f/all about football rah rah rah.!

i haven't had a chance to gloat to you b/c you seem so bitter and upset, you've been name calling, trying to get people on your side.

i'm actually realising this means alot more to you than it does to me.

you've attached your whole security and esteem to winning this argument, i'm right aren't i?

you asked me to point out where you had said the swans weren't a good team and the excuses about WC injuries, which i did about 5 pages ago. you then switched to calling me young and dumb??? I'm now wondering what is this all about b/c you seem to want to win at all costs but don't have means to do it.!

 

[nicky]

No dude I agree with you. But all those syllables you used at this time of note has made my brain liquify. For the record I really respect the swannies

funky ??? wtf????

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

you keep saying that i'm gloating, maybe you're just too sensitive. This whole argument has been about you saying i'm young, i know f/all about football rah rah rah.!

i haven't had a chance to gloat to you b/c you seem so bitter and upset, you've been name calling, trying to get people on your side.

i'm actually realising this means alot more to you than it does to me.

you've attached your whole security and esteem to winning this argument, i'm right aren't i?

you asked me to point out where you had said the swans weren't a good team and the excuses about WC injuries, which i did about 5 pages ago. you then switched to calling me young and dumb??? I'm now wondering what is this all about b/c you seem to want to win at all costs but don't have means to do it.!

Yo Nicky you fully nailed him but a well placed "Pwn3d" would have really knocked him back.

 

[nicky]

Yo Nicky you fully nailed him but a well placed "Pwn3d" would have really knocked him back.

hahahaha bunsen burner you just got a 2 day pwn3d.... hehehehe

did you read the whole arguement? this guy's having a mental breakdown

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

funky ??? wtf????

Yeah sorry. I thought he was arguing FOR the Swans who I said were a gun team. I just realised he was arguin for the west coast.

Its midnight here. My cognitive faculties are not working

 

[bunsen burner]

hahahaha bunsen burner you just got a 2 day pwn3d.... hehehehe

If you think so. Don't be crying and running to the mods when we next meet.

 

[nicky]

Yeah sorry. I thought he was arguing FOR the Swans who I said were a gun team. I just realised he was arguin for the west coast.

Its midnight here. My cognitive faculties are not working

are you studying?

i think he's lost the plot