Can you read?

I said it was the [i"appropriate interpretation"[/i of the [i"consecutively ordered words forming sentences and opinions which you appear incapable of handling in a rational and unbiased manner"[/i.

I’ve not popped onto the Warrington board so I can’t comment on that front. However it looks like that Danny has got you right where he wants you.

That’s complaining about his cheeky but not nasty character that he is on here.

Think about it…

I mentioned that was the key word on Friday. They've been too busy frothing at the mouth to take it on board.

He did indeed, but why would you think that prefacing offensive statements with uncertain adverbs removes the possibility of causing offence?

Why would i base my interpretation on the order of the words and not their context and meaning? The order of the words is pretty much secondary to context and meaning.

I'll tell you Damo, he's wrong as per usual. David makes wild assertions but never backs them up. His worst (and most unforgivable) was when he said Jayne Tomlinson was faking her cancer. Just don't get on the wrong side of him, that's all I can say.

Anyway, I digress. ALL OVER the board would suggest on every thread rather than starting the one thread like I have done.

Like I say, wild assertions.

It's the key contextual difference between what Clarke questioningly said and what McClennan disgustingly and pointedly said.

The problem for those who cry wolf too often is they are never believed when they are telling the truth.

PERHAPS and HOPEFULLY, McGuire will think twice next time about ordering a stretcher when there's fook all wrong with him like he did at Wembley last month, eh?

Are you really so clueless about rugby that you think McGuire will have ordered the stretcher?

Your comments about McGuire "faking injuries" are far more insidious than Mclennan's comments.

I suspect Geoff's knowledge of the English language is limited to reading the address's on the mail he's delivering, whilst Danny is simply a very immature plonker, in the best Del Boy tradition.

Simples.

Are they more insidious than Clarke's?

Clarke's are fine. Keith's were the most insidious (and he was proven very wrong, sadly) then Mclennan's were the next worse.

Is it perhaps part of your agenda to omit key words and quotations in your responses?

I said [iconsecutively[/i ordered words and the [iappropriate[/i interpretation thereof.

Your confirmed inability to apply any requisite form of appropriate interpretational skills fit neatly alongside your inability to accurately read and respond directly what others have actually wrote.

If you're going to post in such a pompous manner it should have been "[ihave actually written[/i"

HTH

Are you suggesting McGuire wasn't faking it at Wembley?